"Just Having Fun" MS68 PCGS Slab! 0

[rainbow roosie]

Wondercoin,

Awesome series of posts. You are now officially the historian of Roosie dimes...I still have the JHF catalogue...It sits between my catelogues of the Rothenberger and Shepard commem sales... I think it sits with appropriate company.

[mumu]

Well had this been part of the ebay listing maybe I wouldn't have been so hard on the coin.

[mumu]

Aside from the torch hits, I am a fan of the die polish striations on the obverse. Are they generally seen as a plus or neutral when on a coin not achieving PL status because of them?

[onlyroosies]

This coin was recently graded at PCGS. I once owned this coin several years back. At that time it was graded NGC MS67FT. The coin has changed hands several times since then. It now resides in a PCGS holder. Care to guess the grade. Look the coin over real good. I have no connection to the coin nor do I know who currently owns it.

 

[coinman_23885]

Did that one (the 1950) upgrade to MS68 FB or MS68+ FB at PCGS?

[onlyroosies]

talking about hits, gashes and marks, post or pre, Look at the tip of the chin and tip of the nose

[coinman_23885]

talking about hits, gashes and marks, post or pre, Look at the tip of the chin and tip of the nose

 

I didn't mean to suggest that I would agree with the grade, but based on the original coin, if it is a MS68 FB by PCGS color standards, then I see no reason the 1950 wouldn't be.

[AHFreak]

If I remember right, the 1964 MS68 Kennedy half dollar fetched 25K at auction in Feb.

[coinman_23885]

On another note, I have seen coins of equal technical merit (aside from the toning) in MS68FB NNC, NTC, and PCI holders, and sadly I am not joking.

 

Pricing is even more subjective than coin grading IMHO, and if the grading services are going to try to price a coin rather than describing its grade, then they should stop pretending like the label represents the coin's physical condition. Color bumping to that degree pretty much moots the grade as most collectors understand it. To complicate it for collectors, the published grading standards by each service even focus on technical aspects when clearly they no longer matter. Since the market is subject to huge fluctuations in tastes and pricing, there is no wonder that grade inflation is rampant. I would say that very few collectors are able to grade at that level, so many are effectively paying a premium on a premium not realizing that there is already a color premium built in as they chase fantasy grades on paper labels for registry slots.

 

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the 1950 you posted is not worthy of a strong premium above its technical grade - it absolutely is. I am not anti-toning (indeed I have sold common date toned coins in mid to lower MS grade for MS68 money), but at least I thought the grades were close. The situation that is being described is analogous to a Jenga tower; with changing market conditions and positions (blocks), it is setting the entire market up for long term

systemic risk and possible collapse. The grading services brought money and investors into the coin market, and it looks to me like they are going to cause the certified coin market to collapse when money fleas due to market confusion.

 

Will the grading services be able to honor their guarantees when the market changes and the coins that were MS68 FBs by today's standards are really MS67 FBs by tomorrow's standards? It would seem that a change in market standards could set up the services for huge unfunded liabilities. I cannot envision this being sustainable, and I can now see why there is so much instability in the rare coin market.

Edited May 14, 2016 by coinman_23885

[Afterword]

"....but based on the original coin, if it is a MS68 FB by PCGS color standards, then I see no reason the 1950 wouldn't be."

 

 

 

 

If this is true, color (eye appeal) plays a powerful role in the grading process – overriding even original condition. Pretty interesting, for something that is produced post mint.

[AHFreak]

"....but based on the original coin, if it is a MS68 FB by PCGS color standards, then I see no reason the 1950 wouldn't be."

 

 

 

 

If this is true, color (eye appeal) plays a powerful role in the grading process – overriding even original condition. Pretty interesting, for something that is produced post mint.

 

Eye appeal is the most important factor in grading a coin, that's one of the first things you learn in the grading classes.

 

Also, I hate to be the guy who does this again in this thread, but the nose and chin on that 1950 dime do not have hits on them, not saying that they should or shouldn't affect grade, I'm just saying they were caused during the minting process... if that affected grade, then we would need to acknowledge any and all machine doubling and factor it into the overall grade of the coin. I'd rather not go there after this thread

Edited May 14, 2016 by AHFreak

[coinman_23885]

"....but based on the original coin, if it is a MS68 FB by PCGS color standards, then I see no reason the 1950 wouldn't be."

 

 

 

 

If this is true, color (eye appeal) plays a powerful role in the grading process – overriding even original condition. Pretty interesting, for something that is produced post mint.

 

Eye appeal is the most important factor in grading a coin, that's one of the first things you learn in the grading classes.

 

Also, I hate to be the guy who does this again in this thread, but the nose and chin on that 1950 dime do not have hits on them, not saying that they should or shouldn't affect grade, I'm just saying they were caused during the minting process... if that affected grade, then we would need to acknowledge any and all machine doubling and factor it into the overall grade of the coin. I'd rather not go there after this thread

 

The obvious scrape on the reverse (on the torch) was enough for me.

Edited May 14, 2016 by coinman_23885

[Afterword]

"The situation that is being described is analogous to a Jenga tower; with changing market conditions and positions (blocks), it is setting the entire market up for long term systemic risk and possible collapse."

 

 

 

 

It is one specialty market among many such building blocks of the coin market. I do not know that the collapse of one block would cause it all to start tumbling down. Perhaps it would simply disintegrate, leaving an empty niche to be filled.

[coinman_23885]

"The situation that is being described is analogous to a Jenga tower; with changing market conditions and positions (blocks), it is setting the entire market up for long term systemic risk and possible collapse."

 

 

 

 

It is one specialty market among many such building blocks of the coin market. I do not know that the collapse of one block would cause it all to start tumbling down. Perhaps it would simply disintegrate, leaving an empty niche to be filled.

 

But grade inflation isn't just limited to toning, unfortunately. That I could live with given that it is but a small segment of the market. To me it is a larger issue: the inherent long term instability of market grading.

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by coinman_23885

[onlyroosies]

Yes, the 50P above is PCGS graded MS68FB and is currently listed in the next Heritage auction.

[erwindoc]

Wondercoin,

Awesome series of posts. You are now officially the historian of Roosie dimes...I still have the JHF catalogue...It sits between my catelogues of the Rothenberger and Shepard commem sales... I think it sits with appropriate company.

 

I still have my JHF catalogue too! I don't own any of his coins, I do have some with the same pedigrees!

[physics-fan3.14]

 

So, we have a pop 1 half dollar at $22,000 now (real auction price), at least one 1964 quarter at $15,000 guide (and that coin is only an MS67+ grade, not MS68) .... is the "lowly" pop 1 dime from 1964 in MS68FB not worth $8,000 - $10,000? OK, should it be a $5,000 coin? $3,000? Obviously, JHF has the right to ask any price he wants for his pop 1 coin.

 

Wondercoin

 

Wondercoin - thanks for that very interesting history of the collection.

 

I think there are two separate issues that people are talking about here: the price of the coin, and the grade of the coin. I believe you have satisfactorily given us the history of the prices for these ultra high grade coins, and the seller is absolutely free to ask anything he wants.

 

The second issue, and the one that is more of a sticking point for a lot of us - is the 68 grade actually warranted for this piece, given the large hits on the torch? (perhaps you can shed some light on whether these are pre- or post- strike hits as well - although the difference is unimportant to me - a hit is a hit. I'm not as convinced as some others are that these are "mint made").

[brg5658]

Having read the very interesting posts by Wondercoin, the thing that bothers me the most is that he has basically documented the inconsistency of grading these "uber-grade" gems over many years, and has also along the way documented the gradeflation problem.

 

For many of these "top pop" coins, take away the registry nonsense, and you have a $100 coin in a $10K+ labeled plastic holder. If that's what people want, then so be it. But, not my cup of tea.

 

 

[coinsbygary]

Having read the very interesting posts by Wondercoin, the thing that bothers me the most is that he has basically documented the inconsistency of grading these "uber-grade" gems over many years, and has also along the way documented the gradeflation problem.

 

For many of these "top pop" coins, take away the registry nonsense, and you have a $100 coin in a $10K+ labeled plastic holder. If that's what people want, then so be it. But, not my cup of tea.

 

 

I've been reluctant to comment on this thread but what brg5658 has summarized as evidenced by the other posts in this thread is true. I myself have been tempted by the registry bug, but as they say, "you gotta pay to play". That is just the nature of the beast. This puts pressure on the grading services to inflate the grades based on the demands placed on them by collectors desiring to assemble top graded registry sets (re-submits until you get the desired grade).

 

That said, it is not my intention to beat up on the registry system because I believe it serves a very important purpose. I've always believed that the best coins in a series belong in sets together. And all the better if they are on display for the rest of the numismatic community to see. The "competition" between collectors to assemble the best sets drives up the cost of the coins.

 

My desire then is to assemble sets that I can be proud to own based on my means to pay for them. They may not be the top POPs but they fit into my budget. Take for example the subject of this thread. I can't compete for MS-68 Rosies, but a set of MS-66 to 67 Rosies is definitely something I could be proud of and have fun collecting especially if I can cherry-pick the nicest looking coins for their grade. The registry then serves me as a tool to to assemble the best sets I can afford.

 

In my own collection, I have targeted one set to be the best of the best. That set is my eleven coin collection of Netherlands Wilhelmina 10 gulden gold coins. This set is only affordable because it's small and practically no one collects them. However, if it's about the coins and assembling the best of the best coins together into a set, then this set accomplishes just that. Six of the eleven coins are top POPs and all the coins are MS-65 or higher. Yes ego gets into it, but this set satisfies my fix for the best set without breaking my bank!

 

In the end, if someone wants to buy the coin that is the subject of this thread, they will have to believe that the coin is worth $10,000 AND that the coin is properly graded. That responsibility falls upon the person willing to spend the money. For my part, I'm just an arm chair quarterback agreeing with brg5658 that this is not my cup of tea, at least not for Rosies. Furthermore, I am in no way jealous of those who have the resources to do this as long as I can enjoy perusing their sets!

Gary

 

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by gherrmann44

[Wondercoin]

"Having read the very interesting posts by Wondercoin, the thing that bothers me the most is that he has basically documented the inconsistency of grading these "uber-grade" gems over many years, and has also along the way documented the gradeflation problem.

 

For many of these "top pop" coins, take away the registry nonsense, and you have a $100 coin in a $10K+ labeled plastic holder. If that's what people want, then so be it. But, not my cup of tea."

 

BRG: Yes and no. Remember, that at the 2009 Auction, in representing JHF, I personally assessed what the grade on each coin SHOULD HAVE BEEN and not what it was at that time, and then priced the reserves accordingly.

 

For example, at the time I sold the set for JHF, I knew that many of the PCGS-MS67FB coins would very likely cross over to NGC-MS68FT coins. But, I never submitted any coins in the set to NGC for that purpose. I simply reserved the coins valued at NGC-MS68FT money (minus 10% or 20% to leave some "meat on the bones" for the professional upgraders). In fact, one of the strongest "world class" upgraders in the country (who can easily make 7 figures a year simply buying coins at auction to upgrade them at the services) called me after the auction and congratulated me on reserving the coins in the set for JHF to "near perfection". He told me which coins he bought to cross over to NGC-MS68FT and which he could not buy because my reserve did not leave enough money on the table to make it worth his while. Both myself and JHF then watched with enjoyment all of the JHF dimes getting crossed over to NGC-MS68FT (with and without * where deserving) where they were worth a little more money that what they fetched in the sale (and the coins that failed to upgrade that were worth less). Total "win-win". We ended up getting upwards of 20x the Price Guide for coins in their current holders and collectors and dealers ended up with coins that were either among the nicest ever seen for that date or coins they could cross over successfully for a reasonable profit.

 

BUT, this does not mean that "gradeflation" has reared its ugly head. Many of these dimes were a point higher in quality when we sold them in the holder a point lower. Or, in the case of the "monster" 1947-S Dime in the set that I reserved at 26x the Price Guide at the time, had a real bid at 24.6x the Price Guide which JHF passed on, the coin thereafter upgraded from MS67FB to MS68FB and I still believe the coin is an MS68+FB coin. In fact, Nick must also agree as he asked me yesterday in a note to please stop trying the 1947-S for MS68+FB so I do not ruin his current pop 1 coin for the type where he is currently receiving "bonus" registry points for the pop 1! .

 

Wondercoin

 

edited to add ... As the top set holder at PCGS of 1932-date Washington quarters, we can have a serious conversation about "gradeflation". I have watched about 15-20 of my pop 1/0 coins go to pop 2/0 or even worse over the past couple years. But, obviously, this is not the thread for that.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

Physics-fan... The impartial catalogers at Superior Auctions back in 2009 described the condition of the coin as follows:

 

"An abundant amount of deep reddish-golden toning decorates the lower portion of the obverse. The reverse displays a peripheral ring of olive-golden color. Sharply impressed and virtually without flaws. This represents a unique opportunity to own the very best!".

 

At some point in the next 30-60 days, I will likely send the coin over to Mark Feld to have it auctioned off in the August Summer ANA sale in Anaheim, CA (right "down the street" from me if anyone wants to grab a drink and talk Roosies). We can also let the impartial catalogers at Heritage describe the coin for everyone to read.

 

Since my "master" is solely JHF in this case, I would not be as impartial as Superior was and I know Heritage will be in the auctioning of the coin. If I told folks here the coin was "wonderful" and someone bought it and did not agree with me when they received it, I would need to deal with the complaint on line here publicly. If I wanted to be "super careful" and find any fault I could with the coin to make the board members here greatly appreciate my extreme conservative grading approach, I might not be representing JHF's best interests in the process.

 

So, let Heritage auction the coin and anyone here can call Mark directly ahead of the sale and ask him to personally describe the dime to anyone who cares. Probably couldn't be a fairer resolution to finally saying "goodbye" to this very special pop 1/0 coin! And, the new owner can then field all the questions from there .

 

Wondercoin

 

P.S. Of course, if the dime sells first on ebay Mark, it won't be consigned

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[mumu]

If it's not gradeflation then what would you call it that these coins were obviously in the wrong holders at a lower grade? Wrong grades at the time? \Maturity of the resubmit game? Which leads into the question of if a coin requires 10 submissions to get into the "right" grade slab then who's wrong? 9 graders or 1 submitter and the last grader?

 

I am not a wealth hater. I do not envy anyone wealthy. I am thankful I live in a paradigm where I have an opportunity to the play the game. I have had financial ups and downs and currently I am on the ascend with a few so far successful business ventures. That being said as a purist at heart, any time money can brute force an advantage to the wealthy at the detriment of the truth when its in "poor hands", I get the urge to whine.

 

This same coin in the OP, in the hands of an unimportant player, would get SLAMMED( its kind of getting slammed here too but it also has a solid defense that would not exist in my hypothetical). I am a good example of that as a not very popular poster here or ATS for the better whole of a decade+ now. If I posted that coin as a GTG NEWP it would get order MS 66'd all day. (I do not pick myself as the example for the sake of sympathy as I have in fact embraced my not so liked persona, I just don't want to call anyone else out).

 

Maybe I am partially biased because I now own them. But I have theorized the asking price for a couple my toned peace dollars in certain dealer hands, and certainly a ton of other poster's coins here. There seems to be a strong reality that many collectors will refuse to pay moon money from other collectors, but as soon as their favorite dealers post prices in the stratosphere, money becomes no object.

Edited May 14, 2016 by mumu

[coinman_23885]

There seems to be a strong reality that many collectors will refuse to pay [strong] money from other collectors, but as soon as their favorite dealers post prices... money becomes no object.

 

I'm not sure I agree with you. My observations do not match. With a few exceptions, I have had success selling very high end (eye appeal wise) coins to collectors at prices comparable to what some of the large national dealers would ask. There have been a few hold outs. But is that a result of collectors not willing to pay up because most wouldn't consider me a dealer? I don't think so. There is a much smaller pool of potential buyers that are willing to play at that level.

Edited May 14, 2016 by coinman_23885

[physics-fan3.14]

Physics-fan... The impartial catalogers at Superior Auctions back in 2009 described the condition of the coin as follows:

 

"An abundant amount of deep reddish-golden toning decorates the lower portion of the obverse. The reverse displays a peripheral ring of olive-golden color. Sharply impressed and virtually without flaws. This represents a unique opportunity to own the very best!".

 

 

Catalogers are absolutely *NOT* impartial. Their duty is to maximize profits for the company, and profits for the consignor to generate continuing submissions. Auction catalogs are advertisements, and should be read with the same skepticism as any other advertisement.

 

For example, "virtually without flaws" completely ignores the large and obvious flaws on the torch which have been the subject of this thread.

 

What I want to hear is your opinions of these marks.

[Wondercoin]

Physics-Fan .... You only posted half the story.... you left out the part about Heritage creating their own description in the near future and YOU having the ability to simply ask the esteemed board member, Mark Feld, to tell you if he fully agrees with the description or not. Do you have any doubt that Mark won't feed you an "advertisement", but rather an honest assessment of the coin?

 

I understand you might like to hear my opinion of JHF's coin. But, why would you treat my opinion any differently than Heritage's assessment? You suggest an auction company is only in it to maximize profits for its consignors (and its company). For some reason, do you trust me more than Heritage when I also (better) have the desire to maximize profits for my consignors or I may be doing a poor job in accepting their consignments in the first place?

 

That said, a reason I will not give you my opinion on the dime is that it would be nothing other than self-serving in nature. I represent the seller and owner of the coin. I've posted on this board about 35-40 posts in 14 years. I am not interested in posting a self serving post about another company's product as the agent for the owner of the coin here when I can just as easily permit a TRULY impartial guy like Mark to tell every board member here what he personally thinks of the coin just as soon as he gets it in hand. Anyone can simply pick up the phone, call Mark and ask Mark what his honest assessment of the coin is.

 

So, Physics-Fan - I have created for you a perfectly simple method to get your questions answered by one of the finest graders in the world. Mark - I hereby grant you express permission to tell Physics-Fan (and any other caller desiring to hear you opinion) the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about this dime and whether you feel it is worthy of the grade or even what grade you might personally assign to it.

 

Could anyone here ask for anything more fair than that?

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[physics-fan3.14]

Well, that was a non-answer. You also have a bias and conflict of interest, I understand that. When asked a direct question, a seller can answer the question honestly and still be fair to both the buyer and seller.

 

Heritage has a bias. Everyone has a bias.

 

Mark Feld also has a bias. I trust him to be honest - but everyone has a bias. There are things that, as an employee of Heritage, it would not be in his or his company's interest to say.

 

As a collector, I have to figure out what the bias is, and interpret it.

[mumu]

Not sure auction descriptions are the answer. Afterall Teletrade has spoiled us with cornering the market back in the day on coins with "pleasing surfaces". Magically 100% of the coins sold had em.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Physics-Fan .... You only posted half the story.... you left out the part about Heritage creating their own description in the near future and YOU having the ability to simply ask the esteemed board member, Mark Feld, to tell you if he fully agrees with the description or not. Do you have any doubt that Mark won't feed you an "advertisement", but rather an honest assessment of the coin?

 

I understand you might like to hear my opinion of JHF's coin. But, why would you treat my opinion any differently than Heritage's assessment? You suggest an auction company is only in it to maximize profits for its consignors (and its company). For some reason, do you trust me more than Heritage when I also (better) have the desire to maximize profits for my consignors or I may be doing a poor job in accepting their consignments in the first place?

 

That said, a reason I will not give you my opinion on the dime is that it would be nothing other than self-serving in nature. I represent the seller and owner of the coin. I've posted on this board about 35-40 posts in 14 years. I am not interested in posting a self serving post about another company's product as the agent for the owner of the coin here when I can just as easily permit a TRULY impartial guy like Mark to tell every board member here what he personally thinks of the coin just as soon as he gets it in hand. Anyone can simply pick up the phone, call Mark and ask Mark what his honest assessment of the coin is.

 

 

 

So, Physics-Fan - I have created for you a perfectly simple method to get your questions answered by one of the finest graders in the world. Mark - I hereby grant you express permission to tell Physics-Fan (and any other caller desiring to hear you opinion) the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about this dime and whether you feel it is worthy of the grade or even what grade you might personally assign to it.

 

Could anyone here ask for anything more fair than that?

 

Wondercoin

 

Please read my thoughts as offered in a spirit of courtesy. I can understand your position, although it has a somewhat defensive tone, and maybe it should. I am not knowledgeable concerning any background noise.

 

Whether Mr. Feld does or does not agree with a description of a coin, it is only an opinion, nothing more. Mr Feld would without hesitation confirm that is all his assessment is: an opinion. Who he works for, his level of experience, his monetary interest or non-interest is not relevant, and presenting his opinion as the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and whether he feels it is worthy of the grade or not, is misdirection of the issue being discussed, which is the marks. Mr Feld earlier opined about his position on descriptions. That is all that is necessary from him. A business decision is involved. Of course everyone is biased. That is the nature of grading and buying and selling and business. Whether Mr. Feld is one of the finest graders in the world or not is not germane and reads as an attempt to silence any objection or commentary concerning the coin, because if one of the finest graders in the world tells the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then what more does anybody require? That is an emotion based statement meant to tug at the hearts of honorable people. Of course he will tell you the truth about his opinion. Feeling is not truth. Impartiality is not truth. Feelings and impartiality are opinions, nothing more. You are attempting to set aside the remarks of another person that disagrees or questions tge value or the status of the coin, by invoking the name of Mr. Feld. Mr. Feld knows no more than any other experienced person as to what caused the marks, and whether or not the marks constitute a downgrading of opinion or a downgrading of eye appeal. All that is being offered for sale is a branding. If the Circle K Cattle Brand is the best of the best, then why buy the Circle Y Brand? Forget that the person rendering an opinion possibly has a different depth perception, a different opinion of what constitutes eye appeal, a different color spectrum ability, a different vision acuity, or a different level of knowledge about marks.It is the #1 Circle K Brand, and has been judged to be the #1 finest of the #1 Circle K Brand. In other words, all that is happening is salesmanship and publicity. There is no such thing as bad publicity in the present issue. There is vested interest to sell. There is vested interest to convince the public to buy. Somebody will or somebody won't. The rest is just a commercial. I appreciate your silence position of offering your personal opinion. But, you should not invoke the name of another to make a sales pitch. You mentioned only half a story being told. That in itself is a sales pitch. There is nothing wrong with it. Sometimes the method of hype can backfire.

 

The point is IMHO it was not very mannerly to place someone else in the position of spokesperson for you in this manner. Make your own sales pitch would be a more acceptable manner, to me.

[Wondercoin]

Mr. McKnowitall ...

 

Perhaps you did not read a page or two earlier. Or, perhaps you did and it did not matter to you. But,

 

I did not just randomly select Mark to render an opinion of the dime to anyone asking. I mentioned that I planned to consign the coin to Mark's auction house. And, I gave Mark "my blessing" to be as candid as possible (as I am sure he usually is anyway) with anyone asking about the coin. I "gave that blessing" because it was suggested that perhaps the auction house might embellish the quality of coins from time to time in an effort to maximize the recovery for its consignors. I just wanted Mark to know I was totally comfortable with him rendering his opinion (however positive or negative) to anyone interested in the dime.

 

I've already commented on the overall quality of the dime. And, to be clear, it was the nicest quality coin I ever located for that particular date/MM in my personal (26 year) search from 1983-2009. I don't recall seeing a nicer example for the date in the 7+ years since the time of the landmark 2009 auction.

 

The coin has been in a bank vault for 99.999% of the time since the 2009 auction. I have spent perhaps 1 or 2 minutes with the coin in hand in the past several years. My son Justin prepared the ebay auction for me, including the coin photography (which, by the way, I believe he did a sensational job with, don't you think?) In any event, I should have the coin in hand before sending it off to Mark and if anyone desires my personal impression of the coin (knowing full well to do your own homework before bidding on it), feel free to send me an email (mjcapc@aol.com) with your phone number and I will try to give you a call to discuss the coin.

 

Wondercoin

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2016 by Wondercoin

[coinman_23885]

Mark Feld also has a bias. I trust him to be honest - but everyone has a bias. There are things that, as an employee of Heritage, it would not be in his or his company's interest to say.

 

Even though I too would be interested in hearing Wondercoin's candid assessment of the coin and specifically the residue and marks, in his defense, I agree that Mark Feld would be 100% neutral and would be completely candid.

 

Mark Feld has always been candid with me and doesn't hold back. This is based on my interactions with him as a dealer and even after joining Heritage. If his position prevents him from revealing information or being neutral, I have no doubt he would tell you that he couldn't advise you because of a conflict of interest. He wouldn't sugar coat the coin or downplay its faults.