How Much Is Buying A Slab Worth ?

I was just checking Ebay and was curious as to what some people were asking for older holders from PCGS/NGC. Specifically, the Old Green Holders (OGH) from PCGS.

Asking prices are different from complete sales, but I noticed that common 1924/27 Saint-Gaudens MS-65 were asking sometimes $3,000. Other prices were mid-2's. You are talking premiums of 25-80%.

I know we are supposed to buy the coin and not the grade/slab, but there must be an aesthetic value for some of the older slabs when grading standards (according to some) were 'stricter.'

Do you actively seek out coins in older slabs ? Will you pay a premium for it -- if so, how much ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I want to be the first one to say it as I know its coming, "buy the coin, not the holder!"

 

There's one case in which I'd love to buy the slab. I want the ugliest MS70 ACG coin I can find. I literally don't care what coin it is.

 

First off, I'm not a big slab guy. However, in my experience, when I come across coins in the early holders, the coins quality is at the low end of the assigned grade, or they are just plain overgraded. Perhaps the reason is that if the coin were choice or undergraded, somebody would have attempted to resubmit them already.

 

Make sense....though supposedly the standards were so stringent in the late-1980's that you'd value the desirability over a 1-grade move. In recent years, you could just CAC it.

What I find strange is that the OGH holders some revere seem to be from 1995-1998, which is post-bubble and could be associated with looser standards. So that confuses me a bit.

 

IMO if a coin is still in an OGH then other people have deemed it not upgradeable.

 

To people who can grade coins accurately, the slab is worth around $25 bucks or whatever the submission cost is. To someone who relies on TPG's to tell them what the grade/value of a coin is, the slab may be worth much more. Specifically the OGH.

 

The "old holder" hype has been around since the TPGs first changed the style of their respective holders. For the most part, you can ignore it. The ONLY thing an old holder tells you is that nobody has futzed with the coin since it was holdered, implying that a relatively untoned coin is stable, as it has been that way for quite a while. It doesn't tell you the coin is overgraded, undergraded, or correctly graded.

 

I think messydesk gave a great answer.

To back up a bit, though, the asking price on ebay can have relatively little to do with the sales price of a completed transaction. After all, you can ask whatever you like, but no one has to pay it.

OGHs have a strong following and it might be due to aesthetics, scarcity, uniformity or a desire for a certain grading standard. Many of these OGH coins have been kicked around for 15-20 years and the slabs are worse for the experience, the coins may be low end, they may be problem-coins or they might be just plain not too attractive. However, there are also some absolute stunning, incredible gems in these holders, too, and when they surface they are often associated with a far higher price tag than the vast majority would be willing to pay since that price tag might be related to the quality of the coin and not the number on the holder.

 

This is very valuable information. Thank you all.

 

Most people have no idea when various holders came out so if doesn't have a blue label, to them it is an "old green holder". And the reason most of the "OGH' you see are from the 1995 - 98 period, is because that IS after the standards were loosened and those coins typically won't upgrade. A great many of those that would from the earlier 1990 - 95 period have already been cracked out and resubmitted. So what is left are the dregs from the early old green holders, and the balance from the New Green Holders that everyone calls OGH. (And ALL of the non rattler or two piece holders are post bubble.)

 

NGC 1st Generation Black Slabs drive a hefty premium and the coin is essentially irrelevant.

 

Who said we are not supposed to buy the slab? When I get coins, I look at the coin first. However, being a smart buyer, and wanting value for my money, I do take certification into consideration, as it is definitely value added. How much value is added? That depends upon the coin. As Paul said above, certain slabs (PCGS and NGC first generations) demand premiums on their own. So, it is a conscious decision on my part to buy the coin AND the slab. Why not have both, and have maximum value for my dollar. I know when a coin is priced excessively, and as such, I won't buy an overpriced coin.

I say "Buy the coin AND the holder."

 

OGH or Rattler Slabs.

 

Makes sense on the surface, but what if the coin is top-quality ?

 

Buy the coin and then the holder. I have many of the OGH coins and bought them back in those days. I do say in the past them companies are much strictor then now.

 

Here's something I'd be interested in hearing from some of you:

2 coins...identical or nearly identical....one graded from the early-2000's, the other either an OGH (early-1990's thru mid-1990's) or even earlier from the late-1980's (apparently, the Green Holders were used through 1998 but many people refer to them as "OGHs" even though they are 10 years later than the light-green ones from when PCGS first started: http://forums.collectors.com/messag...d=222533&highlight_key=y&keyword1=generations ).

Would you pay more for the coin in the older PCGS and/or OGH holder (whatever year you consider an OGH to be from) ?

 

Agreed...but the consensus is that grading standards have not been like the Speed Of Light -- constant.

There were periods where things supposedly got 'loose.' That's why CAC started, in part.

I'm not sure when the loose standards actually took place -- either right after the Coin Bubble burst in the early-1990's (ironically when the OGHs became common) or in the early-2000's (blue holders, after many years of depressed coin pricing may have led to a subtle grading ease).

I wasn't active back then, so I don't want to speak definitively. Vets, feel free to chime in.

 

Agreed, GD, I have actual articles saved which talked about Kidder, Peabody putting $50MM - $150 MM into coins. MS-65 Saints went to a 500% premium to gold, or higher !!

GD, I have a link to all the PCGS holders through the mid-2000's above.

But didn't prices rise FIRST and any loosening happen towards the end of the bubble or after ? I know we are trying to ascertain an overlap of only a few months but I think what happened was this, based on my recollection and also articles I have from the time:

• PCGS opened her doors.
• Grading was pretty tight.
• Wall Street $$$ rumoured to come in.
• Prices soar, esp. for gold coins and liquid, MS-65 Saints & Liberty's. Saints go for 500-800% premium to gold content by mid-1989.
• As prices soar despite PMs being flat, more and more people submit coins and get into the hobby.
• PCGS needs to hire many more graders and volumes soar.
• Standards then loosen until volume and quality of graders can reverse.

I'm not even sure they did get involved, at least not to the extent folks thought they would be. I think it was just the promise of them getting involved. A couple of partnerships involving gold jewelry dealers with connections to Wall Street may have bought a few million $$$ worth of coins each month for a few months. A coin firm and Merrill Lynch launched a $25 MM partnership but it was the promise of taking it to $75 MM that juiced investors. The American Rare Coin Fund invested $42 MM in 1989 but was promising another $100 MM in 1990. It's possible the lower initial sums never even got invested but rather led to 'front-running' and that drove the figures. Many people talked a good game about how much they had deployed but there was no way to find out.

But the huge promises of $$$ from Wall Street firms in 1990 and later never materialized. That's what crashed the market -- that, and the ridiculous spike from 1988-89.