Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;BooksB4Coins, post: 2280378, member: 36230&quot;]I thought you probably had, and know they didn&#039;t make huge numbers of these things, so I can&#039;t say I&#039;m that surprised with the lack of results unfortunately.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Perhaps, and perhaps not... I suppose much would depend upon the actual standards used by the Canadian company coupled with collector acceptance. Again, Canadian is not an area I am vastly familair with, but the &quot;<i>cameo</i>&quot; designation intrigues me, and makes me wonder if, perhaps, this is their way of assigning a PL designation. If so, we could reasonably compare this to how NGC will designate coins other than Morgans as PL while PCGS does not. An NGC designated PL will almost certainly bring higher prices than that very same coin would if residing in non-designated PCGS plastic, so to simply assume NGC&#039;s listed values are &quot;<i>overpriced</i>&quot; (or in the example, PCGS) without taking all factors into consideration, could be folly. Now, I&#039;m certainly <i>not</i> saying this is the case, but only that it&#039;s something the OP should look into. Perhaps the cameo designation means little and has no real effect on price/value, but it would be unfortunate for her to assume the worst and possibly leave money on the table, especially if her desire is to sell.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is also possible that an NGC or PCGS 63 is not the same as what this company would assign, and is another reason why she should compare only apples to apples unless someone genuinely in the know (and not just pretending, as we see all too often here) tells her differently.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in