Based upon the input of everyone in this forum, I can see that there would
be great resistance to dropping all but UNC prices from any catalog of
notes. Thanks to everyone for sharing their opinions.
On 7/6/08 5:30 PM, in article rho2749cq3mhb6jj8di3551cbh4bm2puqc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 10:40:23 -0700, "Owen W. Linzmayer"
> <IBNS@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Not everybody wants perfect UNC notes. Not all notes are perfect UNC.
> What is your alternative?
>
>> 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?
>
> So long as people are desirous of buying and selling banknotes in less
> than UNC grades, then the answer is yes. If dealers are willing to
> sell all these rare and otherwise valuable but less than UNC notes at
> two for a dollar, then I wouldn't have a problem with that either!
>
> Padraic
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com
**
|
