DeplorableDan

You’re still taking it way too literally. You can’t extrapolate his methodology from a 15 year old interview. When a CEO is interviewed for TV, the content is softened and modified for public digestion. What was he supposed to say, that there’s a ton of coins that suck for the grade and PCGS/NGC is not good at their job? Maybe some of those C coins might be “ok” for the grade in their holder, but JA certainly wasn’t standing behind those coins financially, and now that they opened their own grading company we now get to see exactly what he really thought of those coins. Forget about that interview, 15 years was a a long time in the past and there have been several cycles of inconsistent grading since then. Who knows how he would have answered those questions in 2021.

Thanks GF! I also wanted to respond to you on CU, but i had already proclaimed that i was exiting the thread so i must keep my word Re. A/B/C, you're conflating the other tpg's A/B/C with JA's A/B/C, and the whole explanation is just a delicate way to let the masses know that his scale is just a bit tighter than the competition. @Coinbuf made a great suggestion for you in this thread to just read between the lines some and not to take it all too literally. They are not intentionally holdering a 65 "C" as a 64+, it just means that the range of other tpg's 65 "C" actually encompasses coins that he would grade as a 64 "A". Imagine the uproar if he had stated that a large number of coins that he declined to sticker we're either overgraded or should be details coins? Hence his reasoning to tread lightly and to just state that C coins were not necessarily overgraded. The truth is that many of them are overgraded in his opinion, but with optics in mind it wouldnt have been a good idea for him to be brutally honest. Here is a diagram I made to attempt to put it in perspective, but this isn;'t meant to be taken that literally either. Let me know if this helps at all.

Yes and no. There will always be coins that fall right on the border between grades, or the border between "B" and "C". Not even JA can grade these all consistently 100 times in a row, its simply too close to call. The coin's grade isnt inherently "wrong" as a 64+ OR a 65, a 55 OR a 58. Perhaps the coin is teetering on the edge of being too cleany, but it toned over time and the overall appearance is somewhat pleasing so it could go either way. These threshold cases will never cease to exist, at any grading company. In theory, yes, but if the CACG coins are being graded to the same standard, or perhaps even a bit tighter, then they would have an equal chance to cross also. Absolutely, explained above. It's not possible for humans to be that accurate. Hypothetically, yes.

Yes. It may sound silly, but PCAC selling for more money then NCAC also sounds silly, yet that is the harsh reality of the coin market. Its not only the fact that the coins originated from NGC plastic, its that many believe CAC/CACG is actually a bit tighter now than they were in the past. If that were true, it would mean that the coins without the "L" might have been graded to a sticter standard then some of the crossovers. As @Coinbuf stated, this is an irrational knee-jerk reaction and its very early to be drawing conclusions. It's mostly speculation and hearsay, and will probably just take some time for things to shake out. Also, a coin with a legacy designation is no more likely to cross back to PCGS/NGC than any other coins that CACG grades, the fresh coins graded by CACG are just as likely to cross. Some non cac coins actually are crossing at grade, albeit a very small percentage. Many others are being detailed and downgraded. They have very little tolerance for rub/friction, scratches, wipes, or any other surface issue you can think of. You could send in 10 random unstickered coins from both services and theres a decent chance that the majority come back deets for one reason or another. As time goes on, we can start to get a better feel but initially its been quite a shock to the market and subsequently some dealers have been rabbling. Laura will still be pushing CACG through Legend Numismatics, though she has implored CACG to get on the ball with marketing and the registry. Evidently all of her top set collectors are still fixated on PCGS/CAC.

The "L" (Legacy) signifies any previously stickered coin, PCGS or NGC, that was crossed directly from its previous holder to CACG. Since most have not submitted many PCGS/CAC coins for crossover, many assume the early legacy coins will be predominantly NGC crossovers. The purpose of the designation was more or less a safeguard against gradeflation.

Read the transcription of the interview again. He says that "A" and "B" get stickered, "C" does not. That is always how its been explained by CAC. Regardless, I think people always get too hung up on this. "ABC" is a clever euphemism to try to put things in laymens terms to explain how the other companies standards are inferior to his. The graders at CACG dont look at a coin to decide if its an "A" "B" or "C" coin, they are simply grading the coins as they normally would. Theyre not identifying a 65 "C" and intentionally piutting it into a 64+ holder, if they think the coin is a 65 its going to be holdered as a 65. John Butler has made this very clear on the CAC forum.