When you purchase your next NGC or PCGS graded coin from a dealer....

[BillJones]

No.

 

I buy coins because I like them not because of what a grading service or CAC had to say about them.

 

I'd like to see CAC fail because I don't want to have to have my coins re-regraded in order to get a good price for them. For that reason if I had two identical coins in front of me, I'd by the non CAC piece. I don't want to encourage a company that is out to cost me money in duplicate certification charges.

[MikeKing]

You 3 who are so adamantly in the CAC corner-you HONESTLY believe that the CDC is going to catch doctored or fake coins that : the initial owner missed, the dealer or submitter missed and all of the pros who handled the coin through the grading process? I do not doubt that some may slip by, but if a coin is that expertly faked/AT'd or whatever that so many people mistook it for genuine when holding the actual coin...CDC is going to miraculously discover it through its scuffy plastic holder---where the tools of weighing, measuring and rim inspection are also not available? I want some of what you're smoking...

 

the answer to that is 'yes'. CAC will be looking at the coins without the financial incentive of market grading and other factors that ultimately influence the hired graders at the TPGs. Also, based on the history of how this evolved, it was the volume of stuff that kept cropping up which gave major players in this arena the incentive to form a company such as this.

 

I think there may be other benefits from an organization like the CAC, and that is to level the playing field between the two major TPGs. After all, an NGC MS whatever, that won't cross to PCGS because it's in an NGC holder and not because it misses the grade, will be recognized as appropriately graded by the CAC and perhaps...time will tell...increase it's value. Of course, the mystique of PCGS breeds insanity, but these things don't usually last forever.

 

edited to add: of course, if the CAC were altruistic, their fees would be much less than they currently are, because Bill, as a collector, has a perfectly valid point. This may incur upon collectors, a real burdeon, even if this wasn't the intent of the company to begin with. Taking that into consideration should be consistent with their initial goals.

[BillJones]

Even for a high priced coin, CAC gets relatively pricy.

 

This year I purchased 1795 half eagle in a PCGS AU-55 holder. The coin was "dream coin" for me because it was exactly what it says on the holder AND the coin is totally original with nice coppery toning. (No "white gold" for me!)

 

Now if CAC floats I'll have to pay them $100 to tell me something I already know PLUS shipping and insurance both ways, which could come close to ANOTHER $100.

 

In addition I've got the risk of having the coin lost in shipment. Even if insurance paid me back, I'd have to find another coin that I like as well, which in this market would a formidable task. If there were a time lag, the market could go up, and I’d have to pay more than the amount the insurance paid me to replace the coin I would also incur further travel costs to go to major shows or auctions to find a replacement coin.

 

So there you have it. An imputed cost of at least $200 for NOTHING but a damn sticker that tells me what and every competent dealer already knows and PCGS has already certified.

 

CAC is an unnecessary redundancy and a scheme that has been created mostly to enrich its founders and investors than to provide consumer protection. It's an added costs that collectors should have to incur.

 

[jesbroken]

In answer to CC's post-NO.

 

As an addition to this post, I would like to add an observation of mine. Many people are complaining about the TPG's tightening their grading standards(as in some cases they should), thus an increase in BodyBags. I feel a prime reason for the BB increase is the recent push for guarantees, such as the milk spot fiasco. Buyers, perfectly within their rights, are driving the TPG's to a typical CYA attitude that pervades American business. If a coin looks odd-REJECT IT-regardless whether they know why or not! This is one reason the TPG's do NOT give explicit reasons for BBing a coin, as in many cases they do not know why only that they are uncomfortable with it. The liability they face is the driving force behind this attitude. They get paid whether they reject or pass the coin--why take on any more liability than is needed. The submitters all complain but keep on sending in coins. JMHO.

By the way, for those who think that CAC is only after the ultra high end coins-How much do you think they will have to charge for $50k in liability-a standard fee-I think not-at least not for long. They will be after as much low end business as they can get to cover their overall liabilities. again JMHO.

 

 

[BillJones]

The submitters all complain but keep on sending in coins.

 

We put up with it because you can't get a fair price for a raw coin any more.

[BillJones]

I believe the fee is $10 for coins values up to $500 and $20 for coins valued up to $5,000.00. Whatever the case, if they don't cut their prices in half, I'd be surprised if they survive as a company.

 

Their prices are not just high, the service is slow too. $10 and $20 fees have 30 day turnaround times. You need to pay $40 to get it down to 3 to 5 days. This is not for a slab. It's for a damn sticker!

 

PLUS, as others have pointed out, you have pay for the shipping both ways, which at least for Registered mail is not cheap.

[bsshog40]

And then by the sounds of it, if you don't get a sticker, the fees are lost. It's kind of like sending in a coin and having it BB'd.

[MarkFeld]

And then by the sounds of it, if you don't get a sticker, the fees are lost. It's kind of like sending in a coin and having it BB'd.

If the coin is rejected for a sticker, half of the fee is refunded.

[carson city]

Half back for something you didn't receive ? What is the buy-back price for a coin that is Stickered and who are the CAC dealers that will buy it ?

[CHABSENTIA]

There are going to be people that need the extra assurance of the CAC sticker.I just feel that there is no way that there is not going to be an extra charge built into the Price pf the coin. It will affect people on the low end more than those on the high end.If a 1884 O Morgan is worth $147.00 in MS 65 and the CAC sticker ads $25.00 to it then has the coin really attained a value of $172.00 or did the Seller/ Dealer just pass the increase to the Buyer?

 

If as others state "Newbies need that extra assurance " and over time that $172.00 becomes the established norm then will the MS 64 go up in value to match the increase in the MS65?.You are talking about an almost 20% increase.

 

I would think that a person paying $25,000 for a coin would look more carefully then one paying $250.00 What are the chances that a coin in a PCGS or NGC holder that has been cleaned is going to slip through numerous times.If you are talking about a Raw coin getting body bagged then you are talking about a coin that has not been certified and hence can't get a CAC sticker.

 

I have seen Raw Morgans on E bay and have written the Seller and asked if they have been cleaned dipped or polished.About 50% of them have responded " that the coin is over 100 years old and could have been cleaned but since I bought it 3 months ago I have not cleaned it". One seller that appears to sell mostly Morgan Vams in a raw state when I asked "since he offered only a 7 day return privelege and if I sent it off to NGC to get it graded and it did not possess the actual Vam then what was m guarantee"

 

He responded that it was all in his Posted refund policy that not only was there a 7 day return privilege but that if the coin was removed from its Mylar holder that there it could not be returned.

 

You just don't do business with such people.I have watched his auctions and many expire without even one bid.

 

Everybody has to make their own decisions.I just mentioned a possible inflated price built into the coin that would be noticeable on the low end as well as a Marketing result on the low end.

 

What happens in the case of the first paragraph as more and more people get experienced in grading coins as another poster suggested and they stay away from the CAC sticker and due to the dis-interest that cointhat people paid $172.00 sinks again to $147.00 for about a 20% loss.I guess they are just out of Luck .

 

There are going to be disruptions especially on the lower end because of the above and other reasons.

[Bruceswar]

The submitters all complain but keep on sending in coins.

 

We put up with it because you can't get a fair price for a raw coin any more.

 

I love raw coins, but I totally agree! Sad day

[carson city]

Sad, indeed !

[CHABSENTIA]

Still the situation I mentioned earlier. If the fee for a $200.00 coin is $10.00 then you are talking about 5%.. If you are talking about a $20.00 fee for a $5,000.00 coin then you are talking about a fee less than 1% or 10 times less so the CAC sticker will move toward the high end for many if not most people.

 

I do not know the exact History but Albanese that founded CAC is a co founder of PCGS and a Founder of NGC.He is not presently asssociated with either.

 

Since he was co-founder and founder of the two then it stands to reason that he either originated or approved the grading standards for each.For the most part this leaves to possibilities.

 

1. The grading standards since leaving each have really deterioated since his departure.

2. The grading standards which he approved/founded are for the most part are the same.

 

Since the same person is now the head of CAC then this means that they want to apply stricter standards or rubber stamp the original evaluation. If the original evaluation was correct and CAC imposed stricter standards then there are going to be a lot of collectors of slabbed coins that are going to be unhappy.If they agree with the grade then an unwarranted fee will be paid and passed on to the buyer for no reason.

 

I think somehting that needs to be mentioned here and has not been mentioned before is this. I would be interested and so should others as to the coins that are refused a sticker by CAC during the time that Albanese was co founder and active in PCGS and the ones NGC Coins refused a sticker by NGC that were graded by NGC during the time that Albanese was Founder and active in NGC.

 

Don't forget that CAC is only stickering NGC and PCGS coins.

[MikeInFL]

I would be interested and so should others as to the coins that are refused a sticker by CAC during the time that Albanese was co founder and active in PCGS and the ones NGC Coins refused a sticker by NGC that were graded by NGC during the time that Albanese was Founder and active in NGC.

 

I don't follow. Would you please explain/reword this? Thanks..>Mike

[Arizonadesertrat]

Chabsentia, the grading standards have notably deteriorated at BOTH since his departures.

Just look at Morgans and Saints graded during the last 2-4 years. Grading has gotten tighter more recently, but there are lots of coins slabbed by both TPGs that aren't moving well because of grading 'problems.' These will take years to disappear, and I wouldn't advise any collector to buy them.

[carson city]

Thank you for your advise .

[Bruceswar]

I would be interested and so should others as to the coins that are refused a sticker by CAC during the time that Albanese was co founder and active in PCGS and the ones NGC Coins refused a sticker by NGC that were graded by NGC during the time that Albanese was Founder and active in NGC.

 

I don't follow. Would you please explain/reword this? Thanks..>Mike

 

What he is saying is when Albanese was at PCGS or NGC.. Coins from those time periods should meet CAC standards, since afterall John helped set them right? Unless the coin turned in the holder...

[CHABSENTIA]

This is exactly what I am saying. THe times he was at PCGS and PCGS thenhe either had to set the standards or oversee them.When you are talking about these time periods the there are only two answers.

 

1.The coins will be CAC stickered the same

2.The coins will be refused a sticker.

 

The first time that a Collector tries to get a coin CAC stickered and it is refused and it was an NGC or PCGS coinon his watch then there is going to be a problem.

[MarkFeld]

This is exactly what I am saying. THe times he was at PCGS and PCGS thenhe either had to set the standards or oversee them.When you are talking about these time periods the there are only two answers.

 

1.The coins will be CAC stickered the same

2.The coins will be refused a sticker.

 

The first time that a Collector tries to get a coin CAC stickered and it is refused and it was an NGC or PCGS coinon his watch then there is going to be a problem.

Sorry, but that is simply bologna. There have already been plenty of such coins that have been refused stickers and there have been no "problems". People seem to forget that a grader at a grading company is part of a team and that one grader's opinion of a coin isn't necessarily the final grade assigned to it.

[carson city]

MF----If records are not kept regarding "plenty of such coins that have been refused stickers" It smells like BOLOGNA !!!!!

[Tradedollarnut]

If CC makes a sound in the forest, and you have him on 'ignore', was he really even there?

[CHABSENTIA]

Exactly.Nothing has been said now because the CAC sticker is not widespread.I had a situation a while back.I purchased a coin at auction and was not a member of NGC nad before I bid on the coin I called NGC nd gave them the certification number.The label was not a standard NGC Label but was a "flag" label.

 

I also described the label.The NGC rep must have misunderstood my question because she told me that she was not allowed to give me the name of the submitter but that it was a special request.

 

I would assume that NGC not only has the dates the coins were slabbed but who had them slabbed and the type of label etc.

 

If somebody for whatever reason wants a sticker on an NGC coin to verify the grade and it is refused then one of the first things they will do is contact NGC.If they are the original submitter and they know the date and it coincides with the time that A lbanese was the head of NGC and it has caused his/her coib to decrease much in value because of this and it happens to enough people then I suspect that CAC will be looking at a class action Lawsuit which will out the whole practice into question and cause disruptions. They won't need a record of CAC refused stickers at this point.just a group of collectors whose coins lost value.

 

Doesn't make. any difference that one grader thought different at the time.I don't think that just one grader is responsible anyway.What makes this even more liable is that Albanese was the head of the Company at the time and is the head of the Company which is called CAC at this time..If CAC refuses to sticker a coin then they are saying that the coin does not meet the standards of the grade.

 

This can only be for one of two reasons.

1. Either CAC which Albanese has founded now has applied stricter standards or

2. The Standards which graded the coin in the first place were substandard.

 

This only becomes a problem if the period in question was when Albanese was the head of both organizations.This is not Bologna because when ALbanese founded NGC then he was responsible for overseeing and approved of the grading just as the head of any company is responsible for the product of their country. You don't sue the employees of a Company.

 

James is correct in that it is Bologna if CAC does not keep records of the coins they sticker just as NGC keeps records of the coin they grade.

 

This means that it doesn't have to be a disgruntled collector.Anybody will be able to compare the records between CAC and NGC and PCGS.There will be np problem if Albanese was not present at the same time at both companies. The problem will arise if the coins were submitted for grading while he was he head of PCGS or NGC and then refused a sticker by CAC just as the owner of any Company is responsible for its product. If somebody buys a GM car and it fails and causes an accident you don't sue the employee on the asembly line you sue GM.

 

If this happens then all CAC stickered coins will come into question

[carson city]

You are soooo right !

[MarkFeld]

Exactly.Nothing has been said now because the CAC sticker is not widespread.I had a situation a while back.I purchased a coin at auction and was not a member of NGC nad before I bid on the coin I called NGC nd gave them the certification number.The label was not a standard NGC Label but was a "flag" label.

 

I also described the label.The NGC rep must have misunderstood my question because she told me that she was not allowed to give me the name of the submitter but that it was a special request.

 

I would assume that NGC not only has the dates the coins were slabbed but who had them slabbed and the type of label etc.

 

If somebody for whatever reason wants a sticker on an NGC coin to verify the grade and it is refused then one of the first things they will do is contact NGC.If they are the original submitter and they know the date and it coincides with the time that A lbanese was the head of NGC and it has caused his/her coib to decrease much in value because of this and it happens to enough people then I suspect that CAC will be looking at a class action Lawsuit which will out the whole practice into question and cause disruptions. They won't need a record of CAC refused stickers at this point.just a group of collectors whose coins lost value.

 

Doesn't make. any difference that one grader thought different at the time.I don't think that just one grader is responsible anyway.What makes this even more liable is that Albanese was the head of the Company at the time and is the head of the Company which is called CAC at this time..If CAC refuses to sticker a coin then they are saying that the coin does not meet the standards of the grade.

 

This can only be for one of two reasons.

1. Either CAC which Albanese has founded now has applied stricter standards or

2. The Standards which graded the coin in the first place were substandard.

 

This only becomes a problem if the period in question was when Albanese was the head of both organizations.This is not Bologna because when ALbanese founded NGC then he was responsible for overseeing and approved of the grading just as the head of any company is responsible for the product of their country. You don't sue the employees of a Company.

 

James is correct in that it is Bologna if CAC does not keep records of the coins they sticker just as NGC keeps records of the coin they grade.

 

This means that it doesn't have to be a disgruntled collector.Anybody will be able to compare the records between CAC and NGC and PCGS.There will be np problem if Albanese was not present at the same time at both companies. The problem will arise if the coins were submitted for grading while he was he head of PCGS or NGC and then refused a sticker by CAC just as the owner of any Company is responsible for its product. If somebody buys a GM car and it fails and causes an accident you don't sue the employee on the asembly line you sue GM.

 

If this happens then all CAC stickered coins will come into question

You could substitute "PCGS" or "NGC" wherever you wrote "CAC". What has happened on the countless occasions when PCGS or NGC re-graded a coin THEY had previously graded and assigned a different grade (or even a no-grade)? I'm not aware of any class action lawsuits, etc., you would have predicted.

[carson city]

Chabsentia----don't expect a lucid answer regarding CAC !

[michael]

but rather than PCGS I was going to be a bit more generic and replace "CAC sticker" with "slab" and jump back to 1987 - 88. And back then that same statement, or one very similar WAS being made to promote the slabbing concept. If that statement was true, why do we need CAC stickers now? And if it wasn't true, then how true is it today with regard to the stickers?

 

I think we will see the same result. The slab (Sticker) will encourage the beginning novice collector to depend on the slab grade and they will never bother to learn how to grade. Eventually they will be sold low end coins for premium prices and someday in order to "correct the abuses" a 5PG will come along to approve of the stickers.

 

 

(thumbs u

 

 

[CHABSENTIA]

I would imagine that the situation has deterioated and tightened etc. I only mention the possibility.I mentioned that the period would have to be a PCGS coin that was refused a CAC sticker that was graded at the time he was at PCGS and the same for NGC.

 

Will it happen? Don't know .Can it happen? Possibly. The thread seems to point pretty much to the fact that Albanese was the best in th Business and you mention that Grading Standards had gone down since he left.So what possible defense would there be if for any reason a coin that was graded during his Tenure was refused a CAC sticker?

 

If it did happen then the whole situation of the CAC sticker becomes suspect.It only takes once.Is it possible that a few coins might have been overgraded during his tenure at either?

 

The new rules for Ebay also include ANACS and ICG. Why aren't they included. Why is the CAC sticker only possible for NGC and PCGS? I have also seen on this Forum that CAC will not sticker Modern Coins.If Standards have deterioated since Albanese left than there have to be Modern coins that were under graded so what is going on here?

 

I have to go with the previous Poster that would have to pay $200.00 tostcker a coin that he knows is the true grade.

 

If it does happen that a Lawsuit is brought against CAC because of even one or two that slipped through the cracks then there are going to be a lot of upset collectors that have spent several hundred dollars for the sticker for whatever reason.

 

Is CAC going to verify that each coin to be stickered was or was not graded during the Tenure of either PCGS and NGC.? I would think that Albanes would have thought of this possibilty that I mentioned above.

 

Are NGC and PCGS the only ones that keep Population reports and extensive records?I have not heard of any from SGS or NEC etc. Possibly ANACS and ICG.. CAC is only going with NGC and PCGS. Could it be that their records are more accessible and then again Albanese is more familar with both.

 

When did Albanese depart NGC and PCGS. How soon before or after they started grading the Moderns?

 

I am not suggesting any shady deals. Just the possibility of a Coin not being stickered during his Tenure and the possibility of a disgruntled collector/s and the familarity with certain procedures which is a matter of convenience and nothing else.

 

Might not ever happen.

 

As for the statement that you wouldn't advise any collector to buy Morgans or Saints graded during the "bad" period of grading then would you suggest that one not buy any Morgans or Saints at all or just those graded during the "bad" period?

 

Looks like we wre then back to my above statements about finding the when the coins were stickered by CAC were during the "good " period and the ones refused were during the "bad" period. Do you only buy slabbed coins during the tenure of Albanese at each and none of coins slabbed after he left? Looks like we are back to determining the "best" period which is exactly what CAC needs to do to keep away any allusions of conflict.

[CHABSENTIA]

You are correct. I have already gone into detail here so no need again.You can substitute and interchange at will. The difference is that the Co Founder of PCGS and the Founder of NGC is the driving factor here.

 

If the coins that are refused or for that matter approved by CAC and they were coins that were slabbed during his Tenure then you have at least the allusion of a conflict.

 

I put the most emphasis on the refusal because it is much easier to prove a conflict with a negative then it is with a postive.

 

The possibilty exists because of the Founder of CAC and its driving force and the minute that some collector or a group of collectors discover that the exact same grading standards of CAC were not the same exact grading standards for coins that were slabbed during his tenure at either NGC or PCGS then there is a possibilty of problems that could be made worse since they are the only two that can qualify for a CAC sticker.

 

 

May never happen

[MarkFeld]

So what possible defense would there be if for any reason a coin that was graded during his Tenure was refused a CAC sticker?

As I stated before, a grade is determined by a team of graders, not just one person. It is also widely known that grading is subjective, inconsistent and imperfect. There would therefore be a number of defenses, though none will be needed.

 

Edited to add: Also, the fact that CAC refuses to sticker a coin (and they have already done so in several hundreds of cases) doesn't automatically mean that the coin was over-graded. It means that it is not up to the CAC standard of solid for the grade or PQ coins.

[carson city]

I guess the best defense is a good offense ?