Things are changing across the street …

[Tradedollarnut]

Here's some more proof for you:

 

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=568175&highlight_key=y&keyword1=gobrecht&keyword2=grade

[Tradedollarnut]

And yet more:

 

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=476878&highlight_key=y&keyword1=peace&keyword2=toned

[Tradedollarnut]

And more:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3300212#Post3300212

[Tradedollarnut]

And of course there's the 'magic felt pad' $10 Indian

 

Need I go on?

[RWB]

The CAC's mission is to identify nice coins for the grade that haven't been doctored…

 

Interesting. I have a similar mission for cute, single women…Now, about sticker placement….

 

[DC Dawg]

the allegation that the TPGs encapsulate problem coins is nothing more than hearsay.

 

This is patently false as has been proven time and time and time again in the chatroom forums here and across the street.

 

Oops! This was a bad editing job on my part before leaving to go to the hospital. I was a bit excited to learn that my mother was responding to her environment and people around her. After a week in critical care, I was more excited about her condition than editing this statement properly. I apologize for the misstatement and I hope you understand.

 

I was trying to say that "the allegation that all the TPGs encapsulate are problem coins and do not stand behind their guarantees is nothing more than hearsay." I have said in the past that I believe the people who run the TPGs are human and subject to human failures. I don't expect them to be perfect, but considering their reported processes, they may be doing a better job than alleged by those associated with the CAC.

 

Scott

[DC Dawg]

I'm wondering why you mistrust the CAC so much when you put your trust in the TPG's and PNG? Known coin doctors are members of the PNG. Shareholders submit to the TPG's. Why aren't you up in arms about those facts?

OMG! A reasonable question! Considering your past posts, I am not only shocked, I am impressed!

 

I never said I trusted the TPGs and I never mentioned any trust, one way or another regarding PNG. I have said that I trusted the TPGs more than the CAC because of the experience, independent review (see the ICTA study), and more transparency than the CAC. I know what the NGC and PCGS grading standards are. NGC and PCGS has published their standards and have had industry "oversight" for more than 30 years. What are the CAC's standards? More trust is garnered from transparency that can be reviewed than the CAC's perceived super-secret processes.

 

I have questioned PCGS and how Collectors' Universe creates its own market through the Certified Coin Exchange. I have said that there is something about it that bothers me. But in our last round of "discussions," I also said that I do not know enough about securities laws to even figure out if there is something legally to be concerned about. I do know that there is enough to question this relationship. What I have not said is that I am researching what Collectors Universe is doing and am in the process of verifying aspects of securities laws with someone who knows more about it than I do. I will comment when appropriate.

 

As for NGC, I am unaware of conflicts. But that does not mean I trust them any more or any less than PCGS. I do contend that NGC offers a level of transparency that CAC does not offer.

 

Regarding "known coin doctors" being members of PNG, I am not aware of whom you speak nor what their status is with PNG. I would hope that if PNG was aware of unethical behavior then I would hope they would take appropriate action. But I have not been concerned with PNG and have no information in order to comment positively or negatively. If you want to enlighten me, I am more than willing to listen.

 

One area you missed are the crackout artist. I wonder if it is because we may agree on this issue. I am not particularly fond of those who insist on cracking coins out of holders looking for higher grades by resubmitting them. I do believe that crack out artists have questionable ethics.

 

 

Scott

[Bugmann1974]

Again from page 9

From Page 4

So you think it's ok to buy a puttied coin for several times what it's worth enriching a coin doctor ... because you enjoy the coin and don't plan to sell.

 

Hmmmm.

 

I have a serious question, What is the percentage of coins in TPG slabs that have been found by CAC to be doctored?

 

No Answer yet.

Can someone please answer this question?

 

This is obviously a huge point for you CAC advocates.

Don't you think that since you had already asked twice, before asking a third time, if someone here had an answer, that they would have chimed in?

If I am among a group of people who are debating the validity of a service and I ask a question about one of their main points, especially when thread has been turned in that specific direction, and I don't get an answer one way or the other. I assume that I am being ignored or avoided. Especially if it is an extremely valid question. And yes, I know that the TPGs have holdered fake and doctored coins, I just want to know how common of an occurrence it is.

 

A simple, "That is a good question but I don't know the answer" would have sufficed.

 

Forget my question though, I will just e-mail CAC and get the answer from them.

[Tradedollarnut]

NGC and PCGS .... have had industry "oversight" for more than 30 years

 

What's the old saying?

 

 

I do contend that NGC offers a level of transparency that CAC does not offer.

 

How so?

[Tradedollarnut]

What is the percentage of coins in TPG slabs that have been found by CAC to be doctored?

 

I have no idea

[Tradedollarnut]

I don't expect them to be perfect

 

What error rate is acceptable? Do you think that 99.5% correctly or undergraded is great? [ I do]

 

So if only a measly 1/2 of 1% are overgraded [or doctored] that means that out of 20,000,000 coins graded between the two, there are "only" 100,000 problem coins on the market. Now let's say that on average those errors involve only a few thousand dollars [i happen to think that's low because it's the high value coins that tend to be messed with or tried repeatedly over and over again]. That's $20,000,000 in liability - which overwhelms the market capital of NGC and PCGS combined. They simply can't afford to buy them all back - so they won't.

 

That's if they can manage 99.5%.

[CarlWohlforth]

Wow, I was expecting a thread about PCGS banning or poofing threads and read another CAC debate. At least I expect it to hang around for posterity. I'm getting more and more annoyed with poofing and banning.

 

As to CAC the most interesting thing I read here is TDN made $14 grand on it last quarter! Nice, I need to come up with some business ideas or back someone else's...

 

CAC may help for super expensive high end coins. It may not. However it is useless for lower grade coins where the difference in cost and look between a VF and a VF+ is insignificant.

 

I'd pay close to PR 65 prices for TomB's PR 64 1942 T2 Jefferson nickel sticker or no sticker. Really there isn't much difference in price to start with and his coin looks nice.

[Bugmann1974]

What is the percentage of coins in TPG slabs that have been found by CAC to be doctored?

 

I have no idea

 

Thank you.

[DC Dawg]

I don't expect them to be perfect

 

What error rate is acceptable? Do you think that 99.5% correctly or undergraded is great? [ I do]

 

So if only a measly 1/2 of 1% are overgraded [or doctored] that means that out of 20,000,000 coins graded between the two, there are "only" 100,000 problem coins on the market. Now let's say that on average those errors involve only a few thousand dollars [i happen to think that's low because it's the high value coins that tend to be messed with or tried repeatedly over and over again]. That's $20,000,000 in liability - which overwhelms the market capital of NGC and PCGS combined. They simply can't afford to buy them all back - so they won't.

 

That's if they can manage 99.5%.

You know... you keep going like this and I will begin to think you are actually reasonable!!

 

Seriously, II had not thought of the problems in this context nor have I heard anyone else present it in this way. I was literally scratching my beard while thinking about it.

 

In business, there is an accepted rate of risk at 5-percent. For example, the credit card industry plans for a 5-percent rate of fraud or other nefarious incidents (not defaults) to make business plans. When the actual loss for fraud rose to 8-percent in 2006, the credit card industry found that the loss was too much and started to institute additional security measures to bring that number down.

 

But your 0.5 percent may be too high if we look at the risk based on revenues. While we can find out what that number would be for PCGS (Collectors Universe is a public company), we may never know how to evaluate risk and return for NGC. Therefore, the margin of overgraded or doctored coins may have to be less if we maintain an appropriate risk model based on revenues.

 

You have given me something to think about--which I will do. However, what would help are the statistics from CAC that shows the rejection rate.

 

Scott

[Tradedollarnut]

However, what would help are the statistics from CAC that shows the rejection rate.

 

All I can give you is my personal experience. I have had a $50k coin rejected due to being chloroxed. I have had a $5k coin rejected due to being dipped copper. And I have had a $100k coin rejected due to having altered surfaces. 2 were NGC and one was PCGS.

 

That's out of about 60 coins. So 5% doctored from handpicked coins in a top tier collection owned by a good grader and reviewed by a national dealer prior to purchase.

[Catbert]

All I can give you is my personal experience. I have had a $50k coin rejected due to being chloroxed. I have had a $5k coin rejected due to being dipped copper. And I have had a $100k coin rejected due to having altered surfaces. 2 were NGC and one was PCGS.

 

Say what you will about CAC, but that is some convincing evidence of the value of their service, IMHO.

[DC Dawg]

All I can give you is my personal experience. I have had a $50k coin rejected due to being chloroxed. I have had a $5k coin rejected due to being dipped copper. And I have had a $100k coin rejected due to having altered surfaces. 2 were NGC and one was PCGS.

 

Say what you will about CAC, but that is some convincing evidence of the value of their service, IMHO.

That is one experience. One is not a pattern. One could be an anomaly (NOTE: I am not doubting the accuracy of this report but noting that it is difficult to extrapolate one account into an entire population). In journalism, they require at least two independent corroborating accounts before calling it fact.

 

Scott

[mommam17]

I had 1 coin thay was AT and 1 had PVC contamination. Oreville had, I think, 9 coins with PVC contamination. There should be more corroborating accounts.

[MarkFeld]

..... There should be more corroborating accounts.

Of course there are, unless someone wants to believe that the only two submitters who were made aware of probelm coins happened to be the only two who provided results.

 

Submitting to CAC for myself and/or clients and/or with clients submitting through my account, I have been made aware of puttied coins, a coin with a spot-removal, as well as environmentally damaged and artificially colored/toned coins. I don't keep records/statistics, but my guess is that the % of such problems has been roughly 5%.

[Tradedollarnut]

but my guess is that the % of such problems has been roughly 5%.

 

Which matches my experience for coins in my collection.

 

I believe that the coins in the marketplace in general would experience a much higher percentage - especially those in any given auction.

 

[MikeInFL]

Bill, I'm curious as to what posts ATS in particular you are referring to. I haven't been over there in quite some time - can you provide links by any chance?

 

This is the quote that really hit my hot button yesterday. It came from unsuspected source who is normally quite civil to people. Needless say, I think I’m through with this individual. The PCGS census blew the string away before I could answer it. It started with a bogus poll with a group of options that were stacked to make CAC look good, and those who don’t care for concept like foolish, regardless of how you answered it.

 

This in response to my comment that I do not wish to spend many thousands of dollars for CAC stickers and the postage expense that would be required to get them.

 

Or is the real answer here that you're not really that confident in your coins, and/or it is the emotion around change and the unknown that is really driving your position? Or is it the realization that the TPG game -- a game you're obviously bought into -- ain't such a great game after all? Or something else?

 

Since I am the person that is quoted above and the person that Bill is upset with, it may be worth the time to understand the point I was trying to make when I wrote the above words (the thread has since been poofed).

 

The intent of the above words was not to be a hit on Bill, but rather trying to put myself in his shoes to understand what I consider to be illogical arguments against the CAC, and the possible rationale for making such an argument. It is worth noting that each of the statements were worded as questions and not statements of fact. However, perception is reality, and regardless of my intent, if Bill felt they were a hit on him then I was wrong to word them that way.

 

I have apologized to Bill, a numismatist who I have a great deal of respect for and have asked for help from in the past. My apology (in the form of a PM) has not be acknowledged or replied to in the five days since it was offered.

 

All that said, part of the reason I push him (and others) on this topic is because I have respect for them and I can't understand their rationale for despising the CAC the way they do. As I said to Bill, I just don't understand -- and I want to. However, it takes two to tango, and if Bill wants nothing to do with me going forward, I will certainly respect his wishes.

 

Take care....Mike

[MikeInFL]

What is the percentage of coins in TPG slabs that have been found by CAC to be doctored?

 

I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but of the 35 coins I submitted to CAC, 4 of them came back with "problems" (doctoring/AT). I suspected that there was a problem with one of them, and the other 3 were a surprise.

[Catbert]

It is depressing to me that even very experienced collectors are being fooled by the coin doctors. The first level of defense is a TPG, afterwhich it is the collector who has done what they can to know what they are buying before they do so. Even this, it seems, is insufficient to avoid getting burned. So, I guess then that CAC is the third level of defense if one can afford the processing, insurance, and postage fees. In most cases, that expense is too high for the level of coin I collect.

[MarkFeld]

It is depressing to me that even very experienced collectors are being fooled by the coin doctors. The first level of defense is a TPG, afterwhich it is the collector who has done what they can to know what they are buying before they do so. Even this, it seems, is insufficient to avoid getting burned. So, I guess then that CAC is the third level of defense if one can afford the processing, insurance, and postage fees. In most cases, that expense is too high for the level of coin I collect.

The good news for you is that if the expense of CAC is too high for what you collect, chances are good that what you collect isn't nearly as likely to be messed with. Please don't take that as a guarantee, though.

 

And I agree, it is depressing.

[bochiman]

It is depressing to me that even very experienced collectors are being fooled by the coin doctors. The first level of defense is a TPG, afterwhich it is the collector who has done what they can to know what they are buying before they do so. Even this, it seems, is insufficient to avoid getting burned. So, I guess then that CAC is the third level of defense if one can afford the processing, insurance, and postage fees. In most cases, that expense is too high for the level of coin I collect.

The good news for you is that if the expense of CAC is too high for what you collect, chances are good that what you collect isn't nearly as likely to be messed with. Please don't take that as a guarantee, though.

 

And I agree, it is depressing.

 

 

Careful Mark, I can guarantee that a lot of what I collect isn't worth the CAC (and most of the time, it isn't worth the TPGS plastic either) but plenty of it is still messed with...just at a lower level (ie....just AT and knowing the difference versus puttying, etc)

[MarkFeld]

It is depressing to me that even very experienced collectors are being fooled by the coin doctors. The first level of defense is a TPG, afterwhich it is the collector who has done what they can to know what they are buying before they do so. Even this, it seems, is insufficient to avoid getting burned. So, I guess then that CAC is the third level of defense if one can afford the processing, insurance, and postage fees. In most cases, that expense is too high for the level of coin I collect.

The good news for you is that if the expense of CAC is too high for what you collect, chances are good that what you collect isn't nearly as likely to be messed with. Please don't take that as a guarantee, though.

 

And I agree, it is depressing.

 

 

Careful Mark, I can guarantee that a lot of what I collect isn't worth the CAC (and most of the time, it isn't worth the TPGS plastic either) but plenty of it is still messed with...just at a lower level (ie....just AT and knowing the difference versus puttying, etc)

Ron, I can't help it if you're a magnet for the coin doctors and their wares

[Bugmann1974]

I have another question.

 

I am not familiar with the history of NGC. I just recently found out that Mr. Albanese was the founder of NGC. My question is this, why is Mr. Albanese no longer with NGC?

[michael]

I have another question.

 

I am not familiar with the history of NGC. I just recently found out that Mr. Albanese was the founder of NGC. My question is this, why is Mr. Albanese no longer with NGC?

 

he sold it to mark salzburg in the 1990's to pursue other opportunities

[mommam17]

He also stated he was tired of doing so many shows and wanted to spend more time with his family. I`m sure from 1986- the early 90`s he was a very busy man.

[gpnyc]

As a collector who can see the merits of CAC but would likely not actively seek out use of the service, I just want to add that the green football would be infinitely more valuable if we, as the ultimate consumers of their product, had access to the following information:

 

A list, by service and certification #, of the coins which were "rejected" by CAC and the specific issue which caused such rejection. I am fairly certain such a list undoubtedly exists and is possibly being used by CAC insiders in their day to day coin buying.

 

Until such a list is made public, CAC insiders and the rest of us are not on an even playing field. Even of this is not true, the perception is there, and sometimes that is more important.