For those of you who love CAC...

[coinman_23885]

You see it time and time again ATS. "Were the Pogue coins reviewed by CAC? Do you ask a dealer if a coin has had a CAC review when you inquire about buying an item? Do you think this coin will get CAC approval."

 

Gee, would any of these guys care to think for themselves now and then? Is that too much to ask?

 

Here's an example: http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&threadid=965044&enterthread=y

 

I stopped asking. Instead I offer to purchase coins if the dealer is willing to submit and the coin is accepted by CAC.

 

If someone has CAC stickers on lesser coins they are selling, I automatically assume the others failed. I might be wrong sometimes but it has served me well. Besides, how do you know they are telling you the truth? There is no way to verify it for the common man.

 

Do you ask about CAC submission before purchasing?

 

I equate this with asking a dealer if a raw coin he is selling has been sent to PCGS.

 

I thought CAC threads were taboo ATS. When did that change?

[mommam17]

Anybody that has gotten back millions of dollars for swindled seniors has given back to the hobby in a big way.....

[jom]

You see it time and time again ATS. "Were the Pogue coins reviewed by CAC? Do you ask a dealer if a coin has had a CAC review when you inquire about buying an item? Do you think this coin will get CAC approval."

 

Gee, would any of these guys care to think for themselves now and then? Is that too much to ask?

 

Here's an example: http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&threadid=965044&enterthread=y

 

I stopped asking. Instead I offer to purchase coins if the dealer is willing to submit and the coin is accepted by CAC.

 

If someone has CAC stickers on lesser coins they are selling, I automatically assume the others failed. I might be wrong sometimes but it has served me well. Besides, how do you know they are telling you the truth? There is no way to verify it for the common man.

 

Do you ask about CAC submission before purchasing?

 

I equate this with asking a dealer if a raw coin he is selling has been sent to PCGS.

 

All of those questions, IMO, are legit and there is nothing wrong with asking. Bill states that this leads to collectors not thinking for themselves. That certain COULD be the case but in my mind it is best to get as much info about a purchase as possible. Especially if you are spending a lot of hard-earned money for a hunk of metal.

 

I do ask the seller if the coin has been through CAC...especially if I'm buying online. I find the CAC sticker of great help with that.

 

However, I do not make the final decision without seeing the coin first. I've kept coins without the sticker (and even after a subsequent failed trip to CAC) and I've sent coins back that did have a sticker...a number of times in fact.

 

In my mind thinking for myself involves gathering ALL relevant data and using it all to make a decision.

 

jom

[jom]

I thought CAC threads were taboo ATS. When did that change?

 

It got really boring over there when all of the threads were about how great David Hall is.

 

 

jom

 

PS: Sorry...I couldn't help it. If Margulies is reading this I'm sure he'd appreciate it.

[Hard Times]

Given that narrow range, their batting average should higher than it is..

 

What's their batting average?

 

mark

 

That is a good question and I know you asked Bill but I will give my dimes worth. I think it is 80-90%, which is not too bad as long as one does not expect perfection which I now know not to. MJ what do you think their BA is?

 

Best, HT

 

What do you mean by "batting average"? How would one go about determining their "batting average"? And who would do it?

 

I don't know. Bill made the spurious statement that their batting average should be higher knowing there was no way to either refute or confirm. I was just asking what he thought it was.

 

To answer HT's question I think it's more in the 98% range from my POV. Honestly for all that bashing CAC takes on this board I've only seen a few instances were I thought they may of missed one. They were indeed outliers. I've rifled through hundreds of boxes of auction coins and I think 98% would be a fair number. Of course I have no way of knowing what he doesn't sticker except for the sour grape threads I read from time to time.

 

Mark, what percentage of coins that pass through John's hands do you think he gets right?

 

mark

 

Edited for a typo

 

 

This is what I mean by each person is going to have their own opinion on CAC's BA which is to be expected. What I don't agree with is they will bean coins simply because they are original as one example. They can be outright fugly, but they will bean it. This is especially true for worn silver seated and bust coins (my primary US coin collecting interest). And then, many times they don't award eye appeal. I can can show you two coins that I cannot tell the difference in after staring at them for a good hour, same grade, same type, same surfaces, same eye appeal, one beaned the other did not. I have shown these as a pair to informed numismatists and they are mystified as well. So that is where my 80-90% comes from. I simply don't agree all of the time with the standards they are applying, and the standards will be inconsistent at some level as to be expected. That is okay though, everyone has a right to apply whatever standards they want and grading is subjective and I still like to get CAC's opinion on coins I buy within their purview.

 

I know alot of others I have talked to, that would be considered highly informed numismatists who agree with my opinion on originality and eye appeal with respect to CAC in some cases. So no doubt CAC gets it right very often for the standards they apply, but one has to have their own standards IMHO and if they gel with CAC great, if they don't, that is okay too.

 

Best, HT

[Hard Times]

 

All of those questions, IMO, are legit and there is nothing wrong with asking. Bill states that this leads to collectors not thinking for themselves. That certain COULD be the case but in my mind it is best to get as much info about a purchase as possible. Especially if you are spending a lot of hard-earned money for a hunk of metal.

 

I do ask the seller if the coin has been through CAC...especially if I'm buying online. I find the CAC sticker of great help with that.

 

However, I do not make the final decision without seeing the coin first. I've kept coins without the sticker (and even after a subsequent failed trip to CAC) and I've sent coins back that did have a sticker...a number of times in fact.

 

In my mind thinking for myself involves gathering ALL relevant data and using it all to make a decision.

 

jom

 

Exactly

[coinman_23885]

Anybody that has gotten back millions of dollars for swindled seniors has given back to the hobby in a big way.....

 

Again, there is no doubt that JA is a great man, and I do think CAC has done a lot of good. Unfortunately, collector behavior is creating unintended consequences in the market. I don't blame CAC for it, but I cannot pretend that there have not been consequences. Even if the difference in quality is minimal, all non CAC coins are treated as problem coins by a sizeable cohort of collectors.

[coinman_23885]

All of those questions, IMO, are legit and there is nothing wrong with asking. Bill states that this leads to collectors not thinking for themselves. That certain COULD be the case but in my mind it is best to get as much info about a purchase as possible. Especially if you are spending a lot of hard-earned money for a hunk of metal.

 

I do ask the seller if the coin has been through CAC...especially if I'm buying online. I find the CAC sticker of great help with that.

 

However, I do not make the final decision without seeing the coin first. I've kept coins without the sticker (and even after a subsequent failed trip to CAC) and I've sent coins back that did have a sticker...a number of times in fact.

 

In my mind thinking for myself involves gathering ALL relevant data and using it all to make a decision.

 

jom

 

Fair enough.

[MJ]

Given that narrow range, their batting average should higher than it is..

 

What's their batting average?

 

mark

 

That is a good question and I know you asked Bill but I will give my dimes worth. I think it is 80-90%, which is not too bad as long as one does not expect perfection which I now know not to. MJ what do you think their BA is?

 

Best, HT

 

What do you mean by "batting average"? How would one go about determining their "batting average"? And who would do it?

 

I don't know. Bill made the spurious statement that their batting average should be higher knowing there was no way to either refute or confirm. I was just asking what he thought it was.

 

To answer HT's question I think it's more in the 98% range from my POV. Honestly for all that bashing CAC takes on this board I've only seen a few instances were I thought they may of missed one. They were indeed outliers. I've rifled through hundreds of boxes of auction coins and I think 98% would be a fair number. Of course I have no way of knowing what he doesn't sticker except for the sour grape threads I read from time to time.

 

Mark, what percentage of coins that pass through John's hands do you think he gets right?

 

mark

 

Edited for a typo

 

 

This is what I mean by each person is going to have their own opinion on CAC's BA which is to be expected. What I don't agree with is they will bean coins simply because they are original as one example. They can be outright fugly, but they will bean it. This is especially true for worn silver seated and bust coins (my primary US coin collecting interest). And then, many times they don't award eye appeal. I can can show you two coins that I cannot tell the difference in after staring at them for a good hour, same grade, same type, same surfaces, same eye appeal, one beaned the other did not. I have shown these as a pair to informed numismatists and they are mystified as well. So that is where my 80-90% comes from. I simply don't agree all of the time with the standards they are applying, and the standards will be inconsistent at some level as to be expected. That is okay though, everyone has a right to apply whatever standards they want and grading is subjective and I still like to get CAC's opinion on coins I buy within their purview.

 

I know alot of others I have talked to, that would be considered highly informed numismatists who agree with my opinion on originality and eye appeal with respect to CAC in some cases. So no doubt CAC gets it right very often for the standards they apply, but one has to have their own standards IMHO and if they gel with CAC great, if they don't, that is okay too.

 

Best, HT

 

I understand where you are coming from. For example John is ok with a couple copper spots on gold as it adds to the originality. I find them distracting. I'm certainly not going to change what John likes and I'm not changing either on this front.

 

mark

[orifdoc]

Batting average is "hits" divided by number of "at bats".

 

However, not every plate appearance results in an "at bat". Hit by pitch, walks, sacrifices, fielder's choice, interference, etc. do not count. Complicated as all of that all is, a thousand people could analyze a player's entire career and each calculate precisely the same number, to three decimal places of accuracy.

 

As far as determining the batting average of a TPG or CAC, it's a nonsensical concept. Since there is no accepted consensus or set definition of a coin's precise grade, there is ABSOLUTELY no way to determine if a given opinion is correct.

 

It's child's play to demonstrate, through a series multiple sequential crack-outs and submissions of the same coin (or almost any coin), that there is NO consensus. The same coin, submitted to CAC over a long enough period to negate the "memory factor" will also come back with a variety of results. I know of many coins that did not sticker until their third or fourth trip to CAC, each time wearing a different cert number.

 

Y'all are asking for a level of precision that is simply impossible. I think a great many people don't really understand what "subjective" means.

[david3142]

Fielder's choice is an out.

 

CAC is no different than taking a coin to a nearby expert and asking "how did I do?" I used to do this all the time when I started collecting as I didn't yet have the confidence to evaluate the coins on my own (most of which were raw, and where the range was greater). Obvioisly a green bean helps with the final sale price but I think the idea of collecting only solid-for-the-grade coins is misguided and leads to ridiculousness like trying to downgrade coins so they will sticker. All that matters is whether the buyer likes the coin for the price. Usually that will be very well reflected by the grade but not always.

[Hard Times]

Sperber comments 12/13/2010:

 

http://www.coinlink.com/News/commentary-and-opinion/laura-sperber-2010-in-review-my-vision/

 

"CAC

 

Of course I am going to make a comment about CAC. CAC has survived and thrived from its start up period to become one of the most influential groups that helped stablize and create a huge positive for the coin market.

 

2010 was CAC’s year. Its acceptence is massive and is now fully ingrained in the marketplace. CAC coins are now traded on the major CCE dealer exhange. The naysayers have been silenced across the board. Unless you are selling major “fresh old time collection”, CAC coins by far bring the MOST money. Why? Coins with CAC stickers are trusted. Think about where the coin market would be without CAC. You’d have great coins fetching LESS, consumer confidence would be at an all time low, and we’d be losing even more collectors (more than just normal market attrition). CAC has been a critical step in helping the marketplace be self policed (for lack of a better term). I’m sure the chatroom weenies will have a field day with me on this, but facts are facts.

 

The ONLY people who still dislike CAC are the ones who CAC is costing money. Well isn’t that too bad?

 

Legend Numismatics and its three partners, Laura Sperber, George Huang, and Bruce Morlean are ALL proud shareholders in CAC."

[BillJones]

I've seen many CAC approved coins that just left me shaking my head. "Why? When it's so easy just to say "No."

And you're not shaking your head at the grading company's grade, only the sticker? Sounds like someone is a little jealous because they aren't getting paid for their opinion.

 

WRONG!

 

I shake my head at some grading company opinions also. I'm trying to maintain grading standards. "Gradeflation" is the enemy of all collectors. I don't know why you seem to support it.

 

Your last statement really makes me angry. I have plenty of assets, and I am retired. And for your information JA once asked me to be a CAC grader, and I turned him down because I am retired as a dealer. It was my understanding that only active dealers were supposed to have those positions.

[Afterword]

"I think a great many people don't really understand what "subjective" means."

 

 

 

 

I think some people are incapable of accepting a reality that conflicts with their notion of how things should be.

[BillJones]

"I think a great many people don't really understand what "subjective" means."

 

 

 

 

I think some people are incapable of accepting a reality that conflicts with their notion of how things should be.

 

And if you take this "subjective" argument too far, you end up with no standards for anything. If you think that all grading is "subjective," then why bother to pay the premiums for NGC and PCGS coins? You can buy raw coins for less money, or if you want certified coins, you can buy pieces from the grading services that have much lower standards. After all, grading is "subjective" so that fact that a coin has been whizzed, polished, altered or repaired isn't really important, because those who point that out are "subjective."

 

Let's end the silliness.

 

[BillJones]

The ONLY people who still dislike CAC are the ones who CAC is costing money. Well isn’t that too bad?

 

Legend Numismatics and its three partners, Laura Sperber, George Huang, and Bruce Morlean are ALL proud shareholders in CAC."

 

An one should point out that those three are all MAKING MONEY from CAC, so they are not exactly the paragons of altruism and virtue who have an exclusive right to throw stones at other people.

[MJ]

I've seen many CAC approved coins that just left me shaking my head. "Why? When it's so easy just to say "No."

And you're not shaking your head at the grading company's grade, only the sticker? Sounds like someone is a little jealous because they aren't getting paid for their opinion.

 

WRONG!

 

I shake my head at some grading company opinions also. I'm trying to maintain grading standards. "Gradeflation" is the enemy of all collectors. I don't know why you seem to support it.

 

Your last statement really makes me angry. I have plenty of assets, and I am retired. And for your information JA once asked me to be a CAC grader, and I turned him down because I am retired as a dealer. It was my understanding that only active dealers were supposed to have those positions.

 

It's too bad you aren't a grader. We could all second guess you as it's the easy thing to do

 

mark

 

 

[coinman_23885]

And for your information JA once asked me to be a CAC grader, and I turned him down because I am retired as a dealer. It was my understanding that only active dealers were supposed to have those positions.

 

You should have taken it; you could have tightened the standards considerably like the scratched bust coinage that CAC admits it will routinely sticker.

[Afterword]

"If you think that all grading is "subjective," then why bother to pay the premiums for NGC and PCGS coins?"

 

 

 

 

I will consider the opinions of those with more experience and either agree or disagree with their evaluation. If I disagree, I move on to another source. I allow them their opinion, however, with no delusions of knowing better than they do. We simply disagree.

 

 

 

 

[Afterword]

"You should have taken it; you could have tightened the standards considerably like the scratched bust coinage that CAC admits it will routinely sticker."

 

 

 

That would make at least two of you happy.

 

[bochiman]

I've seen many CAC approved coins that just left me shaking my head. "Why? When it's so easy just to say "No."

And you're not shaking your head at the grading company's grade, only the sticker? Sounds like someone is a little jealous because they aren't getting paid for their opinion.

 

WRONG!

 

I shake my head at some grading company opinions also. I'm trying to maintain grading standards. "Gradeflation" is the enemy of all collectors. I don't know why you seem to support it.

 

Your last statement really makes me angry. I have plenty of assets, and I am retired. And for your information JA once asked me to be a CAC grader, and I turned him down because I am retired as a dealer. It was my understanding that only active dealers were supposed to have those positions.

 

 

 

 

It's too bad you aren't a grader. We could all second guess you as it's the easy thing to do

 

mark

 

 

 

Snap!

Post of the day!

[MarkFeld]

The

Given that narrow range, their batting average should higher than it is..

 

What's their batting average?

 

mark

 

That is a good question and I know you asked Bill but I will give my dimes worth. I think it is 80-90%, which is not too bad as long as one does not expect perfection which I now know not to. MJ what do you think their BA is?

 

Best, HT

 

What do you mean by "batting average"? How would one go about determining their "batting average"? And who would do it?

 

I don't know. Bill made the spurious statement that their batting average should be higher knowing there was no way to either refute or confirm. I was just asking what he thought it was.

 

To answer HT's question I think it's more in the 98% range from my POV. Honestly for all that bashing CAC takes on this board I've only seen a few instances were I thought they may of missed one. They were indeed outliers. I've rifled through hundreds of boxes of auction coins and I think 98% would be a fair number. Of course I have no way of knowing what he doesn't sticker except for the sour grape threads I read from time to time.

 

Mark, what percentage of coins that pass through John's hands do you think he gets right?

 

mark

 

Edited for a typo

 

 

Mark, my short answer is roughly 92-93%.

 

My longer answer is as follows...

 

I think that for some coins, there is a single "right" grade. But for others, there can be two (or on rare occasions, even more) "right" grades.

 

And in instances when I think CAC got it "wrong", I am very open to the possibility, that I am

mistaken. Likewise, I might be mistaken when I think CAC got it right.

 

 

[Hard Times]

Mark, two right grades - like 65 with a green bean and 67 with a green bean? Where does that fit? In the realm that you are mistaken?

 

Best, HT

[stman]

I think some people wanted CAC to be perfect and get angry when they find out it is not. Then when their coins don't sticker they get even angrier at John/CAC. Then they come here to complain about CAC but get their lunch eaten every time.......

 

So is getting their lunch eaten for complaining about CAC what it's all about? Crush any disagreement? Sure seems that way glad to hear someone state it.

[Hard Times]

I think some people wanted CAC to be perfect and get angry when they find out it is not. Then when their coins don't sticker they get even angrier at John/CAC. Then they come here to complain about CAC but get their lunch eaten every time.......

 

So is getting their lunch eaten for complaining about CAC what it's all about? Crush any disagreement? Sure seems that way glad to hear someone state it.

 

Sounds like it don't it?

 

Best, HT

[MarkFeld]

Mark, two right grades - like 65 with a green bean and 67 with a green bean? Where does that fit? In the realm that you are mistaken?

 

Best, HT

 

Without seeing the coin in person, it's hard for me to imagine that both the (MS65 and MS67) grades could be "right".

[MarkFeld]

I think some people wanted CAC to be perfect and get angry when they find out it is not. Then when their coins don't sticker they get even angrier at John/CAC. Then they come here to complain about CAC but get their lunch eaten every time.......

 

So is getting their lunch eaten for complaining about CAC what it's all about? Crush any disagreement? Sure seems that way glad to hear someone state it.

 

Sounds like it don't it?

 

Best, HT

 

Come on. There has been plenty of disagreement within this thread and it has been almost entirely polite and civil. For example, I think Brandon and I have disagreed as much as or more than anyone and we've gotten along fine.

 

I don't recall a single poster suggesting that disagreements be silenced. That's not the same thing as saying that someone gets their "lunch eaten" when they complain- at least not as far as I understand the expression.

[stman]

Same to me. But of course we would disagree. And what's this "Come on" stuff.

[stman]

BTW, If I'm so wrong, why is it folks can post positive comments about CAC, about "JOHN" get all giddy when he tells them they have nice coins...... but let one person say something negative and all the "John" fans come in and try and silence them in their own way. And yes Mr. Feld you are one of the main ones IMO.

[stman]

Mark, two right grades - like 65 with a green bean and 67 with a green bean? Where does that fit? In the realm that you are mistaken?

 

Best, HT

 

Without seeing the coin in person, it's hard for me to imagine that both the (MS65 and MS67) grades could be "right".

 

I guess this applies here too.