How Much Is Buying A Slab Worth ?

No. In fact, I dislike the "rattler" holders themselves, so any coin in one of those probably gets an unconscious downgrade in my mind. (It's the rattling itself I dislike, not anything about how the holders look.) I think some of the older "OGH"s are truly ugly, too, but it's still all about the coin, IMO.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

OGH coins that haven't been through the auction mill or sold on ebay a bunch off times are worth a good look.

Most of my best coins are in old holders. Some I paid a bit more for, some I didn't.

Because you like Saints, OGH are worth a look. If a Saint was puttied, it most certainly would have turned by now. I certainly wouldn't pay 66+ money for them though.

 

'

That's a good point. If it's in old plastic, obviously it's been there a long time. Still not worth paying a premium just for the plastic, IMO, but a small nod in favor of the "OGH" nonetheless.

 

Gotcha MD...good points.

BTW, came across an interesting factoid while hitting the archives for GDJMSP's post......during The Bubble, a Morgan Silver common went for as much as $3,500 or so. A year or two later, it was down to $600 !!!!

 

They should call it the LOGH -- Light Original Green Holder. Those holders (see link above) were so pale green it's tough to tell what color they were. The expert also said they faded over time.

The definitive green holders called the Type 4 or Type 5 -- I think I just bought one -- came into play about 1995 or so. But I see lots of people call this an OGH even though I thought that mean the 1986-1991 period.

 

I do, that's great advice, and Thank You !!!

 

OGH has taken on a generic definition of practically anything in a PCGS holder prior to the advent of the blue inserts in late 1998. I wouldn't sweat the semantics.

 

Conder101's PCGS 1
"Clear blue tinted plastic slab with coarse dot matrix printing on white perforated label. Green reverse, no hologram. (This is the type that was counterfeited) 1986-1989"

PCGS 2
"Hologram added to the reverse of the label. Label is of white paper with the tint being created by thousands of evenly spaced dots. The dots are only visible under magnification. The slab is truly different being actually a slab similar to PCGS 1 within a separate surrounding plastic frame. This two piece construction was done by PCGS as their logo is molded into the edge of the frame at the front lower right. The label is still on perforated edge paper but the perforation are much finer. Printing is from a finer dot matrix printer. Late 1989 maybe Sept - Nov."

You can tell the 2 piece construction by GENTLY pushing a fingernail along the edge of the slab inside the outer ring. If you feel it start to separate, it's a PCGS2, otherwise it's PCGS4 (one piece).

Also, lots of PCGS2s exist without the outer ring (broken off) and are thought to be PCGS1s - the paper and hologram are the give-aways

PCGS 3 is the Doily - same as 2 with the doily label

PCGS 4 is a single piece frame

 

Understood....it's just that there were a few varieties and they eoncompassed a period of 12+ years. So when I saw "OGH" all the time referencing tighter grading standards, I thought it was strange.

 

Some slabs are genuinely rare and people pay premiums for them (things like the NGC black, PCGS Regency, doily, etc). Most of the hype for the OGHs are just that - hype. Sellers on Ebay put slabs up there with high asking prices hoping to trap a sucker, who's heard about the OGHs and their magical properties. They aren't worth a premium at all.

As in all cases, buy the coin not the holder (unless you really are collecting the holder ).

 

PF, I read an article where it appears that alot of easy grading took place about 1997 or so. This would jibe with a lack of recovery from the 1989-90 Bubble after a few years.

So I think even Version 4.0 (up to 1998) would carry some favor with most buyers. Of course, you still have to look at the coin but I would bet the CAC rate for older holders is higher than for the late-1990's/early-2000's.

 

I was there and quite active in this market as both a dealer and collector. My experience in high end, toned gems and both circulated and mint state classic type is that the last version of the OGH (around December 1994-September 1998) was a little bit less tight (less conservative) than the previous version OGH, but that the first version of the blue insert holders (around September 1998-February 2002) were every bit as tight as the OGHs. Additionally, the next short-lived blue insert holder (around February 2002-November 2004) was initially consistent with these standards, too. However, I noticed a definite relaxation in my niche sometime in 2003 and that lasted several years, at least.

Keep in mind that this is for my niche (wonderfully toned gems or circulated and mint state classic coins; primarily silver) and this is for the average coin. Many of the better coins have been cracked out by now, but some are cherished. Lastly, while the grading standards might have changed, what also changed was what PCGS considered a problem-coin and they have gotten much more tough on certain problems in the last fifteen years.

 

GoldFinger - you've put the finger on it. There really are two markets, maybe three...

1. People who collect slabs - a very small # of collectors focused on the history of the slabs, the small differences over time, etc. (buy the holder not the coin)

2. People who are looking to crack out and gain on the upgrade. The fallacy there is that MOST of the EASY upgrades were done during several waves previously. It's really only new material that's been locked away in a collection for 20-30 years that is a candidate. It's just hard to tell the difference between new and picked over unless you look at the coin very carefully (buy the coin not the holder)

3. People looking to complete sets that were started long ago in a particular holder - I've seen a nearly complete set of commems that came to market this year all in PCGS 1 OGH. I would guess the collector spent a lot of time & money to chase down the missing pieces and finally gave up - it was as complete as it would ever be. I guess s/he decided not to try and cross it over en-mass and so consigned it to a Texas dealer...

But #3 is a tiny group, #1 isn't very large either...

 

Tom, I think your timeline overlaps pretty much what I have read and heard from a few people who were active back then. You could nit-pick a bit between the last of the OGH's and the early Blues, but the ones about 2003-04 definitely coincided with loosening standards (maybe why CAC was formed a few years later ?).

What I can't figure out is if during the actual coin bubble of 1988-90 the standards changed. You would think you might be able to 'get away' with looser standards when prices are rising 10-20% a month or so.

You would think either existing graders might subconsciously loosen during heightened activity (the bubble) and also if the torrent of grade requests led to inexperienced graders working for the TPGs. That's above my pay grade.

There does appear to be SOMEWHAT -- not super-strong -- but somewhat of a link that looser grading accompanies a rising gold price. The rising gold price would normally be associated with rising coin prices (except where the premiums deflated). But it's not one I would expect a very high R-squared or whatever they call it.

Did you actually find big demand for toned coins back then ? I thought that was a recent phenomena.

Tom, what do you mean with the reference to 'problem coin' and getting tough on certain problems in the last 15 years ? Can you elaborate ?

 

Thanks Burton...I actually don't think there are too many people focused on the slab as opposed to the grade ON the slab.

But I do think that for some people a nice coin in an older holder (or one associated with normal/hard grading standards) is a plus. Not as much as a CAC, but a plus.

But then there are those that say if the coin was really high-end for the grade given it's in an older holder, it would have been cracked out by now. Ergo, Laws of Darwinism would lean to it being a lower-quality coin for the grade (even though if it's still in the older holder there's no way to ascertain for sure if it was submitted, right ?).

Great point...spot on. I never thought of this.

I guess it depends on what coin is in the slab, huh ? Tough to do with Saints or Morgans....unless your Bob Simpson.

 

"Did you actually find big demand for toned coins back then ? I thought that was a recent phenomena.
Tom, what do you mean with the reference to 'problem coin' and getting tough on certain problems in the last 15 years ? Can you elaborate ?"

To answer your questions; yes, there was a very large demand for toned coins at that time. Toning is not a recent phenomena and the desirability of toned coinage is not new, either. What is new, however, is the internet and its ability to share images of wonderfully toned coins as well as its ability to drive the prices even higher for these coins since they have a much larger audience who know about it when special pieces are sold. Just two decades ago coin photography was not nearly as refined or universal as it is today and the ability to buy great toned coins was much more often linked to being lucky and seeing one on the bourse floor or having contacts who would save such coins for their clients. The internet has changed all that and now these toned coins are chased by a much larger audience that drive the prices higher (classic supply and demand scenario).

PCGS is better today at identifying various types of AT and surface manipulation than they were two decades ago. Consequently, coins that likely would have received a straight grade in the 1990s now will get placed into a genuine holder. As an extension of that, some coins that currently reside in OGHs, and that benefit from the OGH mystique or cache, would get bagged today. Ironic, isn't it?

 

Tom,

I have long argued with people that the reason why the toned coin market exploded over the last 15 years is due to two important factors: technological advances in digital photography and the proliferation of said photos via the internet. It is very refreshing to see someone with the same opinion.

Furthermore, for all the people who think that toned coins are a fad, like beanie babies, and will someday carry no premiums to their untoned counterparts, I say this. Neither the internet, nor digital photography is going to disappear. The primary reason why people like rainbow toned coinage is because rainbow toned coins CAN have exceptional eye appeal. I don't see eye appeal falling out of style anytime soon.

In fact, the only threat I see to the rainbow toned coin market, is the widespread advancement of coin doctoring techniques that make distinguishing AT from NT (or QT from MA if you prefer) impossible. While their may be a handful of coin doctors presently who can get their creations past the TPGs, widespread knowledge of those techniques would flood the market with newly toned coins. The effect would be twofold. First, supply would increase causing prices to drop. But the other effect would be the erosion in the confidence of the TPGs to filter out AT coins which would severely affect the market causing a massive drop in prices. That said, the market would probably not collapse completely because collectors would simply seek out coins that had been encapsulated in the past.

 

Checkout the cover of this COIN PRICES Magazine. The two items of interest are the coin shown on the top left and the date on the top right.

 

Wow, nice cover...peak of the Coin Bubble, too.

Tom, Lehigh...good stuff, thanks for the info.

 

Not to high jack this thread as its a great one to read but in all of my years I have never seen an original first generation black slab. Antoine have a pic of one, what was done with the recent retro slab so one can tell them apart and last how many voids did ngc holder that first year.