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

[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.

 

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".

 

They have not given any indication that they want that reputation. They want to be able to make a market in coins that they feel are solid for the grade or better, and which they identify as such, by stickering.

 

And how would you want or expect them to take care of their "mistakes"?

 

By handling them fairly, with the owner of the coin, as they do? Or by doing so publicly - I'm not even sure how that could be done - so it doesn't appear as if they are taking "care of their mistakes behind the scenes"?

[newprepper]

My thought was not well explained. It was really more aimed at those who think CAC unfallible and everything should be kept private. Those are the same people who do all they can to bring public things that could be kept private. The same way there was nothing good about Ankurs forum. Most of that thread was unnecessary. I assume CAC only wants a good reputation, but it should be a deseved reputation, not undeserved.

[MarkFeld]

My thought was not well explained. It was really more aimed at those who think CAC unfallible and everything should be kept private. Those are the same people who do all they can to bring public things that could be kept private. The same way there was nothing good about Ankurs forum. Most of that thread was unnecessary. I assume CAC only wants a good reputation, but it should be a deseved reputation, not undeserved.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

[jom]

My thought was not well explained. It was really more aimed at those who think CAC unfallible and everything should be kept private. Those are the same people who do all they can to bring public things that could be kept private. The same way there was nothing good about Ankurs forum. Most of that thread was unnecessary. I assume CAC only wants a good reputation, but it should be a deseved reputation, not undeserved.

 

This is what I thought you meant. I agree with mumu on this one. If Ankur wants to post his situation with CAC on this coin that is HIS business. Whether CAC likes it or not that is another matter entirely.

 

To me, this can only be a GOOD thing. They've handled a mistake in the best possible manner. So why all the complaining?

 

jom

[newprepper]

My thought was not well explained. It was really more aimed at those who think CAC unfallible and everything should be kept private. Those are the same people who do all they can to bring public things that could be kept private. The same way there was nothing good about Ankurs forum. Most of that thread was unnecessary. I assume CAC only wants a good reputation, but it should be a deseved reputation, not undeserved.

 

This is what I thought you meant. I agree with mumu on this one. If Ankur wants to post his situation with CAC on this coin that is HIS business. Whether CAC likes it or not that is another matter entirely.

 

To me, this can only be a GOOD thing. They've handled a mistake in the best possible manner. So why all the complaining?

 

jom

 

I agree, as my earlier post said, I would rather deal with those kind of folk

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The subject of CAC has been the source of hours of entertainment.

 

I recall the original "launch" of the subject across the street, and the Board Baptismal of a new service. It is easy to look up. It is enjoyable reading.

 

CAC is no different than any other business entity for profit. It will make mistakes. It will score victories. It will build followers and build naysayers.

 

Superiority in grading a coin is easily presented as a marketing tool.

Superiority of opinion is easily presented as a marketing tool.

 

Following thru with either of those marketing tools to the satisfaction of the majority of users, is the goal.

 

Unfortunately, until all have the exact same depth perception, color recognition, sharpness of vision, level of knowledge, and a clear and precise grading law/rule/guideline, there will always be difference of opinion.

 

A business entity will always have solicited and unsolicted supporters and also disgruntled and disappointed clients.

 

I understand that there are individuals within the numismatic community that have achieved a level of general acceptance of their opinion by the numismatic community, for many reasons-they have"won" many grading contests, they have built certain collections to the envy of many collectors, they have built a reputation of integrity, their research is the envy of all collectors, etc.

 

These individuals certainly don't think they can't make a mistake.

 

When the day arrives that these individuals believe that they are infallible, all that they do from that point forward will fail, and all they did prior will be questioned.

 

But (blah,blah), when their opinion is in error, and they as the individual declare the error, and seek a reasonable solution, then we as collectors can not ask for more.

 

How the presentation of the solution is made, and to whom, is entirely the responsibility of the individual that seeks to correct the error.

 

After all, the individual could just as easily declared blessings on the subject coin and avoided posssible bad press.

 

I do not know any of the individuals involved. I can not state what their intent is or is not.

 

However, to assume total failure of the perceived promise of the CAC logo, regardless of logo color, because of an admitted error, is not logical. To assume permanent damage to the reputation of the entity because of public disclosure of an error of opinion admitted by the entity, when the entity has offered a reasonable solution(s) to the error of opinion, is not logical.

 

But (blah, blah) what do I know.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

 

[MarkFeld]

John, that was an excellent post, at least, in my opinion.

 

And I apologize for forgetting to have replied to your previous post in which you posed a question to me. The answer is yes.

[leeg]

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

 

John,

Not meaning to offend anyone's anatomy or beliefs. I am a man so I posted my opinion as such. A "woman" can post what she wants to this forum with I hope no fear of any retribution also.

 

Thank-You,

 

Enjoy Your Coins!!

[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

 

John,

Not meaning to offend anyone's anatomy or beliefs. I am a man so I posted my opinion as such. A "woman" can post what she wants to this forum with I hope no fear of any retribution also.

 

Thank-You,

 

Enjoy Your Coins!!

 

I will ease any burden of thought you may have that it offends my anatomy-I am a male.

 

Its just that my wife reads the Posts sometimes over my shoulder, and I have to make it look good....

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis (memo to self-erase this Post...)

[newprepper]

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

 

John,

Not meaning to offend anyone's anatomy or beliefs. I am a man so I posted my opinion as such. A "woman" can post what she wants to this forum with I hope no fear of any retribution also.

 

Thank-You,

 

Enjoy Your Coins!!

 

I will ease any burden of thought you may have that it offends my anatomy-I am a male.

 

Its just that my wife reads the Posts sometimes over my shoulder, and I have to make it look good....

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis (memo to self-erase this Post...)

 

Don't let her read the Declaration of Independance then, especially the part where all men are created equal.

[DirtyGoldMan]

UPDATE!

 

So I gave this coin to John this past weekend so he could take a closer look at it. After reviewing it, he told me there was indeed something done to the coin many many years ago, and the marks were NOT mint made. But it has toned over and the coin still has a nice look to it

.

That being said, he has offered to buy the coin back for what I paid, or refund me $20 and remove the sticker. Or the last option is keep the coin as is with the CAC sticker.

What would you guys do?

Ankur

I would have to reevaluate how I view the CAC if the final determination of borderline coins is up to the submitter. It would be like sending a coin to NGC, they evaluate the coin, and give you the choice between a 65, a 65+, and a body bag, that you get to decide.

 

Somehow, I think that there has to be more to the story or something else that is lost in translation.

 

As I indicated in my earliest post on the matter (above), something indeed was lost in translation or misrepresented, and when Ankur added these details, it made a lot more sense to me. The CAC would not allow Ankur to unconditionally own the coin and have it with a CAC sticker on the slab. (The $20 figure for the markdown was really $200, as Ankur later stated.)

 

And, yes, I did discuss with John A earlier today that it was my opinion that Ankur posing as a representative of the CAC (on this and the other thread) was probably not good for the company image.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I have the impression that there is an ongoing commentary between AJ and DGM.

 

It seems that whenever either posts, there is an opposed reply form the other. It seems more than disagreement of opinion; it has qualities of intended public disrespect.

 

This present Thread has a number of examples, and one continuous theme is the level of personal knowledge both enjoy of the individual JA, and his position in the matter being discussed.

 

I know none of the individuals personally or by sight or any other interaction.

 

My question: is it not possible that the individual JA can not answer and comment for himself? Must a third party, or multiple third parties, speak for him, to the extent that it distracts from the very issue being discussed?

 

It is obvious that many know the individual JA on a personal level, and have access to him and I can understand a certain level of pride in declaring this association.

 

But (blah, blah) when the association is used to the detriment of all, via comments of personality differences that border on discourtesy and interfere with the subject being discussed, then I am not sure anything has been accomplished or any viable point made.

 

Is it really so important to have the upper position and forget manners?

 

Respect To All,

John Curlis

[leeg]

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

 

John,

Not meaning to offend anyone's anatomy or beliefs. I am a man so I posted my opinion as such. A "woman" can post what she wants to this forum with I hope no fear of any retribution also.

 

Thank-You,

 

Enjoy Your Coins!!

 

I will ease any burden of thought you may have that it offends my anatomy-I am a male.

 

Its just that my wife reads the Posts sometimes over my shoulder, and I have to make it look good....

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis (memo to self-erase this Post...)

I totally understand. Happy collecting my friend!!

 

[DirtyGoldMan]

JC,

 

Think Hatfields and McCoys.

[leeg]

I have the impression that there is an ongoing commentary between AJ and DGM.

 

It seems that whenever either posts, there is an opposed reply form the other. It seems more than disagreement of opinion; it has qualities of intended public disrespect.

 

This present Thread has a number of examples, and one continuous theme is the level of personal knowledge both enjoy of the individual JA, and his position in the matter being discussed.

 

I know none of the individuals personally or by sight or any other interaction.

 

My question: is it not possible that the individual JA can not answer and comment for himself? Must a third party, or multiple third parties, speak for him, to the extent that it distracts from the very issue being discussed?

 

It is obvious that many know the individual JA on a personal level, and have access to him and I can understand a certain level of pride in declaring this association.

 

But (blah, blah) when the association is used to the detriment of all, via comments of personality differences that border on discourtesy and interfere with the subject being discussed, then I am not sure anything has been accomplished or any viable point made.

 

Is it really so important to have the upper position and forget manners?

 

Respect To All,

John Curlis

 

(thumbs u

[leeg]

JC,

 

Think Hatfields and McCoys.

Watched the whole series and a good majority of both family's died. It was sad but had some meaning.

 

Lets look more to the series named "Friend's." They often disagreed but still kept things civil and maintained some sort of decency.

[Kurtdog]

Looking at the coin with a 20x loupe, there is no movement of metal or a depression that would be caused by a repair. On the opposite side, there is just weakness in the strike. The more I look at it, the more I think it is a die issue.

 

By the way, the coin is CAC'd as well. I will be showing it to John tomorrow.

I'll save you the bother. He's going to tell you the same thing I'm going to tell you. That grade was taken down to VF because that area can't be explained away as die-related. PCGS isn't CSI Miami. They know that area is PMD of some kind, but they believe the coin is marketable at that grade-reduction. And, so does CAC, and, so do I.

UPDATE!

 

So I gave this coin to John this past weekend so he could take a closer look at it. After reviewing it, he told me there was indeed something done to the coin many many years ago, and the marks were NOT mint made. But it has toned over and the coin still has a nice look to it

.

That being said, he has offered to buy the coin back for what I paid, or refund me $200 and remove the sticker. Or the last option is keep the coin as is with the CAC sticker.

What would you guys do?

Ankur

It looks like at least a half-dozen pages went by since this but if you need another opinion mine is keep the coin as it is. It's imminently marketable at that reduced-grade, not only to me, but to PCGS and CAC, as well. What more does one want?

 

PS: I'll give you my Kurtdog sticker for free, if that's what's holding you up.

[FishyOne]

I wish "DirtyGoldMan" would change his screen name to "RYK"! I can't keep things straight in my old age!

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

JC,

 

Think Hatfields and McCoys.

 

Thank You.

 

When put in that context, I COMPLETELY understand.

There will be no further observations by me on the subject.

I will wait for the movie.

 

I will say that the level of knowledge of both is impressive, at least to me, and I have always admired same.

 

Now, please proceed with your individual weapons of choice.

 

With Respect,

John Curlis

[mkman123]

I'm hoping Ankur learns something from all of this.....don't put all your trust in stickers! Coins without stickers are just as good!

[jerseycat10]

Ankur didnt stir enough people up in his last thread, so he starts a new, equally inciting thread.

 

What's more, he proves that expendable income and CAC does not necessarily equal numismatic success.

 

What's more, yet another example of how net grading is bad for the hobby.

 

Finally, answer me this: You claim to keep your CAC forums private to keep it safe from pcgs reps seeing posts, yet, you banned me from your forum, for a post i made here. How is that not hypocritical?

[mumu]

Ankur didnt stir enough people up in his last thread, so he starts a new, equally inciting thread.

 

What's more, he proves that expendable income and CAC does not necessarily equal numismatic success.

 

What's more, yet another example of how net grading is bad for the hobby.

 

Finally, answer me this: You claim to keep your CAC forums private to keep it safe from pcgs reps seeing posts, yet, you banned me from your forum, for a post i made here. How is that not hypocritical?

 

WAITER....MORE POPCORN STAT

 

Seriously this thread has a lot of potential. Can anyone get Don Willis over here. I heard BNB has a new youtube video for him.

[Kurtdog]

Anybody want to give me an update on what's happening? I left off on page 2. I swear, I let you boys and girls alone for just a couple days, look at this place!

[MarkFeld]

Ankur didnt stir enough people up in his last thread, so he starts a new, equally inciting thread.

 

What's more, he proves that expendable income and CAC does not necessarily equal numismatic success.

 

What's more, yet another example of how net grading is bad for the hobby.

 

Finally, answer me this: You claim to keep your CAC forums private to keep it safe from pcgs reps seeing posts, yet, you banned me from your forum, for a post i made here. How is that not hypocritical?

 

I am admittedly not a mind reader. But I don't think Ankur meant to do any stirring or inciting with this thread. But rather, he was reporting back and providing an update on a subject that he thought would be of interest to a good number of forum members. And indeed, it was.

 

And I don't know that much of anything was proved.

[EVillageProwler]

Has CAC become the new Legend? Or maybe it's AnkurJ that's become the new Legend...

[Walkerfan]

UPDATE!

 

So I gave this coin to John this past weekend so he could take a closer look at it. After reviewing it, he told me there was indeed something done to the coin many many years ago, and the marks were NOT mint made. But it has toned over and the coin still has a nice look to it

.

That being said, he has offered to buy the coin back for what I paid, or refund me $20 and remove the sticker. Or the last option is keep the coin as is with the CAC sticker.

What would you guys do?

Ankur

 

Ankur, if it was me, I would take the buy back offer unless this coin had a special, personal value.

 

Everybody makes mistakes.

 

+1

 

Same here

 

Thanks for the update, Ankur. I found it to be very interesting indeed.

[James_OldeTowne]

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.

The unabridged (and excellent) version of what I was stating above.

[James_OldeTowne]

Incidentally, I am a little surprised that nobody has addressed something which I would have thought key to the whole argument: the coin really should be removed from the slab. One might think that given the current extreme-anti-doctor environment, ALL clearly doctored coins like this one should be de-certified.

 

[copper toning]

I have a few coins that I have been debating on sending to CAC. Fortunately this thread has helped me make my decision as I will not be submitting the coins.

 

The fact that this particular coin was stickered not only with damage but with a green sticker. Not a gold sticker which if they believed was a problem free coin it obvioulsy should have had. It has been clearly stated the coin is ef-au which is why I am sure it was submitted and purchased to begin with.

 

The fact that other coins are surely lurking with similar issues and the fact that CAC can not force you to remove the stickerand there are dealers/collectors who are discussing to keep the coins with the stickers is a big issue. I can see no reason to due so except for saving your wallet down the road.

[MarkFeld]

Incidentally, I am a little surprised that nobody has addressed something which I would have thought key to the whole argument: the coin really should be removed from the slab. One might think that given the current extreme-anti-doctor environment, ALL clearly doctored coins like this one should be de-certified.

 

James, I stated (I think more than once) earlier in this thread, that if the coin is damaged, I don't think it should be graded (even seemingly conservatively). Hopefully 1) CAC will forward it to PCGS and 2) PCGS will buy it and no-grade it.