When a sticker is worth $20000.

The unstickered MS65 is priced at the top of the market. It sold for $32,250 at Heritage a couple months ago:

http://coins.ha.com/itm/early-half-...3-3979.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

The CAC coin is priced....a bit enthusiastically considering a PCGS/CAC MS65+ was only worth $47k last June.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Okay. Then it's definitely priced at the top or above previous sales/market, but it's not out of this world crazy... like say $150,000+. The non-stickered coin sold for "$32,250 a couple months ago" and is now listed on eBay for $44,100.00. That's not a large enough difference (at least not in my opinion. Especially when you consider fees and profit target) to say with absolute certainty that HA is ONLY using eBay for advertising. Although no one may buy it at this price and I do agree maybe HA is mainly using eBay to draw clients in directly, it's not out of the question that HA has some hope that someone with a lot of money and desire to own this coin might pay their eBay list price.

Again all I'm saying is that brg's post (quoted below) could be inaccurate.

Same goes for the stickered one.

 

I wouldn't necessarily attribute it to the sticker at all. Some collectors collect these by die marriage and variety, and this can lead to a large disparity in value. I don't the relevant die marriages or varieties, but someone here might.

 

Also note that the cheaper coin has a scratch across the face if you enlarge the photos. I didn't do that initially, but I am sure that this is probably part of it as well. (And no, it doesn't look like an adjustment mark to me.)

 

Since I collect certified coins in the lower price ranges ($200 or less), CAC is not much of a factor for me, as sending such coins to CAC may not be cost effective. But if I was looking for a coin in the 5 figures I would assume that any non stickered coin had been sent in and rejected. If a coin similar to the one in the OP had even the slightest chance of getting a sticker, who in their right mind would not send it in? Based on this my only conclusion would be that the lower priced coin was submitted and rejected and therefore is at the lower end of the grade. That, along with other previous posts stating that it is less appealing, explains the lower asking price.

 

Let me point out the obvious:

Neither of the coins listed has actually sold at the prices advertised on eBay. Lets talk about a supposed "$20,000 difference" when the coins actually sell. You can ask whatever you want for a coin -- doesn't mean you're going to get it.

And, as others have pointed out, all MS65 coins are not equal (with or without the silly CAC sticker). I have viewed a lot of coins with CAC stickers that I would pass on, and a lot of coins without CAC stickers that I would buy in a heartbeat. CAC isn't everything. As I like to say, CAC is one "A" short of reality (i.e., CACA).

 

Although certain die marriages can definitely garner a premium in this particular case both coins are the same DM--LM-10 (or Valentine 4a if one prefers the older nomenclature) which is one of, if not the most common DM for the year.

The price difference, IMO, is almost entirely based on the fact that the first coin appears to be much nicer looking than the second which is probably why it got the sticker and the other didn't. Nor, do I necessarily think the difference is unwarranted.

 

it's just advertisement...the CAC sticker to me has no relevance.

 

Do you think that coin could sell outside of eBay for the price listed on eBay or near that price? Why or why not?

 

One is clearly nicer than the other. It really calls into question the consistency of grading and the absurdity of price setting based on grade.

 

Right you are, on all counts. Unfortunately, that's what makes CAC necessary, to the people it was created for.

 

Thank you for attributing these for us!