CAC Itself Will Be Publishing Retail Values on it’s Website Shortly

winesteven

I just read the above in the current Legend Numismatics Weekly Report. According to Legend, this could reduce the variation in pricing from one CAC coin to another in the same date and grade. However, IMO many coins are not commodities, but eye appeal is of tremendous importance regardless of the sticker. Many people like very attractive toning, while others, like myself and @Ricko prefer highly lustrous untoned coins. I think most of us can agree there are also coins that legitimately merit the CAC sticker but have eye appeal that most of us would not pay top dollar for. Pricing guides are good, and often helpful, but I believe the wide price ranges will still exist due to differences in eye appeal.

Separately, I also wonder how similar this new retail pricing database will be to the new publication offered by CDN (PLEASE do NOT mention the name of that publication, since our moderators will delete this post since it’s name is much too similar to the name of the publication put out by our host, and many people easily mix them up). Unfortunately IMO the new CAC website pricing will probably not include separate retail pricing for coins with CAC’s that also have pluses. Not only is there a demand for those, but quite often the pricing differentials are large. With that in mind, will the new pricing database blend together prices of CAC coins in the whole grade number with that of coins with CAC’s with pluses? If so, I believe that can make the data somewhat useless, since the blended pricing might then be too high for coins without the plus, and too low for coins with the plus. Again, without mentioning the pub name, fortunately Mark Ferguson has a pub that does differentiate in CAC retail pricing between those coins with CAC’s that are not plus, and those with pluses.

I hope this post stays live, as I believe these issues are of importance to many in our hobby.

Catbert

Good analysis. Agree that the generic approach will limit its value and I fear that special coins with great appeal could be undermined.

lcoopie

Online publication is good.

ricko

@winesteven....Good post...and the point about 'eye appeal' is on target. That is why I believe it should never be part of the grade....Cheers, RickO

jdimmick

Eye-appeal to me carries a lot of weight. Some of the coins that JA likes and stickers, because there dark dirty and unmolested, I actually don't care for as much especially when their lacking in "my eye-appeal". Most of the stickered coins I see, I like, but there are several I don't.

Kyle

@winesteven said:
Unfortunately IMO the new CAC Website pricing will probably not include separate retail pricing for coins with CAC’s that also have pluses. Not only is there a demand for those, but quite often the pricing differentials are large.

Your assumption is probably correct. CAC doesn’t recognize plus graded coins when they are submitted for CAC approval, so it seems unlikely that they would include pricing for them now.

I don’t think the information will be useless though, price guides are just a point of reference. Like you said, eye appeal always plays an important role in pricing.

winesteven

@Kyle said:

@winesteven said:
Unfortunately IMO the new CAC Website pricing will probably not include separate retail pricing for coins with CAC’s that also have pluses. Not only is there a demand for those, but quite often the pricing differentials are large.

Your assumption is probably correct. CAC doesn’t recognize plus graded coins when they are submitted for CAC approval, so it seems unlikely that they would include pricing for them now.

I don’t think the information will be useless though, price guides are just a point of reference. Like you said, eye appeal always plays an important role in pricing.

@kyle - My point wasn’t that the data would be somewhat useless if they did not include separate data on plus coins with CAC’s. It was if they decide to blend pricing of coins with pluses with pricing of coins without pluses, THAT could make it somewhat useless. I’m hoping they just use pricing of CAC coins without pluses to compile their pricing data, as then the pricing data will be much more useful, at least for CAC coins without pluses.

Cougar1978

I look forward to the CAC retail on their website as another reference tool.

Pricing of certain coins which are really PQ will always be a matter of demand and subjectivity.

For me cost plus / bid in the sheet trumps some price guide. In my view plus coins are worth more than non plus coins. I just take the plus premium pct (CF) adjust sheet markup basis. So frankly I could care less what somebody else does.

NSP

That is a good point that one price doesn’t fit all coins. I wonder if they compiled auction data and reported a 25th percentile price (i.e.-the price that 25% of the coins sold below) and a 75th percentile price (i.e.-the price that 25% of the coins sold above) if it would provide more useful information. That way, you’d have an idea of the price range between higher priced examples and lower priced examples. However, that would take a lot of work to do and would probably confuse a lot of people.

topstuf

"Retail?"
Where?

MFeld

@NSP said:
That is a good point that one price doesn’t fit all coins. I wonder if they compiled auction data and reported a 25th percentile price (i.e.-the price that 25% of the coins sold below) and a 75th percentile price (i.e.-the price that 25% of the coins sold above) if it would provide more useful information. That way, you’d have an idea of the price range between higher priced examples and lower priced examples. However, that would take a lot of work to do and would probably confuse a lot of people.

The auction data showing differences in prices realized between higher and lower price examples, is already readily available in more than one place, without a “price guide”.😉

fiftysevener

I don't think the difference between CAC and CAC plus is anything to me and many think it is a double positive. Marketing hype will probably soon have TPG's grading coins MS ++ or Pf ++ but John Albanese won't care.