Coin Profits Hinged On Graders' Opinions

NEWS FLASH!!!!
I have just completed an Alpha Version 1.0 of my new software entitled "Coinamatron-Gradeputteron." I have tested the script on my personal collection with outstanding results. This breakthrough in numismatic gradeology will render Third Party Grading Co. obsolete.

This program scans the image of a coin and enters it onto the mainframe's motherboard's databases' hard-drive. There, it will be given a overall grade based on a set of objective criterion.

WHAT'S THE CATCH?

The catch is that this software was developed for classic coins minted prior to 1837 (I apologize to all you modern hoarders. In the future I hope to have the capabilities to accommodate you). You will also NEVER receive your coin back in a BODY BAG! I feel it would be in the best interest of the numismatic community if these coins were taken out of the collecting circle. In it's place you will receive a b/w, dot matrix photocopy of your (not really yours anymore) coin.

If interested just PM me to schedule an appointment for you coins. My book is open as of now so, I should be able to pencil you in at your convenience.

AsciiBaron, you've summed it all up pretty well. I would be concerned about those $50,000 coins holding value, too, since I perceive the market in those rarefied strata as very thinly traded. It may be difficult to actually extract that kind of money from a coin if you "need to sell it."

I don't have to worry, of course, since my entire collection fits nicely in a Shaq-sized shoe box.

i wonder what the percentage of the TPG's business is resubs? how many high grade/high value coins have yet to be slabbed?

-steve

I have enjoyed the responses to this post. I hope everyone knows the only reason I post is to share material I found to help educate one on the dynamics of the coin grading business that seems to be public information.


Here again the grading game which does entail a large amount of telemarketing ventures by some if not all the slabbing companies big and small and it is so far regulated by some of those that by their association with the regulatory part of coin marketing makes me even more of a skeptic about this whole coin and bullion grading game etc .

Industry Council for Tangible Assets I think it is a self regulatory group over telemarketing of coins. As you can read below they haven't been to self regulatory in the opinion of the the FTC. Granted this was dated in 1991, though it seems not much has changed by what I've read and check out who some of the board members are.

http://www.ictaonline.org/board.html

Like at least 2 of the members that I have read about have been charged and had to pay fines to the FTC.
I believe Mike Fuljenz which owns or works for Universal Coin & Bullion, Ltd., Beaumont, TX case is still pending I believe. http://coins.vanosteen.com/




FTC'S CUTLER WARNS COIN INDUSTRY:
SERIOUS PROBLEMS REMAIN UNADDRESSED


Neither a government-affiliated "self-regulatory organi-
zation" nor an industry-run watchdog group is the perfect
solution to combatting fraud in the rare coin industry, said
Barry J. Cutler, Director of the Federal Trade Commission's
Bureau of Consumer Protection, in remarks before the Industry
Council for Tangible Assets in Washington, D.C. today. Rather,
Cutler challenged the industry leaders who have been considering
alternatives for self-regulation to go beyond the rhetoric and
commit themselves to true consumer protection for rare coin
investors and collectors alike.
Cutler cited the annual Salomon Brothers Report, a com-
parison of investment options used by telemarketers and others to
make lavish investment claims about rare coins, as an example of
the industry's lost opportunities to take decisive action to
protect unwary investors.

"Is there anyone in this room who does not agree that the
Report has been a major selling point for virtually every
telemarketer?" Cutler asked. "If the leaders in numismatics
today are unwilling or unable to prevent unwarranted consumer
reliance on such rosy investment claims, what hope can rare coin
dealers realistically have for the idea that the industry alone
can do the job of self-regulation without a self-regulatory
organization (SRO) or other government involvement?"

The FTC has challenged one rare coin dealer who used the
Report to market coins that had little in common with the truly
scarce and rare coins used to base the Salomon Brothers Report.
Cutler noted that previous Salomon Brothers surveys had been used
in fraudulent schemes to market investment-grade diamonds, as
well.

Investment fraud has not abated since it was first called to
the attention of industry leaders last year, Cutler said, and he
challenged the audience to educate the public and take behind-
the-scenes action to prevent the pitfalls awaiting consumers who
rely on the Salomon Brothers Report and other indices to project
appreciation for rare coins.

Cutler doubted that industry proposals for a formal SRO
would be the panacea claimed by some of its supporters. At the
same time, he said, industry self-regulation by itself may be
insufficient to solve the fraud problem. "The industry has
offered much talk, but little action, about self-regulation in
the five years since the FTC became very active in the coin
industry," he said.

"Industry leaders agree on what they do not want --
government regulation," Cutler continued. "What I see lacking is
any genuine commitment to what industry leaders say they do want
-- true consumer protection for investors and hobbyists alike.

"The next few months . . . will give your industry an
opportunity to convince the government and the consuming public
that you really mean business this time," Cutler said.

# # #

MEDIA CONTACT: Bonnie Jansen, Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2161

(icta)

To read more on Icta here is a link to other readings.

http://search.ftc.gov/query.html?co...t=iso-8859-1