CHABSENTIA

But you did learn why John Albanese left 1 of the TPG`s?

Why does one have to search for it ?Why can' JA say in one of his interviews. "I started CAC becuase when I was at TPG #1 or #2 I........." or when Rosen says " when we were grading coins" why can't Rosen ask " when you were at TPG .........".ETC.

Since so many people here seem to think that Mr. Albanese is the greatest grader in the history of numismatics and the ultimate savior of the industry from over grading why shouldnt we concerned about his exit from the two firms he started?

Bill, please cite just a single source/example for your above statement. I bet you can't, because you have exaggerated what others have said in order to make your point.

 

I guess you have not bothered to read one post after another in this string and elsewhere that indicate that Mr. Albanese can do no wrong. Ive never seen such glowing remarks made about anyone in this business, including some of the great authors who given us some wonderful books. Read the messages; dont yell at me. Mr. Albanese almost looks like a cult figure.

 

It's clear that if CAC succeeds his company will invalidate the PCGS and NGC grades on great many expensive coins if those pieces are not presented to and approved by his minions. It is disappointing that you are unable or unwilling to grasp that concept. When someone reaches into other peoples pocketbooks dont expect those who are harmed financially to thank him for it.

Bill, I have read a great many posts in various CAC threads, yet haven't seen a single one/person praise Mr. Albanese in the exaggerated way that you stated. Again, please cite just a single source/example for your above statement - it should be easy, if, as you say, it's in "one post after another".

 

And I didn't "yell" at you - I accused you of exaggerating to make your point, and I stand by that now. Lastly, I didn't see anyone asking you or anyone else "to thank him for it" - another exaggeration on your part.

I have mentioned it several times. Albanese in the Rosen Interview seems to have distanced himself from his time at PCGS and NGC. He talks about policing the TPGs but not about his time at them. I have not once heard him even compare the situation today or what he thinks it is today with his time at PCGS or NGC.

When I have read articles about the new head of ANA then there is talk about his History. When you talk about Taylor and the ICG/ANACS deal then there is talk about the History of each.You just don't see it in any of the conversations with Albanese.

He has also set himself up as somebody who feels that he can at least correct the present situation that he claims exists today. Yet he also admits that " Graders make mistakes". So what exists in CAC that his Graders are not going to incorrectly sticker coins?This itself also implies an elitist attitude.

He was the Co Founder of one of the two firms and the Founder of another.This is a fact. What were the circumstances of his exits and was there a clause that he could not start another Grading Company and if so then what is the time frame.?If there was a time frame and it has ended then how soon did it end before he founded CAC etc?

I agree with Bill Jones and I have listed many other Possibilites that may or may not happen, The Problem is that if they do happen there will be a great turmoil to Collectors as a result.

Who is to say that his standards are not too strict? If this is the case then if CAC is accepted to any degree then this will even put into question even correctly graded slabs up to now. I would consider this an Elitist attitude. Logic would tell you that if he is going to issue a different colr sticker for an upgrade that the standards would have to be very strict to reduce any Liability on their part because people would be demanding upgrades.

So I would consider the Lack of information and the implied attitudes to be a concern as well as further divisions such as A and B etc.

Nobody esle has come along and started a concern to evaluate thr already established TPGs. This alone demonstrates an attitude.You have already seen an instance where Delaers are statinf that CAC is uncorrect. How many Dealers are going to admit that their coins were rejescted by CAC etc

It would seem Logical that if JA was proud of his experiences etc at TPG #1 and #2 that he would be shouting it to the Stars.Why not make the comparison between then and now?It seems to me that in all his Interviews that he only wants to talk about the positive effects that CAC can bring. Not putting this comparison in relation to his previous experiences sets off a alarm for me in light of Future possibilites.

One does not have ot come out and say that they think they are better etc when actions seem to imply it.

The fact that many people are not going to avail themselves of CAC does not mean that CAC is not going to have any effect on Coin Collecting. It has already been noticed by many that perhaps the TPGs have tightened up their grading because of CAC. I do not have any evidence that this is the case but let us say that it is the case.

Who is to say that they haven't tightened too much? Now we have CAC being the sole arbiter of whether or not the TPGs are too tight or just right or a guarantee for the grade etc.Can you or anybody else state with 100% certainity that CAC is more correct or too strict or just right.

Then we have a situation where there has been talk of going to a 100 point grading scale. Albanese has already increased it by the A B and C.Do all the coins then graded on a 70 point scale have oe evaluated on the new 100 point scale?

Of course there is eventually going to have to be another layer to make sure that CAC has it right.You don't think that if CAC has a sticker denoting an upgrade that people aren't going to send their coin back to the TPG that originally certified it. What happens when the TPG refuses to upgrade it?

Meanwhile we still have another layer that is prone to errors watching over another Entity that is also prone to errors,

Bill, You said John Albanese abandoned 2 grading companies. Some day you will find out why he left both, then you`ll understand John a lot better.

I would like to know the reason/s for it. Some people that support CAC are also critical of Taylor and the ICG/ ANACS deal.

1. Why did John Albanese leave PCGS and NGC?

2 As a Founder and a Co Founder then he should have been in charge and able to direct to his satisfaction. If not then what makes anybody think the same thing won't happen at CAC?

3.Under what conditions did he leave? Was it Voluntary?

4. When he left did he agree not to start up another Grading company in a certain time frame etc.

5. ETC

Since this is the case then it seems that JA is saying that his graders are better

Bologna. PCGS and NGC could screen their coins too in the same manner if they cared to.

Why just take a sentence out my whole paragraph and then try to disassemble it?

I quoted the whole area where JA said that "graders are not perfect and that they all make mistakes". My question was two fold.

1. What need is there for CAC if all the graders make mistakes?Does that mean that we also have to have another such entity as CAC to minimize their mistakes?

2. or does JA feel that his graders are better or put another way less prone to mistakes?

Everybody knows that you you are a big backer of CAC but how about responding to the whole thing instead of one sentence?

Be sure to let us know when you find the clear and concise explanation of NGC's grading standards.

I don't know about NGC, but PCGS does describe their standards in a widely available book. At the very least, NGC has a considerable volume of work that seemingly implies a standard (loose though it may be).

 

It just seems that since "grading standards" evidently plays the pivotal role in CAC's existence, the least they would do is explain what standards are being used (but apparently not guaranteed). To put it another way, how is it advantageous to those who want to use the CAC to be kept uninformed of the actual standards being used to evaluate their coins? Wouldn't CAC want to give buyers of CAC coins every possible advantage in understanding the grading process?[/quote

 

Actually I subsrcibe to the Rosen letter and had read it before. Notice in the letter here where JA states that 'all graders are human and that they are not perfect and that they just want CAC to keep it to a minimum.". Since this is the case then it seems that JA is saying that his graders are better.

 

Another part is when JA is asked about "ever" starting his own grading service and JA states that he has no desire to start his own grading service.I find this a little misleading as it implies that CAC is a first attempt to keep mistakes at a minimum and that he has never been part of a Grading service . The fact is that he has been a Co Founder and a Founder of the two top TPGS. Even in the body of the letter he uses sentences such as "when I was grading coins" and Rosen states to him "During the time we were grading coins".

 

So do we need another Entity such as CAC to keep the mistakes at a better minimum?Why not mention his previous role at the two top TPGs and instead mention that he had no desire to start his own grading service?

Well, in the mail today I received this eBay purchase, which completes my ASE roll set:

 

 

Then stopped at the bank to get cash and make a deposit and saw glint of silver in the teller's coin tray, bought all 7 for $3.50 and the other teller even remarked that it sounded like a silver one in there! Not one, but 7 40% Kennedy halves!

 

I found a Dansco album last year that I had forgotten about with Kennedys. I went through them and took out the worst and turned them into the Bank last month.

Some super pick up's guys

I know that many people on here don't think that much about the Moderns. I paid $92.00 for the Leif Ericson. Numismedia kists it as $350.00 on thsi MS70. I paid 113.00 for the Olympic Cycling also in raw form and sent them in to e graded.It is listed as $400.00 by Numismedia in this MS70 condition so I figure I have a lot of Price Flexibilty if it goes down.

Just got these back from NGC.

1. http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/1995obv.jpg

2. http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/2000obv.jpg

Nice Morgan.

Nice looking Coins!

Thanks. I will try it next time.

Thanks. I don't know why I can't get it on here like that. For some reason I don't have the three links anymore. Just the Picture and the Image URL.

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/1897PLO.jpg

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/1897PLR.jpg

Thanks. I already looked it up in VAM World and saw that .It also stated that the 222 Vam was revised from 176 or 178 and some other numbers.

I am not that familar with Vams. What does all this mean as far as rarity is concerened etc.

Again thanks for the reply.

Hope somebody can help me on this. I had a Morgan dollar in a slab and after reading an article in Coin World thought it might be a 229 Vam and I knew NGC did not list the Vam.

NGC had it as a AU58 but I sent it in anyway. The breast feathers on the reverse look a lot better then some I have in MS62. I can't figure out how to enlarge the image so don't know if you can see it. In order to get the scan down to 120 K for the Registry here I had to do it at 75 PPI. I did this one at 300 PPI. May be it isn't the PPI that is the problem to get the picture bigger. I am new at this and am doing good to get the URL for the images here.

Also I thought people might like to see the new ANACS Holder

What can anybody tell me about the VAM 222 on this Variety etc.

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/1878REV.jpg

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj194/CHABSENTIA/1878OBV.jpg

I have a question here. I am cleaning out things and I have about 200 wheat cents and about 100 Mercury and Roosevelt Dimes.

All are circulated and the pennies look like they are mostly in the 40s and later but I will check later this week. Dont think there is anything on the dimes. I think there might be a well circukated 1916 and a few other well circulated about that time etc.

Is there any thing I should look for and be aware of here?

Thanks

I have a Sub to the SAE among others.

Thanks. Most of it goes to you for helping me.

I don't know if anybody is interested but I phoned ANACS and got right through to them.

I used my Lap top to get out and I knew I was using the right P.W. but I got locked out.Idon't think the cookies were enabled on it.

I called up and the guy told me that there was nothing they could do as the Website was down. I asked when it would be back up and the guy send it could be later on or it could be weeks or months.

If these guys aren't bashful about talking weeks or months then there must be some problems.

I also received my 2008 Proof A.S.E. in the mail today from the U.S. Mint. They charged me $31.95 plus $4.95 S/H/

Thanks to Saen for posting the image. One small step at a time for......

Thanks for the compliment.It has been an experience for me to get the URL here.I spnet several hours getting it right. I have E Mailed pictures with the Scanner and of course put images in the Registry. In the Registry it is a simple thing of using the "Browse" feature to bring up the Image and then to Save it.My next thing will be to enlarge the Image as I am used to the 120K that the Registry allows.

I got the Coin raw on Ebay for $69.00. The guy said he thought it would grade as a MS63 but it looked a little different in hand. I usually check Numismedia and at least two others for a starting point.

I noticed that Numismedia does not seem to put a premium on VAMS. When I looked they seemed to be pricing it as a 1880S without the VAM but PCGS makes the distinction in its Pricing guide.

I got it for my second Registry on the Morgans-one per annum.I also got an 1899 O MS65 in this batch which I purchased raw.

This was one of four 1/10 $5 I submitted to NGC. They were just sitting in my Safe Deposit Box and the tohers were a

1999 MS

1999w Proof

2006w Proof

Not my usual area but with Gold breaking news highs thought it would be better to slab them.

Couple of people beat me to it. Harvey shouldn't me the greater part earlier.

It was nothing to go to the Registry and hit " Browse" and pick off the picture and then "Save".

It was an effort for me to get the URL for it to work. Thanks

You know what they say " One small step for Coins" or was that the Moon?

Thanks but I still was having problems and Harvey helped.I uploaded a coin to Photobucket and saw the three links. I used the second link which is the direct link.I couldn't seem to copy it on to the Forum.

I noticed later that the third link which is the Image link said it was used for Forums. I clicked on the link and immediatley got the message "copied" but it I don't know where it went or what it copied to.

On the URL on the third link it has (IMG) in front of the URL and in back of it.Finally the only way I could get it to the Forum was by writing down and copying the direct link such as http:// i272.photobucket.com/albums/..........."

URL in the message .

I know that there has to be a way to copy it without the hassle of writing it down etc but until I can figure it out then this will do.

With the Registry all you have to do is "Browse" and go to the location where it is stored on your Computer and " save" an it is done.

Oh well, Its one step at a time for us Newbies in this area.

Thamk for everybodys help.