CAC green beaned at 63, goes to 64 CAC beans green again

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I'm going to call shenanigans. That is not inconsistent, that is down right misleading. CAC had to be aware of this coins history in their data base.

 

Because, after all, CAC does have that newfangled computer feature that matches the current new PCGS cert # to the old NGC cert #....don't they?

 

/eyeroll

 

That could have been a little more effective if the yellow eye roll thingy showed up.

 

NGC Conspiracy against you.....

[Hard Times]

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Interesting thread. I too have looked at all this from the point of view of a scientist. What I've decided is that grading isn't all that scientific, and I'm OK with that. What does make me crazy is when someone goes on a rant about something that happened once or a handful of times. Coins don't have grades so there is no "correct" answer - just opinions. In a world where thousands of coins get graded every week there are bound to be some outliers. Focusing on these and not on the generally good judgement of the TPGs and CAC is a little short-sighted.

 

If you want 100% accuracy in a field that is hugely subjective, you're going to be disappointed from time to time.

 

I once got a Pepsi Can and when I opened it, it was only about a 1/4 full.

 

Even though it has been 7 years that I have complained about the Pepsi Co. lack of can filling perfection, and they have not done anything about it yet, I will be darned if they are going to get away with it

 

I am not letting this go.

[Hard Times]

Interesting thread. I too have looked at all this from the point of view of a scientist. What I've decided is that grading isn't all that scientific, and I'm OK with that. What does make me crazy is when someone goes on a rant about something that happened once or a handful of times. Coins don't have grades so there is no "correct" answer - just opinions. In a world where thousands of coins get graded every week there are bound to be some outliers. Focusing on these and not on the generally good judgement of the TPGs and CAC is a little short-sighted.

 

If you want 100% accuracy in a field that is hugely subjective, you're going to be disappointed from time to time.

 

 

Gentle friend, why I created this original post was to raise a discussion about the inconsistencies of CAC beaning. We have every right to discuss the shortcomings we see as well as the many positives that I personally like about CAC.

 

No one here is saying that grading is 100% accurate and it is obviously far from it. But when the graders grade the graders and then use this to drive the market for their distributors, the 4th party graders should be expected to be a little more accurate in their assessments. If they are not, then we should discuss it because this impacts alot of collectors and their wallets. If you think disagreeing with CAC grading is ranting, no worries, but I am here to discuss a serious issue in the collecting world and will do so.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

 

[FishyOne]

CAC stickers coins that it feels are "solid" for the grade and rarely hands out gold stickers, that much is known. CAC saw an NGC 63+ as solid and stickered it. They then saw the same coin in a PCGS 64 holder and saw it as solid and worth stickering as a 64.

 

Is the argument that it MUST HAVE a gold sticker as 63+ to get a green sticker at 64? My guess is if the original NGC slab said 64 it would have gotten a green bean. There's very few new slabs with gold beans, I'd but anything holdered in the last 3 years and submitted to CAC has a 0.01% chance of a gold sticker.

[jom]

If you want 100% accuracy in a field that is hugely subjective, you're going to be disappointed from time to time.

 

Absolutely. As an engineer myself I simply cannot expect much from a measurement that has high precision (A, B, C grades) in a medium that is inherently subjective (potentially inaccurate). If coins are graded by a bunch of experts you'll get many different grades. It will looks like a "normal" curve as more and more "experts" grade the coin. Some coins will be obvious so the deviation will be smaller. Other coins might be all over the place (MS62 vs AU58 is an example) with a high deviation from the mean (average).

 

I like to compare high precision grading to trying to measure the length of a car. You can use a ruler or tape measure to the 1/8 inch. That's all well and good ...unfortunately you have to measure this length as the car moves by you at 80 MPH. That's to me is similar to the grading scenario. It's not all that meaningful to get high precision in a situation that is potentially inaccurate due to the type of measurement. Some coins are easy...others not so much.

 

So to me I just don't understand why this is such a crime against humanity when a coin gets graded MS63 or MS64. It just comes down to what someone will pay for it anyway so what's the big deal?

 

jom

[jom]

There was a coin in an auction with a staple scratch and had a CAC... I pointed it out and the auction went on as if nothing ever happened... so all I hope is the fine folks on this forum don't rely solely on the CAC sticker. Please do your homework whether it be in hand inspection or whatever you chose.

 

How has this changed over the last 20 years (and more) really? It's not just CAC but all the TPGs and any dealers or sellers that tell you a coin is "such and such". Even you and I as we all have our biases etc etc.

 

jom

[Hard Times]

jom, confidence, which is as subjective as grading, but confidence is a marketing tool to sell coins. This is why it is a big deal. How can I be confident if one day a coin is green 63 and the next day it is green 64?

 

From their webiste:

 

"CAC-verified.

Because Confidence in a Coin's Quality is Priceless.

 

Whether you're a novice or advanced collector, you know that quality is what determines the value of a rare coin.

 

However, within any certified coin grade, not all coins are "solid" quality coins.

 

Now there's an easy way to identify coins that are solid for the grade - a CAC verification sticker.

 

CAC was founded by leading members of the numismatic community who recognized the need for a higher level of grading.

 

With CAC, prices for the solid quality coins can be untethered from the lesser quality counterparts.

 

A CAC sticker means:

 

It has been verified as meeting our strict quality standards.

 

CAC is an active bidder on many CAC coins. In fact, CAC has purchased over $275 million of CAC verified coins.

 

Want confidence in the quality of a coin?

 

Look for the CAC sticker!"

[dimefreak]

There was a coin in an auction with a staple scratch and had a CAC... I pointed it out and the auction went on as if nothing ever happened... so all I hope is the fine folks on this forum don't rely solely on the CAC sticker. Please do your homework whether it be in hand inspection or whatever you chose.

 

How has this changed over the last 20 years (and more) really? It's not just CAC but all the TPGs and any dealers or sellers that tell you a coin is "such and such". Even you and I as we all have our biases etc etc.

 

jom

 

Doesn't have to be different... just feel its worth re-mentioning ... ya see there are some that don't realize this. Many buy from auctions without a set of eyes seeing it in hand for them. Just like many put alot of stock in what certain people in this thread say... If TDN name didn't hold so much weight id likely not even bother correcting him... but in fact there are people here that believe that .... anyhow... I will stick to my bag toned Morgans until all these greedy fools make the market collapse...

[dimefreak]

By the way Jom... I believe your in Cali... you can view this coin in person at any show that QRC is set up at... MS67*FB... I dumped it because of the scratch... later showed up with CAC... I feel horrible today for not making NGC enforce there guarantee but at the time I had no clue that was an option.

[EVillageProwler]

HT,

 

Your assertion, or question, is that CAC is not accurate enough.

 

What does "accurate enough" mean? Please provide hard metrics. Right now, there is simply too much human factor. But you are complaining that the human factor is too human -- but humanity can't possibly all agree on what is too human in this context because the measurement of this context is also human.

 

You're arguing for a solution for which none exists.

 

EVP

[Hard Times]

HT,

 

Your assertion, or question, is that CAC is not accurate enough.

 

What does "accurate enough" mean? Please provide hard metrics. Right now, there is simply too much human factor. But you are complaining that the human factor is too human -- but humanity can't possibly all agree on what is too human in this context because the measurement of this context is also human.

 

You're arguing for a solution for which none exists.

 

EVP

 

I agree with you except there is a solution, make decisions on coins independent of the green bean because they are just as subjective as TPG's. The bean is a marketing tool and nothing less, nothing more. Not what it is being sold as, but it is what it is. So this is why I wanted to point this out because many are under the impression that they are more accurate because of their marketing.

 

Best, HT

[dimefreak]

HT,

 

Your assertion, or question, is that CAC is not accurate enough.

 

What does "accurate enough" mean? Please provide hard metrics. Right now, there is simply too much human factor. But you are complaining that the human factor is too human -- but humanity can't possibly all agree on what is too human in this context because the measurement of this context is also human.

 

You're arguing for a solution for which none exists.

 

EVP

 

I agree with you except there is a solution, make decisions on coins independent of the green bean because they are just as subjective as TPG's. The bean is a marketing tool and nothing less, nothing more. Not what it is being sold as, but it is what it is. So this is why I wanted to point this out because many are under the impression that they are more accurate because of their marketing.

 

Best, HT

 

 

Well said! JA started NGC PCGS and CAC.. never met him and from what I have heard he has amazing knowledge in this field. But above all.... he is a business man. Furthermore some people posting in this thread benefit from CAC and CAC benefits from them... so they scratch each others back... once again its business. I'm not mad at them nor do I blame them. But I will call them on there BS any chance I get. Especially when they get on there soap box and condemn others (PNG) any chance they get!

[jom]

jom, confidence, which is as subjective as grading, but confidence is a marketing tool to sell coins. This is why it is a big deal. How can I be confident if one day a coin is green 63 and the next day it is green 64?

 

From their webiste:

 

"CAC-verified.

Because Confidence in a Coin's Quality is Priceless.

 

Whether you're a novice or advanced collector, you know that quality is what determines the value of a rare coin.

 

However, within any certified coin grade, not all coins are "solid" quality coins.

 

Now there's an easy way to identify coins that are solid for the grade - a CAC verification sticker.

 

CAC was founded by leading members of the numismatic community who recognized the need for a higher level of grading.

 

With CAC, prices for the solid quality coins can be untethered from the lesser quality counterparts.

 

A CAC sticker means:

 

It has been verified as meeting our strict quality standards.

 

CAC is an active bidder on many CAC coins. In fact, CAC has purchased over $275 million of CAC verified coins.

 

Want confidence in the quality of a coin?

 

Look for the CAC sticker!"

 

Well, again, I think trying to make precision grading and selling it as "accurate" is a potential house of cards. If people want to pay big premiums for CAC stickers that is their business.

 

I don't think it's all a big deal if we as collectors (or investors) take the time to learn to grade (and more importantly, IMO, valuate) coins ourselves.

 

Then again, I'm not so sure that is happening. I attended the PCGS 103 Grading seminar and I was shocked to learn there were only FOUR people in the class. I mean, c'mon...is that all? I'm wondering now if anyone cares to grade for themselves and just let the TPGs do the work for them. Maybe I'm off base with that but only FOUR...really?

 

jom

[Hard Times]

jom, confidence, which is as subjective as grading, but confidence is a marketing tool to sell coins. This is why it is a big deal. How can I be confident if one day a coin is green 63 and the next day it is green 64?

 

From their webiste:

 

"CAC-verified.

Because Confidence in a Coin's Quality is Priceless.

 

Whether you're a novice or advanced collector, you know that quality is what determines the value of a rare coin.

 

However, within any certified coin grade, not all coins are "solid" quality coins.

 

Now there's an easy way to identify coins that are solid for the grade - a CAC verification sticker.

 

CAC was founded by leading members of the numismatic community who recognized the need for a higher level of grading.

 

With CAC, prices for the solid quality coins can be untethered from the lesser quality counterparts.

 

A CAC sticker means:

 

It has been verified as meeting our strict quality standards.

 

CAC is an active bidder on many CAC coins. In fact, CAC has purchased over $275 million of CAC verified coins.

 

Want confidence in the quality of a coin?

 

Look for the CAC sticker!"

 

Well, again, I think trying to make precision grading and selling it as "accurate" is a potential house of cards. If people want to pay big premiums for CAC stickers that is their business.

 

I don't think it's all a big deal if we as collectors (or investors) take the time to learn to grade (and more importantly, IMO, valuate) coins ourselves.

 

Then again, I'm not so sure that is happening. I attended the PCGS 103 Grading seminar and I was shocked to learn there were only FOUR people in the class. I mean, c'mon...is that all? I'm wondering now if anyone cares to grade for themselves and just let the TPGs do the work for them. Maybe I'm off base with that but only FOUR...really?

 

jom

 

Yup, look at alot of coins, learn to grade and make your own decisions, fully agreed. If you are right jom, too many people appear to be relying on others to grade with stickers and numbers on holders. Hope that changes.

 

Best, HT

[JVC]

This is one of the longest threads in a while. It is good to read so many varied opinions.

[EVillageProwler]

HT,

 

Your assertion, or question, is that CAC is not accurate enough.

 

What does "accurate enough" mean? Please provide hard metrics. Right now, there is simply too much human factor. But you are complaining that the human factor is too human -- but humanity can't possibly all agree on what is too human in this context because the measurement of this context is also human.

 

You're arguing for a solution for which none exists.

 

EVP

 

I agree with you except there is a solution, make decisions on coins independent of the green bean because they are just as subjective as TPG's. The bean is a marketing tool and nothing less, nothing more. Not what it is being sold as, but it is what it is. So this is why I wanted to point this out because many are under the impression that they are more accurate because of their marketing.

 

Best, HT

 

Learning to make good decisions based solely on the coin is a good thing. That is undeniable. But in our imperfect world, human beings all learn at different times, at different rates, and at different levels of competence.

 

I believe that over a reasonable sample size, JA and his CAC team (his graders, not business partners) will vastly exceed my efforts in numismatic grading competence. IMHO, trusting their judgment over mine is wise. I encourage everyone to trust CAC's judgment on US coin grading over mine.

 

EVP

 

PS I think their business partners are more skilled at US coin grading than I am too, but that's a different issue.

[orifdoc]

Interesting thread. I too have looked at all this from the point of view of a scientist. What I've decided is that grading isn't all that scientific, and I'm OK with that. What does make me crazy is when someone goes on a rant about something that happened once or a handful of times. Coins don't have grades so there is no "correct" answer - just opinions. In a world where thousands of coins get graded every week there are bound to be some outliers. Focusing on these and not on the generally good judgement of the TPGs and CAC is a little short-sighted.

 

If you want 100% accuracy in a field that is hugely subjective, you're going to be disappointed from time to time.

 

 

Gentle friend, why I created this original post was to raise a discussion about the inconsistencies of CAC beaning. We have every right to discuss the shortcomings we see as well as the many positives that I personally like about CAC.

 

No one here is saying that grading is 100% accurate and it is obviously far from it. But when the graders grade the graders and then use this to drive the market for their distributors, the 4th party graders should be expected to be a little more accurate in their assessments. If they are not, then we should discuss it because this impacts alot of collectors and their wallets. If you think disagreeing with CAC grading is ranting, no worries, but I am here to discuss a serious issue in the collecting world and will do so.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "Gentle Friend".... written forum-speak leaves much to the imagination. I do try to be polite. As adults and fellow hobbyists we owe at least that to each other. There's been enough name-calling and childish behavior in this thread that it put off many of the people who tried to contribute.

 

I have no problem with you bringing up this topic. You have every right to feel that a standard has been violated. The financial implications of beans and grades are real, and shouldn't be ignored. Some, like me, just see it as part of the game and don't get too uptight about little variations. To me, a single grade up or down is well within the margin of error.

 

I had a dealer friend tell me of a certain coin that he submitted to CAC as an MS63 (worth about $2k). It was rejected. He resubmitted it to the same TPG and it upgraded to an MS64 (worth about $7k). It went back to New Jersey where it then stickered. Is that ideal? Obviously no. Did someone screw up big time? In my view, not really. Opinions change. Lighting changes. Personal biases change, sometimes very quickly depending on the last 200 coins you looked at. Grades are a one-time shot at estimating a coin's value - nothing more. If you crack out 100 coins and submit them a dozen times over a 5 year period you'll likely see all sorts of weird things both from the TPGs and the bean people. On average though, they do a pretty good job.

 

The value of the opinion of the bean people is that they're willing to buy any coin they sticker at a grade at a reasonable price for that grade. If they bean something ridiculous (it happens) they're generally willing to step up and eat it. If they bean it at an MS63, they'll pay 63 money for it. If they bean it the next week at 64, they'll pay even more.

 

Savvy folks make a really great living buying huge quantities of coins, cracking them, and resubmitting them en masse. Many, many green stickers have been tossed out with the rest of the plastic shrapnel. Obviously grades wander around enough to make this a profitable venture for those with a good eye. Speaking to a few wholesalers really opened my eyes about the sheer volume and fickleness of the market. What's the little guy to do? Learn the best you can. Buy the best you can, and don't get so leveraged or upset that a grade point here or there breaks you down.

 

T's'all I'm sayin'.

[Hard Times]

Interesting thread. I too have looked at all this from the point of view of a scientist. What I've decided is that grading isn't all that scientific, and I'm OK with that. What does make me crazy is when someone goes on a rant about something that happened once or a handful of times. Coins don't have grades so there is no "correct" answer - just opinions. In a world where thousands of coins get graded every week there are bound to be some outliers. Focusing on these and not on the generally good judgement of the TPGs and CAC is a little short-sighted.

 

If you want 100% accuracy in a field that is hugely subjective, you're going to be disappointed from time to time.

 

 

Gentle friend, why I created this original post was to raise a discussion about the inconsistencies of CAC beaning. We have every right to discuss the shortcomings we see as well as the many positives that I personally like about CAC.

 

No one here is saying that grading is 100% accurate and it is obviously far from it. But when the graders grade the graders and then use this to drive the market for their distributors, the 4th party graders should be expected to be a little more accurate in their assessments. If they are not, then we should discuss it because this impacts alot of collectors and their wallets. If you think disagreeing with CAC grading is ranting, no worries, but I am here to discuss a serious issue in the collecting world and will do so.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "Gentle Friend".... written forum-speak leaves much to the imagination. I do try to be polite. As adults and fellow hobbyists we owe at least that to each other. There's been enough name-calling and childish behavior in this thread that it put off many of the people who tried to contribute.

 

I have no problem with you bringing up this topic. You have every right to feel that a standard has been violated. The financial implications of beans and grades are real, and shouldn't be ignored. Some, like me, just see it as part of the game and don't get too uptight about little variations. To me, a single grade up or down is well within the margin of error.

 

I had a dealer friend tell me of a certain coin that he submitted to CAC as an MS63 (worth about $2k). It was rejected. He resubmitted it to the same TPG and it upgraded to an MS64 (worth about $7k). It went back to New Jersey where it then stickered. Is that ideal? Obviously no. Did someone screw up big time? In my view, not really. Opinions change. Lighting changes. Personal biases change, sometimes very quickly depending on the last 200 coins you looked at. Grades are a one-time shot at estimating a coin's value - nothing more. If you crack out 100 coins and submit them a dozen times over a 5 year period you'll likely see all sorts of weird things both from the TPGs and the bean people. On average though, they do a pretty good job.

 

The value of the opinion of the bean people is that they're willing to buy any coin they sticker at a grade at a reasonable price for that grade. If they bean something ridiculous (it happens) they're generally willing to step up and eat it. If they bean it at an MS63, they'll pay 63 money for it. If they bean it the next week at 64, they'll pay even more.

 

Savvy folks make a really great living buying huge quantities of coins, cracking them, and resubmitting them en masse. Many, many green stickers have been tossed out with the rest of the plastic shrapnel. Obviously grades wander around enough to make this a profitable venture for those with a good eye. Speaking to a few wholesalers really opened my eyes about the sheer volume and fickleness of the market. What's the little guy to do? Learn the best you can. Buy the best you can, and don't get so leveraged or upset that a grade point here or there breaks you down.

 

T's'all I'm sayin'.

 

I agree with your post here fully, but in the first post you suggested I was going on a rant. Instead I am trying to do is point out the inconsistencies of CAC. I believe this is an important topic to discuss given their impact to the market and all positive and negative opinions are welcome.

 

CAC is a group of dealers, they are using this as a marketing tool. Sure they know how to grade, sure they have PQ coins, even in 63 and 64 But it is not completely about grading, it is about marketing and dealers making money. And you know what, if they or their supporters are asked about the inconsistencies they can just conveniently say 'well gosh, grading is subjective after all', and have an easy way out. Perfect marketing tool! People should think about this and make their own judgements that is all I am saying.

 

Best, HT

[mommam17]

I've thought about CAC and made my own judgements.. Point out all the inconsistencies you want but CAC is highly consistent and that's a fact. They make a market for nice coins, which is good if you have them.

[brg5658]

I've thought about CAC and made my own judgements.. Point out all the inconsistencies you want but CAC is highly consistent and that's a fact. They make a market for nice coins, which is good if you have them.

 

Short of having data to support this claim, you are just expressing your opinion, not fact. I know the difference is hard for some people to recognize. I'm not being snarky here, I'm being serious.

 

[mommam17]

Just talk to some people that know coins, if you know any.

I'm being serious.

[Hard Times]

Mommam, When you say the 'people that know coins', are you talking about the dealers who are making the market for CAC or are you talking about the people who have spent their lives studying coins who are not part of the CAC distributor group? I know two highly regarded folks in the latter category who have told me that their opinions on what makes a PQ coin can strongly differ from what CAC thinks. Each of these have been dealers for most of their careers and are well known.

 

So it seems the people that know coins have varying opinions on what makes a PQ coin.

 

Best, HT

[mommam17]

Who are they? Is it a secret? Tell me someone that knows coins that says CAC is inconsistent.

[Nutmeg Coin]

The question is not whether CAC is consistant. They can be extremely fussy and they are. In my experience there are many coins that are not sub-"B" for grade that they will not "approve". There are plenty of good for grade coins that get the boot from their perspective. There are many coins that should not be submitted to them because the cost of submission plus shipping and lost time do not warrant the upside. If you have nice coins with eye appeal about $2500 in value, it is probably worth the submission. But realize that their offers are not usually over GS, so it is more of a liquidity advantage, that in the Coinplex network there are active bids for most CAC coins.

 

I was speaking with someone with RCNH recently and they average 87% plus approval with thousands beaned, and over 200 gold stickers; Warren Mills is sharp as anyone in the business. They may be the leading dealer in terms of approval rates.

[Hard Times]

I don't repeat folks opinions, they should do it themselves. I can only say what they told me and respect their right to privacy. But it is always amazing when people say things like 'Just talk to some people that know coins, if you know any, I'm being serious'. As if all people that 'know coins' will say the same about CAC. No chance that is going to happen. You don't have to go any further than this thread, many have noted their inconsistencies, and most of the folks here know coins, and have different opinions, which is okay, just look at the first post green at 63, green at 64. It is plain as night and day that they are inconsistent and subjective, just like any TPG.

 

Best, HT

[Hard Times]

The question is not whether CAC is consistant. They can be extremely fussy and they are. In my experience there are many coins that are not sub-"B" for grade that they will not "approve". There are plenty of good for grade coins that get the boot from their perspective. There are many coins that should not be submitted to them because the cost of submission plus shipping and lost time do not warrant the upside. If you have nice coins with eye appeal about $2500 in value, it is probably worth the submission. But realize that their offers are not usually over GS, so it is more of a liquidity advantage, that in the Coinplex network there are active bids for most CAC coins.

 

I was speaking with something with RCNH recently and they average 87% plus approval with thousands beaned, and over 200 gold stickers; Warren Mills is sharp as anyone in the business. They may be the leading dealer in terms of approval rates.

 

Interesting insights, thanks for posting.

 

Best, HT

[mommam17]

Never said ALL people that know coins. Good try at saying CAC is inconsistent by taking a few examples out of thousands doesn't make it, even though you were told time and time again.

[MarkFeld]

The question is not whether CAC is consistant. They can be extremely fussy and they are. In my experience there are many coins that are not sub-"B" for grade that they will not "approve". There are plenty of good for grade coins that get the boot from their perspective. There are many coins that should not be submitted to them because the cost of submission plus shipping and lost time do not warrant the upside. If you have nice coins with eye appeal about $2500 in value, it is probably worth the submission. But realize that their offers are not usually over GS, so it is more of a liquidity advantage, that in the Coinplex network there are active bids for most CAC coins.

 

I was speaking with something with RCNH recently and they average 87% plus approval with thousands beaned, and over 200 gold stickers; Warren Mills is sharp as anyone in the business. They may be the leading dealer in terms of approval rates.

 

You said "But realize that their offers are not usually over GS, so it is more of a liquidity advantage, .."

 

I think that in many instances, GS bid is based on/the result of CAC bids. So in essence, you said that "But realize that their offers are not usually over their own offers...".

 

Without CAC bids, GS prices would possibly/probably be lower than they are. Thus CAC bids are not just a "liquidity advantage".

[jom]

A couple of things here:

 

To Mark: What is GS? I can't figure you the acronym on that one.

 

On CAC: CAC can do whatever it wants in terms of buying but I use them as another opinion. If you spend a lot on coins that's a pretty good idea. Especially when JA is nice enough to actually TELL you in person (or in my case over the phone) why they passed on a coin. Very nice and helpful, IMO. Do I disagree with him at times? Sure (like my 20P SLQ which I still think is an A or B MS65) but so what?

 

I'm not sure that CAC is making themselves out more than they are or is it the market that might be over-reacting to the stickers. I think it's mostly the latter....

 

To Nutmeg and Hard Times: Come on guys! Get different avatars please!

 

jom