| Article content |
- From jagre@attbi.com Mon Dec 30 16:54:44 2002
Return-Path: <jagre@attbi.com>
X-Sender: jagre@attbi.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 31 Dec 2002 00:54:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 30602 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 00:54:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 31 Dec 2002 00:54:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n29.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.85)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 00:54:42 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.181] by n29.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Dec 2002 00:54:39 -0000
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:54:39 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Fun with Grades
Message-ID: <auqpsf+2p9t@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <004c01c2b054$f3db9270$33a55a0c@NUMBER1>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 4045
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
From: "colonialcoinunion <jagre@attbi.com>" <jagre@attbi.com>
X-Originating-IP: 65.96.211.39
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=127693374
X-Yahoo-Profile: colonialcoinunion
I think the ideal approach to grading should be something like the buy-out
clause I have with my 50/50 joint-venture partners in Mexico.
In our contract, it stipulates that I can make a bid of any amount to buy-out
their 50% share of the business. The Mexican guys can then agree to sell to
me their share for my offer price, or they can buy MY 50% share for that
amount.
I'm not sure how to apply this to a coin I already own, but I'm going to go have
a beer and think about it.
On to something -
JA
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Bonjour" <r.bonjour@w...>
wrote:
> I've been thinking about grading for some time. I won't bore you with my
> opinions, but have an idea. At the Nov 2003 C4 Convention someone
(Ray)
> should bring in three coins (probably NJ, since all of the email traffic
> seems to indicate that they are the flavor of the period). Set up a table at
> the rear and allow those interested, to secretly grade each coin on a
> provided ballot. The results will be announced at the end of the meeting.
> Let's have the "experts" grade the coins. Should be interesting!
> Roy
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <jagre@a...>
> To: <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 7:41 PM
> Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Fun with Grades
>
>
> > Byron -
> >
> > I agree with that.
> >
> > But what bothers me about the present situation is not the wide variety of
> > equally valid opinions (I accept that), its the element of 'when I'm
> selling it its
> > an AU, when I'm buying it its a VF' mentality that I find to be so
> distasteful and
> > one of the very worst parts of our hobby.
> >
> > Speaking for myself, whatever opinion I hold of a coin I honestly believe
> it will
> > be the same whether I'm buying or selling it.
> >
> > The other thing I find noteworthy in this situation is that while PCGS can
> be
> > criticized for many things (its a Camel Head!), they do have the capacity
> to
> > eliminate some (but not all) of this sellers / buyer 'bias'.
> >
> > John Agre
> >
> > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Byron K. Weston <
bkweston@l...>" <
> > bkweston@l...> wrote:
> > > There's an old saying about opinions, Eric, that I don't think I need
> > > to repeat here.<s> That's why I've only ever relied upon my own -
> > > perhaps that is your point?
> > > Byron
> > >
> > > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "colonialcoinunion
> > > <jagre@a...>" <jagre@a...> wrote:
> > > > During the C4 in Boston I showed a Chalmers Long Worm Shilling to a
> > > > number of people for grading opinions.
> > > >
> > > > The coin was in a PCGS holder at the time but I had covered the
> > > grade.
> > > >
> > > > I was interested to see what people thought of the coin, not to see
> > > if anyone
> > > > could guess what PCGS had called it and I received comments
ranging
> > > from
> > > > XF40 Cleaned to AU58 or better 'sharpest seen' or words to that
> > > effect.
> > > >
> > > > I also showed the coin to the Bowers contingent at the show who
> > > were very
> > > > nice, but generally unimpressed with the coin (they were the XF40
> > > cleaned
> > > > comment). They also mentioned that they 'feared PCGS had called it
> > > an AU
> > > > or something'.
> > > >
> > > > Fast forward to about a week ago when I traced the coin back to the
> > > Bowers
> > > > 97 Rarities Sale where it had been previously sold and where it was
> > > decribed
> > > > at that time (I 'm pretty sure by the same Bowers contingent) as
> > > Choice AU,
> > > > lustrous, and a 'numismatic prize at this grade level'.
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, PCGS called it a 58.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not saying PCGS is right, or any of the opinions I received are
> > > wrong. I'm
> > > > not sure what I'm saying.
> > > >
> > > > It is odd though.
> > > >
> > > > JA
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > colonial-coins-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
|
|---|
| Source URL |
|
|---|
| Date published |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
