How arrogant is MS. Laura Sperber in her most recent "Hot Topics" wherein....

[TheMightyDuke]

I dont mean to sound ignorant, or uninformed (which most of you have forgotten more than I could ever know...Im like jackson64, just a collector), but as 'just' a collector, I see this as what it is...grading the graders. What comes next? NGC and PCGS have all the horses....they are well respected, and most importantly, trusted. If they didnt have all the horses, they wouldnt get the lions shareLaura stated that CAC picks up "95%"....do NGC/PCGS have a worse average than that??? For an apology, it sure seemed more like vowing allegiance to CAC, DLRC is going to have to make a make a market for PCI....who's the next tag team? And, the solo acts seem to be making stellar moves themselves (ie, ANACS and ICG).

[Tradedollarnut]

The vast majority of nice for the grade coins are off the market right now...leaving the dregs to float around and around looking for a home. Thus the percentage of bad coins mixxed into the supply is probably at an all time high. So you have a choice - ignore this fact completely and buy what you like; recognize this fact and work with a dealer to minimize the bad coins you buy; take other steps to avoid bad coins. Do whichever one you are comfortable with.

 

I sent in about a dozen of the type coins that I retained when I sold my set in progress. All but two stickered. One was rejected for being Chlorox toned, the other for being dipped copper. They were nice looking coins so I can certainly appreciate people having the attitude that it just doesn't matter if they are original. But for me, I prefer my coins to be wonders of nature, not wonders of technology.

[Doogy]

I dont mean to sound ignorant, or uninformed (which most of you have forgotten more than I could ever know...Im like jackson64, just a collector), but as 'just' a collector, I see this as what it is...grading the graders. What comes next? NGC and PCGS have all the horses....they are well respected, and most importantly, trusted. If they didnt have all the horses, they wouldnt get the lions shareLaura stated that CAC picks up "95%"....do NGC/PCGS have a worse average than that??? For an apology, it sure seemed more like vowing allegiance to CAC, DLRC is going to have to make a make a market for PCI....who's the next tag team? And, the solo acts seem to be making stellar moves themselves (ie, ANACS and ICG).

 

 

YES, I would say "grading the graders" is true......the market already does that in the form of collectors. If one were to start a list of the all of the threads on the PCGS and NGC forums that were created with regards to mis-graded/doctored/AT'd coins, you'd get one huge list! The collector and dealer market already "grades the graders", both on the public forums and when they re-submit coins for things like Presidential Review.

 

Also, having more eyes on a coin is also "grading the graders" i'd say. IF I were to be interested in a higher end US Seated or Trade dollar, I may email Bruce to ask if he were going to such and such show, and was lending to lend an eye to a certain coin I was interested in. (this is just an example; as a very considerate collector, and not technically an "advisor" ala Julian, he may or may not be willing to do it) This is, in effect, covering your backside by grading the graders. Getting more expert eyes on a coin is always a good thing, and truly assessing the coin for what it is FIRST, and then seeing what grade the TPG assigned it. If before the auction started, Bruce could simply text me that the "coin wasn't all there. In fact, Laura looked at the coin, looked at the grade, and choked up the soda she was drinking on the front of the slab!" There you have it, two experts with this type of coin series have just graded the graders, all in the course of a couple of minutes; and because of it, i'm not buying the coin!

 

Using another example that moves from a friendly gesture that Bruce may have provided on a one time and one coin example, to a more professional type service; if I were to "hire" Julian to assess a group of better coins coming up at a major auction, he is in effect doing the same service that Bruce did for me (although for a fee, as he is in this business and is having to assess and proxy bid multiple coins for me). In this case, I am paying for another set of expert eyes to "grade the graders" and give me and my money an honest assessment if he thinks the coin is worthy of the grade assigned.

 

TPGs make mistakes, and they have readily admitted it. The idea is to have more eyes on coins so you don't end up buying their mistakes. Whether those eyes are yours, or the eyes of others (or both!), it is merely a good idea to cover your backside.

 

 

[carson city]

Maybe the "new and improved" Legends auction site will feature only CAC stickered coins. What a concept---the fox watching the hen house ! We can all hardly wait !

[gmarguli]

You're missing a very large part of the picture. With respect to your comment "CAC stickering isnt helping get rid of doctoring, its simply telling you what was painfully, plainly obvious to the coins owner" - CAC has pointed out problems with coins which were anything but obvious, to a number of their owners, some of whom are extremely knowledgeable.

 

Who says CAC got it right? Perhaps they are seeing problems that aren't there? Chicken Littles? Perhaps they are being too strict? Maybe they are just using different standards than the TPG? Saying the CAC pointed this out and it being true isn't necessarily the same thing.

 

Personally, I think the CAC is a joke. The only people I see praising it are the people who are financially benefiting from it. It's not here to help us, it is here to make money for its owners.

[James_OldeTowne]

I prefer my coins to be wonders of nature, not wonders of technology.

Brilliantly stated!

 

I'm not necessarily sure that "CAC", or TPG, is the answer, but I truly admire and appreciate your sentiments.

[carson city]

CAC would have you believe they and their stickers are the answer. However, their arrogance appears to get in the way. Read Ms. Laura's Hot Topics. Just incredible !

[Tradedollarnut]

CAC would have you believe they and their stickers are the answer. However, their arrogance appears to get in the way.

 

Kindly point to even one example of arrogance from CAC itself.

[Tradedollarnut]

Personally, I think the CAC is a joke. The only people I see praising it are the people who are financially benefiting from it. It's not here to help us, it is here to make money for its owners.

 

I can certainly see how someone who thinks AT is ok and 'improves' copper would have that attitude...

[jackson64]

that is well said Doogy...if the whole CAC thing were presented to me as such...an extra look by a few more experienced numismatists--I would be much more receptive. I think many of the nay sayers may not like the approach that feels like a condemnation of NGC & PCGS....it feels as if they are saying" these TPG's just scattershot grades and we'll tell you which ones they got lucky and got right".....not saying that is their intent or attitude, just that it feels that way......many people will automatically get defensive because it calls all of their purchases into question....

 

 

 

PS: on a quick personal note--I have hundreds of coins depicting sailing ships...when I send them in for slabbing many become a population of 1...thus the grades aren't as important to me...but for others collectors, I can see both sides of the issue...

[gmarguli]

Personally, I think the CAC is a joke. The only people I see praising it are the people who are financially benefiting from it. It's not here to help us, it is here to make money for its owners.

 

I can certainly see how someone who thinks AT is ok and 'improves' copper would have that attitude...

 

Fair enough, but I am also sure everyone else can see your financial objectives with your businesses.

 

You own Legend coin, a coin dealership which purports to deal in only high end coins. Now you have a supposedly independent company, the CAC, which you also have a financial interest in, tell the world that the coins Legend sells really are Premium Quality*. You can now charge even more for these coins.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the business model. I think it is a great idea. It's more ingenious (and one step above) the self-slabbers on eBay and you get to hook the bigger fish. Just don't pretend your mess don't stink. This whole concept is to make money. And that is 100% fine!!

 

*Premium Quality = graded correctly or even low end for the grade. Just as deceptive as First Strike = first 30 days of shipment. Or perhaps, more deceptive than a self-slabber calling a coin FBL when it only has 70% of the bell lines, or calling a coin DCAM when it is only a one-sided cameo.

 

 

BTW, is the CAC still stickering coins for collectors for free? I've got some copper coins I'd like to try.

[DC Dawg]

You're missing a very large part of the picture. With respect to your comment "CAC stickering isnt helping get rid of doctoring, its simply telling you what was painfully, plainly obvious to the coins owner" - CAC has pointed out problems with coins which were anything but obvious, to a number of their owners, some of whom are extremely knowledgeable.

Then when will the CAC publish it's data to back up its claims that there are problems?

 

Or is this going to be "take our word for it, we're experts?" I think the last time that happened the US military was in Iraq looking for WMD that did not exist!!

 

Scott

Scott, that's not your typical reasonable type of debate. I doubt that published data of that sort would prove anything to you (or others). Which would you prefer, data, or the word of the coins' owners, whom were shown the problems which they were previously unaware of?

I thought it was very reasonable--with a corollary for strong emphasis. The premise of Ms. Laura's comments and the forming of the CAC was that the grading services (specifically PCGS and NGC) were slabbing problem coins and over grading others. In her most recent post, she basically said it again. While I believe that neither service is perfect, I find it difficult to believe they are as bad as portrayed.

 

Supporting my feeling is the PNG/ICTA survey announced a year ago that put PCGS and NCG in the "superior" category (with "outstanding" being the top and unattained by any TPG). Either this report (see this article) is wrong or the PNG/ICTA's methods were inadequate to perform a proper analysis. (I had a copy of the report, I just cannot locate it at the moment.)

 

To support the claim that NGC and PCGS are slabbing problem coins or over grading certain types of coins, why not publish the statistics to prove the claim? We get population reports from NGC and PCGS, why not offer the same information from CAC?

 

I make my living as an information security analyst. I look at fact and not speculation. Risk assessment and mitigations are based on real evidence. Implementation of the countermeasures are based on the level of protection, consistency, and the residual risk that would be left after implementation. This analysis is based on large amounts factual information that has to be reasonably correlated. Thus, I would prefer hard data over anecdotal evidence to analyze the claim. So, if you present five people who discuss their experiences, I will ask you if those are the only five? If they are a representative sample, I will ask what is the potential pool size? I will also comment on the potential margin of error for the sample size. Sampling is very difficult to get accurate... just ask the pollsters who keep predicting the wrong outcome to the primaries!

 

Without statistics, we cannot verify the assertion Laura made in her note that said, "There is a serious problem that exists especially from the auctions where dealrs [sic] love to dump their stuff." Laura precedes that statement with anecdotal evidence that might be based on her experiences, but it is still anecdotal and not even a representative sample. Let's see some hard numbers to back up the assertion and let us decide if there is a problem.

 

Is that a more "reasoned" response?

 

Scott

[Tradedollarnut]

Greg: I'm a minority owner in Legend and a miniscule non voting shareholder in CAC... certainly less than 1%. So small, in fact, that the profits [if any] are completely irrelevant to me. While I'd prefer not to actually lose my investment, even a loss would be acceptable to me in return for what I believe are positive impacts on the industry side of numismatics...many of which have already occurred.

 

Someone doing something ethical in this hobby without regard to profit ... shocking!

[MarkFeld]

that is well said Doogy...if the whole CAC thing were presented to me as such...an extra look by a few more experienced numismatists--I would be much more receptive. I think many of the nay sayers may not like the approach that feels like a condemnation of NGC & PCGS....it feels as if they are saying" these TPG's just scattershot grades and we'll tell you which ones they got lucky and got right".....not saying that is their intent or attitude, just that it feels that way......many people will automatically get defensive because it calls all of their purchases into question....

 

 

 

PS: on a quick personal note--I have hundreds of coins depicting sailing ships...when I send them in for slabbing many become a population of 1...thus the grades aren't as important to me...but for others collectors, I can see both sides of the issue...

I look upon CAC as providing an additional expert opinion for (and screening of) coins. It's certainly not for all, or even most coins, or collectors. However, it can provide a valuable service in many instances. People should use it if they want to and don't if they don't.

[carson city]

Good luck on getting a report on anything relevant to CAC coins. It's too easy for CAC to merely state, NGC & PCGS are not doing as good a job at detecting problem coins as we ( CAC ) are doing, than to verify it with a meaningful report. PS--has the announcement been made regarding the "new" auction site ? I think not !

[Tradedollarnut]

Good luck on getting a report on anything relevant to CAC coins. It's too easy for CAC to merely state, NGC & PCGS are not doing as good a job at detecting problem coins as we ( CAC ) are doing, than to verify it with a meaningful report.

 

CAC is going to publish its first quarter report shortly. The headline will be 'carson city zero for two in prognosticating...

 

PS--has the announcement been made regarding the "new" auction site ? I think not !

 

Are you in Baltimore today like they are? I think not!

[BULLY]

Where are this woman's letters being published that I am missing them?

[EZ_E]

www.legendcoin.com

 

AN APPOLOGY TO PCGS

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Its been a long rough year for the grading services and myself. I do appologize for the way I spent the past year or so expressing my anger. The way I carried my message about what I saw as troubleseome was completely wrong.

 

Never was I out to hurt any individual or PCGS itself. From my stand point I felt victimized too.

 

I was so fired up, to a degree I probably had blinders on. I now realize I was unfair to PCGS. To you , David Hall, and the PCGS staff I appologize for the harsh comments that were made.

 

At this point, we both have mutual issues in the marketplace to work on. Coin doctoring is #1. I do know we must work together to stop it and all other activities that are harmful to the grading sevices. I do know from many conversations and witnessing the actions, that PCGS IS clearly committed to consumer protection and the fight against coin doctoring and gradeflation. Their job is not an easy job by any means.

 

The future is much better for my feelings and action since I have a dealer support group who is very responsive and I have open communication with the leadership at PCGS.

 

I hope you can accept my sincere appology.

 

Laura Sperber

 

 

This does not mean in any way that I am forgiving to the criminalistic dealers who are so blinded by their own greed they don't care how they hurt the coin biz. Coin doctors have to be stopped. I do know for sure that BOTH PCGS and NGC are at the highest levels of alert looking for suspect coins. They are both angry and tired of these losers always trying to better their techniques and making a game of seing what they can slip by the graders.

 

At the Long Beach Show, I was confronted and seriously verbally harrassed by THREE coin doctors. Several others moaned at me and even one huge crackout guy had members of his staff blame me for his slow down. First, they are for thinking I am responsible for the grading services going after them. They don't realize its a liablity every time a coin turns due to a foregin substance for the services. Second, they need to realize they are nothing but cowards and crimials who either need to learn simply how to buy and sell coins (and make a bigger and better market) or retire. One actually got in my face and said "back off, your ruining my living". Amazing, isn't it? The good thing is these chumps then went around and tried to stir things up againt me with other dealers. Well congrats genusies, now everyone for sure knows what you do and who you are.

 

Sitting at home how can you protect yourself from buying doctored coins? Its hard. I suggest buying CAC stickered coins. While not perfect, they do catch 95% of whats turned in the holders. This week we submitted to CAC 7 gold coins for a collector who brought them via a major national auction house. EVERY COIN WAS EITHER PUTTIED OR WAS GROSSLY OVER GRADED. There is a serious problem that exists especially from the auctions where dealrs love to dump their stuff. When buying from a major auction house, hire someone to screen the coins! Or, if you are buying from a dealer, ask for them to sent to CAC. The majority of these coins when originally submitted are undetectable to the services.

 

Work with a good dealer who's offerings do not consist of every other coin being upgraded in the past six months! They should be able to catch which coins have been waxed, lasered, etc. This is especially impotant if you choose not to buy CAC stickered coins.

 

We still have a lot of work ahead of us. I do very much predict you WILL see good coins worth far more than ones that are messed with soon. It feels good to be taking control away from the crackout guys and coin docs and putting it back where it belongs-with the consumers.

[gmarguli]

On the Legend Coin website.

[Tradedollarnut]

We still have a lot of work ahead of us. I do very much predict you WILL see good coins worth far more than ones that are messed with soon. It feels good to be taking control away from the crackout guys and coin docs and putting it back where it belongs-with the consumers.

 

[EZ_E]

We still have a lot of work ahead of us. I do very much predict you WILL see good coins worth far more than ones that are messed with soon. It feels good to be taking control away from the crackout guys and coin docs and putting it back where it belongs-with the consumers.

 

 

I agree.

 

I've never met Laura (although I've heard from plenty who have). Perhaps she doesn't have a rosie personality. Well, Dave Hall doesn't either, but this does not detract from their contributions to the hobby. I think if we would ponder upon these people's merits a little more and on their shortcomings a little less then the hobby would be much better off.

 

[carson city]

We can all hope the APPOLOGY isn't "messed with" and it turns into a real Apology----one P. Or maybe CAC will also blame this on NGC & PCGS also !

[TomB]

This is actually a serious question that perhaps TDN might be able to answer. Laura wrote-

This week we submitted to CAC 7 gold coins for a collector who brought them via a major national auction house. EVERY COIN WAS EITHER PUTTIED OR WAS GROSSLY OVER GRADED.

It seems odd to me that Laura would submit seven puttied or grossly overgraded coins to CAC since she should be able to successfully pre-screen at least the grossly overgraded coins out of the submission. What happened here?

[Houston Investor]

I am looking forward to Legend's auctions starting up again if in fact that is going to happen.

 

What a mess all this debate in here about CAC and Laura of Legend has become. Frankly, I have lot more respect for Ginger Lee (who I got to see perform and then meet in person at Allstars, a fav entertainment and dinner spot of mine in Houston last week - she is awesome) than certain well known individuals in numismatics.

 

I don't go by the "everybody knows" style when it comes to coins (or for that matter anything else). I go by facts, stats, ratios, and published pricing / population data. Hopefully, I can find some more US Gold Type coins at auction like this:

 

 

 

[Oldtrader3]

Personally, I do have nor may not ever have, much experience with CAC. I do however, note for the record, that most of the lower grade MS and AU gold coins, up to MS 62, that I look at are overgraded or have been messed with as far as luster and original surfaces are concerned. They are dipped, stripped and overgraded. This fact makes me sad because I can not buy the material I want to own at less than MS63 prices when, for my budget, nice, clean AU's would please me to own. I have been buying gold coins since the mid-1960's and the coins that I see now are mostly worse examples for grade than I can remember in 40 years.

[EZ_E]

Those are gorgeous examples, Parker! I've been keeping one eye open for nice circulated gold types but am almost always disappointed.

 

I have been buying gold coins since the mid-1960's and the coins that I see now are mostly worse examples for grade than I can remember in 40 years.

 

That kind of sums it up.

[Tradedollarnut]

Personally, I do have nor may not ever have, much experience with CAC. I do however, note for the record, that most of the lower grade MS and AU gold coins, up to MS 62, that I look at are overgraded or have been messed with as far as luster and original surfaces are concerned. They are dipped, stripped and overgraded. This fact makes me sad because I can not buy the material I want to own at less than MS63 prices when, for my budget, nice, clean AU's would please me to own. I have been buying gold coins since the mid-1960's and the coins that I see now are mostly worse examples for grade than I can remember in 40 years.

 

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I showed a box of keepers to a well known numismatist and he shook his head and said 'we don't see coins that look like that anymore'. They've all been scrubbed up and made to look commercial in order to get the highest grade on the label.

 

Well, what happens if the coin's value is rewarded for looking PQ in the correct holder instead of messed with and maxxed out? The financial incentive to upgrade is reduced and [hopefully] more coins will look like they used to look...

[MarkFeld]

You're missing a very large part of the picture. With respect to your comment "CAC stickering isnt helping get rid of doctoring, its simply telling you what was painfully, plainly obvious to the coins owner" - CAC has pointed out problems with coins which were anything but obvious, to a number of their owners, some of whom are extremely knowledgeable.

Then when will the CAC publish it's data to back up its claims that there are problems?

 

Or is this going to be "take our word for it, we're experts?" I think the last time that happened the US military was in Iraq looking for WMD that did not exist!!

 

Scott

Scott, that's not your typical reasonable type of debate. I doubt that published data of that sort would prove anything to you (or others). Which would you prefer, data, or the word of the coins' owners, whom were shown the problems which they were previously unaware of?

I thought it was very reasonable--with a corollary for strong emphasis. The premise of Ms. Laura's comments and the forming of the CAC was that the grading services (specifically PCGS and NGC) were slabbing problem coins and over grading others. In her most recent post, she basically said it again. While I believe that neither service is perfect, I find it difficult to believe they are as bad as portrayed.

 

Supporting my feeling is the PNG/ICTA survey announced a year ago that put PCGS and NCG in the "superior" category (with "outstanding" being the top and unattained by any TPG). Either this report (see this article) is wrong or the PNG/ICTA's methods were inadequate to perform a proper analysis. (I had a copy of the report, I just cannot locate it at the moment.)

 

To support the claim that NGC and PCGS are slabbing problem coins or over grading certain types of coins, why not publish the statistics to prove the claim? We get population reports from NGC and PCGS, why not offer the same information from CAC?

 

I make my living as an information security analyst. I look at fact and not speculation. Risk assessment and mitigations are based on real evidence. Implementation of the countermeasures are based on the level of protection, consistency, and the residual risk that would be left after implementation. This analysis is based on large amounts factual information that has to be reasonably correlated. Thus, I would prefer hard data over anecdotal evidence to analyze the claim. So, if you present five people who discuss their experiences, I will ask you if those are the only five? If they are a representative sample, I will ask what is the potential pool size? I will also comment on the potential margin of error for the sample size. Sampling is very difficult to get accurate... just ask the pollsters who keep predicting the wrong outcome to the primaries!

 

Without statistics, we cannot verify the assertion Laura made in her note that said, "There is a serious problem that exists especially from the auctions where dealrs [sic] love to dump their stuff." Laura precedes that statement with anecdotal evidence that might be based on her experiences, but it is still anecdotal and not even a representative sample. Let's see some hard numbers to back up the assertion and let us decide if there is a problem.

 

Is that a more "reasoned" response?

 

Scott

Sorry, Scott, but to me, at least, you never adequately addressed the issue of what a data base could prove to anyone regarding the detection of problem coins in holders. People will either believe that problem coins are in holders or not, regardless of any data base statistics, based upon the opinions of CAC.

[MarkFeld]

Greg: I'm a minority owner in Legend and a miniscule non voting shareholder in CAC... certainly less than 1%. So small, in fact, that the profits [if any] are completely irrelevant to me. While I'd prefer not to actually lose my investment, even a loss would be acceptable to me in return for what I believe are positive impacts on the industry side of numismatics...many of which have already occurred.

 

Someone doing something ethical in this hobby without regard to profit ... shocking!

Just so the above post by TDN doesn't get lost for too long.

[carson city]

Are we to believe CAC is the only ethical protector for the coin hobby and they have no regard for profit ? Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here---Jack Nicholson, As Good as it Gets !

 

Good to see MFeld hasn't left us for ATS---he's too much fun !