What Mark Salzberg said in 2011 about CAC

[MarkFeld]

The CAC sticker means just that the coin will trade sight unseen, with some exceptions in the CAC "Coinplex" network. So JA is looking for specific criteria for what will pass muster with his network.

 

It does not mean that non-CAC coins are inferior, just that they will not trade sight unseen in his network. What are causes of rejection by CAC? Coins that have "issues" that CAC *thinks* will be a problem within the network.

 

Sorry, but that sounds like a gross and inaccurate generalization.There is a great deal more to consider (and at stake) than just the sight-unseen trading on a network.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The CAC sticker means just that the coin will trade sight unseen, with some exceptions in the CAC "Coinplex" network. So JA is looking for specific criteria for what will pass muster with his network.

 

It does not mean that non-CAC coins are inferior, just that they will not trade sight unseen in his network. What are causes of rejection by CAC? Coins that have "issues" that CAC *thinks* will be a problem within the network.

 

Sorry, but that sounds like a gross and inaccurate generalization.There is a great deal more to consider (and at stake) than just the sight-unseen trading on a network.

 

...and that is why coin hypotheticals exist, to air out the inaccuracies/generalizations, but (blah, blah) I'll bet you knew that.

[GoldFinger1969]

Can I Suggest That If You Use The Quote Function That You Delete All The Extraneous Back-and-Forth ?

It makes the thread easier to read if only the critical part of someone's post is re-quoted....otherwise, it adds a lot to the length of the Replys and the Thread.....and it's tough to follow which of the quotes/posters/replys you want others to focus on. (thumbs u

 

As for the CAC core argument here: I repeat that you guys seem to be in general agreement on The Big Picture and you are all splitting-hairs on the extra-marketability afforded the various CAC stickers.

 

To me, it's no different than having a signed affadavit or a few seconds of video of someone who's a current grader or an ex-grader (like Mark) or someone respected in the industry saying that your coin is top-notch for the grade and/or they see it as 1-grade higher.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Can I Suggest That If You Use The Quote Function That You Delete All The Extraneous Back-and-Forth ?

It makes the thread easier to read if only the critical part of someone's post is re-quoted....otherwise, it adds a lot to the length of the Replys and the Thread.....and it's tough to follow which of the quotes/posters/replys you want others to focus on. (thumbs u

 

As for the CAC core argument here: I repeat that you guys seem to be in general agreement on The Big Picture and you are all splitting-hairs on the extra-marketability afforded the various CAC stickers.

 

To me, it's no different than having a signed affadavit or a few seconds of video of someone who's a current grader or an ex-grader (like Mark) or someone respected in the industry saying that your coin is top-notch for the grade and/or they see it as 1-grade higher.

 

Can I respectfully suggest you not use large red letters that tend to add an air of superiority and possibly anger to the reader? Can I also respectfully suggest that if your suggestion is general in nature and directed to all, and not the Post prior, that you use the function to convey same? Sometimes, if a person doen't understand the reply, it simply requires focusing, or asking, as opposed to deciding a Post is extraneous.

 

I would also suggest there is not general agreement among those posting. I also think the subject is very different from the legal document scenario you are presenting.

 

May I suggest a brief review of the hypotehticals, and formulating replies to same?

It may assist in a logic posit that has merit.

[GoldFinger1969]

Can I respectfully suggest you not use large red letters that tend to add an air of superiority and possibly anger to the reader? Can I also respectfully suggest that if your suggestion is general in nature and directed to all, and not the Post prior, that you use the function to convey same? Sometimes, if a person doen't understand the reply, it simply requires focusing, or asking, as opposed to deciding a Post is extraneous.

If you go back in this thread, there are numerous posts which are 99% a re-hash of an earlier post most of which isn't germane to the new one.

My type size and color are not indicative of anger, they're simply reflecting my hope to keep this thread relevant. Years of experience tells me that the flow is interrupted with larger-and-larger quote posts.

 

I would also suggest there is not general agreement among those posting. I also think the subject is very different from the legal document scenario you are presenting.

I disagree. Much more posting/reading is being done re-hashing older posts/quotes than presenting new information.

 

As I indicated, we seem to be splitting hairs. CAC stickers matter because they do. Doesn't mean it should, doesn't mean it's always worthy of such-and-such a premium. But it's a plus-factor, and we can debate how much until the cows come home.

 

I don't pretend to know as much about this as you guys but I do understand pricing mechanisms very well and CAC is simply another price-discovery mechanism.

 

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

ok.

[jom]

Can I respectfully suggest you not use large red letters that tend to add an air of superiority and possibly anger to the reader?

 

It's a form of mind control.

 

jom

[GoldFinger1969]

It's a form of mind control. :insane:jom

Trust me, I have no control. I don't even have a mind.

[jom]

It's a form of mind control. :insane:jom

Trust me, I have no control. I don't even have a mind.

 

I agree

 

 

jom

[yonico]

Can I Suggest That If You Use The Quote Function That You Delete All The Extraneous Back-and-Forth ?

It makes the thread easier to read if only the critical part of someone's post is re-quoted....otherwise, it adds a lot to the length of the Replys and the Thread.....and it's tough to follow which of the quotes/posters/replys you want others to focus on. (thumbs u

 

As for the CAC core argument here: I repeat that you guys seem to be in general agreement on The Big Picture and you are all splitting-hairs on the extra-marketability afforded the various CAC stickers.

 

To me, it's no different than having a signed affadavit or a few seconds of video of someone who's a current grader or an ex-grader (like Mark) or someone respected in the industry saying that your coin is top-notch for the grade and/or they see it as 1-grade higher.

 

Can I respectfully suggest you not use large red letters that tend to add an air of superiority and possibly anger to the reader? Can I also respectfully suggest that if your suggestion is general in nature and directed to all, and not the Post prior, that you use the function to convey same? Sometimes, if a person doen't understand the reply, it simply requires focusing, or asking, as opposed to deciding a Post is extraneous.

 

I would also suggest there is not general agreement among those posting. I also think the subject is very different from the legal document scenario you are presenting.

 

May I suggest a brief review of the hypotehticals, and formulating replies to same?

It may assist in a logic posit that has merit.

 

I laughed way too hard at this comment.. SMH

[johnny9434]

Can I respectfully suggest you not use large red letters that tend to add an air of superiority and possibly anger to the reader?

 

It's a form of mind control.

 

jom

mind control, who would have thunk.

[O mint bug]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

 

O mint bug

[MarkFeld]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

 

O mint bug

 

 

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

That is dead wrong. While that would obviously be a huge conflict of interest, JA does not place stickers on his own coins, period.

[bochiman]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

 

O mint bug

 

 

Nope. JA doesn't do that. BS does it with his PQ stickers though

 

[O mint bug]

I may have misinterpreted a post . if he does not here is a formal apology. Still wonder about the value of CAC stickers as I know they bring more but how much on average, Is JA the individual that CACs coins?

[GoldFinger1969]

BS does it with his PQ stickers though

 

BS and PQ stand for......?

[GoldFinger1969]

I may have misinterpreted a post . if he does not here is a formal apology. Still wonder about the value of CAC stickers as I know they bring more but how much on average, Is JA the individual that CACs coins?

 

I'll just tell you that from what I have seen with the Saint Gaudens Double Eagles, all else equal, a CAC sticker is going to add anywhere from 10-30% (or more !!) to the price of the coin.

 

If it's CAC on an MS-63 or MS-64 for a common, it won't jump the price too much. Get to MS-65 or MS-66 where you have condition scarcity, and it jumps alot.

 

Same thing applies to coins in lower grade condition where there are far fewer coins.

 

For the MS-65's that I focus on, I would say CAC adds at least $500-$750 to the cost (about 25-30%).

[Walkerfan]

BS does it with his PQ stickers though

 

BS and PQ stand for......?

 

BS=Barry Stuppler

 

PQ=Premium Quality.

[Nutmeg Coin]

The CAC sticker means just that the coin will trade sight unseen, with some exceptions in the CAC "Coinplex" network. So JA is looking for specific criteria for what will pass muster with his network.

 

It does not mean that non-CAC coins are inferior, just that they will not trade sight unseen in his network. What are causes of rejection by CAC? Coins that have "issues" that CAC *thinks* will be a problem within the network.

 

Sorry, but that sounds like a gross and inaccurate generalization.There is a great deal more to consider (and at stake) than just the sight-unseen trading on a network.

 

While there are other considerations, CAC does have active bids on coins they consider CAC-worthy.

 

But since they reject more than half of the coins submitted to them, are they then saying that those are all "C" coins?

 

Look at their FAQ: "5. I noticed that CAC uses the term “premium quality” to describe coins that receive a CAC sticker. How does CAC define premium quality?

 

"For many years, coin dealers and advanced collectors have used the letters A, B, and C among themselves to further describe coins. C indicates low-end for the grade, B indicates solid for the grade, and A indicates high-end. CAC will only award stickers to coins in the A or B category. C coins, although accurately graded, will be returned without a CAC sticker".

http://www.caccoin.com/faqs/

 

So they appear to be claiming that the coins that do not pass muster are "C" coins. And they reject well over half, closer to 70%! Correct me if I'm wrong. So they are saying that over 70% of the coins they review (and there must be many other coins with obvious slight problems the dealers don't submit) are "C" coins!!

 

"6. Why can’t I use the CAC Verification Search to look up a PCGS or NGC graded coin that has no CAC sticker to find out if it has already been reviewed by CAC?

 

"Many coins that CAC has reviewed, but did not sticker, have been accurately graded by PCGS or NGC. However, CAC stickers only coins that are solid for the grade, often referred to as B quality coins, and those that are considered high-end for the grade, which are often called A quality coins. Those that are accurately graded by PCGS or NGC, but are considered low-end for the grade and often referred to as C quality coins, are not stickered by CAC.

 

"Furthermore, CAC wishes to protect the interest of an owner of a coin that has been reviewed by CAC but did not receive a sticker. Therefore, CAC does not want to compromise the value of such a coin by disclosing a negative review by CAC."

 

I remember when their FAQ had the comment, if I remember correctly that coins that are "C" are worth "Bluesheet" prices. Bluesheet also lists some of the CAC offers for type coins as well as popularly traded coins. Clearly GS has benefited by strong active bids by CAC. But GS tends to be higher or lower than actual market on many issues, especially those issues that trade infrequently or where they do not get enough transaction records to properly adjust pricing.

 

I and many others simply disagree with the characterization or stigmatization of coins that do not pass their review, no one should have that much power and diversity is a good thing as long as standards are upheld in reasonable ways. It's the nitpicking, almost fanatical fault-finding that is really unhealthy for numismatics, balance between the extremes should be the aim. Think of the larger world and how they would regard such fanaticism? I have seen it in many other fields. As Voltaire said: "Dans ses écrits, un sage Italien. Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." He never spoke a truer word.

[Hard Times]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

 

O mint bug

 

 

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

That is dead wrong. While that would obviously be a huge conflict of interest, JA does not place stickers on his own coins, period.

 

Not sure how you can say this is dead wrong - JA is a wholesaler, he sells coins to dealers that have his sticker, he has to own the coins to sell them, so they are HIS coins. O mint is correct this is a huge conflict of interest from the perspective of publicly traded securities, but what JA is doing is making a market for the coins he likes. Because of the high respect in the numismatic community for JA, many people agree with JA on what he likes for coins. Nothing is hidden in this marketing strategy and you are buying his opinion so I don't think it is really a conflict on interest so long as the buyer understands what the bean stands for.

 

Best, HT

[MarkFeld]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

 

O mint bug

 

 

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

That is dead wrong. While that would obviously be a huge conflict of interest, JA does not place stickers on his own coins, period.

 

Not sure how you can say this is dead wrong - JA is a wholesaler, he sells coins to dealers that have his sticker, he has to own the coins to sell them, so they are HIS coins. O mint is correct this is a huge conflict of interest from the perspective of publicly traded securities, but what JA is doing is making a market for the coins he likes. Because of the high respect in the numismatic community for JA, many people agree with JA on what he likes for coins. Nothing is hidden in this marketing strategy and you are buying his opinion so I don't think it is really a conflict on interest so long as the buyer understands what the bean stands for.

 

Best, HT

 

JA does not buy non-stickered coins and then place stickers on them. I believe that was the impression the poster to whom I replied, was under. If not, I apologize for my misunderstanding.

[Kurtdog]

If I am reading your comment about JA he is placing CAC stickers on ones he is selling and this should be the definition of a conflict of interest. If this very do with publicly traded securities it would very close if not market manipulation on the coins he sells and CACs. The sticker may help but if this is the case and people catch on to this activity a CAC sticker is something to avoid if a premium is ask for it. The slabbed coins by NGC and PCGS are what provide a meaningful grade in my opinion not a third party grader. A AU 53 is a AU 53 but I admit eye appeal effects the price as does how well the coin fits into the AU 53 class. I just posted some ?s about both graders and what a CAC sticker means and what value it may add to a coin. Your post answered most of my CAC ?.

 

O mint bug

Welcome to the forum.

 

That is dead wrong. While that would obviously be a huge conflict of interest, JA does not place stickers on his own coins, period.

Not sure how you can say this is dead wrong - JA is a wholesaler, he sells coins to dealers that have his sticker, he has to own the coins to sell them, so they are HIS coins. O mint is correct this is a huge conflict of interest from the perspective of publicly traded securities, but what JA is doing is making a market for the coins he likes. Because of the high respect in the numismatic community for JA, many people agree with JA on what he likes for coins. Nothing is hidden in this marketing strategy and you are buying his opinion so I don't think it is really a conflict on interest so long as the buyer understands what the bean stands for.

 

Best, HT

JA does not buy non-stickered coins and then place stickers on them. I believe that was the impression the poster to whom I replied, was under. If not, I apologize for my misunderstanding.

I used to think a green sticker means CAC thinks the market grade is solid, which would mean a failure to sticker means CAC thinks the market grade isn't solid. By "solid," "A" or "B" quality, as opposed to average ("C") or lower quality. Is that about right? A failure to sticker doesn't mean a bad market grade, just a market grade that isn't "solid" for the market grade.

[GoldFinger1969]

What is this "A" "B" and "C" stuff ? This is just an unwritten subjective grade of the grade, right ?

[Hard Times]

The idea behind A, B, and C has some subjectivity in it as we have discussed to the ends of the Earth. Some are obvious, some are not. What you get with CAC is what JA believes to be A-B vs. C at the time he views the coin, at least I think that is what is meant with the bean.

 

Best, HT

[Catbert]

So they appear to be claiming that the coins that do not pass muster are "C" coins. And they reject well over half, closer to 70%! Correct me if I'm wrong. So they are saying that over 70% of the coins they review (and there must be many other coins with obvious slight problems the dealers don't submit) are "C" coins!!

 

JA has recently stated that their sticker rate is about 40% of what is submitted.

 

Separately, he also stated that the average value of a coin stickered is around $5,000.

[mkman123]

Lets remember that JA/CACs view of a A/B/C coin changes........look at the other thread in which a coin that was declined a bean later got it in another holder at the same grade.

[MJ]

Lets remember that JA/CACs view of a A/B/C coin changes........look at the other thread in which a coin that was declined a bean later got it in another holder at the same grade.

 

No. His opinion on that coin changed. It happens . People change their minds. Some folks can't happen to wrap their heads around that. It's not a weakness, it's a strength.

 

Mark

[Kurtdog]

Lets remember that JA/CACs view of a A/B/C coin changes........look at the other thread in which a coin that was declined a bean later got it in another holder at the same grade.

No. His opinion on that coin changed. It happens. People change their minds. Some folks can't happen to wrap their heads around that. It's not a weakness, it's a strength.

 

Mark

Give him a medal for his strength but it means to the market he's unreliable.

[jom]

Lets remember that JA/CACs view of a A/B/C coin changes........look at the other thread in which a coin that was declined a bean later got it in another holder at the same grade.

No. His opinion on that coin changed. It happens. People change their minds. Some folks can't happen to wrap their heads around that. It's not a weakness, it's a strength.

 

Mark

Give him a medal for his strength but it means to the market he's unreliable.

 

Evidently not since CAC coins often go for a premium.

 

I'm not so certain it's a "strength" if it begins to happen a lot. Much like the TPGs themselves....

 

jom

[MJ]

Lets remember that JA/CACs view of a A/B/C coin changes........look at the other thread in which a coin that was declined a bean later got it in another holder at the same grade.

No. His opinion on that coin changed. It happens. People change their minds. Some folks can't happen to wrap their heads around that. It's not a weakness, it's a strength.

 

Mark

Give him a medal for his strength but it means to the market he's unreliable.

 

Hardly. Laughable. It just really just means means your tunnel vision remains intact. Baby, bath water spin doctor. There maybe kool aid drinkers across the street but this place has an inordinate amount of cynical thinkers with chips on their shoulders. A dangerous blinding combination.

 

Mark