World Colonial

Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by World Colonial

  1. I think the problem with what you describe for a dealer is on the buying side, but this is an inference only. It also might be a problem for auction firms but this is more of an inference. For what I collect, there isn't and never was much available to buy but the supply of coins form these countries seems to be noticeably lower, except for overpriced mostly junk on eBay. Heritage used to have a much better selection of Latin coinage but it's substantially dried up. Look at the May sale (forgot the sponsor offhand) if you have interest. For far more widely collected coinage, don'
  2. When I was a less experienced collector, I bought a few fakes. The first I bought was in 2000 shortly after I resumed collecting, from a street peddler in LaPaz, Bolivia. It was a "1684 Bolivian royal 2R" for which I paid $40. (Should of been a hint right there, right?) A real one in this condition (which I don't believe even exists) would be worth thousands even then. I was more focused on the consistency of the design elements, never paying attention that it was undersized (diameter of a 1R instead of a 2R) and underweight (tin or aluminum instead of silver). In other words, it was
  3. Yes, that's usually all that makes most key dates a key date for the most widely collected series now and recently. It's one of the most widely misused terms in US collecting along with "scarce" and "rare". On the PCGS forum, I've seen posters claim 2019 and 2020 W quarters are "key dates". I suppose it is if collecting strictly out of circulation as predominated in the 60's but it still renders the concept meaningless where most series must be bought at a premium to FV.
  4. The form requires CC information and if you don't pay this way, bank account details I believe. By signing the form and submitting the coins, you are agreeing in advance to pay for the services rendered. When I have submitted to NGC, my recollection is they charged my card after the grading results were finalized. The submitter can dispute the charge but good luck winning that. As you know, in exchange for the fee, the TPG agrees to provide an opinion on the authenticity and grade. From what I can tell, that's what the OP received. We can debate the amount of the fee due to the decla
  5. I don't know much about comic pricing but infer that any key comics which have increased noticeably are more prominent than most (supposed) key date (mostly US) coins. These comics have a (much) higher cultural appeal than any coin too, most of which have none. This is my concurrent inference behind the reported recent price for the Jordan GM-10 rookie card of 700K where I understand the population count is already 316. No duplicates for sure so the price can't be based upon any supposed rarity. For very common key date US coinage (all of the most widely collected series) to increa
  6. I stumbled across this thread yesterday but have not read all (only some) of the posts. It's a rant and nothing more, the only thing it is expressing is that the outcome was contrary to their personal preference. I have seen similar sentiments before, but without the conspiratorial accusations. Somehow, I have the sneaking suspicion it has a lot to do with the amount of grading fees paid. I'd be disgusted too, but at myself if I wasted that kind of money
  7. I think the answer to your question is because the physical market is actually very illiquid. I have not read anyone else admit it but this seems to be the reality. I have read plenty of claims about a shortage and on the website, they have been out of many products for months. Above I surmised it might be a hedging issue because if it isn't that, I have no idea why dealers don't raise their bids. Surely that would make some difference. If the demand is so great, why don't they cut their spreads to try to make more profit on volume? Physical silver is a horrible "i
  8. The premiums have been near current levels since last March when the price tanked to $11+. I mostly check but have also looked at APMEX on occasion. Spread is $8.50 for the ASE, $27.99 bid and $36.49 ask. Somewhat cheaper at APMEX if bought in volume.
  9. It depends upon the valuation measure used. By what I consider to be the little of value P/E ratio, maybe. I don't follow it as closely anymore. By others, definitely worse now. Recently, several foreign markets have "broken out" or appear to but valuation wise, the US is still on an island alone in deep outer space. The absolute worst are credit markets, not something like crypto or NFT, because that's what's propping up this whole house of cards. There is no question that credit quality and leverage is far worse now than 2000, even as economic conditions have noticeably deteriora
  10. These posts have gone somewhat off track but anyway, you seem to be misreading my sentiments. From the accounts I have read, I don't think it would be inaccurate to claim that Greece experienced something worse than the 1930's depression. I have no idea what it is like now (don't follow it anymore) and don't know if what I read was fully accurate, but it was quite bad after 2011. I don't see a Greece here for the foreseeable future but I do expect living standards to be noticeably worse for a noticeable proportion of the population than you apparently do. Another thing I will add
  11. I'm not specifically claiming JP Morgan will or won't become insolvent. I was using it as an example as part of my earlier rebuttal that the banking system is in such great shape. The financial system and the economy isn't either. I wasn't stating it is imminent. My primary claim is that the living standards of most Americans are going to decline noticeably,, whether it happens suddenly or protracted. Given the current political response, I expect it will mostly be protracted which will be worse. The current economic performance is substantially artificial. How can anyone not
  12. My posts were hardly apocalyptic. Claiming the majority of Americans are going to be poorer or a lot poorer because the country has been living beyond its means is hardly radical, it's completely rational. Anyone who knows anything about market history knows this is a mania. Anyone who claims it isn't a mania believes that it's somehow different this time and that somehow, the United States economy and American living standards are exempt from reality. Why would anyone believe that? The 1970's weren't "doom and gloom". By any sensible standard, it was a time of minor difficulty f
  13. Absent some really unforeseen event, I don't think JP Morgan will fail in the traditional sense but this doesn't change what I wrote. My primary point is that the banking system as a whole only appears "sound" because of everything else I wrote. I don't place reliance on models. How reliable would these models be without the distortions I described? The financial and economic community (publicly anyway) was also almost completely caught off guard by 2008. There is no "new normal", not in the sense that I interpret this sentiment. This "new normal" infers something for nothin
  14. It will be viewed as "too high" if and when people ever correlate it with declining living standards. That's one of the points I was trying to make. Up to this point especially in the prior year, most people (even many who should know better) seem to believe there is no consequence to this unprecedented issuance or claim it can be worried about later.. It's probably not "too high" yet because the actual public debt that must be serviced is "only" about 85% of current GDP. This is the nominal $28T+ less amounts held by government "trust funds" and the Federal Reserve. It's still "manag
  15. I am aware of this. I used this example as a counterpoint that bank balance sheets are "rock solid". My point is that it is artificial. The only "natural" buyer for mortgages are pension funds, insurance companies and if there is anyone else who happens to have long term matching liabilities. Banks obviously don't think holding most of this paper is such a great investment or else they wouldn't securitize it. Yes, I know they also sell it to maintain leverage ratios. The point I was making is that the relative risk is much higher. I don't see how anyone can dispute it, consid
  16. My definition of "rock solid" is a lot different than yours but that's ok. Balance sheets and capital only appear to be "rock solid" since the underlying assets are inflated by the credit bubble. As an example, issuing an 80/20 mortgage in today's residential real estate market at bubble level prices is hardly conservative lending and a "quality asset". Credit quality in the aggregate is the lowest, ever. There is more debt than ever before and measured by either GDP or the value of underlying real collateral, the economy has never been more leveraged than it is now. Whatever risk
  17. That pretty much sums it up. Best I can deduce, a portion of the "metal bugs" have concluded that because what is actually mostly credit expansion which they call "printing" doesn't result in their expected outcome, it has to be manipulation. After all, they cannot possibly be wrong, so there has to be some dastardly conspiracy which has cheated them out of their deserved windfall. The current gold price doesn't make any difference either. Gold has increased what, 40 fold since 1971 when convertibility was suspended? It isn't remotely cheap versus other commodities (historically
  18. I don't know what these agencies would say about it as I have not talked to anyone responsible for direct supervision at one of these firms and they aren't allowed to discuss specifics anyway. What was generally reported when the financial system nearly blew up in 2008, these firms had all kinds of garbage on their balance sheets. "Level 2" and "level 3" assets which I would classify as less liquid and mostly riskier than any equally leveraged position in futures. I doubt it's much better now. IMO, the regulators are attempting to keep the financial system from falling apart but eq
  19. I agree with you here, with the qualifications I added in my prior replies. For one, there would be more supply if the spread wasn't an insane 20% to 25% right now. If someone buys, they have to hold as if they don't, they might as well incinerate their savings. The risk reward proposition as a retail buyer isn't that great due to the buy-sell spread. This is presumably the primary reason most opt to buy the "paper" metal.
  20. It's psychology, not the cause-effect most claim to believe.
  21. Take a look at the relative value of silver versus other things. Is it really that cheap compared to houses? Cars? A barrel of oil? Most things people have to buy? I have been hearing the "manipulation" claim for several decades. If it were actually true and it was that underpriced, there shouldn't be now and should not have been at any time a single ounce to be bought. That's what happens in a freely traded market with price control attempts. There has been nothing stopping anyone (including "metal bugs") from buying up every available ounce on the open market to force the "pape
  22. Nothing the upcoming end of the financial asset levitation act won't resolve on the supply side. I have admitted that I have been wrong on the timing on the never ending financial mania many times but it's coming because there is no free lunch in life. I expect enough metal accumulators to turn into forced sellers later. It's not like most metal advocates have much economic staying power. (They are mostly weak hands. Middle class with limited savings and dependent upon their job and artificially cheap credit.) What I do not know is whether there is going to be another 1980 or 2011 sp
  23. I was being sarcastic. When someone is running a Ponzi scheme, no succession plan required. No segregation of duties either and you don't take vacations so someone else can look at the records.