Slab Vs. Slab Vs. Slab

Seth here is a link to some very fine reading By Ed Kiershon on this subject that should be very educational for you & others on slabs.

And the Crack Out Of the Slab Game!


http://www.cigaraficionado.com/Ciga...,448,00.html

Here is an excerpt from the article in itself is educational about the population reports as in his judgment bogus.

Prices of American coins are significantly influenced by rarity, and to determine the number of certified mint-state coins in each U.S. date and series, consumers have long trusted the "population reports" issued by grading services. Subscribing to these census tracts, however, may have limited value, according to Travers and other critics, who charge that they've been "skewed" by the wave of resubmissions unleashed by the crack-out game. "Novices heavily rely on these reports when buying, and that's a big mistake," says Travers, who, as an expert witness and consultant, has assisted the Federal Trade Commission in its various attempts to curb coin industry abuses. "Say someone resubmits the same coin 147 times. Then, after it's sold to a dealer, it's again resubmitted another 200 times. All this just adds to the 'population,' and so while there may be only one of these coins in existence, it seems like there are 347 of them. This is one area where a novice has to depend on a dealer's honesty, as he can't be an instant expert on rarity."

Heh. Population reports being skewed by resubmissions. Think about it. Resubmissions artificially inflate the population numbers. The population is actually lower, the coin actually rarer, than the figures indicate.

Higher pops=lesser rarity=lower prices for the novice buyer, and any other buyer. I like and respect Scott Travers, but I can't understand why he's taking this position. It's the seller, not the buyer, who is hurt by inflated pops.

And it's the sellers, the dealers, who have created the situation. I am amused by the irony.

quote:

---

Originally posted by seth

Thanks, all. Sure I've read all that stuff and some of Travers' books. I guess we'll never know why some fetch more.

Using the Hadleydog theory and past statements (elsewhere) that ICG is tougher on gold, why am I not seeing it out there in the Eagle and Buffalo wars? Everyone scared to send to them and a get a real grade? Probably not--it's all about marketing (!?!?!)

As to populations, I just got two Buffalos graded by ANACS. (Even though they say 70 and no one believes them, I got them at RAW price.) On the front they show 326/1500 and 328/1500 respectively. How do they know when the year's not over? Kind of puts populations in question here, doesn't it?

---

Those arent pop numbers. Someone had ANACS grade a large group of coins, slabbed all of the 70s, and that person(company) then resold them. You just have the 326th and 328th out of a group of 1500. HSN,S@H, etc. put together sets like this to give the illusion of a "limited series" but it is just a marketing gimmick

Glad to hear you only paid raw money for them though. I bet the person selling took a loss...