Taking another look at CAC

[RI AL]

Well, I have my new Coin World with me on the kitchen table while I listen to TV news and see the stock market tanking again. What else is new...

 

Anyway, P.14 in Coin World of October 6 offers a guest commentary by Victor Easley, "To CAC or not to CAC..." . In paragraph 4, Mr. Easley states, in reference to the CAC sticker, "Yet, it is not a perfect system. A CAC sticker by no means implies a premium quality (PQ) coin, although it very well may be. It merely acknowledges that a specific coin meets the minimum CAC standard for the grade assigned".

 

Well, though I'm not a CAC fan, (I would certainly not eliminate a CAC coin from consideration though) the above quote took me a bit by surprise. I WAS under the impression that a CAC footballed coin WAS PQ coin for the grade. OK...so I was wrong...I THINK.

 

Then I read this on p.26 in the Blanchard ad: "John Albanese recently announced the formation of CAC which has made it possible for coin buyers to identify coins that are of premium quality for the grade".

 

It can't be both ways. So, exactly what DOES a CAC sticker mean? Is it a PQ coin...or MAYBE PQ coin? I'd be very interested in your thoughts.

 

RI AL

[jesbroken]

Here we go again. This should be interesting.

Jim

[MarkFeld]

It is my understanding that a CAC sticker signifies a coin as solid for the grade or better. But that does not necessarily mean a coin is "PQ" (premium quality).

 

There has been quite a bit of ambiguity and confusion on this subject, partly through the fault of CAC - I have told them that more than once, even as a supporter. And there has also been considerable hyping from a number of sellers.

[James_OldeTowne]

Yep. This discussion always seems to grow new legs from time to time, and the one party that you would think could answer it - that being the CAC - cannot or will not.

 

If you read every single word on the CAC website, you will come away with no idea at all what the sticker actually means. Nor will you find a clue about what "standards" are used by the CAC, only that some unknown "standard" is allegedly being used.

 

Still, it's fun to see the argument bubble to the top from time to time.

 

From the standpoint of being a coin collector, the CAC has sunk into the oblivion of irrelevance for me. From the standpoint of participating in the coin market, it's little more than irritant, albeit one that siphons money off the coin market.

 

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

[WoodenJefferson]

Yes, there are some sellers that are using the CAC decal as a vehicle to denote the coin as having Premium Quality. Those exact sellers might just as well be saying, "This coin has recently been CAC'ed, it is special, you better buy this one because it is better than all the rest of those coins that are in the same grade!"

 

You almost knew in advance that there would be those who would take advantage or misconstrue the definitions to enhance a sales tactic, but shame on the buyers who take for granted these self professed definitions and fall prey to those very well expressed “hype-traps”

 

The only up-side of a naive collector who buys into a stickered coin for these hyped up reasons, is that they inadvertently bought a nice coin. The central question still remains though, did they buy it at the right price?

 

 

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, way to go Victor for getting your article published, it's in it's entirety here in a thread somewhere. (thumbs u

[gmarguli]

There has been quite a bit of ambiguity and confusion on this subject, partly through the fault of CAC - I have told them that more than once, even as a supporter. And there has also been considerable hyping from a number of sellers.

 

Partly their fault? You're being far too kind to them. Its 100% their fault. They outright failed to explain their (ever changing) meanings. There is no one else to blame for the mess they have created.

[MarkFeld]

There has been quite a bit of ambiguity and confusion on this subject, partly through the fault of CAC - I have told them that more than once, even as a supporter. And there has also been considerable hyping from a number of sellers.

 

Partly their fault? You're being far too kind to them. Its 100% their fault. They outright failed to explain their (ever changing) meanings. There is no one else to blame for the mess they have created.

Sure, Greg, there would be absolutely no seller's hype whatsoever, if only CAC had been perfectly clear in their "meanings".

[MarkFeld]

Nor will you find a clue about what "standards" are used by the CAC, only that some unknown "standard" is allegedly being used.

On a practical basis, the same could be said about any grading company, as well, even if the so-called standards are articulated and/or published.

[gmarguli]

There has been quite a bit of ambiguity and confusion on this subject, partly through the fault of CAC - I have told them that more than once, even as a supporter. And there has also been considerable hyping from a number of sellers.

 

Partly their fault? You're being far too kind to them. Its 100% their fault. They outright failed to explain their (ever changing) meanings. There is no one else to blame for the mess they have created.

Sure, Greg, there would be absolutely no seller's hype whatsoever, if only CAC had been perfectly clear in their "meanings".

 

There will be sellers hype no matter what. Therefore, you can exclude this. Besides, a significant percentage of the hype is the result of the CAC failing to explain what they are doing.

 

The fact is that CAC started to say that their stickers were for PQ coins. Then they had the balls to laugh at the collectors and say that PQ = average for the grade. They they said the stickers were for coins meeting their standard. Next week maybe it will mean the coins are round?

 

I have trouble believing that you'd be defending any other company if they did the same as CAC. It's been 6 months (?), a year (?), since CAC started and they still have failed to get their message across. It'd take them less than an hour to change their web site to state exactly what their mission and standards are. They have failed to do this. I can only assume this is because they either don't have a clue as to what they are doing or they want the confusion to persist because they think it will be good for their business.

[IGWT]

There has been quite a bit of ambiguity and confusion on this subject, partly through the fault of CAC - I have told them that more than once, even as a supporter. And there has also been considerable hyping from a number of sellers.

 

At least some of the sellers who are engaged in "considerable hyping" have a financial interest in CAC. CAC could end the hype if it wanted.

[TomB]

CAC has unilaterally decided to combine minimally acceptable for a specific grade with superior for the grade under the term premium quality. This is a business decision made by CAC alone and does not reflect the broader usage of the terms within the hobby-industry. I strongly suspect this unilateral change in definition, as used by CAC, was done for marketing purposes, but is has had no positive effect on the numismatic community.

[NPCoin]

So, exactly what DOES a CAC sticker mean?

 

It means that yet another company has made money off of collectors for doing absolutely nothing but bringing confusion to the industry and opportunity for making even more money because of it.

[michael]

cac sticker on holder means that the coin IN THE HOLDER AT THE STATED GRADE on the holder at least meets cac standards for this grade on the holder and MOST IMPORTANTLY the cac has deemed the coin problem free

 

and the cac backs up their green been stickered coins by firm sight unseen bids from member dealers that many times are greater than greysheet ask

 

and yes there is much confusion on what cac means even to their member dealers in their ads for cac stickered coins offered for sale

[michael]

good luck

 

here is a 100% full proof way to know what you are geting in holdered coins

 

stepone------if you view a coin make sure you know and understand exactly what you are looking at if not then do not buy it and go learn first but if you do understand and know what your looking at then go to step two

 

step two------if you know what you are looking at then ask yourself if i break this coin out of its respective holder is the coin worth just as much if not more in demand and money value as when in its respective holder IF THE ANSWER IS YES!! THEN ADVANCE TO STEP THREE IF NOT PASS

 

STEP THREE----- now if you are finallyat this step and you are buying the coin as a collector coin with discretionary funds only then buy the coin if not pass

 

do all of these steps and if you buy the coin then you got nothing to worry about

 

if you should pass at any one of these steps then you are safe and made the correct decision

 

 

 

[EZ_E]

The reason that I wrote the article is because there is so much confusion over the term. I'm sure there will be plenty of comments in CW because of it but if it enlightens some poor dupe's eyes from being took by a confusion of terms then it will be worth while.

 

Like Greg says: the defined standards have changed so tomorrow the CAC sticker may just mean that the coin is round. :þ

[physics-fan3.14]

The reason that I wrote the article is because there is so much confusion over the term. I'm sure there will be plenty of comments in CW because of it but if it enlightens some poor dupes eyes from being took by a confusion of terms then it will be worth while.

 

Like Greg says: the defined standards have changed so tomorrow the CAC sticker may just mean that the coin is round. :þ

 

Well, thats really gonna stink if you submit one of those funky darkside coins that happens to be not-round.

[gmarguli]

The reason that I wrote the article is because there is so much confusion over the term. I'm sure there will be plenty of comments in CW because of it but if it enlightens some poor dupes eyes from being took by a confusion of terms then it will be worth while.

 

Like Greg says: the defined standards have changed so tomorrow the CAC sticker may just mean that the coin is round. :þ

 

Well, thats really gonna stink if you submit one of those funky darkside coins that happens to be not-round.

 

Don't worry, CAC will change their standard yet again to fix this.

[RI AL]

Thanks for your input, Guys. As always, your answers are helpful and informative. I maintain the position now that I won't go out of my way to seek out CAC coins. I guess the old adage is true (modified)..."buy the coin...not the green football".

 

RI Al

[BankNote1]

I had once thought that I should get my better Buffalo Nickels CAC stickered. Now I don't really know what I should do. I still think that some of my higher grade coins would sell for a little more stickered than not.

[Houston Investor]

CAC says their sticker means the coin has met their "stringent grading standards."

 

I would interpret that to mean solid quality which in my view is a B coin at the very least: A for PQ, B for Solid Quality, and C for Average Quality.

 

Consequently I would price a CAC coin at 10 - 15% higher than a non CAC coin on average. A key, better date coin probably a tad higher at a 25% premium vs a non CAC issue.

 

I believe calling a coin PQ is a subjective opinion but if your a seller and your CAC coin looks really nice, well then why not call it PQ?

[dean1345]

Personally I have seen quite a few slabs with the CAC sticker that I thought weren't PQ coins. I would not pay anymore for CAC sticker.

 

Dean

[EZ_E]

I had once thought that I should get my better Buffalo Nickels CAC stickered. Now I don't really know what I should do. I still think that some of my higher grade coins would sell for a little more stickered than not.

 

I'd encourage you to do this if the value vs stickering is there.

 

CAC is providing a legitmate, worthwhile service. It's just too bad that management in whatever industry is nearly always comprised of boneheads. Once again as Greg so astutely stated, they have had months to clarify their mission and goals and define their standards. Why have they refused to do so?

 

I think that if their terms were clearly defined from the beginning then their efforts would have been a great service to the numismatic community. However, due to their diddle-dallying, opportunists have taken the initiative to define the CAC standards themselves.

 

What is a truly worthwhile and legitimate enterprise has been muddied by the above reasons.

 

 

p.s. Woody, thanks for the compliment. (thumbs u

[just-john]

Thank God for the internet this subject would have required the chopping down of 100,000

trees.I would think by now sombody's leg has to be getting very sore or to say the least have a sore foot from kicking this dead horse around the block 20 times . I don't care

use then don't use them like them hate them your eye spooning me with these posts

[EZ_E]

Thank God for the internet this subject would have required the chopping down of 100,000

trees.I would think by now sombody's leg has to be getting very sore or to say the least have a sore foot from kicking this dead horse around the block 20 times . I don't care

use then don't use them like them hate them your eye spooning me with these posts

 

Don't flatter yourself, John. This post has nothing to do with you.

[MikeInFL]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

[James_OldeTowne]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

Mike, CAC may have advanced your knowledge of numismatics, but I would maintain that it has done nothing at all to advance numismatics itself. (CAC might very well be advancing the coin market, however.)

[MarkFeld]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

Mike, CAC may have advanced your knowledge of numismatics, but I would maintain that it has done nothing at all to advance numismatics itself. (CAC might very well be advancing the coin market, however.)

So "numismatics itself" isn't advanced, even when the knowledge of individual numismatists is advanced? As Mike said in his post "I disagree strongly with your comment."

[DirtyGoldMan]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

Mike, CAC may have advanced your knowledge of numismatics, but I would maintain that it has done nothing at all to advance numismatics itself. (CAC might very well be advancing the coin market, however.)

So "numismatics itself" isn't advanced, even when the knowledge of individual numismatists is advanced? As Mike said in his post "I disagree strongly with your comment."

 

The CAC has certainly advanced my understanding of numis-semantics (PQ, solid for the grade, B coin, A coin, C coin, etc.), but has not advanced my understanding of numismatics. I have found little use for the service to date, though do not discount the possibility that it may help me in the future.

 

I wish all collectors, pro-CAC and con-CAC, the best of luck in their numismatic pursuits.

 

Disclosure: The green football has been a passenger on the slabs of about a half dozen coins that I have purchased in the last year. I have not submitted any coins to the CAC and have no plans to do so in the forseeable future.

[MikeInFL]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

Mike, CAC may have advanced your knowledge of numismatics, but I would maintain that it has done nothing at all to advance numismatics itself. (CAC might very well be advancing the coin market, however.)

 

What's the difference?

 

Said another way, isn't the whole the sum of its parts?

[MarkFeld]

At the end of the day, CAC does absolutely nothing to advance numismatics.

 

I can say, with absolute certainty, that the CAC has advanced my understanding of numismatics. Therefore, I disagree strongly with your comment. Respectfully...Mike

Mike, CAC may have advanced your knowledge of numismatics, but I would maintain that it has done nothing at all to advance numismatics itself. (CAC might very well be advancing the coin market, however.)

 

What's the difference?

 

Said another way, isn't the whole the sum of its parts?

Mike, the whole is the sum of the parts only with respect to the negatives, not the positives