• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

My CAC visit today. More pics added!

Started by AnkurJ,

91 posts in this topic

jom

jom

Posted
Posted
not really,

 

you are still learning the grading standards from a top grader

 

and getting confirmation/ examination for doctoring

 

I mean, to each his own.

 

Yes, I agree. Nothing wrong with CAC in all of this.

 

What I was saying was that it is unfortunate we have to rely on yet another opinion because the TPG couldn't DO THEIR JOB in the first place.

 

jom

 

But what if the TPG got it right, and CAC got it wrong? It can go both ways.

 

:frustrated::pullhair::frustrated:

 

I guess then you have to be able to doing it yourself.

 

I agree with Ico above CAC can be good value but if you keep sending coins around getting opinions you could quickly bury yourself (even more so than usual in my case lol ).

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnkurJ

AnkurJ

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You'd be surprised how many problem or non quality couns are in TPG problem free holders. Especially early bust silver and gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
You'd be surprised how many problem or non quality couns are in TPG problem free holders. Especially early bust silver and gold.

 

No, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Many (most?) of them are quite obvious. Remember - the TPG's make no claim to originality or problem free. They only make claim to "market acceptable." If the problem is deemed market acceptable (as I would argue the coin you posted which was rejected is) - then the TPG's will value the coin. Remember, they don't grade coins. Interpreted in this light, many of the coins that CAC rejected aren't violating any standard - the TPG's are doing their advertised job. If CAC want's to change the standard and filter out only the best coins, it is not a knock on what NGC or PCGS are doing; they are performing exactly as advertised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
halfpint

halfpint

Posted
Posted

 

...do you believe that it's just a matter of time before another company appears that will approve CAC that approves the TPG's?

 

you know, like another sticker that qualifies the other stickers? hm

 

and if so would this mean collectors will crave the slab with even more stickers? :popcorn: your thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted

...do you believe that it's just a matter of time before another company appears that will approve CAC that approves the TPG's?

 

you know, like another sticker that qualifies the other stickers? hm

 

and if so would this mean collectors will crave the slab with even more stickers? :popcorn: your thoughts.

 

I do not believe it will happen. I don't know anyone else in the industry with the combination of expertise, backing, deserved respect, lack of substantial profit motivation and concern for collectors and the industry that CAC has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nunfa0

nunfa0

Posted
Posted

I am sure that there are people out there who would just keep adding stickers and in the end you won't even be able to see the coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TomB

TomB

Posted
Posted

It is interesting that the 1938-D Buffalo would get a gold sticker. The reason I state this is because the obverse spots on the coin appear quite distracting. Perhaps the lighting brings them out more prominently, but if not then this is the type of coin that I would likely walk past because of the negative eye appea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
It is interesting that the 1938-D Buffalo would get a gold sticker. The reason I state this is because the obverse spots on the coin appear quite distracting. Perhaps the lighting brings them out more prominently, but if not then this is the type of coin that I would likely walk past because of the negative eye appea.

 

I agree with the awarding of a gold sticker because the coin looks better than a 65 notwithstanding the spotting on the obverse. With this said, I completely agree with you that I would never buy this piece as I don't care for the spotting personally. There is no need to compromise with a common date that are readily available with no additional premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnkurJ

AnkurJ

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

As to CAC, I've seen coins they've put a gold sticker on that I could help but laugh at. There was a certain proof Liberty Nickel I saw in a Stacks auction last summer that was in a Rattler PR65 they put a gold sticker on. With hairlines on the cheek I couldn't believe they thought the coin was really a 66. Even the auction catalog mentioned the lines. So, IMO, CAC ain't perfect.

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FishyOne

FishyOne

Posted
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

As to CAC, I've seen coins they've put a gold sticker on that I could help but laugh at. There was a certain proof Liberty Nickel I saw in a Stacks auction last summer that was in a Rattler PR65 they put a gold sticker on. With hairlines on the cheek I couldn't believe they thought the coin was really a 66. Even the auction catalog mentioned the lines. So, IMO, CAC ain't perfect.

 

jom

 

Eye appeal is, of course, part of the grade. Strike, luster, and contact marks together weigh far more heavily than eye appeal though. I realize you know this. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnkurJ

AnkurJ

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

As to CAC, I've seen coins they've put a gold sticker on that I could help but laugh at. There was a certain proof Liberty Nickel I saw in a Stacks auction last summer that was in a Rattler PR65 they put a gold sticker on. With hairlines on the cheek I couldn't believe they thought the coin was really a 66. Even the auction catalog mentioned the lines. So, IMO, CAC ain't perfect.

 

jom

 

I will agree that CAC is not perfect. But I wouldnt be quick to dismiss their opinion on that said coin based solely on images and a description. Until you see it in hand, its pointless to jump to a conclusion. They obviously saw it in hand, and gave their opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

As to CAC, I've seen coins they've put a gold sticker on that I could help but laugh at. There was a certain proof Liberty Nickel I saw in a Stacks auction last summer that was in a Rattler PR65 they put a gold sticker on. With hairlines on the cheek I couldn't believe they thought the coin was really a 66. Even the auction catalog mentioned the lines. So, IMO, CAC ain't perfect.

 

jom

 

I will agree that CAC is not perfect. But I wouldnt be quick to dismiss their opinion on that said coin based solely on images and a description. Until you see it in hand, its pointless to jump to a conclusion. They obviously saw it in hand, and gave their opinion.

 

And, like the TPGs they are here to police, CAC is human and makes mistakes. JA might be incredibly knowledgeable and one of the best graders out there - but that doesn't mean he gets 100% right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
halfpint

halfpint

Posted
Posted

 

...i wonder if some of these coins were stickered before the spots appeared on some of the coins discussed here. that might explain the discrepancies pointed out. :popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
No+4Me

No+4Me

Posted
Posted

I think that CAC is a real boon for type collectors. It would be nice to study and know every nuance of every US type issue in order to avoid being burned, or just to know that you have a coin that is good for the grade. However, we can't all be Bill Jones!

They provide an additional layer of security for those who want a single, choice example for their set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

jom

 

It is both. Eye appeal is very much a part of market grading, but I will add that the coin still looks MS66 notwithstanding the spotting which is likely much less conspicuous in hand. Just because a coin is a MS66 doesn't meant that is must be a ravishing beauty. The coin may have negative aspects, but be acceptable at the graded level. Also, not all MS66s are created equally, and I wouldn't expect the market to treat them equally as well. Absent the gold sticker, I don't think the coin would fetch MS66 money. It will be interesting to see how much, if any, "gold bean premium" Ankur receives for this coin. For the record, I don't like this coin either, and I wouldn't buy it given that superior specimens could be had for little or no additional premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
I will agree that CAC is not perfect. But I wouldnt be quick to dismiss their opinion on that said coin based solely on images and a description. Until you see it in hand, its pointless to jump to a conclusion. They obviously saw it in hand, and gave their opinion.

 

Yeah, I saw the coin and a couple of other "rattler" gold stickers in the same auction and I had to laugh. I got the immediate impression that CAC loved putting gold stickers on older slabs. Every one I saw was questionable at best. Green stickers would have been fine in all the cases...I should point out...but I thought the gold (implying higher grade) was not.

 

It is both. Eye appeal is very much a part of market grading, but I will add that the coin still looks MS66 notwithstanding the spotting which is likely much less conspicuous in hand. Just because a coin is a MS66 doesn't meant that is must be a ravishing beauty. The coin may have negative aspects, but be acceptable at the graded level. Also, not all MS66s are created equally, and I wouldn't expect the market to treat them equally as well. Absent the gold sticker, I don't think the coin would fetch MS66 money. It will be interesting to see how much, if any, "gold bean premium" Ankur receives for this coin. For the record, I don't like this coin either, and I wouldn't buy it given that superior specimens could be had for little or no additional premium.

 

I should have qualified my statement above. In the earlier thread I referred to someone responded to a coin photo and said basically "it's very pretty and deserves the sticker" (green in this case). I then responded by saying I had thought that CAC stickers were to solidify the grade being dead center or a bit better (top 50% or something). But the poster implied it got the green sticker because it was "pretty". I was confused so I asked why should eye-appeal matter. The coin could be beautiful but still grade lower (and hence no CAC). TomB then said eye-appeal was part of the grade. Now AnkurJ implies otherwise. So that led me to the above statement to AnkurJ.

 

Sorry about the confusion.

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BAJJERFAN

BAJJERFAN

Posted
Posted
The spotting is not noticeable in hand. As you are aware, the sticker is based on the grade, not eye appeal. I agree the coin itself is not worth a premium. But I'm sure we also know that the buyers of this coin will buy it solely for the sticker.

 

In another thread I brought a similar point up about eye-appeal and a gold CAC sticker. It was TomB who said that eye-appeal is part of the grade. OK...so...which is it? hm

 

As to CAC, I've seen coins they've put a gold sticker on that I could help but laugh at. There was a certain proof Liberty Nickel I saw in a Stacks auction last summer that was in a Rattler PR65 they put a gold sticker on. With hairlines on the cheek I couldn't believe they thought the coin was really a 66. Even the auction catalog mentioned the lines. So, IMO, CAC ain't perfect.

 

jom

 

One can always email JA and ask him how EA affects their opinion of grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BAJJERFAN

BAJJERFAN

Posted
Posted

...do you believe that it's just a matter of time before another company appears that will approve CAC that approves the TPG's?

 

you know, like another sticker that qualifies the other stickers? hm

 

and if so would this mean collectors will crave the slab with even more stickers? :popcorn: your thoughts.

 

You know comments like this are just plain silly. Who else out there with the expertise and market-wide credibility is likely to be in a position to or have a desire to start a competing service?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
halfpint

halfpint

Posted
Posted

You know comments like this are just plain silly. Who else out there with the expertise and market-wide credibility is likely to be in a position to or have a desire to start a competing service?

 

...silly? i think not. right now? perhaps not. what about in the future?

 

it's silly to think that it could not happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BAJJERFAN

BAJJERFAN

Posted
Posted
You know comments like this are just plain silly. Who else out there with the expertise and market-wide credibility is likely to be in a position to or have a desire to start a competing service?

 

...silly? i think not. right now? perhaps not. what about in the future?

 

it's silly to think that it could not happen.

 

I have read that same thing many times ATS. Probly aint gonna happen. Then again there is always an opportunity for some enterprising soul. Just scrape off the old bean and stick yours in its place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lehigh96

lehigh96

Posted
Posted

...do you believe that it's just a matter of time before another company appears that will approve CAC that approves the TPG's?

 

you know, like another sticker that qualifies the other stickers? hm

 

and if so would this mean collectors will crave the slab with even more stickers? :popcorn: your thoughts.

 

You know comments like this are just plain silly. Who else out there with the expertise and market-wide credibility is likely to be in a position to or have a desire to start a competing service?

 

Not to mention the start up captial!

 

@AnkurJ, I think you should post that photo of the Buffalo with the pixels being 500X250 so that everyone can get an idea of how insignificant the spotting is in hand. Oversized photos magnify flaws and make them appear much more severe than they really are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catbert

Catbert

Posted
Posted
I think that CAC is a real boon for type collectors. It would be nice to study and know every nuance of every US type issue in order to avoid being burned, or just to know that you have a coin that is good for the grade. However, we can't all be Bill Jones!

They provide an additional layer of security for those who want a single, choice example for their set.

 

I think this is an excellent point!

 

BTW, I know it is often referenced that it is John Albanese who is the one whose opinion is highly valued, but do we know that he reviews all submissions? From this site, we know there are two others, one of which is Bill Shamheart:

 

"And twenty years later, with the inception of Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC), I was again recruited to be one of three graders."

 

Shamheart Bio

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I think that CAC is a real boon for type collectors. It would be nice to study and know every nuance of every US type issue in order to avoid being burned, or just to know that you have a coin that is good for the grade. However, we can't all be Bill Jones!

They provide an additional layer of security for those who want a single, choice example for their set.

 

I think this is an excellent point!

 

BTW, I know it is often referenced that it is John Albanese who is the one whose opinion is highly valued, but do we know that he reviews all submissions? From this site, we know there are two others, one of which is Bill Shamheart:

 

"And twenty years later, with the inception of Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC), I was again recruited to be one of three graders."

 

Shamheart Bio

 

I have been told that John reviews each coin before it is stickered by CAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnkurJ

AnkurJ

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I know the other two graders, and have been told that John reviews every coin regardless of whether the other two do or not.Sometimes the two have different opinions and the third acts as a tie breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
Mark - do you know who the other graders are and share their names?

 

Yes, Dan, Bill Shamhart and Bill Wetzler. Each of them graded at NGC at one time. Not surprisingly, both are very knowledgeable/sharp.

 

Sorry for the delay in answering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing