1807 Dime revisited. UPDATE ON PAGE 2! CAC'S decision!

[AnkurJ]

Also a quick note. John offerred $200 to remove the sticker, not $20. My mistake on that part.

 

And part of keeping it with the sticker is that if I ever sold the coin, it would be sold to CAC and not put on the market.

[BillJones]

I will state my position on this coin very simply then let you people flame away at me.

 

PCGS should never have certified this coin; they should have put it in a body bag. Given that, CAC should have never put a sticker on it. This coin does not project a positive image on either company.

 

Why?

 

All of us who have been collectors for a number of years have seen this cycle. A dealer sells you a coin with a problem with a clean bill of health. You think you have a great treasure because you have a scarce, early U.S. coin with so much detail. Then when you try to sell it, the potential buyer, with justification, says that the coin is damaged and declines to make an offer, or offers a lower price. Quite often you get frustrated and sell the coin for whatever you can get, or it ends up in a auction and sells for a lower price. The next dealer who offers the coin for sale, if he is low on ethics, begins cycle all over again.

 

Putting this in a PCGS holder with no notation for the damage gives this coin more legitimacy than it deserves. It is a problem coin, and it is not as desirable in the eyes of most collectors as a legitimate VF-30, 1807 dime by wear.

 

This is one of the abuses that certification holders were supposed to prevent. The fact that PCGS net graded it does not let them off the hook, and it does not let CAC off the hook. Most collectors would prefer to own a coin like this in the "straight", "clean" VF-30 grade, not as a net graded AU knocked down to VF-30 because of damage. The slab grade on this coin is misleading. It does not tell the complete story, which is "AU-50 (or EF-45) sharpness, net graded to VF-30 because of obverse damage at 11 o'clock."

 

[Conder101]

Well Bill I'd flame you but after reading that my matches won't light.

[AnkurJ]

You are correct Bill.

But the big difference between CAC and PCGS is that CAC will accept their mistake. I would bet PCGS would fight tooth and nail to deny any wrong doing.

[crypto79-migration]

You are correct Bill.

But the big difference between CAC and PCGS is that CAC will accept their mistake. I would bet PCGS would fight tooth and nail to deny any wrong doing.

 

You don't get it Ankur. This is not an attact on you but my opinion and advice.

 

1st off PCGS, NGC and CAC all have impeccable track records on taking care of collectors.

2nd all of these companies have made mistakes.

3rd you appear to be fortunate to have the ear and access to one of the old guard in the hobby who has a mini-empire that provides you consultation. If he chooses to expose skeletons in private conversation I would recommend you keep those private. By showing the amount of wiggle room and double standards that take place it is safe to assume other collectors or dealers could expect the same standard applied to their problem coins to add the CAC bump in value before shipping off to an auction. You are painting the company very poorly by showing their soft side and willingness to turn the other cheek. CAC's brand value is based off of a supposed unwavering standard of grading that is supposed to install extra confidence to collectors to buy said product. You have put a face on not only a problem coin but JA himself not caring enough to take strong action, how many other coins does he not care about?

 

IMO CAC is making a huge mistake letting you run around posing as an insider. Your actions on this board alone have made me think a little less of their organization (not their mission or product yet) and I am a person who puts very little to no weight in what you do or think, others results might be more or less impacted.

[DirtyGoldMan]

You are correct Bill.

But the big difference between CAC and PCGS is that CAC will accept their mistake. I would bet PCGS would fight tooth and nail to deny any wrong doing.

 

You don't get it Ankur. This is not an attact on you but my opinion and advice.

 

1st off PCGS, NGC and CAC all have impeccable track records on taking care of collectors.

2nd all of these companies have made mistakes.

3rd you appear to be fortunate to have the ear and access to one of the old guard in the hobby who has a mini-empire that provides you consultation. If he chooses to expose skeletons in private conversation I would recommend you keep those private. By showing the amount of wiggle room and double standards that take place it is safe to assume other collectors or dealers could expect the same standard applied to their problem coins to add the CAC bump in value before shipping off to an auction. You are painting the company very poorly by showing their soft side and willingness to turn the other cheek. CAC's brand value is based off of a supposed unwavering standard of grading that is supposed to install extra confidence to collectors to buy said product. You have put a face on not only a problem coin but JA himself not caring enough to take strong action, how many other coins does he not care about?

 

IMO CAC is making a huge mistake letting you run around posing as an insider. Your actions on this board alone have made me think a little less of their organization (not their mission or product yet) and I am a person who puts very little to no weight in what you do or think, others results might be more or less impacted.

John, I could not have said it better myself.

[DirtyGoldMan]

Speaking of the CAC, I thought that they were branching into new areas when I saw this headline in a daily professional newsletter in my email mailbox this morning:

 

"CAC Found To Be Best Predictor Of Heart Disease"

 

In this case, CAC is referring to coronary artery calcium, so Ankur need not go to Far Hills, NJ, for his physicals.

[leeg]

As a man, i'll use my own coin collecting knowledge and values, thank-you. That way I can't throw stones at others, as I see done so often.

 

I do read quite a few posts here and on other forums just to help gain knowledge even though I may not post to them.

 

I make the decisions on what I buy or sell. It is not due to all the politics I see on so many coin forums now a days.

[BROADSTRUCK]

You are correct Bill.

But the big difference between CAC and PCGS is that CAC will accept their mistake. I would bet PCGS would fight tooth and nail to deny any wrong doing.

 

You don't get it Ankur. This is not an attact on you but my opinion and advice.

 

1st off PCGS, NGC and CAC all have impeccable track records on taking care of collectors.

2nd all of these companies have made mistakes.

3rd you appear to be fortunate to have the ear and access to one of the old guard in the hobby who has a mini-empire that provides you consultation. If he chooses to expose skeletons in private conversation I would recommend you keep those private. By showing the amount of wiggle room and double standards that take place it is safe to assume other collectors or dealers could expect the same standard applied to their problem coins to add the CAC bump in value before shipping off to an auction. You are painting the company very poorly by showing their soft side and willingness to turn the other cheek. CAC's brand value is based off of a supposed unwavering standard of grading that is supposed to install extra confidence to collectors to buy said product. You have put a face on not only a problem coin but JA himself not caring enough to take strong action, how many other coins does he not care about?

 

IMO CAC is making a huge mistake letting you run around posing as an insider. Your actions on this board alone have made me think a little less of their organization (not their mission or product yet) and I am a person who puts very little to no weight in what you do or think, others results might be more or less impacted.

John, I could not have said it better myself.

 

+1

 

crypto79

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Maybe that should read "...As a person....", so we don't offend those with a slightly different anatomy. Then you would not be in any political danger.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[AnkurJ]

The point of this thread was to be educational. I'm not an insider at CAC, just a regular customer. The reason I sent the coin to John was because everyone including me was curious as to what happened to the coin. While whatever was done was done a long time ago, something on the coin was altered.

 

John wanted to make sure I was made whole on the coin, so he offered a buy back. How this shows CAC's weakness in some people's eyes I don't care to understand. Maybe if CAC was nasty about it like PCGS would be everyone would be happy.

 

Crypto: I have yet to learn a single thing from your posts as well. So I do t doubt you have nothing to learn from mine. Everyone is free to make their own decisions. For someone who doesn't put weight into CAC, I doubt they care what you think of them.

[MarkFeld]

For the record, after having spoken to JA, it is my understanding that:

 

1) Ankur was offered two options by CAC - either sell the coin to CAC at his cost or keep the coin, but without the CAC sticker, and be compensated in the amount of $200.

 

2) CAC has bought the coin from Ankur and will remove the sticker shortly, if they haven't already done so.

 

3) The coin will soon appear on the market with a gold CAC sticker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I fabricated one of the above, for purposes of levity, shock value and for the benefit of conspiracy theorists. I leave it to you to decide which one I made up.

 

[mumu]

For the record, after having spoken to JA, it is my understanding that:

 

1) Ankur was offered two options by CAC - either sell the coin to CAC at his cost or keep the coin, but without the CAC sticker, and be compensated in the amount of $200.

 

2) CAC has bought the coin from Ankur and will remove the sticker shortly, if they haven't already done so.

 

3) The coin will soon appear on the market with a gold CAC sticker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I fabricated one of the above, for purposes of levity, shock value and for the benefit of conspiracy theorists. I leave it to you to decide which one I made up.

 

 

I am going to guess that you made up the existence of Ankur. I hope I win the gold saint in MS 65

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

For the record, after having spoken to JA, it is my understanding that:

 

1) Ankur was offered two options by CAC - either sell the coin to CAC at his cost or keep the coin, but without the CAC sticker, and be compensated in the amount of $200.

 

2) CAC has bought the coin from Ankur and will remove the sticker shortly, if they haven't already done so.

 

3) The coin will soon appear on the market with a gold CAC sticker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I fabricated one of the above, for purposes of levity, shock value and for the benefit of conspiracy theorists. I leave it to you to decide which one I made up.

 

 

Do the choices of which one was made up include:

 

5) For the record....

6) after having spoken to JA...

7) it is my understanding that....

 

These added statements are inclusive of "..one of the above..".

 

I just want the rules to be clear before choosing, and not confuse the issue any more than it already is.

 

It is always my goal to be helpful.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[AnkurJ]

Mark!

[crypto79-migration]

Mark!

 

The saddest thing in life is watching when someone can't tell when people are laughing with them or at them

[AnkurJ]

You must laugh every time you look at a mirror then! lol

[crypto79-migration]

Also a quick note. John offerred $200 to remove the sticker, not $20. My mistake on that part.

 

And part of keeping it with the sticker is that if I ever sold the coin, it would be sold to CAC and not put on the market.

 

 

For the record, after having spoken to JA, it is my understanding that:

 

1) Ankur was offered two options by CAC - either sell the coin to CAC at his cost or keep the coin, but without the CAC sticker, and be compensated in the amount of $200.

 

2) CAC has bought the coin from Ankur and will remove the sticker shortly, if they haven't already done so.

 

3

 

After reading your response and not only Ankur's statement but attached clarification. Two possibilities exist and they don't add up

1. Ankur is lying or confused about the 3rd offer to leave the coin as is.

2. JA doesn't recall giving the 3rd option or chooses to leave it private for obvious reasons.

 

Either way it shouldn't be the kind of issue worked on a public forum. I wonder how many headaches JA will put up within any given week?

 

[MarkFeld]

Mark!

 

The saddest thing in life is watching when someone can't tell when people are laughing with them or at them

 

I'm not sure at whom that was directed. But I wasn't laughing at Ankur, and I don't think he was laughing at me.

[newprepper]

I would be more willing to engage in business with somebody who admits mistakes and has some kind of transparency than one who projects perfection and keeps everything secret. but thats just me

[mumu]

Poor ankur has some of the biggest holes in the coin world on swarm because of this coin.

[AnkurJ]

I was laughing at your third option, Mark.

[MarkFeld]

Also a quick note. John offerred $200 to remove the sticker, not $20. My mistake on that part.

 

And part of keeping it with the sticker is that if I ever sold the coin, it would be sold to CAC and not put on the market.

 

 

For the record, after having spoken to JA, it is my understanding that:

 

1) Ankur was offered two options by CAC - either sell the coin to CAC at his cost or keep the coin, but without the CAC sticker, and be compensated in the amount of $200.

 

2) CAC has bought the coin from Ankur and will remove the sticker shortly, if they haven't already done so.

 

3

 

After reading your response and not only Ankur's statement but attached clarification. Two possibilities exist and they don't add up

1. Ankur is lying or confused about the 3rd offer to leave the coin as is.

2. JA doesn't recall giving the 3rd option or chooses to leave it private for obvious reasons.

 

Either way it shouldn't be the kind of issue worked on a public forum. I wonder how many headaches JA will put up within any given week?

 

It is my understanding that CAC did not extend a third option. But that Ankur requested that he be able to keep the sticker on the coin and promised not to sell it as such. And that, under the circumstances, CAC did not wish to demand that Ankur turn over the coin to have the sticker removed.

 

So you know, I did not post without talking to JA about it, first. And I would bet that he has to put up with a lot more than than this and has much bigger headaches over other matters, on a rather steady basis.

[crypto79-migration]

Mark!

 

The saddest thing in life is watching when someone can't tell when people are laughing with them or at them

 

I'm not sure at whom that was directed. But I wasn't laughing at Ankur, and I don't think he was laughing at me.

 

Mark

"Laughing at" was used figuratively for the condescending tone, nature, narrative of the responses to his thread in general and not just limited to yours. Speaking broadly the majority of the posts were negative and even inferring the intent/tone of yours I would guess it to be a polite form of "hey insufficiently_thoughtful_person, you're speaking on behalf of others and misrepresenting them and here is what is really going on". While you know your intent best, simply going around Ankur to get the real story instead of trusting him to clarify or communicate it speaks volumes.

 

It is similar to getting a call from a teacher verifying that the note you sent with your kid to school for an absence was truly signed by you. It puts the messenger (Ankur) on a lower plateau and assumes the verifier and the originator as persons of authority. I think most grown men would have a problem if someone ran behind them and double checked every time they quoted someone or stated something as fact even if in Ankur's case it is needed. It says to me that when he says something not everybody takes it as the words of a grown man. I chose "laughing at" as it was simple to digest by layman and did not intend it to be absolutely literal.

John

[MarkFeld]

I was laughing at your third option, Mark.

 

I figured that, Ankur and am glad you enjoyed it.

[newprepper]

spoon holes is funny

[BROADSTRUCK]

How does this damage the CAC brand?

 

No one said they are 100% and never make mistakes.

When they do make one, they don't give you a run around and admit it!

And they pay for their mistake.

 

I'll try to answer how damaging this thread is in layman's terms... CAC as a Forth Party Service with a prime objective is to judge the grading consistency of the top two Third Party Services isn't allowed to make any mistakes. As CAC does nothing more then just agree or disagree with pre-graded coins they have to remain 100% consistent as this is the only service they provide. Once mistakes like this become public notice other collectors may begin to wonder if their coins have been wrongfully reviewed by CAC and their credibility crumbles far more rapidly then it took to establish.

[MarkFeld]

How does this damage the CAC brand?

 

No one said they are 100% and never make mistakes.

When they do make one, they don't give you a run around and admit it!

And they pay for their mistake.

 

I'll try to answer how damaging this thread is in layman's terms... CAC as a Forth Party Service with a prime objective is to judge the grading consistency of the top two Third Party Services isn't allowed to make any mistakes. As CAC does nothing more then just agree or disagree with pre-graded coins they have to remain 100% consistent as this is the only service they provide. Once mistakes like this become public notice other collectors may begin to wonder if their coins have been wrongfully reviewed by CAC and their credibility crumbles far more rapidly then it took to establish.

 

Of course they are allowed to (and will) make mistakes. No one can be perfect when it comes to assessing coins, and that is understood by just about everyone.

 

Their credibility could take a hit if they failed to address mistakes, not because they are imperfect.

[newprepper]

How does this damage the CAC brand?

 

No one said they are 100% and never make mistakes.

When they do make one, they don't give you a run around and admit it!

And they pay for their mistake.

 

I'll try to answer how damaging this thread is in layman's terms... CAC as a Forth Party Service with a prime objective is to judge the grading consistency of the top two Third Party Services isn't allowed to make any mistakes. As CAC does nothing more then just agree or disagree with pre-graded coins they have to remain 100% consistent as this is the only service they provide. Once mistakes like this become public notice other collectors may begin to wonder if their coins have been wrongfully reviewed by CAC and their credibility crumbles far more rapidly then it took to establish.

 

Who died and made CAC "GOD" in the grading realm? If that is the reputation they want perpetuated then thay should provide a better service. Not take care of their mistakes "behind the scenes".

[mumu]

How does this damage the CAC brand?

 

No one said they are 100% and never make mistakes.

When they do make one, they don't give you a run around and admit it!

And they pay for their mistake.

 

I'll try to answer how damaging this thread is in layman's terms... CAC as a Forth Party Service with a prime objective is to judge the grading consistency of the top two Third Party Services isn't allowed to make any mistakes. As CAC does nothing more then just agree or disagree with pre-graded coins they have to remain 100% consistent as this is the only service they provide. Once mistakes like this become public notice other collectors may begin to wonder if their coins have been wrongfully reviewed by CAC and their credibility crumbles far more rapidly then it took to establish.

 

So they should have prepped Ankur on how to sweep it under the rug? I think that would be a bigger disservice. They made the mistake now deal with the results. Thats how I was advised when I made my error. No forgiveness from many even after making everyone good. But since its big wig John Albanese lets save the facade by sweeping it under Longacres rare albino kodiak bear rug(is there a way to refer to someone in the third person from the 2nd person?) . Lets all play big circle of trust like Crypto does with his no bid auctions from friends to keep the price down and really stick it to the little guys who get screwed. That will really solidify the hobby for the big shots!

 

Its Ankurs coin and this DID HAPPEN, that gives him the right to discuss what happened despite what it does to anyone elses reputation.