CACG & CAC: Price And Grading Trends 1 1

[Coinbuf]

On 12/28/2023 at 6:26 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I think you're not OFF here...but JA specifically addressed this in that interview.

No I'm not off, you need to listen again, JA has been very consistent in his approach overall.   That does not mean that companies do not evolve or that a person may not change his mind or direction over time in response to new information or changes to the market, that interview was 16 years ago.

 

On 12/29/2023 at 11:34 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

 

I think lots of CACG holder buyers are buying the holder and thinking that the coin is STRONG for the grade (A or B) even though back in 2008 and today CAC says that "C" coins will go into the grade they merit even if "weak" for the grade.

 

You are applying what was said for CAC 16 years ago to CACG today, that is incorrect.    I agree that CACG buyers do expect a CACG holdered coin to be at the level of a stickered A or B coin.   That is because; and this has been thoroughly hashed out on the CAC forum in recent months; JA and John Buttler have made it clear that there are no "C" coins at CACG.  Again the whole A, B, C thing was an easy way for the market to digest how JA approached the sticker business, the grading side of the business doesn't use that analogy when grading coins.   However, because the market is used to the A, B, C line of reasoning, when a coin is graded as MS65 at CACG it is easier right now for the market to equate that to an A or B coin as the market understands the sticker side of the business with the standout A coins possibly getting a + grade.   If a coin fails to meet the standard that CACG has set for the MS65 grade it will be graded lower, that does not make it a C coin just an A or B coin at a lower grade.

For example, if you have a coin that has a CAC green bean it is almost guaranteed to cross into a CACG holder at the same grade.   I say almost because it could upgrade, or in the case that the coin has changed or deteriorated in the TPG holder it may get declined as a cross at same grade.   An easy to understand example of this could be where a previously red graded copper coin has mellowed and now looks more red brown.   But if you have a coin that failed at CAC (stickering) in the past because it was thought to be in the C coin bucket, it can still be crossed but would be given a lower grade than the MS65 the previous TPG graded it, as a result there are no C coins.

The concept is to end up with stellar and solid for the grade coins only for that grade in a CACG holder, period.   Of course, over time because people are not perfect, and often opinions differ, there will be coins that some will consider as low end (or C coins if you like) for the grade in a CACG MS65 holder, it is inevitable.

Edited December 29, 2023 by Coinbuf

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/29/2023 at 4:02 PM, Coinbuf said:

No I'm not off, you need to listen again, JA has been very consistent in his approach overall.   That does not mean that companies do not evolve or that a person may not change his mind or direction over time in response to new information or changes to the market, that interview was 16 years ago....

You are applying what was said for CAC 16 years ago to CACG today, that is incorrect....

[Your entire comment was laudatory, but one cannot stress enough the importance of consistency vs the evolution of one's thought.  At a Senate confirmation period, nominees for this or that are skewered for relating schools of thought that have since evolved. Analogies: Earl Warren whilst Governor of California was a conservative. When he ascended to the SCOTUS, there were billboards posted throughout the Deep South condemning him for his activist rulings. (Governors are elected; U.S. S. Ct justices are appointed for life.) When Sam Leibowitz was a defense attorney, he defended the nine Scottsboro Boys in 1931 Alabama. When he later became a state Supreme Court Judge in Brooklyn, he became known as a hanging judge.

JA is no different. I have reviewed most of the threads, sites and YouTube videos of same. Mark Feld, as a long-time friend stuck up for him unflinchingly. People change. Everyone is entitled to change his opinions or views. (Even Quintus ditched the Rooster and became Henri.)  CAC and CACG do not appeal to me, per se, but I believe JA has been on the level during his long numismatic career.  The point you've brought up is key.  A change of mind does not necessarily indicate contradiction. Rather, when viewed through a multiplicity of lenses, it indicates flexibility and growth.]  

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/29/2023 at 4:02 PM, Coinbuf said:

No I'm not off, you need to listen again, JA has been very consistent in his approach overall.   That does not mean that companies do not evolve or that a person may not change his mind or direction over time in response to new information or changes to the market, that interview was 16 years ago. You are applying what was said for CAC 16 years ago to CACG today, that is incorrect.    I agree that CACG buyers do expect a CACG holdered coin to be at the level of a stickered A or B coin.   That is because; and this has been thoroughly hashed out on the CAC forum in recent months; JA and John Buttler have made it clear that there are no "C" coins at CACG.  Again the whole A, B, C thing was an easy way for the market to digest how JA approached the sticker business, the grading side of the business doesn't use that analogy when grading coins.   However, because the market is used to the A, B, C line of reasoning, when a coin is graded as MS65 at CACG it is easier right now for the market to equate that to an A or B coin as the market understands the sticker side of the business with the standout A coins possibly getting a + grade.   If a coin fails to meet the standard that CACG has set for the MS65 grade it will be graded lower, that does not make it a C coin just an A or B coin at a lower grade. For example, if you have a coin that has a CAC green bean it is almost guaranteed to cross into a CACG holder at the same grade.   I say almost because it could upgrade, or in the case that the coin has changed or deteriorated in the TPG holder it may get declined as a cross at same grade.   An easy to understand example of this could be where a previously red graded copper coin has mellowed and now looks more red brown.   But if you have a coin that failed at CAC (stickering) in the past because it was thought to be in the C coin bucket, it can still be crossed but would be given a lower grade than the MS65 the previous TPG graded it, as a result there are no C coins.

The concept is to end up with stellar and solid for the grade coins only for that grade in a CACG holder, period.   Of course, over time because people are not perfect, and often opinions differ, there will be coins that some will consider as low end (or C coins if you like) for the grade in a CACG MS65 holder, it is inevitable.

I agree that you are right and yes, JA (who has forgotten more about coins than I will ever know) can grade anyway he wants:  conservative, liberal, technical, market, whatever.

But he said that "C" coins graded MS-65 were STILL MS-65 back then.  I don't see how you can say they are going to go into an MS-64 CACG holder today.  SOMETHING has changed and I'm not sure he has said why. 

It seems to me almost like JA/CACG are trying to shift the entire grading quotient to technical from market grading overnight.  At least with "C" coins.

Edited December 30, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/29/2023 at 7:26 PM, Henri Charriere said:

JA is no different. I have reviewed most of the threads, sites and YouTube videos of same. Mark Feld, as a long-time friend stuck up for him unflinchingly. People change. Everyone is entitled to change his opinions or views. (Even Quintus ditched the Rooster and became Henri.)  CAC and CACG do not appeal to me, per se, but I believe JA has been on the level during his long numismatic career.  The point you've brought up is key.  A change of mind does not necessarily indicate contradiction. Rather, when viewed through a multiplicity of lenses, it indicates flexibility and growth.  

I have no problem with anybody changing grading standards.  But I believe JA should explain WHAT HAS CHANGED that lower-rated but CORRECTLY GRADED coins are going into lower CACG holders.

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 12/29/2023 at 2:28 PM, Coinbuf said:

That video was already posted on the PCGS forum, what a joke, I'll say the same thing I said there.

"Ok here is what I took away from this video. First the guy doing the talking states he is not bashing, but he clearly is, even the video title is worded as bashing and click bait to get views. Second we have no idea who sent in those coins, but if he is actually a coin dealer he needs to find a new job; quickly. I only saw two or three of the coins that were shown that I would question the CAC grade, really the bigger question is why in the world would anyone submit coins that were already ugly and damaged pocket change to start with and/or have turned in the holder unless you hoped to game the system or to purposely bash CACG.

Whoever sent those coins in deserved the grades he got, plain and simple. And the guy doing the talking just looks foolish defending those junk coins."

Basically this video was done to garner likes and views in an attempt to besmirch and bash CAC, total hack job.   I have not looked but I would not be surprised to find that the guy who did the video is a CAC hatter, perhaps he has other older videos bashing CAC stickering.

The video aside, the overall tone I get from reading various chat boards is that more coins are being down graded, some are crossing at the same grade and very, very, few are upgrading. I believe most of the CACG coins that were crossed from other TPG's were not beaned by CAC and for non CAC coins I believe that's how most expected it to go, I did. I image that most of the coins in the video will be sent back to PCGS for grading and it would be interesting to see those results.

How many CACG coins are going to be cracked out in hopes of an upgrade, to another TPG, due to registry fever or perceived poor results on a submission? Will CAC become even more popular? 

If I was going to venture a guess I would say that eventually there will be a bunch of PCGS and NGC coins that everyone will be questioning (wondering if they are good enough to cross), stickered coins will become rare as they will be the only coins standing a chance of crossing over to CACG at the same grade (if CAC stops) and more of a premium given to them (a very large premium possibly), CACG will remain the #3 or 4 TPG in market share if they continue with technical grading (seems to be what they want, maybe to try and boost value), CACG coins will not be allowed in either the PCGS or NGC registries (if they are they almost certainly won't be treated differently than any other coins in the same grade, points wise, and it doesn't seem that CACG wants to have their coins in other registries anyway), and maybe, just maybe, most people will ignore all this TPG stuff and focus on the coins (coin submissions will start to slow down).

Edited December 30, 2023 by Fenntucky Mike
Clarification

[Henri Charriere]

IMNSHO...  How do you determine the "correct" grade in the absence of a clearly delineated continuum which apparently had to be established, in the beginning, at the infancy of TPGS, some decades ago?  We are still in the experimental stage and what we are witnessing are birth pangs.  I have said all along (and been ignored all along) when I mused how can anyone grade a coin in a vacuum when the highest grades have yet to be found and certified? Example: what would you do if a coin is assigned a high grade, but higher grades are [inevitably] submitted over time? A decision must be made to recalibrate the grades.  My MS67 cannot be permitted to remain one if a plethora of intermediate grades are certified suggesting the MS67 should be an MS66 if a more suitable MS67 is found, leaving room for three more increments. The video posted by Fenntucky Mike is instructive in this regard: an MS-70 which had been adjudged flawless is downgraded upon re-examination by CACG as an MS-69 due to a barely perceptible mark. That's painful, but just.

I enjoy coin collecting as a hobby. If you are in this field to make a killing in a short period of time as an investor, you are bound to be disappointed. I believe RWB has the firmest grasp and understanding of the intricacies of grading and the importance of establishing formal written standards. My rude awakening to the realities of grading came when one TPGS declined to cross-grade another's MS67 -- and the coin I had purchased sight-unseen was re-listed and my money, minus expenses, was duly refunded. How can you argue with a seller who had no part in grading the coin? You cannot. To me it is morally repugnant and ethically reprehensible that such shenanigans are allowed to occur in the Hobby of Kings.

[zadok]

On 12/30/2023 at 9:56 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

The video aside, the overall tone I get from reading various chat boards is that more coins are being down graded, some are crossing at the same grade and very, very, few are upgrading. I believe most of the CACG coins I've seen were not beaned by CAC, and for non CAC coins I believe that's how most expected it to go, I did. I image that most of the coins in the video will be sent back to PCGS for grading and it would be interesting to see those results.

How many CACG coins are going to be cracked out in hopes of an upgrade, to another TPG, due to registry fever or perceived poor results on a submission? Will CAC become even more popular? 

If I was going to venture a guess I would say that eventually there will be a bunch of PCGS and NGC coins that everyone will be questioning (wondering if they are good enough to cross), stickered coins will become rare as they will be the only coins standing a chance of crossing over to CACG at the same grade (if CAC stops) and more of a premium given to them (a very large premium possibly), CACG will remain the #3 or 4 TPG in market share if they continue with technical grading (seems to be what they want, maybe to try and boost value), CACG coins will not be allowed in either the PCGS or NGC registries (if they are they almost certainly won't be treated differently than any other coins in the same grade, points wise, and it doesn't seem that CACG wants to have their coins in other registries anyway), and maybe, just maybe, most people will ignore all this TPG stuff and focus on the coins (coin submissions will start to slow down).

...valid opinion, n u mite be correct on collectors questioning why certain coins have not been crossed, but i still believe the tpgs n the market will have to adjust to cacg rather than the other way around...one other comment, coins submitted for crossing do not necessarily get downgraded if they dont cross, one option is for return in same holder as submitted....

[zadok]

On 12/30/2023 at 10:05 AM, Henri Charriere said:

IMNSHO...  How do you determine the "correct" grade in the absence of a clearly delineated continuum which apparently had to be established, in the beginning, at the infancy of TPGS, some decades ago?  We are still in the experimental stage and what we are witnessing are birth pangs.  I have said all along (and been ignored all along) when I mused how can anyone grade a coin in a vacuum when the highest grades have yet to be found and certified? Example: what would you do if a coin is assigned a high grade, but higher grades are [inevitably] submitted over time? A decision must be made to recalibrate the grades.  My MS67 cannot be permitted to remain one if a plethora of intermediate grades are certified suggesting the MS67 should be an MS66 if a more suitable MS67 is found, leaving room for three more increments. The video posted by Fenntucky Mike is instructive in this regard: an MS-70 which had been adjudged flawless is downgraded upon re-examination by CACG as an MS-69 due to a barely perceptible mark. That's painful, but just.

I enjoy coin collecting as a hobby. If you are in this field to make a killing in a short period of time as an investor, you are bound to be disappointed. I believe RWB has the firmest grasp and understanding of the intricacies of grading and the importance of establishing formal written standards. My rude awakening to the realities of grading came when one TPGS declined to cross-grade another's MS67 -- and the coin I had purchased sight-unseen was re-listed and my money, minus expenses, was duly refunded. How can you argue with a seller who had no part in grading the coin? You cannot. To me it is morally repugnant and ethically reprehensible that such shenanigans are allowed to occur in the Hobby of Kings.

...oh god, where is that vomit emoji when u need it?....

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/30/2023 at 2:02 PM, zadok said:

...oh god, where is that vomit emoji when u need it?....

Relax, Great One!  You don't need it anymore.

[VKurtB]

On 12/30/2023 at 8:56 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

and maybe, just maybe, most people will ignore all this TPG stuff and focus on the coins (coin submissions will start to slow down).

Gawd, I hope so, but I doubt it. Only the USA and China have so many dilettante collectors so that TPGS firms are perceived to be necessary in order to have a vibrant marketplace. Me? I choose to participate, obviously, in a non-vibrant marketplace or several. I still overwhelming buy raw, and I plan to continue to do so. I sell ALMOST nothing, so being “unable to sell a coin that isn’t third party graded” is a nonsensical complaint in the world in which I live. My son can worry about resale, if he cares to, which I doubt. Sure, he might lighten up on some areas, but he’ll want to keep the majority. He has more time to wait for sanity to re-prevail and third party grading to again become the tiniest sliver of the market that it was always intended to be. Of course, the newbies will resist that trend. 

Edited December 30, 2023 by VKurtB

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 12/30/2023 at 1:59 PM, zadok said:

...valid opinion, n u mite be correct on collectors questioning why certain coins have not been crossed, but i still believe the tpgs n the market will have to adjust to cacg rather than the other way around...one other comment, coins submitted for crossing do not necessarily get downgraded if they dont cross, one option is for return in same holder as submitted....

I'm of the mind that CACG will have to adjust to grow, if they want to. I don't believe there will be enough pressure from CACG if a large majority of coins don't cross or get downgraded, I don't know that the general public will have an appetite for that, and PCGS & NGC will continue grading and encapsulating as they currently do. I expect that people will be better off leaving non CAC PCGS and NGC coins in those holders at higher grades, then will lower graded CACG coins sell at the same price level as a one or two point higher PCGS or NGC coins once things settle in. If the answer is yes then you maybe correct but then how many CACG coins will get cracked out and sent to PCGS or NGC? The biggest potential upside still seems to be with CAC'd coins, no matter the scenario.

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/30/2023 at 1:08 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I have no problem with anybody changing grading standards.  But I believe JA should explain WHAT HAS CHANGED that lower-rated but CORRECTLY GRADED coins are going into lower CACG holders.

What TPGS, "The  People" had long held in sepulchral awe, is going to ever admit, "Houston, we have a problem!"?  The irrepressible Mark Feld, the consummate gentleman, put his name and reputation on the line, repeatedly, to defend a dear old friend, JA, whose very integrity was being questioned and it is hardly surprising to learn, faced with a "scandal" which would impugn the reputation of an innovative company, and all who were affiliated with it, J.A., presented with the choice of explaining a conflict of interest, i.e. engaging in questionable conduct which had apparently gone on for some time -- worshipping both God and mammon with a bit of body English, fancy footwork and sleight of hand --  exercised his right instead to remain silent, excused himself, and abandoned the baby he had a hand in creating, with class, neither explaining or implicating anyone else directly.

If, as you maintain, "lower-rated but CORRECTLY GRADED coins are going into lower CACG holders," that is as tacit an admission as any that they were not correctly graded to begin with.  Hence, the outbreaks of incidences of the insidious "crackitis," the roots of which can be traced to the advent of Sheldonized grading which has since been weaponized with the advent of TPGS fueled by the insatiable thirst of investors who discovered money can be made by simply manipulating the one  factor which gives it its value.  How 'bout we call this a long overdue "market correction," and leave it at that. 

Attn: Moderator... I thank you for permitting me to express myself.  Man, I love this place!  🤣 

[VKurtB]

This is undeniable truth: over time, JA has said things which seem to be incompatible. That means one of three things are true. 1) the early things he said were incorrectly understood, 2) the more recent things he said are incorrectly misunderstood, or 3) JA moves male bovines by common carrier, i.e. he is a bull shipper. Maybe all three are true. Given what I see in the numismatic hobby writ large, the 3rd choice becomes the “leader in the clubhouse”. What do all FOUR phases have in common? C’mon everybody, you know. Each phase; his NGC, his PCGS, his sticker business, and the CACG service phase, all have something in common, the financial enrichment of JA. Think!

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 9:56 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

The video aside, the overall tone I get from reading various chat boards is that more coins are being down graded, some are crossing at the same grade and very, very, few are upgrading. I believe most of the CACG coins that were crossed from other TPG's were not beaned by CAC and for non CAC coins I believe that's how most expected it to go, I did. I image that most of the coins in the video will be sent back to PCGS for grading and it would be interesting to see those results.

Haven't had time to see the video yet so I'm flying kind of blind here.

But as I have noted elsewhere in the NGC Forums, it appears that with the passage of time that all the top "A" coins and some of the "B"s that were able to cross and upgrade have done so.  The low-hanging fruit has been picked, especially in popular series like Saints and Morgans and probably other coin series that I don't follow that many of you do.

Which means that coins are NOT going to upgrade with the frequency we have seen in the past....unless CACG is seen as #1 and folks want to move a coin from CACG to the #2 or #3 TPG, PCGS or NGC, take your pick...which they don't do NOW.    Did folks with U.S. coins prefer a PCGS coin lower than a higher-grade @ NGC...and similarly, did foreign/world coin holders prefer NGC over a higher-grade PCGS holder ?  Yeah, apparently they did. 

But what is interesting is that both PCGS and NGC had periods of tight and loose grading.  If CACG is going to resist market grading coins when the next "hot" period or bubble hits -- and the pressure will be enormous -- then maybe their "brutal honesty" and "consistency" will be constant over many coin cycles as a testament to their staying power of grading coins by the book. 

Neither NGC nor PCGS made the dramatic statement that CACG has had that they are going to lean more to technical grading and reverse the multi-decade trend of market grading.  This is (potentially) seismic.  I'm not sure how it plays out.  Both PCGS and NGC had periods where they leaned one way or the other.  Longer term, it will depend on how the collecting and investment public views the TPGs...how all 3 TPGs market themselves (many thought PCGS got a premium over NGC because of marketing, NOT because of a perception of better/tighter grading)..and other factors.

That slight change on the "C" coins and the CACG holder, 15% of the coins submitted according to JA (at least in the early years) has really made a major shift in this industry, one which I am not sure we have seen in a long long time. 

Edited December 31, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[J P M]

On 12/31/2023 at 2:17 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Haven't had time to see the video yet so I'm flying kind of blind here.

But as I have noted elsewhere in the NGC Forums, it appears that with the passage of time that all the top "A" coins and some of the "B"s that were able to cross and upgrade have done so.  The low-hanging fruit has been picked, especially in popular series like Saints and Morgans and probably other coin series that I don't follow that many of you do.

Which means that coins are NOT going to upgrade with the frequency we have seen in the past....unless CACG is seen as #1 and folks want to move a coin from CACG to the #2 or #3 TPG, PCGS or NGC, take your pick...which they don't do NOW.    Did folks with U.S. coins prefer a PCGS coin lower than a higher-grade @ NGC...and similarly, did foreign/world coin holders prefer NGC over a higher-grade PCGS holder ?  Yeah, apparently they did. 

But what is interesting is that both PCGS and NGC had periods of tight and loose grading.  If CACG is going to resist market grading coins when the next "hot" period or bubble hits -- and the pressure will be enormous -- then maybe their "brutal honesty" and "consistency" will be constant over many coin cycles as a testament to their staying power of grading coins by the book. 

Neither NGC nor PCGS made the dramatic statement that CACG has had that they are going to lean more to technical grading and reverse the multi-decade trend of market grading.  This is (potentially) seismic.  I'm not sure how it plays out.  Both PCGS and NGC had periods where they leaned one way or the other.  Longer term, it will depend on how the collecting and investment public views the TPGs...how all 3 TPGs market themselves (many thought PCGS got a premium over NGC because of marketing, NOT because of a perception of better/tighter grading)..and other factors.

That slight change on the "C" coins and the CACG holder, 15% of the coins submitted according to JA (at least in the early years) has really made a major shift in this industry, one which I am not sure we have seen in a long long time. 

You should look at the video GF.  I see you talking about ABC coins and after watching the video I do not think there is B or C anymore. You get a Details Questionable Surface or a Bean CAC.

Edited December 31, 2023 by J P M

[samclemen3991]

VkurtB.  Just so I understand.  You are angered or something because someone is using their acumen and capital to profit in a capitalist society?  I think that is just called envy.  James

[zadok]

On 12/30/2023 at 5:42 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

I'm of the mind that CACG will have to adjust to grow, if they want to. I don't believe there will be enough pressure from CACG if a large majority of coins don't cross or get downgraded, I don't know that the general public will have an appetite for that, and PCGS & NGC will continue grading and encapsulating as they currently do. I expect that people will be better off leaving non CAC PCGS and NGC coins in those holders at higher grades, then will lower graded CACG coins sell at the same price level as a one or two point higher PCGS or NGC coins once things settle in. If the answer is yes then you maybe correct but then how many CACG coins will get cracked out and sent to PCGS or NGC? The biggest potential upside still seems to be with CAC'd coins, no matter the scenario.

...the ultimate arbiter will be the retail buyer, of course the dealers will try to influence the market to whatever is their financial advantage, but the market follows the top dollar...cac stickers still lead the current market regardless of all the counter pressures, i guess time will  tell which way the new tides will flow...i doubt many cacg coins will be broken out n resubmitted to other tpgs, but just my opinion....

Edited December 31, 2023 by zadok
grammar

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/31/2023 at 11:46 AM, zadok said:

...the ultimate arbiter will be the retail buyer, of course the dealers will try to influence the market to whatever is their financial advantage, but the market follows the top dollar...cac stickers still lead the current market regardless of all the counter pressures, i guess time will be tell which way the new tides will flow...i doubt many cacg coins will be broken out n resubmitted to other tpgs, but just my opinion....

Absolutely correct.  Correctamundo.

But do not quote me for attribution on this!  

[zadok]

On 12/31/2023 at 2:17 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Haven't had time to see the video yet so I'm flying kind of blind here.

But as I have noted elsewhere in the NGC Forums, it appears that with the passage of time that all the top "A" coins and some of the "B"s that were able to cross and upgrade have done so.  The low-hanging fruit has been picked, especially in popular series like Saints and Morgans and probably other coin series that I don't follow that many of you do.

Which means that coins are NOT going to upgrade with the frequency we have seen in the past....unless CACG is seen as #1 and folks want to move a coin from CACG to the #2 or #3 TPG, PCGS or NGC, take your pick...which they don't do NOW.    Did folks with U.S. coins prefer a PCGS coin lower than a higher-grade @ NGC...and similarly, did foreign/world coin holders prefer NGC over a higher-grade PCGS holder ?  Yeah, apparently they did. 

But what is interesting is that both PCGS and NGC had periods of tight and loose grading.  If CACG is going to resist market grading coins when the next "hot" period or bubble hits -- and the pressure will be enormous -- then maybe their "brutal honesty" and "consistency" will be constant over many coin cycles as a testament to their staying power of grading coins by the book. 

Neither NGC nor PCGS made the dramatic statement that CACG has had that they are going to lean more to technical grading and reverse the multi-decade trend of market grading.  This is (potentially) seismic.  I'm not sure how it plays out.  Both PCGS and NGC had periods where they leaned one way or the other.  Longer term, it will depend on how the collecting and investment public views the TPGs...how all 3 TPGs market themselves (many thought PCGS got a premium over NGC because of marketing, NOT because of a perception of better/tighter grading)..and other factors.

That slight change on the "C" coins and the CACG holder, 15% of the coins submitted according to JA (at least in the early years) has really made a major shift in this industry, one which I am not sure we have seen in a long long time. 

...im going to start looking for all the "D" coins, vastly overgraded coins in tpg holders....

[Coinbuf]

On 12/29/2023 at 11:04 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

 

But he said that "C" coins graded MS-65 were STILL MS-65 back then.  I don't see how you can say they are going to go into an MS-64 CACG holder today.  SOMETHING has changed and I'm not sure he has said why. 

I don't think anything has changed, I think his choice of words in that interview you keep referring to were carefully chosen.   It would not be wise to off the people that get back unstickered coins by saying that those unstickered coins are the dreck.    His goal was to not place a scarlet letter on those coins that failed, that is why CAC does not disclose the cert numbers of coins that fail.   So, by saying the many are ok but just not up to CAC standards is a way of providing a soft landing and not upsetting the entire apple cart, so to speak; I think you need to read between the lines just a bit and not take every word so literally.

But the real truth is that if a coin fails to sticker there is a reason, JA may feel it is over graded, it may have surface issues that the TPG missed or decided were acceptable to them, these and other reasons are why a coin that failed to receive a sticker are and will likely be graded lower at CACG than at P or N.   I see you popped into the thread ats (and were quickly corrected there on your misunderstanding of this) and if you read that thread and look at the coins posted to it you should have a clear understanding of why an N or P graded coin might not cross at grade.  There are very good reasons that coins which have failed for a sticker will in most cases be graded lower if submitted for crossover at any grade.

However, the submitter can avoid this problem, just as at N or P the submitter has the option to choose on the submission form to cross at any grade or choose the grade he/she is willing to accept from CACG.

Personally, I think crossovers are a waste of money and I have no plans at this time to cross any of my coins to CACG holders, stickered or not.   For at least a decade or longer collectors have been crossing NGC coins to PCGS (many times happily taking a downgrade in grade) because they have been brainwashed to think that coin will be worth more in the P plastic.   This has become a self-fulling prophecy as in most cases and series PCGS coins do sell at a premium over like graded NGC coins.   But now you have CACG on the scene and already people that screamed to get collectors to cross to PCGS are now screaming to cross all N and P coins to CACG.  Laura at Legend is a prime example of this, she has been a PCGS or nothing dealer for as long as I can remember, but now she is pushing that everyone should cross all those coins into CACG holders.   It is important to remember that she is one of the investors at CACG.

 

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 9:40 AM, samclemen3991 said:

VkurtB.  Just so I understand.  You are angered or something because someone is using their acumen and capital to profit in a capitalist society?  I think that is just called envy.  James

I dissent. Someone is using their reputation, whether STILL justified or not, or ever was, to disrupt a market that he, in no small measure, created. That’s not capitalism. That’s abusive use of monopolistic power. Capitalism REQUIRES that suppliers be small and numerous. There is no virtue in monopolistic behavior. We once knew that as a society. We’ve forgotten it, and how to address it. Every Presidents’ Day, the local talk show in Reading, Pennsylvania asked callers to name the greatest president ever. Most years, the winner was FDR. I called one year and stated that FDR was not even the greatest President Roosevelt. Theodore was. The trust buster. 

Edited December 31, 2023 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 10:40 AM, samclemen3991 said:

VkurtB.  Just so I understand.  You are angered or something because someone is using their acumen and capital to profit in a capitalist society?  I think that is just called envy.  James

Nah, he's just a curmudgeon. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 10:05 AM, Henri Charriere said:

IMNSHO...  How do you determine the "correct" grade in the absence of a clearly delineated continuum which apparently had to be established, in the beginning, at the infancy of TPGS, some decades ago?  We are still in the experimental stage and what we are witnessing are birth pangs.  I have said all along (and been ignored all along) when I mused how can anyone grade a coin in a vacuum when the highest grades have yet to be found and certified? Example: what would you do if a coin is assigned a high grade, but higher grades are [inevitably] submitted over time? A decision must be made to recalibrate the grades.  My MS67 cannot be permitted to remain one if a plethora of intermediate grades are certified suggesting the MS67 should be an MS66 if a more suitable MS67 is found, leaving room for three more increments. The video posted by Fenntucky Mike is instructive in this regard: an MS-70 which had been adjudged flawless is downgraded upon re-examination by CACG as an MS-69 due to a barely perceptible mark. That's painful, but just.  I enjoy coin collecting as a hobby. If you are in this field to make a killing in a short period of time as an investor, you are bound to be disappointed. I believe RWB has the firmest grasp and understanding of the intricacies of grading and the importance of establishing formal written standards. My rude awakening to the realities of grading came when one TPGS declined to cross-grade another's MS67 -- and the coin I had purchased sight-unseen was re-listed and my money, minus expenses, was duly refunded. How can you argue with a seller who had no part in grading the coin? You cannot. To me it is morally repugnant and ethically reprehensible that such shenanigans are allowed to occur in the Hobby of Kings.

(1) We need CONSISTENCY more than whether coins are graded conservatively, liberally, market grading, or technical grading.  I think that is something we can all agree on.  Conisistency matters.

(2)  Even with the grading differentials of the last 4 decades, we're certainly better off than with the years before TPGs where it literally was The Wild, Wild West (apologies to Jim West and Artemus Gordon  ).

The problem I see now is that CACG is going to basically try and establish an NGO -- New Grading Order -- which is more technical than market with an admission that their standards are such that CACG holders encompass coins worthy of BOTH the grade AND a CAC sticker.  The kicking-out of the "C" coins is problematic alongside the (allegedly) stricter grading system.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 9:56 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

The video aside, the overall tone I get from reading various chat boards is that more coins are being down graded, some are crossing at the same grade and very, very, few are upgrading. I believe most of the CACG coins that were crossed from other TPG's were not beaned by CAC and for non CAC coins I believe that's how most expected it to go, I did. I image that most of the coins in the video will be sent back to PCGS for grading and it would be interesting to see those results.

Apparently, many coins are coming back as Details-like coins with no grade after getting pretty good grades with additional scoring like "RD" or "RB". 

Or at least that's the early results from the videos being posted.

[World Colonial]

On 12/17/2023 at 10:27 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

Triopoly, with CACG at the top and everybody wondering if all the U.S. coins in PCGS and NGC holders weren't good enough to cross. I wonder if this possibility has anything to do with the number of world coins in brand new PCGS holders hitting the market the past 6 months. I've never seen so many PCGS world coins, they don't pull in premiums like PCGS U.S. coins do over NGC U.S. typically 

Premiums for CAC stickered coins will probably go up multiples compared to any of the three TPG slabs if/when they stop. 

I mostly own NGC coins, somewhat by default.  But for pillar coinage and South Africa (Union and ZAR), I have seen a higher proportion of better quality for the grade coins.  Concurrently, NGC has graded a lot more of both.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 10:05 AM, Henri Charriere said:

I enjoy coin collecting as a hobby. If you are in this field to make a killing in a short period of time as an investor, you are bound to be disappointed.

I am not into the coins to make a killing in the short or long-term.  I don't care if I lose $$$.  But for sure, yeah, I don't want to pay full-price for an MS-66 and then find out it'll be priced a few years later as an MS-64 and worth 40% less because the new standard is that the Old 66's are the New 64's. 

On 12/30/2023 at 10:05 AM, Henri Charriere said:

RWB has the firmest grasp and understanding of the intricacies of grading and the importance of establishing formal written standards. 

 But we DO have formal, in-writing standards from the ANA's 7th Edition, right ?

On 12/30/2023 at 10:05 AM, Henri Charriere said:

My rude awakening to the realities of grading came when one TPGS declined to cross-grade another's MS67 -- and the coin I had purchased sight-unseen was re-listed and my money, minus expenses, was duly refunded. How can you argue with a seller who had no part in grading the coin? You cannot. To me it is morally repugnant and ethically reprehensible that such shenanigans are allowed to occur in the Hobby of Kings.

 I'm a bit confused as to what happened here.  It seems you are saying you got treated OK -- that an overgraded coin's cost was refunded to you -- but then you segue into shenanigans ?  Can you or someone explain this for a novice as I was never good with the re-submission thing.  Thanks ! 

[World Colonial]

On 12/18/2023 at 11:39 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

The current NYINC auction listings seem more inline with what I would normally expect as far as a split between NGC and PCGS, 3:1 or higher depending on which auction/session, auctions prior to this were much closer with the split or seemingly flipped. 

NGC won the grading for the Emilio Ortiz collection of Latin American 1/4R, 422 lots.  Conversely, Pat Johnson's collection sold last year was PCGS.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 4:05 PM, VKurtB said:

Gawd, I hope so, but I doubt it. Only the USA and China have so many dilettante collectors so that TPGS firms are perceived to be necessary in order to have a vibrant marketplace. Me? I choose to participate, obviously, in a non-vibrant marketplace or several. I still overwhelming buy raw, and I plan to continue to do so. I sell ALMOST nothing, so being “unable to sell a coin that isn’t third party graded” is a nonsensical complaint in the world in which I live. My son can worry about resale, if he cares to, which I doubt. Sure, he might lighten up on some areas, but he’ll want to keep the majority. He has more time to wait for sanity to re-prevail and third party grading to again become the tiniest sliver of the market that it was always intended to be. Of course, the newbies will resist that trend. 

I am sympathetic to what you are saying, Kurt, but if this hobby is not going to be dominated by dealers and savvy, knowledgeable collectors (like yourself and many of the posters here)....then it's going to be the Sharks vs. The Guppies as it was pre-TPG. 

I'd personally rather debate an occasisionally misgraded slider by the TPGs....or a coin over or undergraded by 1-2 grades...or a questionable Details grade.....then have novices buying coins at prices 5-15 grades too high as was done in the 1960's and 1970's and early-1980's. 

Edited January 1 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 5:42 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

I'm of the mind that CACG will have to adjust to grow, if they want to. 

Yup, at some point when coin prices rise big the pressue to market grade will increase on CACG.  Then we'll see if they have diamond hands. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 7:01 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Feld, the consummate gentleman, put his name and reputation on the line, repeatedly, to defend a dear old friend, JA, whose very integrity was being questioned and it is hardly surprising to learn, faced with a "scandal" which would impugn the reputation of an innovative company, and all who were affiliated with it, J.A., presented with the choice of explaining a conflict of interest, i.e. engaging in questionable conduct which had apparently gone on for some time -- worshipping both God and mammon with a bit of body English, fancy footwork and sleight of hand --  exercised his right instead to remain silent, excused himself, and abandoned the baby he had a hand in creating, with class, neither explaining or implicating anyone else directly.

Are you talking about the creation of CAC in 2008 ?