The "Consortium"

[JamminJ]

It's just a handfull of scabs trying to cut their own piece of the pie. Greed, pure and simple.

 

Bingo

[bkeckley-migration]

If there is anyone on the board tonight could you please talk with me about selling comic books.

We are getting a few graded and then we'd like to have some advice from different people on how they would go about selling their comic books.

Please help us out

[MunkyMan95]

If there is anyone on the board tonight could you please talk with me about selling comic books.

We are getting a few graded and then we'd like to have some advice from different people on how they would go about selling their comic books.

Please help us out

 

Try the CGC forum

[just-john]

This is BS with a simple solution as a collector of coins I will not purchase any coins approved by any Consortiun because it's BS. When I see a coin approved for sale by this Consortiun at a dealer or auction I will discount it price by 10 to 40 % when bidding and if I loss the bid so what.When I enter a coin shop with these coins I'll know the dealer is unable to grade his own coins and anything he tells me about coins is probably BS and he thinks I'M a sucker.THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY JUST THE MONEY AND ONLY THE MONEY.

Like Hi I'M from the Consortium and I'M here to help OR- Hi I'm from the Consortium and can see your a fool -OR more like this Hey guy's here a new way to get into their pockets and they will thank you for the peace of mind.

[ziggy29]

This is BS with a simple solution as a collector of coins I will not purchase any coins approved by any Consortiun because it's BS. When I see a coin approved for sale by this Consortiun at a dealer or auction I will discount it price by 10 to 40 % when bidding and if I loss the bid so what.When I enter a coin shop with these coins I'll know the dealer is unable to grade his own coins and anything he tells me about coins is probably BS and he thinks I'M a sucker.THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY JUST THE MONEY AND ONLY THE MONEY.

I think dealers and investors have cause to be excited about this. For the average collector of modest means, I'm not sure if this would mean anything other than higher prices. (Which, again, is good for dealers and investors, not so much for collectors who plan to be net buyers in the years and decades to come.)

[MarkFeld]

This is BS with a simple solution as a collector of coins I will not purchase any coins approved by any Consortiun because it's BS. When I see a coin approved for sale by this Consortiun at a dealer or auction I will discount it price by 10 to 40 % when bidding and if I loss the bid so what.When I enter a coin shop with these coins I'll know the dealer is unable to grade his own coins and anything he tells me about coins is probably BS and he thinks I'M a sucker.THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY JUST THE MONEY AND ONLY THE MONEY.

Like Hi I'M from the Consortium and I'M here to help OR- Hi I'm from the Consortium and can see your a fool -OR more like this Hey guy's here a new way to get into their pockets and they will thank you for the peace of mind.

Do you also feel that way about certified coins? If not, why not? Thanks.

[ziggy29]

Do you also feel that way about certified coins? If not, why not? Thanks.

Mark, I would agree that a lot of the same objections could have (and sometimes were) raised 20+ years ago when encapsulation began to take off.

 

In fact, I think it was the rise of third-party graded, encapsulated coins which at least partially led to a rush of investor money into the coin market. It wasn't the average collector, IMO, which bid up ordinary, common-as-dirt MS-65 1881-S Morgans to $500. That was a lot of investor/speculator money applying the Greater Fool Theory, until some of them got caught with their pants down when the bubble popped in '89.

 

To me, this feels like an attempt to get more investor money into the market again, some of which may have been burned badly in '89 like people buying WorldCom or JDS Uniphase stock in 2000. Some backers of this initiative I've heard from have referred to "investors" and "sight-unseen" trading in conjunction with this initiative.

 

But coins aren't stocks. One MS-64 1862 Seated Half is not just like all the others, unlike a share of stock. I don't think a true fanatical *collector* cares about sight-unseen buying; if that 1862 half I referred to is "acceptable" for the grade, it doesn't matter to me unless I like the look and it fits in with what I'm collecting. Who would be interested in sight-unseen trading? Traders, investors (who don't particularly know coins well) and dealers, both retail and wholesale.

 

To the pure investor, maybe one "acceptable" MS-64 1862 Seated Half is just like another, as it if were a security trading on an exchange. But not to the collector.

 

I like the stated goals of tightening the noose on grade inflation and doctored coins, and I'll take this group at its word that this is one of their priorities. That is good for all of us if it means fewer overgraded coins in slabs and less coin doctoring. But it also seems like it will result in ordinary collectors paying a lot more for nice coins if this concept becomes widely accepted. And it feels like any "competitive advantage" knowledgeable collectors may have in identifying nice coins will evaporate as there will be increased competition from big money, new to the coin market, which only appreciates the profit potential and not the coin.

[James_OldeTowne]

This is BS with a simple solution as a collector of coins I will not purchase any coins approved by any Consortiun because it's BS. When I see a coin approved for sale by this Consortiun at a dealer or auction I will discount it price by 10 to 40 % when bidding and if I loss the bid so what.When I enter a coin shop with these coins I'll know the dealer is unable to grade his own coins and anything he tells me about coins is probably BS and he thinks I'M a sucker.THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY JUST THE MONEY AND ONLY THE MONEY.

Like Hi I'M from the Consortium and I'M here to help OR- Hi I'm from the Consortium and can see your a fool -OR more like this Hey guy's here a new way to get into their pockets and they will thank you for the peace of mind.

Do you also feel that way about certified coins? If not, why not? Thanks.

I think certified coins are different (at least in theory). NGC is not a market-maker in the coins they grade. But my understanding is that consortium members will actively be making a market in the coins they approve of.

 

I hadn't planned to comment anymore on the issue, but this morning, a buddy of mine ATS linked numerous spawned PCGS threads to me, and I am simply appalled at the way people are getting consumed by the whole notion. What ever happened to the simple pleasure of collecting coins as a hobby? Again, I must say that it's time that collectors took the hobby back from the dealers.

[WinstonWare]

I would like to note that I have decided to offer a similar service. My service will be $50 per coin but will be cooler because all coins will receive a sticker. My stickers will be scratch-n-sniff and you will be able to tell what I thought of your coin by the smell of the sticker. If your scratch-n-sniff sticker smells like daisies or ladies perfume or steak you will know that I approved of your coin. If, on the other hand, your coin smelled like skunk or poop you will know that I was not impressed with your coin. It will be well worth your money to know how I feel about your coin (thumbs u

[Tradedollarnut]

NGC is not a market-maker in the coins they grade.

 

Many of NGC's owners are - no difference.

[TJ'S Coins]

The more I think about this "added value sticker" applied to coins it amounts to another de facto tax on quality, premium coins.

 

Those who purchase only certified coins now will gravitate towards purchasing those that are both certified and approved by the consortium which will be inflationary on the industry.

 

Those of us who enjoy, purchase and trade raw coins will find an increasing price differential between the so-called "have" and "have not" coins that are not slabbed by a top tier TPG and approved by the consortium. Just as there are many slabbed coins that are hardly worth the price of the TPG process, there may be pressure to have them "consortium approved" with added expense, so that they will garner a few more dollars when it comes time to sell. Since the cost for approval will have to be passed off on someone it will undoubtedly be the collector who foots the bill. Or the one with average, widget coins will find any potential profit diminished. It sounds like the old adage, "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer."

 

I'm willing to listen to any and all points of view to either convince me or discourage me from this proposal.

 

 

[ziggy29]

If your scratch-n-sniff sticker smells like daisies or ladies perfume or steak you will know that I approved of your coin. If, on the other hand, your coin smelled like skunk or poop you will know that I was not impressed with your coin.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to make is smell like a cherry or a dog?

[WinstonWare]

If your scratch-n-sniff sticker smells like daisies or ladies perfume or steak you will know that I approved of your coin. If, on the other hand, your coin smelled like skunk or poop you will know that I was not impressed with your coin.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to make is smell like a cherry or a dog?

 

If you think you have a better business model than mine, then perhaps you should start your own company . I think the market will need many consortium sticker companies so that folks can get 2nd, 3rd, and 4th opinions on their coins.

[Keleum]

See, I told you the current grading system was insufficent. :=) Whatever this business starts out as, the only place to make money is those sweet spots in-between grades, where there's 235 of one grade and 7 of the next.

 

My question is, why would I bother with TPG, and not just get the "seal" on a raw coin. And then why wouldn't the TPGs just "integrate" this scale and push said consortium out of business.

 

What I think there is the need for is pre-judging coins, for $5 tell me if it's worth grading or just give me a airtite holder and a adjective and a grade range. Useless for anything but the 3 billion prez dollars, 100 million proof sets, not to mention the 15 billion state quarters... ;}

[James_OldeTowne]

NGC is not a market-maker in the coins they grade.

 

Many of NGC's owners are - no difference.

Many? How many?

 

And there's a huge difference: All of the consortium's owners will be, and in fact are required to be, market-makers, by the consortium's own self-definition.

 

By the way, I, along with thousands of other folks, am a part owner of many companies, and am not a market maker in any of their fields. Examples: Boeing, Anheuser-Busch, Hewlett-Packard, etc.

[MarkFeld]

NGC is not a market-maker in the coins they grade.

 

Many of NGC's owners are - no difference.

Many? How many?

 

And there's a huge difference: All of the consortium's owners will be, and in fact are required to be, market-makers, by the consortium's own self-definition.

 

By the way, I, along with thousands of other folks, am a part owner of many companies, and am not a market maker in any of their fields. Examples: Boeing, Anheuser-Busch, Hewlett-Packard, etc.

James, (understandably) there seems to be a fairly widespread misconception - unlike the current grading companies, I expect that many of the new group's owners will NOT be providing any grading opinions on coins. They will simply buy and sell them. Hence, much of the conflict of interest talk is way off base.

[gmarguli]

NGC is not a market-maker in the coins they grade.

 

Many of NGC's owners are - no difference.

 

And which ones are also graders?

[Tradedollarnut]

No grades will be assigned by CAC. Coins will be labeled as acceptable for the grade. There's a distinct difference between CAC and a TPG.

[gmarguli]

But you made it sound like the fact that some owners of NGC are also market makers is no different than "blessers" of the Consortium also being market makers in those very same coins.

 

The NGC owners presumably do not have any control over the grades assigned and are likely market makers in lots of coins - even those graded by other TPG.

 

The Consortium "blessers" appear to have direct control over a coin getting blessed and they are market makers in these specific coins which they are blessing/rejecting.

 

Big difference. Big conflict of interest.

[MarkFeld]

But you made it sound like the fact that some owners of NGC are also market makers is no different than "blessers" of the Consortium also being market makers in those very same coins.

 

The NGC owners presumably do not have any control over the grades assigned and are likely market makers in lots of coins - even those graded by other TPG.

 

The Consortium "blessers" appear to have direct control over a coin getting blessed and they are market makers in these specific coins which they are blessing/rejecting.

 

Big difference. Big conflict of interest.

Greg, I don't know for certain, but am under the impression that most of the owners who will be making markets will NOT be making decisions regarding acceptance of the coins.

[James_OldeTowne]

Mark, I look forward to your comments on (yet) another thread I just started, regarding the biggest pitfall I see facing the consortium.

[gmarguli]

Greg, I don't know for certain, but am under the impression that most of the owners who will be making markets will NOT be making decisions regarding acceptance of the coins.

 

Most?

 

All it takes is one.

 

There is either arms-length to this process or there isn't. There is a clear conflict of interest here and to allow people making blessing decisions that according to the Consortium will increase the value of the coins, to also deal in those coins hurts the overall credibility.

[MarkFeld]

Greg, I don't know for certain, but am under the impression that most of the owners who will be making markets will NOT be making decisions regarding acceptance of the coins.

 

Most?

 

All it takes is one.

 

There is either arms-length to this process or there isn't. There is a clear conflict of interest here and to allow people making blessing decisions that according to the Consortium will increase the value of the coins, to also deal in those coins hurts the overall credibility.

Greg, I believe that there is a potential conflict of interest for any grading company or entity that opines on coins and/or bids on them. In fact, many are of the opinion that a dealer has a conflict of interest any time he is dealing with a client.

 

A regular (non-coin related) company might give its best customers price breaks and/or better speed and/or service, etc. to keep them happy. It's very different for a grading company, however, where the best customers are more likely to care about better (as in higher) grades, than they are other things. For example, what happens when a large submitter to a grading company complains about grades?

 

So, for me, at least, the bottom line is that you either trust them or you don't, and everyone is free to do as they please in that regard. I have known John Albanese as a friend, advisor and as an employer for about 25 years, and I trust and respect him as much as anyone I know. So I trust and expect him to do things honestly and expertly. I don't expect others who don't know him as well (if at all) to feel the same way I do. And I have no problems if they choose to take a wait and see attitude - in fact I recommend it.

 

What I do have a problem with, however (and I am not speaking of you), is the bashers, who know little or nothing, yet make wild, unfounded accusations without any apparent regard for the truth or the facts. I know that there are many unanswered questions, but that is no excuse for much of the pathetic behavior I have seen.

[WinstonWare]

Maybe the consortium should be democratic, like we vote for who’s in it for the next 4 years. During that time the elected individuals would be prohibited from selling coins.

[relicsncoins]

TPG's and now FPG's (Fourth Party Graders) Sorry, but I think it's a waste of time and money. If a coin is worthy of a premium due to eye appeal and originality, then it will command that premium regardless of whether it has a sticker or not.

 

JJ

[Houston Investor]

I will believe there is going to be a consortium when I actually see it in action - so far it just looks like a lot of hot air by people that got kicked off the PCGS board.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

I will believe there is going to be a consortium when I actually see it in action - so far it just looks like a lot of hot air by people that got kicked off the PCGS board.

 

I'm not even going to tell you that you're badly mistaken - I'll just save your quote for future reference, instead.

[JamminJ]

It will be the greatest thing in numismatics since the Coin Posse. (thumbs u

[PerryHall]

It will be the greatest thing in numismatics since the Coin Posse. (thumbs u

Now that's funny.

[goldrarities.com-migration]

I"t will be the greatest thing in numismatics since the Coin Posse. "

 

 

While the market will decide in the long run, if Collectors Assurance Corp ( CAC) is as successful as Numismatic Consumer Alliance has been it's going to be a grand slam. The one thing that is always indisputable is actual results.

 

From stopcoinfraud.org

 

 

"Year to date, NCA has recovered $1,220,366.00 on behalf of consumers."

 

This is as the of the end of 2006, the number is actually higher now.