BillJones

Going back to the title of this thread "Walter Breen's Numismatic Legacy," the above discussion highlights one of the indirect effects of Breen's outright fabrications and questionable attributions. His popular reputation among collectors is so strong that some are unable to think past what Breen claimed. This tends to perpetuate  errors and fabrications rather than encouraging open inquiry. (The Encyclopedia is the primary culprit here.)
Yet another issue is that some appear to expect almost perpetual accuracy or infallibility from Breen's 30-year old work. That is unfair to Breen and to all others who do the best they can in researching numismatics. Change is constant in all things.
As noted before, much of Breen's work was quite good and innovative for its day. He was very sparse on documentation, but the hobby was tolerant of that back then. Today's numismatic standards are more rigorous, questioning, and demand much better documentation than back in the "good ole' days." Sadly, separating the reliable-Breen from the fantasy-Breen is a slow and difficult process.

That was not the way the spread of numismatic information was happened in the old days (1960s). A lot of the big dealers kept information to themselves, and as it is today some of them knew less than you might imagine. A few of them, like John Ford, were bad news. Read the book about Eric P. Newman to get the scoop on that. Others had no time for small collectors and kids like me in 1960s.
There were very few books on die varieties and what few there were are often out of print and hard to find. Dr. Sheldon's early date large cent book was the only one that was easy to get in the 1960s. The coin magazines were not great for information. Breen and Taxay were the leading authors. Collectors don't know how great they have it today.

I agree with Mark's assessment of Walter Breen. His private life was reprehensible, but as a numismatic writer he was and remains a very important figure. During the 1960s and for most of the '70s there were very few numismatic writers who provided collectors with much information beyond "The Red Book."
 
The main experts at that time were Breen and Don Taxay. I learned a lot from Breen's articles, booklets and books. He was a much better writer than Taxay was. His prose was fluid and easy to read. His "Supplement" to Valentine's work on the early half dime varieties brought me many hours of pleasure when I was collecting those coins.
 
Breen could have an active imagination about some of the facts, and he was sometimes wrong about the rarity of certain varieties, but that was not always his fault. When a new variety is discovered about all you can do is describe it and make a guess as to how rare it might be. Over time you might be proven right or wrong as more collectors and dealers inspect their items and make attributions. It is impossible for a researcher, like Breen, to get that right every time.
 
Conversely Breen's pronouncements about some items and his testimonial letters were sometimes motivated more by the fees he received than the truth. I doubt that Breen was always paid for what his services were really worth given the lack of ethics that some sellers displayed in the 1950's, '60s and '70s. Therefore he probably needed the money.
 
Breen should not be roundly condemned as some people like to do. He was an important figure in his time and deserves recognition for the good things he did by modern collectors. Many people like to dump on his greatest work, his encyclopedia. Some of facts in it are wrong, but to date no one was come forward to write anything like it. It still deserves a place on every serious collector's bookshelf.

My opinion is that on balance, it's better to read his books, but with a reasonable and healthy dose of skepticism. In other words, don't take his writings at face value. I also believe that his numismatic contributions have done much more good than harm.

After talking with a number of dealers about CAC, who have sent in a lot of submissions to the company, the candid answer is there is more going on behind the scenes, than just, "Is the grade on the slab right or not?" There is a grading verification AND a marketing component to CAC. Sometimes CAC has an interest in controlling the number of coins from a given issue and type that are on the market at a given period of time. CAC also provides a supply service to some dealers who are mass marketing coins to non collectors or collectors who are involved in the hobby in a casual way.
 
The CAC sticker means something, but it is not the be all and end all that some people make it out to be. In the end you still have know how to grade to avoid making mistakes or work with an honest, trusted dealer who knows how to grade.
 
Now those who are angry at me because I am not a blindly supportive CAC cheerleader can start with their attacks. You are entitled to your opinions and observations, and I am entitled to mine.
 
Those in the middle should bear in made that some of the most vociferous CAC supporters have big dogs in the game. In other words they have a lot of money and marketing invested in CAC products and will defend them to hilt regardless of the facts. The issue is not a "black or white" situation. It is a shade of gray, mostly in favor of CAC, but not supportive of the service 100% of the time.  

After talking with a number of dealers about CAC, who have sent in a lot of submissions to the company, the candid answer is there is more going on behind the scenes, than just, "Is the grade on the slab right or not?" There is a grading verification AND a marketing component to CAC. Sometimes CAC has an interest in controlling the number of coins from a given issue and type that are on the market at a given period of time. CAC also provides a supply service to some dealers who are mass marketing coins to non collectors or collectors who are involved in the hobby in a casual way.
 
The CAC sticker means something, but it is not the be all and end all that some people make it out to be. In the end you still have know how to grade to avoid making mistakes or work with an honest, trusted dealer who knows how to grade.
 
Now those who are angry at me because I am not a blindly supportive CAC cheerleader can start with their attacks. You are entitled to your opinions and observations, and I am entitled to mine.
 
Those in the middle should bear in made that some of the most vociferous CAC supporters have big dogs in the game. In other words they have a lot of money and marketing invested in CAC products and will defend them to hilt regardless of the facts. The issue is not a "black or white" situation. It is a shade of gray, mostly in favor of CAC, but not supportive of the service 100% of the time.