• 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.

First CAC & PQ coins I have seen...

Started by TonerGuy,

24 posts in this topic

jom

jom

Posted
Posted
thumbsdownsmiley_zps015feb3b.png

 

lol

 

Hey...how about this one that designates the feelings of a seller whose coin was under-graded by a TPG?

 

cry2_zpsf971e19c.gif

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mumu

mumu

Posted
Posted

This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonerGuy

TonerGuy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I would like to see a thumbs up or thumbs down sticker :)

 

Someone (if it hasnt happened already) will develop a sticker for toned coins... then you will have 3 - CAC, PQ and NT ... lol...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnkurJ

AnkurJ

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonerGuy

TonerGuy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Someone has started placing stickers on toned coins. Brandon Kelley offers three levels of stickers for toners.

 

I still cant find the info page on that and I havent seen 1 coin with his sticker. I believe you... I just dont think its gained widespread acceptance. Is anyone here submitting coins to him ? Can anyone submit coins to him ? What are his fees ?

 

And is he has respected as JA is in regards to toning ? Nothing against Mr. Kelly but a sticker from him on a toned Peace $ wouldnt mean much to me - on a Morgan - yes because Ive see him specialize in toned Morgans. Does he specialize in other series ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mumu

mumu

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

The plus is not a standalone system. Its part of the entire package. You get a grade, authentication, check for foreign substances and color, entry into a database for verification which includes a picture, a plastic slab to protect your coin, a guarantee. I am also guaranteed submission rights.

 

I have said my probem with CAC has been how little you get for the money. They should start with a database that includes education over what was determined about your coin. Right now its like getting a sticker on your quiz but not telling you which answers you got right and wrong. OOOH A STICKER!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brg5658

brg5658

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

Of course, in the case of many, you can't submit to CAC until the coin's already in their precious PCGS brand plastic. So, I'm not completely understanding your cost analysis. lol

 

If they (CAC and a "+" coin) are basically the same in your mind, why not just collect all "+" coins and save on the CAC expense? By the way, that's a rhetorical question. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted

Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

It should cost more to send coins to PCGS and NGC than it does CAC. The grading companies have more work, sometimes a lot more work, to do. They must decide if the item is genuine, and they must assign a grade without an assist from anyone.

 

All CAC does is decide if they don't like the coin with the grade assigned (no sticker), like the coin and graded (green sticker) or think the coin is under graded (gold sticker). That is a lot less responsibility.

 

As for the cost angle, it goes back how much you are willing to spend to get something certified. You could get a sow's ear certified if you wanted to, but once it's in the plastic it's still a sow's ear. The difference is you have sunk a sum of money into it that you will probably never recover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mumu

mumu

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

Of course, in the case of many, you can't submit to CAC until the coin's already in their precious PCGS brand plastic. So, I'm not completely understanding your cost analysis. lol

 

If they (CAC and a "+" coin) are basically the same in your mind, why not just collect all "+" coins and save on the CAC expense? By the way, that's a rhetorical question. ;)

 

I think you are addressing me though the quote is of Ankur's post? The cost analysis was taking into account that those fees are being realized in the premiums paid for CAC'd coins when the submitter re-sells. They are built into the CAC premium. So while my example was specifically in the submission to CAC phase, it was implied that it was the next buyer who was going to pay for it via the CAC premium. So let me re-do the example.

 

Purchase of CAC'd coin in 64 has premium that approaches that of non-cac'd 64+ coin. Why not buy the 64+ coin instead of the Cac?

 

With the Cac'd purchase you are getting either an A coin or a B coin with a ratio of 2to1 in favor of B coins (unless you have acces to JA's analysis of the coin before purchase). With a + coin you are getting what should be an A coin 100% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brg5658

brg5658

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

Of course, in the case of many, you can't submit to CAC until the coin's already in their precious PCGS brand plastic. So, I'm not completely understanding your cost analysis. lol

 

If they (CAC and a "+" coin) are basically the same in your mind, why not just collect all "+" coins and save on the CAC expense? By the way, that's a rhetorical question. ;)

 

I think you are addressing me though the quote is of Ankur's post? The cost analysis was taking into account that those fees are being realized in the premiums paid for CAC'd coins when the submitter re-sells. They are built into the CAC premium. So while my example was specifically in the submission to CAC phase, it was implied that it was the next buyer who was going to pay for it via the CAC premium. So let me re-do the example.

 

Purchase of CAC'd coin in 64 has premium that approaches that of non-cac'd 64+ coin. Why not buy the 64+ coin instead of the Cac?

 

With the Cac'd purchase you are getting either an A coin or a B coin with a ratio of 2to1 in favor of B coins (unless you have acces to JA's analysis of the coin before purchase). With a + coin you are getting what should be an A coin 100% of the time.

 

Nope, my quote was to address Ankur's post. Not yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mumu

mumu

Posted
Posted
This coin is an example of what I stated in the other thread. 300$ coin, 25$ in sticker, 25 more in shipping and insurance, + an unquantifiable risk of mail loss.

Youre half way to buying a 64+ instead of buying the 64. At least the + is free and part of grading and in most cases means an A coin rather than a possibly B coin.

 

Is that a PQ gold sticker? Does that mean PQ thinks its a 65?

 

I am trying to figure out why you are concerned about the over valuing of coins by having them stickered, yet the plus system doesn't seem to bother you. Do you feel its any different? Frankly, I dont, except for the fact that it costs substantially more to submit to PCGS than to CAC.

 

Of course, in the case of many, you can't submit to CAC until the coin's already in their precious PCGS brand plastic. So, I'm not completely understanding your cost analysis. lol

 

If they (CAC and a "+" coin) are basically the same in your mind, why not just collect all "+" coins and save on the CAC expense? By the way, that's a rhetorical question. ;)

 

I think you are addressing me though the quote is of Ankur's post? The cost analysis was taking into account that those fees are being realized in the premiums paid for CAC'd coins when the submitter re-sells. They are built into the CAC premium. So while my example was specifically in the submission to CAC phase, it was implied that it was the next buyer who was going to pay for it via the CAC premium. So let me re-do the example.

 

Purchase of CAC'd coin in 64 has premium that approaches that of non-cac'd 64+ coin. Why not buy the 64+ coin instead of the Cac?

 

With the Cac'd purchase you are getting either an A coin or a B coin with a ratio of 2to1 in favor of B coins (unless you have acces to JA's analysis of the coin before purchase). With a + coin you are getting what should be an A coin 100% of the time.

 

Nope, my quote was to address Ankur's post. Not yours.

 

Oh, OK. I thought you meant me since I was an embedded quote and I did give a little cost analysis. I suppose you were referring to some cost analysis Ankur gave in anther post. In any case I think answering you may have further answered Ankurs question to me so not a total waste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing