CAC Sticker on NGC Star Slabs

[Tradedollarnut]

So really the * is financially irrelevant once the CAC sticker goes on... unless you think that CAC stickered * coins bring more than CAC stickered non star coins, which I'm not so sure of.

 

Since the Star and the CAC sticker are used for different reasons, there is no reason to assume that the CAC sticker would nullify the Star premium. In fact, when it comes to toned coins, I highly doubt that a CAC sticker would warrant any premium even close to that of the eye appeal (Star) premium. The CAC may outright be ignored.

 

which I'm not so sure of.

 

I assumed nothing.

 

Correct, you didn't assume, you stated your opinion that So really the * is financially irrelevant once the CAC sticker goes on and qualified this opinion with unless you think that CAC stickered * coins bring more than CAC stickered non star coins which opinion you cleared didn't agree with by saying, which I'm not so sure of.

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

[physics-fan3.14]

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

 

Obviously, since Mr. Albanese is just now coming up with the answer to the question, the CAC sticker on a * coin has not been put to the market test. All I know is what I've seen, and that is * coins bring significant premiums, much more than anything I've seen for CAC. Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value. CAC is supposed to be the great equalizer, but I have seen several star coins bring far more than even PQ PCGS coins do. Now, whether or not CAC approval on the star would bring even more is a question that could vary widely based on the coin and the multiple associated with the star in the first place.

[Tradedollarnut]

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

 

Obviously, since Mr. Albanese is just now coming up with the answer to the question, the CAC sticker on a * coin has not been put to the market test. All I know is what I've seen, and that is * coins bring significant premiums, much more than anything I've seen for CAC. Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value. CAC is supposed to be the great equalizer, but I have seen several star coins bring far more than even PQ PCGS coins do. Now, whether or not CAC approval on the star would bring even more is a question that could vary widely based on the coin and the multiple associated with the star in the first place.

 

Well, perhaps - but since there are many NGC * coins that don't bring those multiples, it's tough to conclude that it's the * that brings the premium rather than the toning on the coin, wouldn't you say?

 

Price guides definitely break down when it comes to toning. I've seen plenty of coins that I KNEW FOR A FACT were not original in both top TPG holders. If I had a wild toned coin, I'd definitely want to have a CAC sticker on it.

[MarkFeld]

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

 

Obviously, since Mr. Albanese is just now coming up with the answer to the question, the CAC sticker on a * coin has not been put to the market test. All I know is what I've seen, and that is * coins bring significant premiums, much more than anything I've seen for CAC. Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value. CAC is supposed to be the great equalizer, but I have seen several star coins bring far more than even PQ PCGS coins do. Now, whether or not CAC approval on the star would bring even more is a question that could vary widely based on the coin and the multiple associated with the star in the first place.

You must be speaking mostly of lower bid/value star coins if they are bringing "multiples of normal market value". That is certainly not usually the case with the four and five figure type coins that I follow. Or for that matter, even upper three figure coins of various types, though I'm sure there are exceptions.

[lehigh96]

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

 

Obviously, since Mr. Albanese is just now coming up with the answer to the question, the CAC sticker on a * coin has not been put to the market test. All I know is what I've seen, and that is * coins bring significant premiums, much more than anything I've seen for CAC. Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value. CAC is supposed to be the great equalizer, but I have seen several star coins bring far more than even PQ PCGS coins do. Now, whether or not CAC approval on the star would bring even more is a question that could vary widely based on the coin and the multiple associated with the star in the first place.

You must be speaking mostly of lower bid/value star coins if they are bringing "multiples of normal market value". That is certainly not usually the case with the four and five figure type coins that I follow. Or for that matter, even upper three figure coins of various types, though I'm sure there are exceptions.

 

Mark,

 

I am sure that he was referring to common date Morgan Dollars, Roosevelt Dimes, Jefferson Nickels, Franklin Halves etc when he spoke of star coins bring multiples of market value. It seems to me that you are just playing devil's advocate in this thread. You know darn well that the majority of star coins are comprised of rainbow toned coins. You also know that price guides are impossible for these coins because the price of the coin is as subjective as the assignment of the star designation itself. One star coin could bring 2X bid and another 50X bid, depends on the coin & the buyer. But to pretend that the star designation does not drive a premium makes you sound a little looney.

 

Furthermore, I would think that 4 & 5 figure type coins would be difficult to locate at all with a star designation due to their rarity. I am not trying to post exceptions as you say, but I would be interested to know what you would think of the Bassano collection had it been graded by NGC. Many of his coins would certainly have been awarded stars and they brought some extremely high prices. For example, this MS67 Pilgrim sold for over double wholesale.

 

Bassano Pilgrim Commem

 

I highly doubt the little CAC sticker is what drove the price of this coin. It was the eye-appeal created by the toning which is the reason for the star designation.

 

[michael]

if for example

 

i saw a ngc/pcgs graded monster cased set toned proof whatever with the right look in proof 65 and has what i considered great original color coloration and also vibrant surfaces and also a strong 65+ and i loved the coin and thought it was something i do not see too often

 

if i was in the market

 

i would pay really strongly for the coin (well over published selling levels for similar coins without the great look and eye appeal and surfaces but still proof 65 solid for the grade)

 

if the coin had a star and cac sticker green bean this would just be a bonus for me as it meant that the star ngc gave the coin and cac both agreed with me

 

but i would still pay the same for the coin

 

 

[MarkFeld]

 

Point being that there is evidence that a * coin brings more than the average NGC coin, and evidence that a CAC coin brings more, but no evidence has been presented that a * adds to a CAC'd coin's value.

 

Obviously, since Mr. Albanese is just now coming up with the answer to the question, the CAC sticker on a * coin has not been put to the market test. All I know is what I've seen, and that is * coins bring significant premiums, much more than anything I've seen for CAC. Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value. CAC is supposed to be the great equalizer, but I have seen several star coins bring far more than even PQ PCGS coins do. Now, whether or not CAC approval on the star would bring even more is a question that could vary widely based on the coin and the multiple associated with the star in the first place.

You must be speaking mostly of lower bid/value star coins if they are bringing "multiples of normal market value". That is certainly not usually the case with the four and five figure type coins that I follow. Or for that matter, even upper three figure coins of various types, though I'm sure there are exceptions.

 

Mark,

 

I am sure that he was referring to common date Morgan Dollars, Roosevelt Dimes, Jefferson Nickels, Franklin Halves etc when he spoke of star coins bring multiples of market value. It seems to me that you are just playing devil's advocate in this thread. You know darn well that the majority of star coins are comprised of rainbow toned coins. You also know that price guides are impossible for these coins because the price of the coin is as subjective as the assignment of the star designation itself. One star coin could bring 2X bid and another 50X bid, depends on the coin & the buyer. But to pretend that the star designation does not drive a premium makes you sound a little looney.

 

Furthermore, I would think that 4 & 5 figure type coins would be difficult to locate at all with a star designation due to their rarity. I am not trying to post exceptions as you say, but I would be interested to know what you would think of the Bassano collection had it been graded by NGC. Many of his coins would certainly have been awarded stars and they brought some extremely high prices. For example, this MS67 Pilgrim sold for over double wholesale.

 

Bassano Pilgrim Commem

 

I highly doubt the little CAC sticker is what drove the price of this coin. It was the eye-appeal created by the toning which is the reason for the star designation.

Paul, nowhere have I tried to imply or pretend that NGC star coins don't bring premiums, or even hefty ones. But I don't think it's accurate to say that "Stars routinely bring multiples of normal market value.". Not unless that is qualified by the types and/or price ranges of the star coins being discussed.

 

I see quite a few classic type coins with star designations that don't bring huge % premiums. And even common date MS65 and MS66 star Morgan dollars and Walkers that I see in fairly large quantities, can often be bought for reasonable premiums.

 

I agree with your points about the Bassano collection.

 

And if you think about it, I think you might even agree with me on the main point of my previous posts in this thread - On a practical basis, it doesn't matter if CAC is agreeing with the NGC star or not when they sticker an NGC coin. A star coin will bring its own level, based largely on its eye-appeal, regardless of the CAC sticker. And, as you and I have both pointed out, there are no published, separate prices in guides for NGC star coins.

[coinman1794]

This seems like sort of a whimsical reply on the part of Albanese. "Hmm, I hadn't thought about it, but sure, why not?" It doesn't seem to inspire confidence.

Would you prefer that confidence be inspired based on a BS reply from him, instead of an honest one? And, as I noted earlier in this thread, on a practical basis, it doesn't matter if CAC is recognizing the NGC star or not. The designation is subjective and there are no distinct/higher published bids for star coins.

 

No, I would not prefer a BS reply. It just seems like something he would have considered when starting this venture. If you are going to be validating the opinion of the two TPGs, it would seem like the star would be an important part of that opinion. NGC has slabbed enough star coins that its not an obscure designation. Its just like FBL, FH, etc., as part of the TPG grade. To have not considered it at all, and to reply to an email 2 years into the venture with such a seemingly flippant response tends to erode confidence in the venture.

 

This is my opinion.

 

The NGC star is completely different from the others as it has no set standard, is completely subjective - and has no published bids whatsoever.

 

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied. Next, neither grading service uses the same standard for most of, if not all of, the other designations, e.i., FBL, FB/FT, FH, FB, etc; and quite a bit of subjectivety is involved with all of these as well, especially when they are boderline. I truly never know when I'll get FB at NGC on a PCGS FB Merc., for example.

 

John gave the right answer, in my view, but it is surprising he hasn't thought about it before now.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

[MarkFeld]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

[coinman1794]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

They are all inconsistently applied. Also, the Star is used for more than eye appeal, a PL, DPL, CAM or ULTRA CAM obverse will earn a coin a Star too.

[gmarguli]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

We have no data to say that the Star designation is applied any more or less consistently than that or any other designation. In fact, NGC may have internal data to show that it is applied far more consistently than other designations.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

 

You may continue to ignore this fact, but bids for CAC coins are NOT SIGHT-UNSEEN bids. These coins have been seen by a company authorized by certain dealers to make assessments on the coins. They are SIGHT-SEEN bids. Comparing a CAC bid to that of a true sight-unseen bid is outright dishonest.

[MarkFeld]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

We have no data to say that the Star designation is applied any more or less consistently than that or any other designation. In fact, NGC may have internal data to show that it is applied far more consistently than other designations.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

 

You may continue to ignore this fact, but bids for CAC coins are NOT SIGHT-UNSEEN bids. These coins have been seen by a company authorized by certain dealers to make assessments on the coins. They are SIGHT-SEEN bids. Comparing a CAC bid to that of a true sight-unseen bid is outright dishonest.

Greg, perhaps the star is applied as or more consistently than other designations. But even if it is, that doesn't change the fact that it is different from other designations by virtue of the fact that there aren't any published prices.

 

If you prefer to call the CAC bids sight-seen, be my guest. But other bidders who post sight-seen bids often reject many coins offered to them at their bids, while to my knowledge, CAC never does. So labeling the CAC bids sight-seen implies a right of rejection that CAC doesn't have or utilize. And that's as "dishonest" as you accuse me of being in referring to the bids as sight-unseen.

 

The bottom line is that in many instances, the CAC bids are higher than any other CCE bids. And that's whether the other bids are for NGC coins or PCGS coins, and whether they are sight-unseen or sight-seen. In many instances, such bids have an impact on what dealers will pay for coins and ask for coins. Would you care to take issue with that?

[lehigh96]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

We have no data to say that the Star designation is applied any more or less consistently than that or any other designation. In fact, NGC may have internal data to show that it is applied far more consistently than other designations.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

 

You may continue to ignore this fact, but bids for CAC coins are NOT SIGHT-UNSEEN bids. These coins have been seen by a company authorized by certain dealers to make assessments on the coins. They are SIGHT-SEEN bids. Comparing a CAC bid to that of a true sight-unseen bid is outright dishonest.

 

Greg,

 

If you like we can poll the members here to determine collector perception of the consistency of the application of the star designation. I think that would qualify as data.

 

My collection is based on these types of coins and I have no idea how they decide which coins should star. I have coins that are no brainer star coins that don't have a star and star coins that have no earthly business having a star. That is my opinion. If you would like examples of the apparent inconsistency, I would be more than happy to oblige.

[Bugmann1974]

I have heard that all Battle Creek coins have a star whether they deserve one or not, is this true?

[MarkFeld]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

We have no data to say that the Star designation is applied any more or less consistently than that or any other designation. In fact, NGC may have internal data to show that it is applied far more consistently than other designations.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

 

You may continue to ignore this fact, but bids for CAC coins are NOT SIGHT-UNSEEN bids. These coins have been seen by a company authorized by certain dealers to make assessments on the coins. They are SIGHT-SEEN bids. Comparing a CAC bid to that of a true sight-unseen bid is outright dishonest.

Greg, perhaps the star is applied as or more consistently than other designations. But even if it is, that doesn't change the fact that it is different from other designations by virtue of the fact that there aren't any published prices.

 

If you prefer to call the CAC bids sight-seen, be my guest. But other bidders who post sight-seen bids often reject many coins offered to them at their bids, while to my knowledge, CAC never does. So labeling the CAC bids sight-seen implies a right of rejection that CAC doesn't have or utilize. And that's as "dishonest" as you accuse me of being in referring to the bids as sight-unseen.

 

The bottom line is that in many instances, the CAC bids are higher than any other CCE bids. And that's whether the other bids are for NGC coins or PCGS coins, and whether they are sight-unseen or sight-seen. Frequently, such bids have an impact on what dealers will pay for coins and ask for coins. Would you care to take issue with that?

[prudden]

I have heard that all Battle Creek coins have a star whether they deserve one or not, is this true?

 

I have heard that rumour as well.Supposedly, it was a part of the agreement to have NGC grade the collection. I can tell you I've only come across one non-rainbow Battle Creek Morgan.It was a blast white Semi prooflike 81S Morgan graded 65*. I've never come across a Battle Creek without at Star either. Anyone?

[lehigh96]

I have heard that all Battle Creek coins have a star whether they deserve one or not, is this true?

 

It is true and I have proof. The coin is attractive but there is no way this coin deserves a star. However, I understand this marketing agreement much more than I do the random coin that gets a star for no apparent reason.

 

[gmarguli]

First, there are standards for the Star designation, and those standards are inconsitently applied...

Sure, there is a standard for the NGC star, but it is a highly subjective one. Hence, the inconsistency in its application.

 

We have no data to say that the Star designation is applied any more or less consistently than that or any other designation. In fact, NGC may have internal data to show that it is applied far more consistently than other designations.

 

What does a published bid have to do with anything, by the way? We all know that guides are just that, guides, and dont encompase every nuance of the hobby.

A published bid, which is very different from a figure listed in a price guide, often has a lot to do with things. In many cases the bids for CAC coins are quite high compared to bids for non-CAC coins - high enough so that many sellers are happy to sell at those levels. And because the bids are sight-unseen, they often affect sight seen bids. And those sight seen bids can affect ask prices.

 

You may continue to ignore this fact, but bids for CAC coins are NOT SIGHT-UNSEEN bids. These coins have been seen by a company authorized by certain dealers to make assessments on the coins. They are SIGHT-SEEN bids. Comparing a CAC bid to that of a true sight-unseen bid is outright dishonest.

 

Greg,

 

If you like we can poll the members here to determine collector perception of the consistency of the application of the star designation. I think that would qualify as data.

 

My collection is based on these types of coins and I have no idea how they decide which coins should star. I have coins that are no brainer star coins that don't have a star and star coins that have no earthly business having a star. That is my opinion. If you would like examples of the apparent inconsistency, I would be more than happy to oblige.

 

Collector perception is not meaningful data. Meaningful data would be NGC saying that of coins that are awarded with a Star by any single grader, 82% get the designation compared to 63% for the FBL or 59% for the PL designation. Then we could say that this is likely a more consistent designation. Until we have this, we cannot say that they are or are not more consistent with this designation.

 

I have many Stars in my collection. Many I had to resubmit several times in order to get the Star. Not much different to me than having to resubmit many several times to get the grade I was looking for.

[gmarguli]

Greg, perhaps the star is applied as or more consistently than other designations. But even if it is, that doesn't change the fact that it is different from other designations by virtue of the fact that there aren't any published prices.

 

That's only because most designations are specific to one series and the Star covers all series. Also, the Star can be awarded for various reasons, each of which can result in different premium levels.

 

 

If you prefer to call the CAC bids sight-seen, be my guest. But other bidders who post sight-seen bids often reject many coins offered to them at their bids, while to my knowledge, CAC never does. So labeling the CAC bids sight-seen implies a right of rejection that CAC doesn't have or utilize. And that's as "dishonest" as you accuse me of being in referring to the bids as sight-unseen.

 

Sure there is a right of rejection. It was when the coin was first presented to CAC. Those rejected by CAC are not stickered and trade at the sight-unseen level. Those accepted by CAC are given a sticker and trade at the sight-seen levels. It's just a non-typical right of rejection for buying coins.

 

 

 

The bottom line is that in many instances, the CAC bids are higher than any other CCE bids. And that's whether the other bids are for NGC coins or PCGS coins, and whether they are sight-unseen or sight-seen. In many instances, such bids have an impact on what dealers will pay for coins and ask for coins. Would you care to take issue with that?

 

Take issue? Nope. I'd assume that a dealer who has looked at the coins beforehand and taken note of the nicer than average ones would be placing higher bids for them than the junk or the sight-seen ones where he has to do more work. After all, why would he place the same bids for CAC as for sight-seen when he can sucker people into paying money to pre-screen them.