As a long time collector, beginning at a time when only ANACS graded coinage, I am one of the dwindling population still actively pursuing the hobby. While this may explain my firm belief to "buy the coin not the holder", this is not to say that I have not or would not buy a third party graded coin. Yet, as contradictory as it may sound, that phrase still applies. What this means is, currently assembling the West Point quarters in PCGS MS65- a nice middle grade- I have selected only the standard blue labels with nothing but the basic information. Why? Those fancy labels, with the themes, bright colors and overly described wording only detract from the coin within. Where is your eye drawn first? As I mentioned, I'm a coin collector and my eyes do not get distracted by a holder. So, the reason for the title. Collectors seem to have been drawn into collecting plastic holders in recent years. As such, the prices have risen, often drastic at times, none so than at the moment. Getting back to the West Point quarters. None of those 2019 specimens set me back more than $30, having four of the five. Searching for the final issue on EBAY, I stumbled upon a War in the Pacific graded PCGS MS64 with a "First Discovery" label proclaiming it to be only 1 of 3. The BIN price is $2800 with a best offer option. So the question is, using the best offer option, what would it ultimately sell for? Eventually it will sell, although far short of the ask price I would think, and most certainly far above an otherwise same graded specimen. What really leaves me shaking my head is how those paying huge premiums seem to forget about long term value. Markets rise and fall. Somehow I can not see the price spread remaining between two identical coins over say ten years. One only needs to look at the thousands of dollars those First Discovery coins sold for at the time. For the person having paid such a huge premium, where's the value? These things I learned having witnessed them in my 47 years of collecting.
@Long Beard I agree with that. I have collected for 72 years. Trends come and go. But, the coin still remains the same. I remember back in 1959 when the "cracked skull" LMC was noticed. People were buying and selling them in the $1 range. Do you think we could get $1 for them today? This may be a very insignificant sample for the current generation. But, it is an example. The modern collector wants to show the world that he has the "hot ticket". And, he wants the world to know that he was one of the first to get one. The day will come when nobody cares if it was the first one.
I have a unique perspective. I dropped out of collecting around 1990 to raise a family and returned maybe ten years ago. It was an entirely different landscape. Radically different even..... At the outset, the TPG's mission was a sound one and I suspect that at the core it still remains. The interred coin is guaranteed to be what the label says it is supposed to be. However like with any business it has become very watered down and quite cliquish over time. I own a number of coins with labels that caused other collectors to reject them and will continue to do so. I love the coin and I love the history that speaks to me through the coin. As far as I am concerned, the plastic has a shelf life. The coin doesn't.
You're in the coin grading business. That's how you earn your living. You've pushed grading a coin in every direction and as far as you can. Business drops off so what choices do you have? The label! A brilliant idea. Make the label collectible. Any collector would love to have a coin label "The Redfield Collection" so you design a label for specific needs. Now, a lot of collectors down buy the coin, they buy the slab and the label. A smart marketing move but I haven't bought into that.
That's an interesting take - and I tend to agree with you - however; I did go and purchase the new 2020w quarters w/the NGC V75 label for WWII (the last, Tallgrass W is on its way). As an avid WWII collector, the label actually adds some value, if only for me. I tend not to "buy the slab", but in this case...
Is there a higher premium for those with the "early release", "first week of discovery" etc., as opposed to a label that only confirms the validity of the coin?
I did a thread about the San Antonio "W" quarter. A bank had released the quarter a day early and the label stated such. It was up for bid on Great Collections as I recall for what i would consider stupid money. That was my whole thing.... Why would that matter to a collector a year from now when San Antonio "W" quarters were old news?
Let's say a young person in 2050 starts a coin collection. That is 30 years from now. I can get a 30 year old quarter right now for 25 cents. I can get an uncirculated one for not much more. And, odds are, that person in 2050 will be able to get a 60 year old quarter for very little more. Why would I pay hundreds or thousands for one in a plastic holder? If I did, my entire collection would need to be likewise represented. I don't think they are going to be worth anything in 25 or 30 years. People are not collecting coins, they are collecting labels. And, that is their prerogative.
I'm so on the fence about the slab. On one hand I wholeheartedly agree about the ridiculous pricing associated with the label. On the other hand I'm very hesitant about my own authentication abilities regarding certain key dates, ie: 1909 S VDB, 1922 no D 1¢, 1916 D merc, etc. Buying a key or semi key date coin unslabbed would not be prudent for me.
I think the TPG's were originally established for the purpose of authentication. And, we very well need them for that. I have one slabbed coin. I would not buy a key date without authentication.
I like slabs for what they were supposed to be originally, a way of being able to handle a coin easily without fingerprints, a professional attesting to its genuineness, and their estimate of the grade. All three of these things added value to coin collecting. I do remember the "bad old days" of US coin collecting with dealers simply lying to customers about a coin's grade or problems, (though collectors should not spend serious money without educating themselves). I did not dislike slabs when they were introduced. However, when the TPGs started claiming their OWN grades, (PCGS MS63 is what we determine it to be), a major element was lost. The graders were no longer liable for bad grades, they simply changed it so that by definition whatever grade they assign is "correct". Then, because these grades were on the slabs, tiny differences of what one company's opinion on a certain day of the grade became OVERLY important. Collectors started treating coins not as coins, but as numbers. That is when I lost interest in my US coins. I am too much of a hoarder to sell them, so still enjoy them some, but I moved on to ancients where we still talk about the coin IS, not arguing whether its a 55 or a 58, or a 64+ versus a 65. I have come back some, getting into colonial paper lately, but not interested in the game of US coins anymore.
The only grade I use is "eye appeal". And, I don't have such a thing as "eye appeal 64" or "eye appeal 58".
But I do find those V day slabs you pictured rather nice. I wouldn't pay extra for it though. Still don't have any 2020 Ws and only two 2019 ws
I’m in the camp of why not have attractive labels? Granted, I think they over use them now and first day of issue and first strike is a total joke for so many issues. I know for the 2016 100th anniversary gold issues they were low mintage with multiple sets of fresh dies used to produce so what does first strike even mean or matter? Just one example. The labels are extremely valuable for pedigrees. I want to know if a Morgan came from a certain hoard. Without the slab and the label it would just get lost in the crowd. Shipwreck coins need the special label and it makes them more attractive. The 2016 gold labels were attractive. I would’ve bought them if there were only plain labels but I appreciate the attractive labels. It enhances the look. For regular coins like CBHs, it’s nice to have the Overton numbers so you know at a glance. I don’t think ive ever purchased anything because the label was neat. But I think if everything just got the old plain Jane labels like they used to use or even a regular modern label for everything,no matter what it was, it would be a little boring. The holders authenticate, they’re tough, easy to store uniformly regardless of coin size, protect somewhat from the atmosphere, make coins easier to handle. Imagine how many millions of coins wouldve been dropped and damaged by now without slabs protecting them. I don’t think the slabs and labels are worth getting upset about. If you want to say it’s made people lazier about grading... that it has. But it’s also protected the buyers. People making a living selling are going to lean towards the higher grade on everything by default and a lot of messed with coins would be sold at full price as originals without the purple labels. They still are... which brings us full circle as to another reason people want slabbed, authenticated, graded coins, by a third party that isn’t the one selling it to you. You can still learn a lot from slabs if you want to.
I agree that some labels are silly and personally don't feel the need to pay extra. I also understand that quite a few collectors stick to the coin rather than the holder. However, others like the special labels and it seems to enhance their collecting experience. If the labels add even a few extra collectors, I'm happy. I get to keep collecting what I like and someone else gets to collect what they like (regardless if I like what they like; in fact, the differences are what makes things more interesting).
@medoraman has an interesting perspective. Are you saying you lost interest over the 70 point grading scale being rolled out? I can see the argument but also see the other argument that this was a path that was inevitably going to happen with buyer vs seller and everyone analyzing every detail even more thoroughly as time went on. If it didn’t happen then, people would be clamoring for it now. And it does come with the issue of coins just becoming numbers. Some would make the argument that even this grading scale could be divided up further. This is on top of standards tightening and loosening somewhat over time (they say).
