Thanks for your input. I guess if the data is available, it's worth
publi****ng in different grades, but I rarely see modern notes sold in
anything less than UNC.
On 7/5/08 5:01 PM, in article
MPG.22d9ab0bc05abce59896ae@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Coffee's For Closers"
<Usenet2008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <C4950017.4E534%IBNS@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> IBNS@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>> I've been looking at the new SCWPM Modern Issues 14th edition and it
>> occurred to me that maybe it's unnecessary to include values for VG,
VF, and
>> UNC when in my experience all most collectors want are perfect UNC
notes.
>>
>> I realize some of the rarer and older notes are desirable in lesser
grades,
>> but do you really think it's required to list VG and VF pricing? A
great
>> number of notes are listed at FV in anything less than UNC, and given
how
>> unreliable the SCWPM pricing can be anyway, would the lack of VG and VF
>> pricing be a deal killer for catalog buyers?
>
>
> Some of us are on a lower budget, and look for more modest notes.
> Settling for one that is crumpled, etc, means that at least I "a"
> sample. As opposed to not having one at all.
>
> So, yes, I would consider it im****tant for a catalogue to list
> the lower grades/prices.
>
|
