TomB

Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Content Count

    11,432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

2 Followers

About TomB

  • Boards Title
    TOTAL NEWBIE

Personal Information

  • Homepage
    www.tbnumismatics.com

Recent Profile Visitors

818 profile views
  1. I think along the same lines as Coinbuf and my reasoning, which I suspect mirrors Coinbuf's reasoning fairly well, follows. A raw copper coin with blazing red color and/or clear mirrors might not have been the same red color or might not have had the same mirrors just two or three weeks ago. In other words, a raw copper coin could have had its surfaces enhanced, altered or otherwise changed in the very recent past and such coins are notorious for changing over time to a different appearance. They may become darker, they may get more brown, they may spot or haze. Regardless, the change is almost always in the negative direction. However, a blazing red copper coin or one with clear mirrors in a PCGS rattler holder, or holder of similar generation, means that it looked pretty much similar when it was holdered (in this case from 1986-1989) as it does today and that also means that it is likely to continue to be stable into the foreseeable future. Once that coin in the ancient holder is placed into a new holder then all bets are off in terms of both stability and in how it is looked at by other folks who might not think the coin stable and/or original. Personally, it is doubtful I would ever take an ancient holder with a gold CAC sticker and regrade for a single point higher with a green CAC sticker. However, I think each of us should do what is best for each of our collections and for the directions we want to take those collections.
  2. My post had meant to convey that all the dealers loved the coin when I first showed it to them and they all asked what I had paid to obtain the piece. I did not find this odd as I have/had a good working relationship with all of them (recall this is about 10-12 years ago so some might not be actively in the business anymore) and I told them honestly what I paid. At that point each dealer, except for one, told me he/she loved the coin, but that I paid too much and wouldn't be able to break even. The lone exception was one dealer who offered me nearly $20k for the coin even though he knew I paid essentially one-third that price. Later, after the coin received the CAC gold sticker, I brought it back to Baltimore and showed it to the same dealers who had seen it previously. This time, their reactions were that they still loved the coin and each offered me around the same number that the previous dealer offered (nearly $20k) at the prior show. In other words, all the dealers loved the coin both before and after the sticker, but the bulk of the dealers valued it differently once it had the gold CAC sticker.
  3. Not exactly. PCGS has a set of rules published in February, 2011 stuck at the top of their coin board. They are pretty much standard or common sense guidelines for a forum that is run by a public company and aimed at a niche market. Traditionally, PCGS moderation has been quite loose in enforcing those rules, which has at times resulted in spiked activity for trolls, alternative IDs and folks who merely post there to muck things up. At such times, PCGS has historically banned a few folks, though they sometimes let them back on the boards. In the last few weeks there was an extreme spike in this type of activity and many of the PCGS regulars got caught up in the nonsense only to find themselves temporarily (or perhaps permanently) banned. The hand of moderation also appears heavier right now because a new, much more active moderator is on the boards and this moderator is making some unpopular choices, which I believe are overdue, regarding closing threads or issuing warnings. Please be advised that there is some heavy bias at times in posts on the NGC boards when the discussion of the PCGS boards pops up and expect to find the same bias at times on the PCGS boards with respect to the NGC boards. As for CaliforniaBen getting banned, I have no information other than what was posted in this thread.
  4. The reverse matches the obverse and might actually be a hair nicer.
  5. Wow! Interesting first post. What was your user ID ATS?
  6. Howdy Mark, and thank you for the welcome. The coin is an 1892 Barber half dollar and I have attached (I believe this was done correctly) an image of the coin, slab and sticker. At the time of acquisition, about a dozen years ago, one could buy an average (euphemistic term for "yuck") PCGS MS66 Barber half dollar in the $4,000-$4,500 range while really nice coins (if they could ever be found!) were in the $6,000-$6,500 range. I paid in the higher range for my coin. Also, at that time a PCGS MS67 Barber half dollar would run at least $12,000 and up to $18,000 or thereabouts. I don't recall if the + grades were being handed out at that time. Today the MS66 cost would be as low as $3,500 and the MS67 cost might be less than $8,000 (in both cases for what I consider inferior coins) while true knockouts have held their value, in my opinion. When I told the bulk of these experienced, seasoned, respectable, reputable, incredibly well-known dealers what I paid they all thought I was buried and then when the coin came back with the gold CAC sticker they all wanted to buy it at the high end of the MS67 range. I guess this shouldn't be so much of a surprise given that even today, more than a decade after CAC was established, they have only awarded 17-business strike Barber half dollars a gold sticker while they have awarded 3,679-green stickers and if we assume a 44% success rate, which I think quite realistic, then around 8,400 business strike Barber half dollars have been submitted to CAC for evaluation. This works out to about one gold CAC sticker for every 494-business strikes submitted for this series.
  7. I can give a real world example of what a gold CAC sticker might be worth. There are only 17 gold CAC stickers for the entire Barber half dollar series and I submitted two of those coins (the only AU58 and the only MS66 gold CAC stickers). Until recently, the MS66 gold sticker coin was not only the single MS66 example with a gold sticker for the type, but it was also the highest graded gold CAC sticker awarded to the series. I paid nearly double the present PCGS Coin Facts price for my MS66 in its OGH shortly before the establishment of CAC and I thought the coin was great. I then brought it to one of the Baltimore shows as a kind of one-coin show-and-tell (it is rare for me to do that) and several high profile, incredibly well-known dealers also apparently loved the coin and each asked what I paid. I told them and every single dealer, save for one, told me I paid too much. The coin was then sent to CAC, received a gold sticker and I decided to do a little test and walked it around the floor at the next Baltimore show and showed it to each of those dealers who had seen it previously. In every case, the dealer who told me I paid too much for the coin as an OGH MS66 at near double the present PCGS Coin Facts price told me they would pay me near current PCGS MS67+ money. That is an enormous percentage and absolute dollar increase. Oh yes, the dealer who didn't think I paid too much for it initially offered me PCGS Coin Facts MS67+ money for the coin prior to its CAC submission.
  8. TomB

    Mr

    Your best bet for a reply would be to contact NGC Customer Service directly.
  9. Obviously, the answer has been posted already, but I meant it when I wrote "No" because there would be no legitimate reason to be able to buy that coin for 80% of melt.
  10. In the earliest days of NGC and PCGS existence, dealers (very few collectors had submission privileges at the time) would quite often prepare coins for submission back-and-forth between NGC and PCGS in order to chase the highest grade possible. This was not done with any form of altruism, but was done to maximize the sales price when they sold the coin. So, to answer your question, dealers sent coins to NGC and PCGS using a strategy to increase their bottom-line and would often ping-pong the coins between services if the possible payoff was attractive enough. Later, perhaps in the early 1990s (1992 or thereabouts) the two grading services started to diverge in what they looked for with respect to high grade type, which was much more popular to send in at the time than the modern coins or bullion pieces of today. In my observation and experience, NGC started to award higher grades to coins with original surfaces where the surfaces were devoid of marks, hits, scrapes, etc... whereas PCGS started to award higher grades to coins with great luster or extremely attractive toning. Over time, this started to weight the pools of coins seen in NGC and PCGS holders so that high grade, valuable coins in NGC holders were more likely to have muted surfaces or neutral-to-unattractive toning while coins from this same niche in PCGS holders were more likely to have good luster, cool toning and better arm's length eye appeal. Obviously, this was not universal and did not happen overnight, but I would think that by 1995-1997 there was a clear distinction between the pools of coins graded by the services that were available at auction or on the bourse. In my opinion, the early decisions by PCGS and NGC ended up harming NGC while helping PCGS establish a firm hold on the top spot in the eyes of many folks.
  11. Honestly, from what you have written I see no reason at all to send them in for certification. There are quite a few of them, they are relatively low grade and you acknowledge that most are not worth the cost of certification. Keep them raw and enjoy them. Buy some sewn-cotton square holders for them and place them inside 2x2 Kraft-style paper envelopes. You will enjoy being able to hold them in-hand, will not have invested the time and expense involved with certification and the coins will take up far less space. Regardless, it would be terrific to see images.
  12. Honestly, from what you have written I see no reason at all to send them in for certification. There are quite a few of them, they are relatively low grade and you acknowledge that most are not worth the cost of certification. Keep them raw and enjoy them. Buy some sewn-cotton square holders for them and place them inside 2x2 Kraft-style paper envelopes. You will enjoy being able to hold them in-hand, will not have invested the time and expense involved with certification and the coins will take up far less space. Regardless, it would be terrific to see images.
  13. Take Mark Feld's advice and buy the book. You will not be sorry.
  14. If the article is "Common" 1909 Lincoln, VDB cent is actually a Matte Proof rarity then you should make note that it is graded PR66RB and that the dealer who submitted it is sharing a portion of the proceeds with the variety attribution specialist who identified it as a matte proof and not with a grader at PCGS. If this is the article you read then your take on it and what is written are two very different things.