Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GoldFinger1969

  • Boards Title
    The Post-man always rings twice. Uhm... ring ring?

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you are getting a common date, I would stretch for the MS-65 level (w or wo CAC)...the premium is worth it for the eye appeal and you'll enjoy a higher-quality coin (at least I do). I doubt you see any AU's sneak that high; MAYBE MS-60/61/62.
  2. They are selling these in-bulk, common dates all MS-63.
  3. By and large, a "C-Corp" is better at protecting assets. CM is right, consult a tax attorney.
  4. 1st post on the new boards ??!! Considering that most of the TPGs and many people here have trouble grading many (most ?) coins to within 2 grades, I find it very funny/ironic that we are worrying about the Top 10% or A-B-C coins.
  5. Agree with Mark, who has been generous with his time on these Forums giving us his opinion, advice, and expertise. CAC is 1 more well-informed opinion. If you don't need it, you don't need it. Most in the hobby sadly do or at least benefit from it (and I include myself in that group).
  6. Anything on Amazon or a coin site regarding 3x, 5x, and 10x magnifyers that you vets swear by ?
  7. I disagree....if they can program chips to drive cars without people and account for all the variables, they can certainly do that for the myriad of possibilities of grading, defects, marks, cleaning, etc. It wouldn't even have to be fool-proof. But on lower-$$$ coins, it would be a nice speedy way to assist the graders.
  8. Mark, on this subject, given the increases in microprocessor and computing power today vs. 10 years ago -- let alone the 1980's when the TPGs came into existence -- how long do you think it will be before all coins submitted to PCGS or NGC are given an automatic scan that checks metallic content, checks dimensions, strike quality, imperfections, etc ? Not necessarily to grade the coins...but to look for counterfeits. A scanner or analyzer should be able to work 50-100x faster than graders if not more. Once a coin was confirmed as authentic, graders could concentrate on the aesthetics and other gray areas that humans excel at but computers can't do (yet).
  9. I personally think it's a nice coin and agree with Mark: if you like it, the $$$ paid are very fair.
  10. Are you talking about that mark between the middle and lower horizontals of the "E" ? Or maybe the indent on the middle horizontal of the "E" ? Either way, it's about 1/50th the size of the "E" itself so maybe it didn't qualify. I can't even tell if the former blotch is on the coin or on the holder. I'd have to see some other PR70 DCAMs to see what the tolerance level is. I mean, if you look long enough at any MS-70 coin you can probably come up with a few microns here or there to knock it down a grade.
  11. Double Eagle Saints ? Augustus Saint Gaudens ?
  12. Good to hear of a case where MS60 gets some respect! Yeah, on alot of coins where high MS is not available at all or at even semi-reasonable prices, the AU is sometimes more visually appealing than MS-60/61/62 coins. Surprised that one has that much of a bump just to MS-60.
  13. Here it is, 1 1/2 and 2 grade up-moves in many of these coins (I am not a Franklin collector so I have no dog in this hunt):
  14. And happens....and I posted a (famous) thread over from CU (not sure if it's still there and I hope I can find it either online or if I cut-and-pasted it into Word) in which a collector saw a Franklin Half he had go up 2 full grades and get the FBL designation and increase in value something like 20-fold (or something like that). I'll try and track down the posts, it was some very savvy collectors who frequent the CU message boards.
  15. I enjoy buying a CAC coin here-and-there and have no problem with the premiums the coins are afforded. I do wonder, however, about John Albanese's statements regarding CAC and grading. First, his belief that there are clearly segmented A-B-C coins within each numerical grade -- I find that farcial. The graders themselves can't agree for sure on many/most coins up to 2 grades higher/lower, and I'm supposed to believe that some of them, including CAC, can tell which are MS-65 A's, B's, and C's ? Please....... Second, his whole mantra is that the TPGs got sloppy with grading, but wasn't he a founding member of NGC right at the time of the 1989-90 Bubble ? I'm not blaming JA, but I think the whole A-B-C thing is ridiculous. I have no problem with CAC affirming some coins as higher/lower for the grade, but the specificity of the A-B-C trichotomy is a bit much to believe given grading standards and their variance. CAC is basically grading the graders, IMO.