Best Of

@pcgscacgold said:
Sorry @Ronsanderson , at 3:30am I read it as Coins of the 1890's

If it’s any consolation, I liked the coins!

I made an encased nickel earlier this year. 75th anniversary of the 1950-D Nickel. I used a bi-metallic brass/copper encasement:
https://dc-coin.com/1792chaintokencopperwithsilvercenter-2.aspx

This dealer listing for the GACC show in Rosemont Sept 25 - 27, 2025 indicates it was updated or listed July 21 (also an announcement). It is now about a month later with no additional update. So I thought I would go ahead and post it or the link.

https://www.gacc.show/dealer-listing.html

Looking at it my thought is that this doesn't look good or at least awkward. Here is what I am seeing.

There are about 260 listings.
Many listings appear twice (a few 3 times). This is due to the listing appearing as the Business name and then again under an individuals name (owner or other). The owner and/or individual names appear last name, first name. I could match up many of them that I knew. But then looked for some that would appear first name last name as the Business and then found a matching last name first name listing. Guesstimate about 80 of these.

Next I don't see any listings for Aisle 100, 200, 300 - maybe those don't exist (I did not find a floor plan).
Aisle 400 has one listing.
Aisle 500, 600, 700 have about half dozen tables listed.
It then starts to pick up from aisle 800 (9 I think) to aisle 1400 that appears to have the most table listings (about two dozen from 1400 to 1450).
The bigger number aisles are similar to the above as the table listings per aisle decrease as they get bigger with aisle 1700, 1800, 1900 (4 list from one name) having only a few tables listed.

This makes me think there is either a big update coming or a bunch of open tables. I am hoping for the prior as I plan to go and would like for it to be a good show. The webpage link does state that table numbers are subject to change near the top.

Again this is just my review of the dealer table listing and don't know if there are other things to account for what I am seeing. Hoping for the big update.

@breakdown said:
I think CACG has a chance to continue to gather momentum and carve out a bigger niche. But it is dealing with at least 3 headwinds:
1. Inertia. Most top coins are in PCGS or PCGS/CAC holders and for most coins there is not a compelling enough reason to ship to Virginia to cross.
2. The PCGS registry is still the 800 pound gorilla and far more people care about the registry than would care to admit.
3. CACG does not grade at shows. This presents a major disadvantage compared to PCGS and NGC because dealers need to keep things moving and like to minimize shipping costs and risks.

I think there is a 4th headwind: the stickering business. Should have been phased out soon after launch.

JA would then be spending more time with graders to ensure his legacy and be seen regularly doing so. Imagine if a significant part of the stickering business now ended up flowing instead to CACG to bolster the reinforcing CACG.

I sold a number of CACG graded gold coins to a dealer in May and they brought strong money. The same money that a PCGS/CAC would have (as stated by the dealer when he searched auction results). I had very low offers for the non-CAC PCGS gold and silver.

Beautiful coins!

I could see the excitement in your eyes when you stopped by to show me the 1818/7!! What a cool story come to fruition and a happy ending. I am stoked you were able to score THE coin. Thanks for sharing the journey with us, and it was good to see you again!

@mbogoman said:

@DDR said:
@lermish - what are the diagnostics/tells/clues that make you believe that that particular chop mark is fake?

I'm only guessing, but there doesn't seem to be any gunk inside the chop and the chop itself seems pretty sharp for a coin with that much wear on it. JMHO...

When looking at the coin it is graded Fair-Cleaned and is clearly heavily circulated. However, the edges of the chop are sharp and straight. The chop itself is thin and with precise edges, as if the punch was machine made rather than man made.

Considering those warning signs, one must also consider that there is only one chop which is perfectly located in the obverse field. It's a shallow punch with no reciprocal damage on the reverse. The chop, as far as I can tell, is not a Chinese character (this is not necessarily disqualifying by itself). The host coin is cleaned and applying a false chop can (in theory) distract from the poor surface condition.

The only conclusion is that this is an imitation chop, not applied by a Chinese merchant. The imitation chop would likely fool many people.