The Pricing Panel

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

Just a quick point.  If you look in the 17th edition of the catalogue the pricing for the 1969 $20 *WA is quite specific ... one listing price for a VF note and one for an UNC note these representing the two known notes.  I beleive the VF note was an e-bay sale which the committee did add to the catalogue disproving the allegation that e-bay sales are ignored.  In the 18th edition, these two notes show a generous appreciation to reflect their rarity.

Similarly now that a known sale of a G/R test note occurred on e-bay, I would expect that this will find it's way into the catalogue.   My question .... is this debate trying to fix something that is not really broken?  

Don's issue of grading is very significant. There are certain e-bay sellers that I can trust the grading on, but for the most part the bulk of notes I have bought on e-bay are overgraded.  A case in point:  The *V/V that I bought a few months ago from a well known e-bay seller was graded as AU-UNC.  If there was no vetting of this process this sale might have affected the catalogue price for *V/V notes.  I had the note graded by a third party and it was EF+ and I negotiated a price reduction with the seller..... but this part of the transaction was not on the public record.  

eyevet-

Examples speak louder than words. Well spoken.

OleDon...should I be YoungDon or at least MiddleAgeDon

I believe two of the G/R test note have now been sold on ebay eyevet. Both in signifigantly different grades so I'd suspect you will be proven correct.

  My question .... is this debate trying to fix something that is not really broken?   

These are important issues that need to be dealt with before the entire paper money business and yes, the very hobby itself spiral uncontrollably downwards into an unredeemable miasma that could lead to the collapse of the economies of both Canada and the United States and then what?
The silver bullion hoarders will be proven correct? You perhaps can live with that but I, my good Sir/M'am, find that both unacceptable and onerous.
God save the Queen.

It is completely original, not pressed, with fresh paper and near perfect corners. The note is virtually uncirculated, except that it has three significant vertical folds.

As requested in the original thread, the above quote has been copied here. It is the text of an eBay auction description.

OleDon requested that it be copied here, and he will be offering comments at his next convenience.

I can see once again an attempt to deflect this topic into a discussion on grading. Grading is absolutely imperfect particularly in the case where a seller has an opportunity to sell an item sight unseen. You have international sellers with different grading standards, you have novices trying to grade and you have experienced dealers simply over grading to attempt to boost prices and you have educated differences of opinion, even between experts and grading firms.

It is buyer beware as always and naturally deal with those who have exceptional reputations and superb no risk refund policies. I have bought hundreds of over-graded notes sight unseen from some of Canada's largest B&M dealers and I will leave it at that.  I have also stood in front of many mid-sized dealers face to face and hear them pitch the condition of a note and when I pick it up and have a close look I wonder if they just pitched me the same note I am looking at. One of my favorite things to do at a show is instantly spot the handful of dealers who up the price and grade as I express early interest in a piece and continue to make my rounds of the room. No one is a perfect grading machine, me included, any dealer who tells you that clients haven't returned a note because they were unhappy with it is either a liar or telling their version of the truth.  What dealer can do is strive for increased disclosure, fewer mistakes and numbers like 4 returns for every 1000 notes sold which would put them light years ahead of the industry average and just about every other industry which requires buyers to pay for product prior to possession.

My experience has been essentially almost 100% of the dealers who mock eBay is due to their failure to capture market share and in fact lose market share because of their inability to succeed in the online marketplace.  I expect the envy is only going to get worse as the online market outpaces the growth of every other sales channel by a million miles on a go forward basis and all they are left with is table scraps eventually because of their failure to modernize.  I can tell you this I will be singing about the viability of the online market for many years to come and will doing everything I can to continue to develop it and using it as a tool to continue to attract international collectors to Canadian Paper.

The concern that needs to be addressed to a conclusion is one of proper representation of the online market on the pricing panel and data capture of eBay and online produced sales results on rare notes, such as the case where 1 or 2 or a less than a handful may exist and the guide 1) fails to report them as even being "rare" and 2) has a price which reflects a version of reality not based on market results off by triple digit percentiles in many cases.

If you want to get back to talking about a process which will remedy this I would be delighted to work this to a successful conclusion.

Don you mentioned at a minimum Internet Sellers could report results to Bob Graham, let's talk about what this process would look like end to end in far greater detail including what the panel will do with the info and let's also talk about what can be done at a "maximum reasonable basis" as well as the minimum is a good place to start but more will be required to address the concerns raised.

If you would like to talk about the Australian and USA models I would be delighted, we dont need to spend any time on the weaker non-annual models of the two countries you mentioned as it is mutually agreed what we have now is better than what they are working with save except the fact the British Duggleby 6th edition guide is being beat up on by the Banknote Yearbook (2005 4th edition) and by Rotographic's 14th ed of Collectors' Banknotes - Treasury and Bank of England which are now taking market share and reputation away from an increasingly obsolete Duggleby 2002 guide, which was the undisputed champion.

My position of funding a venture to build a team of industry pros who would be compensated for creating an alternate pricing model (which has perhaps a 30% weighting <weighting would increase as the net continues to gain market share year over year> of online trends produced by a cross section of the most active online sellers. If the net produces the only sale of a rare note than that's the new price in the guide; afterall the guide is supposed to report market results right?) is and remains it will be done only if necessary (it's the last thing I want to take on at present) as having such a guide which seeks to capture the data is better than having nothing in place at all.  I would prefer not to have to undertake this as the Charlton Guide is an excellent body of work to build on and some changes can evolve it to where it needs to go and not be left eventually obsolete with the growth of the Internet sales channel.

Don we can here and now work through your initial suggestion of reporting to Bob as a place to start for all to see or if you prefer to do this in private over dinner at Torex.  It doesn't matter to me where and how as long as this matter is taken seriously and we can all agree on what is in the market's best interest. Any further ideas on what additional steps could be taken to address the concerns raised would be appreciated and received in good faith.

Troy.


P.S.

Re the new CPMS newsletter: does anyone else find it statistically interesting that 5 of the 8 known historical sales of the 1912 $10 Bank of Toronto note and 4 of 7 of the 1914 $50 were eBay sales?  The sales data is also more current. The answer I would like to get to is the pricing panel finds it very interesting and important and will treat it as such.

Simple amazing.Just plain amazing.As many stray off topic,make personal attacks,write in a condescending manner,I made the original post with a  mind to positive change.That was all.
No disresopect to Charlton,as one here alleged.

Why are so many resisting change?Why so much venom?
I can list at least 6 B&M Dealers that have ripped me off,with over grading,hype,over-priced,notes.

Yet I had to wade thru comments like this,from open minded community members?Highly doubt it

must admit, after just wading through the misery of the Pricing Panel thread for the last 20 minutes,

 there would certainly be a full-time position available for hallway monitor / the grading police for such things...

I don't see how you raised the price of poker anywhere, just talked the subject to death.

I also have been burned on eBay.  I bought a supposedly UNC note from a seller with a 100% positive feedback rating, where the note was most obviously pressed, probably was an EF!  Luckily it was a low-priced asterisk note, so I didn't even mind that much.

This is about solututions,which only OleDon and Troy seem to be willing to put forth.Personally,I don't have the knowledge or experience to offer credible solutions.
May I put it that most here don't as well.

Good thing you all weren't around when they decided to give women the vote.Change you know,progress,making things better,and adapting to new business models.

The Charlton book has a method of obtaining prices from a group of people. It is hardly 100% perfect (but what is) in prices, but then what prices would you like to see?
The attempt is a cross-reference of contributors, including some of the largest sellers of paper.

If you have a better method, what is it?

Rick

I have gone through each of the posts on all 4 pages of this thread, and it seems that Rick's question remains at the crux of this discussion and also remains unanswered: "If you have a better method, what is it?".

I have heard (particularly from MonetaryMan and runningonempty) about "WHAT" is wrong...but little or nothing about "HOW" to fix it?  OK - maybe eBay sales should be factored into the pricing, and rarer notes are not priced realistically...so HOW, practically, should Charlton's resolve its deficiencies in these areas?  What, specifically, should Charlton's do differently when setting the prices for their 19th edition??

According to runningonempty, the bulk of the members of this forum will apparently be unable to formulate solutions as to HOW Charlton's could resolve its pricing inefficiencies.  So, if MonetaryMan ("MM") or OleDon ("OD") DO have answers as to HOW the prices should be determined for Charlton's 19th edition, then the conclusion of this discussion should be very, very simple:
1) MM and OD should (as paid consultants of course) put forth their solutions to Charlton's, so that the 19th and future editions will be more realistic in the pricing, or
2) MM and/or OD should start their own catalogue or "trends" publications.  If Charlton's cannot adapt its catalogue to compete, then, according to the "survival of the fittest" theory, Charlton's will naturally go out of business and the superior new publication(s) will thrive.

I am not a slave to Charlton's!  I know, as do many others, that they are behind the times, both in their prices and in the delivery format of the information (hard-copy vs. online, but that's another matter).  However I am strictly a collector of paper money and not a dealer.  Paper money is only a hobby for me rather than a source of income.  Since I don't make a living by trading in paper money, I probably could not come up with a "better" pricing method than that used by Charlton's pricing panel, since I don't know the ins and outs of buying and selling paper money day in and day out.

I am all for progress and making things better.  I'm not being flippant here: If anyone can put out a better catalogue/pricing guide than Charlton's, then please, by all means, LET'S HAVE IT!  Let's stop nagging about WHAT is wrong...one of you entrepreneurs out there - start up a new and improved, more relevant publication that takes care of all of Charlton's short-comings.  Price it reasonably (say about $30), and I will buy a copy every year (or two), and I will relegate my Charlton's catalogues to the trash can!!

I believe we were finally in the midst of discussing the resolution and steps to get there immediately prior to your post.

I have also invited the Don and the panel for meetings and further discusson here to put different remedies forward.

My world includes Charlton unless it turns it's back on the concerns.

The ball is in their court now.

Troy

Good grief...nearly 100 posts under this thread and we're only in the MIDST of getting to a resolution?

Troy, I'm glad to hear that you have invited the pricing panel to "round-table" discussions...hopefully they will play that ball in their court so that they can hear the ideas you and others have to improve their publication!  I too shall remain loyal to Charlton's only so long as they are the best-available alternative.  If a superior publication comes along, naturally collectors will - some quickly, and some slowly - gravitate toward it.

venga50

According to runningonempty, the bulk of the members of this forum will apparently be unable to formulate solutions as to HOW Charlton's could resolve its pricing inefficiencies.

My statement relating to this comment was an observation,NOT A conclusion.I also offered that I'm not qualified,nor experienced enough to submit credible alternatives.Honesty,although not always self-serving,does the mind and soul good.

If you have read all 100 posts,and I assume you have by your statement"

Good grief...nearly 100 posts under this thread and we're only in the MIDST of getting to a resolution

,you do understand how many who have posted here were,at least at the start of this conversation,resistant to change.

I think we've come a long way.Please re-read the first post I made here,I'm the first to buy the Charlton when available.

Like you,if a better guide materializes,that reflects what I see in the market place,they too shall have my support.
I can't see not buying the Charlton Paper Edition,no matter how many enter the market.It is irreplaceable imo.
Hopefully,it will be made more current in a timely fashion,as well as updated sooner,how ever the powers that be decide.

This is what this thread is about-solutions,to make something better that is a great tool.

Man o man some people sure have been defensive

As promised,an up-date to the following.

Let's take this a step further with scarce notes.
Anyone who wishes to sell the following notes at current book has a definite sale.
1).Osbourne/Towers $2 Original Unc-$950.3 please!!
2).English $25 Original Unc$11,000
3).Osborne/Towers $1000 Original Unc $8500-two please!!!
4).1935 $1000 English Original Unc $9000
5).Gordon/Towers JA Original Unc $2000.2 please.
 
This is a partial list of notes desired by myself and two friends.
I am not trying to turn this into a debate about which notes are under-valued,rather that scarce notes in Original Unc are almost impossible at Catalogue.
 
Ending this part of my response,I suggest it truly is false to say "The old stuff about if note A trends for $400, I will take them all simply doesn't fit anything." If you can't buy them at...nugh said.
I will up-date you regarding the # of responses I receive to the above offers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Give a guy an inch and he takes a mile but I can't let you get away with this one  
 
2).English $25 Original Unc $11,000  
 
- nope, please add approx 15% on the English and at least 20% on the french to be competive in the offline and online market.
 
3).Osborne/Towers $1000 Original Unc $8500-two please!!!  
 
- nope, to be competitive in a list of people waiting for this note in the online and offline market you will need add, on a good day 25%, on a bad bad for you 35%.
 
4).1935 $1000 English Original Unc $9000  
 
- sorry, the market (offline and online) is paying 27.5%-30% more than that on this note.
 
But you know this already, that's why you want em, you little devil you!
 
The other 2 I would have to defer to someone else who have greater sales experience in the issues and on the current market landscape for the notes but I am of the opinion that the $2 Osborne appears to under-valued at $950, I would need to check with the market before sounding as sure I normally do before voicing an opinion with a high degree of confidence.

With over 3500 views to this thread,and over 500 members to this site,not 1, zero,nada.offers to sell any of the above notes,at either book,or Troy's suggested current market trends.

I think that's very telling.

What is really telling is such notes hardly exist, and are seldom traded. The catalogue is an estimate on the price should that note in that condition be offered for sale, it is not an offer to sell them.

There is no registry of the number of certain notes in certain grades that exist, nor does one claimed to be in a particular grade mean that it is in the grade.

All we have to go on in the cat. price, and auction material and their selling price. No one knows how many exist, so the rest is educated guess work.

With coins, we can go to the ICCS population report and get an idea. There is no equivalent in paper.

For example, how many 1909 Bank of Hamilton $100 notes exist? What grades exist? What is the value of these notes in VF, EF, AU and Unc?

Rick

Rick,

How do you describe the published information as found in this months CPMS newsletter and the others before it where a summary of notes known, grades known and ownership details of many key issue notes are known.

I ask this question with good intentions of discovery of your point of view, not as sarcasm.

I have also traded several examples of some of the notes listed by runningonempty in the last few months (some of which were sourced through Ted Bailey and Mel Steinberg) and have the sales data/serial#'s available.

Troy

The information of the CPMS is first class, however, the grades are "as traded". There is no 3rd party to have verified them.

This information is basically priceless if one considers the sources. The grades are really unknown, and many private treaty sales may not have the prices (or grades) published anywhere.

This is similar to problems in doing trends for coins, except population reports are published, the grade is known, and the price is sometimes on public record.

Without showing sarcasm, written without predjudice, expressing my opinion based on many years in the numismatic industry.

Rick