ctrl-migration

"It's a community service and not about the money"

a second expert opinion ... just as if/when NGC crosses a PCGS coin or PCGS crosses an NGC coin. Though still obviously subject to errors, in each of those situations there is good reason to feel at least somewhat more secure about the grade of the coin. Personally, I like the option of having that extra layer of insurance at a low cost and the extra potential liquidity for such coins. If you don't, don't bother with it, but that's not a reason to criticize it as a number of people have done.

Those are all of the positive points I've said about CAC. I only disagree with the notion that it's a pure, good-of-heart charity work with no thought of money and that they are made up of infallible opinions (although they clearly can be too conservative, right? right?). I also disagree with the notion of a gold sticker (what is that, A+++++++?) without a balancing "gross overgrade" judgement.

In actuality, for the reasons I mentioned previously, it DOESN'T, or at least SHOULDN'T, count as (an unbiased) " second opinion of the grade as not overgraded". They won't/can't afford to give out nearly as many "over-graded' grades as they should, as it would seriously erode confidence and cost them gobs of money.

So we all might as well self-slab with our best guess of a grade and send it to CAC since that's the ultimate universal unquestionable opinion? If we get the guess right, we saved ourselves a lot of money and time.

If you meant "to a second TPG", you're either talking about a coin which is cracked out of the original holder or one that is sent for crossover and which the submitter gives permission to cross at a lower grade. What about all of the coins submitted in their holders to the original TPG and which deserve to be down-graded, but aren't? There is no "effective vote for 'overgraded' as a second opinion" on them, either.

A good point, but it counts as a second opinion of the grade as not overgraded. A vote for overgraded would be a lower grade. CAC is not only adding a second opinion, but also designating a specialized 3rd level of precision to the grade. It's no longer just an MS-65, it's either an MS-65-A, B, C, D or worse. Almost similar to a star designation that NGC was already doing. How long until the big TPGs start giving an extra full designation?

When someone resubmits to a TPG, there is a chance they get a lower grade, an effective vote for "overgraded" as a second opinion, and not one that can simply be removed like a sticker.

If a coin is resubmitted to the original TPG in the holder as a re-grade (as in for an up-grade), realistically, there isn't any meaningful chance that it will be down-graded, even if it deserves to be. And even those coins which are resubmitted in the holder for down-grade, under a TPG's grade guarantee, aren't down-graded nearly as often as they deserve to be. That's because the TPG gets to be the arbiter of whether they over-graded the coin or not. Also, each down-grade means that a mistake is being admitted to AND results in money out of their pocket. Therefore, there is a large built in bias against down-grades, even those which are well deserved.

I meant to a second TPG, as a second opinion just as what is happening with CAC.

Better make that 733, TDN.

Mature.

I enjoyed the read. I stand by my view that it's a good thing to have a green sticker to say that such-and-such coin is an 'A'- or 'B'-class example of the grade. A gold sticker should not be given (haven't seen one yet, personally) if there is not a matching "overgraded" judgement. A non-sticker does not necessarily mean overgraded, though it could - it's ambiguous.

When someone resubmits to a TPG, there is a chance they get a lower grade, an effective vote for "overgraded" as a second opinion, and not one that can simply be removed like a sticker.

Without a judgement of "overgraded" to go along with "undergraded", all non-stickered coins, whether they have been looked at by CAC or not, will eventually begin to fall behind in price compared to the stickered ones, even if they are in fact A or B for the grade. Any C-class grade might be sent to CAC multiple times if there is no record of it already being examined (I don't see any such service on their website). If one simply hasn't spent the money to have the coin examined by CAC, a buyer might question if it has been rejected already.

I still agree with the overall notion of a visible second opinion on the grade, and it's good for people to know what the clear definition of a green sticker is.

However, if there were not profits involved, this wouldn't be done. It's not a charity, it's a business that found/created a niche market for itself. There might be noble reasons for CAC as well, but for a certain, it's about money in the end.

I also disagree with the notion that CAC is somehow going to be the perfect end-all, be-all ultimate opinion. They will make mistakes and the number of mistakes will rise over time. The fact that they might buy back mistakes helps with trust, but mistakes and disagreements will still happen.

(As a side note, Higher prices in general are bad for the common individual collector wishing to continue purchases. I fear the day people like this get their wish and coins become a full-fledged asset class for financial institutions. I'm sure Mr. Albanese will make out just nicely, though.)

These are a couple of mine, both of which are about to be submitted to NGC, with the O making a stop at NCS first.

What do you think of them?