@TurtleCat said:
Some that don’t sticker may be JA having a bad day. It’s a lot of trust and weight given to just one person.
Nobody is required to give that trust and weight. You're free to ignore his opinion if you prefer.
I largely do. If a coin I want has a sticker, fine. If it doesn’t I don’t care. My whole point is that the industry seems to care about one person’s grade above and beyond anything else. It’s silly. CAC was controversial when first conceived and it still is.
@TurtleCat said:
Some that don’t sticker may be JA having a bad day. It’s a lot of trust and weight given to just one person.
Nobody is required to give that trust and weight. You're free to ignore his opinion if you prefer.
I largely do. If a coin I want has a sticker, fine. If it doesn’t I don’t care. My whole point is that the industry seems to care about one person’s grade above and beyond anything else. It’s silly. CAC was controversial when first conceived and it still is.
It is not silly. There are luminaries in every field from numismatics to medicine to art whose opinions are valued. Are they fallible? Of course. Do people disagree with them? Of course.
Would you say that Einstein's reputation in physics was beyond silly because people put too much stock in what one person thought?
Would you say that Davinci's voice was amplified to the point of silliness because other artists revered him?
What is silly is for one person (maybe you) to think that the collective wisdom of thousands of people is silly.
Actually, it is completely proportionate. The Market decides what it likes. If you disagree, you are free to do so.
I’ve been around long enough to know the market is fickle. I’ll exit this round robin of opinions about opinions about opinions now.
I total agree about market fickleness. I remember when toning was a think to be avoided not embraced. I remember when NGC and PCGS were more equal in the eyes of the market. Heck, I remember a time before anyone cared what PCGS thought at all. I only object to you considering the opinion of an expert to be "silly".
If you have a piece of art, do you not send it to an expert for expertization? That is never silly. It is, however, always only one or two people's opinion. If you don't value provenance, you don't need to. But if the art market demands the opinion of a recognized authority, you do so at your own peril.
I missed CAC coming to exsistance. In the 90's when I started there was PCGS that everybody excepted. They use to body bag coins but ANACS would give them a "details" grade. I would send the coins to ANACS and they would agree with PCGS and then I would sell on eBay. I used PCGS and ANACS quite frequently. CAC is not taking new people at this time so I will stay with PCGS. CAC has an opinion like PCGS does and it is just another opinion.
It largely has to do with the superciliousness of so many of the CAC proselytizers. Coins without stickers are denigrated as coins unworthy of owning under any circumstances. Collections that aren't all-CAC are dismissed as inferior to those which are, with no consideration of the actual coins they contain. JA is portrayed as some supernatural, omniscient, infallible coin savant. Mere mortal coin collectors, no matter how experienced, are "fooling themselves" if they think they can properly evaluate a coin. There are "all kinds of things" that can be done to coins that only CAC can suss out. It all just gets irritating in its relentless smugness.
Hopefully that clarifies things a bit for you.
I would challenge you - send all of your unbeaned coins into CAC for evaluation. When they come back give each one a thorough evaluation yourself and try to see why one beaned and another did not. For anyone, this would aid in learning how to grade from the opinion of JA and his team (It is not just JA, he is just the finalizer), and also learn what is important in grading. Keep in mind that JA was foundational in both PCGS and NGC. Dude and his team does really know how to grade as good as anyone. HST, if I could send all of my coins to another 10 or so folks (Bush, Jones, Agre, and others) that also have lifelong experience in grading I would, but they don't have companies doing this and I don't have the funds for so many shipments.
And yes, many 'mere mortal coin collectors' would indeed greatly benefit and realize they are "fooling themselves" (i.e. don't know how to grade as well as they think) if they sent their coins to CAC.
HST.2, do I agree with CAC on every coin? Of course not, I think we are agreeable 70-80% of the time. But that is because of what I learned about grading from sending my coins to CAC. In fact I have coins that failed CAC that I love anyway.
Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this.
Yup I guess that makes me a CAC proselytizer and know I am much better off for it. Those who know me know that I was very skeptical at first, but was won over with time.
@TurtleCat said:
Some that don’t sticker may be JA having a bad day. It’s a lot of trust and weight given to just one person.
Nobody is required to give that trust and weight. You're free to ignore his opinion if you prefer.
Some people refuse to buy slabbed coins period. Other people only buy slabbed coins that they agree with. Your money, your choice. Yet somehow when you mention the C-word people take it to a whole new level. I really don't understand why it has become such an irrational, religious issue.
It largely has to do with the superciliousness of so many of the CAC proselytizers. Coins without stickers are denigrated as coins unworthy of owning under any circumstances. Collections that aren't all-CAC are dismissed as inferior to those which are, with no consideration of the actual coins they contain. JA is portrayed as some supernatural, omniscient, infallible coin savant. Mere mortal coin collectors, no matter how experienced, are "fooling themselves" if they think they can properly evaluate a coin. There are "all kinds of things" that can be done to coins that only CAC can suss out. It all just gets irritating in its relentless smugness.
Hopefully that clarifies things a bit for you.
LOL. Not at all. Because substitute PCGS for CAC in your post and it still reads the same only without the rancor. Some people will not buy NGC slabs. People look at raw coins as automatically suspect. Yet only when it is CAC do people claim that the hobby is collapsing under the weight of JAs opinion.
Possibly, but here's some anecdotal evidence for you. I pretty much abandoned collecting US type a few years after the advent of CAC to focus on my Roosie collection and Darkside (mostly British), neither of which CAC evaluates. It was clear that the market generally wasn't going to pay up for nice coins without that bean and I didn't want to deal with all of the extra overhead. Plus, I think stickers are ugly and distracting.
I'm not saying CAC isn't a valuable service. Clearly, it is for a lot of collectors. JA's credentials are beyond reproach and he appears to be a great person to boot. This is all well and good. But don't make CAC into the "one true way". Lots of collections were built pre-CAC where almost every coin got a sticker when later submitted. The expertise was available before CAC came on the scene, and it didn't reside with any single person.
@scubafuel said:
A CAC sticker represents a dealer opinion, in writing of sorts. I’ve started to wonder: why is this specific dealer’s opinion the one we’ve all agreed to value?
No doubt he’s a good grader, but many dealers are. And personally, I don’t know the guy very well. If I’m going to decorate my slabs, I’d rather a stamp of approval from dealers I know and respect. Where is my David Kahn, John Agre, Dave Perkins sticker??
JA was involved in the origins of TPGSs. He has the most trusted eye in the business. There are other people whose opinions are valued. But the fact that you don't know JAs history that well is really on you not the market.
You could say the same about any pedigreed collection. Maybe you know Eliasberg but not Pittman or Green or Bass. Ok. Great. So you put no cache on a Pittman pedigree. But for the million collectors who do know Pittman, it might matter. Personally, I wouldn't pay 1 cent extra for an Eliasberg coin. I don't care about pedigrees. But unlike the anti-CAC people, I don't get all self-righteous and ornery when someone posts an Eliasberg coin here.
What does this have to do with anything? Your analogy breaks down at every level. No one ever claims an Eliasberg provenance means the coin is "superior" to coins he didn't own.
@scubafuel said:
A CAC sticker represents a dealer opinion, in writing of sorts. I’ve started to wonder: why is this specific dealer’s opinion the one we’ve all agreed to value?
No doubt he’s a good grader, but many dealers are. And personally, I don’t know the guy very well. If I’m going to decorate my slabs, I’d rather a stamp of approval from dealers I know and respect. Where is my David Kahn, John Agre, Dave Perkins sticker??
JA was involved in the origins of TPGSs. He has the most trusted eye in the business. There are other people whose opinions are valued. But the fact that you don't know JAs history that well is really on you not the market.
You could say the same about any pedigreed collection. Maybe you know Eliasberg but not Pittman or Green or Bass. Ok. Great. So you put no cache on a Pittman pedigree. But for the million collectors who do know Pittman, it might matter. Personally, I wouldn't pay 1 cent extra for an Eliasberg coin. I don't care about pedigrees. But unlike the anti-CAC people, I don't get all self-righteous and ornery when someone posts an Eliasberg coin here.
What does this have to do with anything? Your analogy breaks down at every level. No one ever claims an Eliasberg provenance means the coin is "superior" to coins he didn't own.
The point is that people value the Eliasberg coins. That is a market fact. If you are a dealer, you can pay more for an Eliasberg coin than an equivalent non-Eliasberg coin because you can sell it for more. Some people won't pay more, so they aren't buyers. That is their choice. But that doesn't mean the Eliasberg cachet doesn't have marketplace value.
The point is that people value the CAC coins. That is a market fact. If you are a dealer, you can pay more for an CAC coin than an equivalent non-CAC coin because you can sell it for more. Some people won't pay more, so they aren't buyers. That is their choice. But that doesn't mean the CAC cachet doesn't have marketplace value.
@TurtleCat said:
Some that don’t sticker may be JA having a bad day. It’s a lot of trust and weight given to just one person.
Nobody is required to give that trust and weight. You're free to ignore his opinion if you prefer.
Some people refuse to buy slabbed coins period. Other people only buy slabbed coins that they agree with. Your money, your choice. Yet somehow when you mention the C-word people take it to a whole new level. I really don't understand why it has become such an irrational, religious issue.
It largely has to do with the superciliousness of so many of the CAC proselytizers. Coins without stickers are denigrated as coins unworthy of owning under any circumstances. Collections that aren't all-CAC are dismissed as inferior to those which are, with no consideration of the actual coins they contain. JA is portrayed as some supernatural, omniscient, infallible coin savant. Mere mortal coin collectors, no matter how experienced, are "fooling themselves" if they think they can properly evaluate a coin. There are "all kinds of things" that can be done to coins that only CAC can suss out. It all just gets irritating in its relentless smugness.
Hopefully that clarifies things a bit for you.
LOL. Not at all. Because substitute PCGS for CAC in your post and it still reads the same only without the rancor. Some people will not buy NGC slabs. People look at raw coins as automatically suspect. Yet only when it is CAC do people claim that the hobby is collapsing under the weight of JAs opinion.
Possibly, but here's some anecdotal evidence for you. I pretty much abandoned collecting US type a few years after the advent of CAC to focus on my Roosie collection and Darkside (mostly British), neither of which CAC evaluates. It was clear that the market generally wasn't going to pay up for nice coins without that bean and I didn't want to deal with all of the extra overhead. Plus, I think stickers are ugly and distracting.
I'm not saying CAC isn't a valuable service. Clearly, it is for a lot of collectors. JA's credentials are beyond reproach and he appears to be a great person to boot. This is all well and good. But don't make CAC into the "one true way". Lots of collections were built pre-CAC where almost every coin got a sticker when later submitted. The expertise was available before CAC came on the scene, and it didn't reside with any single person.
That is all true. But it doesn't really explain the CAC hatred.
Again, substitute PCGS for CAC in your text and it still makes sense. Yet people don't hate PCGS the way they do CAC. Most of the legendary collections were built raw. You could still build nice raw collections. But good luck getting fair value trying to sell that collection raw. Yet I don't hear people yelling and screaming about PCGS.
PCGS also pretty much drove out ANACS and PCI and has subordinated NGC. If you have a premium collection and want full value, you need to cross it to PCGS (we'll ignore CAC). Yet I don't hear people yelling about how PCGS has ruined the coin market.
I don't know how old you are or when you started. But if you built a nice collection in the 1980s, you would be forced to slab everything to get it to market even before CAC came along. All the arguments you make about CAC apply to ANY 3rd party opinion, whether it is a PCGS slab, a letter from Breen, a photocert from ANACS, or a CAC sticker. Yet CAC is what makes people mad.
@jmlanzaf said:
Again, substitute PCGS for CAC in your text and it still makes sense. Yet people don't hate PCGS the way they do CAC. All the arguments you make about CAC apply to ANY 3rd party opinion, whether it is a PCGS slab, a letter from Breen, a photocert from ANACS, or a CAC sticker. Yet CAC is what makes people mad.
And the people who support PCGS yet seem to hate CAC don't see this. Or ignore it, anyway. It's curious, to be sure.
To keep it simple for a CAC and Pcgs plus coin (both) - my MV basis for spreadsheet higher of CAC MV (Cac market report) or PCGS Plus MV per CF. Then a note in seperate column for basis. For Pcgs plus coin I know did not CAC then the value for Pcgs plus goes in the spreadsheet. Not going to lose sleep over it but will make note in comments column. The premium for plus designation by Pcgs can vary considerably and rightfully so if big bump up in MV to next grade. Don’t leave money on the table.
Different grader / sticker players have their own thing. Grading is subjective, a point in time, and YMMV.
A Pcgs plus coin gives good marketing push in terms of pop / number higher. Can be considerably scarcer than non plus issue same grade (pop wise). I am pursuing these.
The other thing is for A material, coins I consider PQ (whether CAC or not) I may price higher especially if cost plus dictates, certainly if low pop.
It largely has to do with the superciliousness of so many of the CAC proselytizers. Coins without stickers are denigrated as coins unworthy of owning under any circumstances. Collections that aren't all-CAC are dismissed as inferior to those which are, with no consideration of the actual coins they contain. JA is portrayed as some supernatural, omniscient, infallible coin savant. Mere mortal coin collectors, no matter how experienced, are "fooling themselves" if they think they can properly evaluate a coin. There are "all kinds of things" that can be done to coins that only CAC can suss out. It all just gets irritating in its relentless smugness.
Hopefully that clarifies things a bit for you.
I would challenge you - send all of your unbeaned coins into CAC for evaluation. When they come back give each one a thorough evaluation yourself and try to see why one beaned and another did not. For anyone, this would aid in learning how to grade from the opinion of JA and his team (It is not just JA, he is just the finalizer), and also learn what is important in grading. Keep in mind that JA was foundational in both PCGS and NGC. Dude and his team does really know how to grade as good as anyone. HST, if I could send all of my coins to another 10 or so folks (Bush, Jones, Agre, and others) that also have lifelong experience in grading I would, but they don't have companies doing this and I don't have the funds for so many shipments.
And yes, many 'mere mortal coin collectors' would indeed greatly benefit and realize they are "fooling themselves" (i.e. don't know how to grade as well as they think) if they sent their coins to CAC.
HST.2, do I agree with CAC on every coin? Of course not, I think we are agreeable 70-80% of the time. But that is because of what I learned about grading from sending my coins to CAC. In fact I have coins that failed CAC that I love anyway.
Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this.
Yup I guess that makes me a CAC proselytizer and know I am much better off for it. Those who know me know that I was very skeptical at first, but was one over with time.
Best, SH
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say... ) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
It largely has to do with the superciliousness of so many of the CAC proselytizers. Coins without stickers are denigrated as coins unworthy of owning under any circumstances. Collections that aren't all-CAC are dismissed as inferior to those which are, with no consideration of the actual coins they contain. JA is portrayed as some supernatural, omniscient, infallible coin savant. Mere mortal coin collectors, no matter how experienced, are "fooling themselves" if they think they can properly evaluate a coin. There are "all kinds of things" that can be done to coins that only CAC can suss out. It all just gets irritating in its relentless smugness.
Hopefully that clarifies things a bit for you.
I would challenge you - send all of your unbeaned coins into CAC for evaluation. When they come back give each one a thorough evaluation yourself and try to see why one beaned and another did not. For anyone, this would aid in learning how to grade from the opinion of JA and his team (It is not just JA, he is just the finalizer), and also learn what is important in grading. Keep in mind that JA was foundational in both PCGS and NGC. Dude and his team does really know how to grade as good as anyone. HST, if I could send all of my coins to another 10 or so folks (Bush, Jones, Agre, and others) that also have lifelong experience in grading I would, but they don't have companies doing this and I don't have the funds for so many shipments.
And yes, many 'mere mortal coin collectors' would indeed greatly benefit and realize they are "fooling themselves" (i.e. don't know how to grade as well as they think) if they sent their coins to CAC.
HST.2, do I agree with CAC on every coin? Of course not, I think we are agreeable 70-80% of the time. But that is because of what I learned about grading from sending my coins to CAC. In fact I have coins that failed CAC that I love anyway.
Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this.
Yup I guess that makes me a CAC proselytizer and know I am much better off for it. Those who know me know that I was very skeptical at first, but was one over with time.
Best, SH
I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
No worries, but don't humorize/denigrate those that do use this evaluation expert please as you did in your post I responded to.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago........ What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
I don't dispute that you know a nice coin when you see it, but submitting two coins is a pretty small data set to start drawing conclusions from.
Apart from that, and on an unrelated note, like CAC or hate it, I hope whoever is selling coins for me tries them for stickers first. Right or wrong, founded or unfounded, the market has spoken and is still speaking.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago........ What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
I don't dispute that you know a nice coin when you see it, but submitting two coins is a pretty small data set to start drawing conclusions from.
Apart from that, and on an unrelated note, like CAC or hate it, I hope whoever is selling coins for me tries them for stickers first. Right or wrong, founded or unfounded, the market has spoken and is still speaking.
Yeah, I figured someone would call me on the small sample size, but I've seen thousands of stickered coins at shows and generally don't find myself scratching my head a whole lot. This subject has been beaten to death (and then some) so I'm not going to get back into a debate about the merits of stickers. I likely would have ignored this thread (as a participant, anyway) except that a question was posed which I felt I could shed some light on.
Collect how and what you want, with whatever certifications make you happy. Cheers.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say... ) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
Going to alot of shows and spending time on this forum does not equal nearly 50 years of experience that JA has (and each of his coin evaluators) on looking at hundreds of coins probably nearly every day IN HAND. Again, send your coins to CAC and let us know how your coins did and whether you learned something, or maybe don't ridicule those of us who like this service.
@ReadyFireAim said:
In 100 years nobody will know who JA was but the coins will still be here.
It's all a dealer money grab.
Trust your judgment.
Nope, I would not trust my judgement over someone with a half century of expertise most of the time. And I can get his and his evaluating teams opinion for $15 a coin (the price of lunch at a fast food restaurant these days) - worth every penny and more. Come to think of it, if I send in 20 coins that means I have to skip 20 fast food lunches and be more healthier for it.
And yes it is a brilliant marketing plan by CAC, but it only works because of the quality of the evaluating team. You can call that a 'money grab' if you want, but it gives many numismatists with less grading skills than CAC evaluators a way to get a top level opinion on the quality of a coin.
@ReadyFireAim said:
In 100 years nobody will know who JA was but the coins will still be here.
It's all a dealer money grab.
Trust your judgment.
Nope, I would not trust my judgement over someone with a half century of expertise most of the time. And I can get his and his evaluating teams opinion for $15 a coin (the price of lunch at a fast food restaurant these days) - worth every penny and more. Come to think of it, if I send in 20 coins that means I have to skip 20 fast food lunches and be more healthier for it.
And yes it is a brilliant marketing plan by CAC, but it only works because of the quality of the evaluating team. You can call that a 'money grab' if you want, but it gives many numismatists with less grading skills than CAC evaluators a way to get a top level opinion on the quality of a coin.
RFA - have you sent your coins into CAC, or?
Best, SH
Well said. And based on his posts, he sent a number of his Saints to CAC and fared poorly.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Would you prefer to get more $ or fewer $ for your coins when you sell? Why would anyone suppose dealers would be any different?
Sellers (dealers and collectors) wouldn't send their coins to CAC if buyers didn't express a preference for them by their willingness to pay more for coins with the sticker than without. Clearly, there's enough of a demand for the service to make providing it practical. What's wrong with doing so, for those who want the service? After all, nobody is forced to send their coins to CAC for evaluation.
Would you prefer to get more $ or fewer $ for your coins when you sell? Why would anyone suppose dealers would be any different?
Sellers (dealers and collectors) wouldn't send their coins to CAC if buyers didn't express a preference for them by their willingness to pay more for coins with the sticker than without. Clearly, there's enough of a demand for the service to make providing it practical. What's wrong with doing so, for those who want the service? After all, nobody is forced to send their coins to CAC for evaluation.
Hopefully, you understand that if there is a “money grab” involved, it’s only on the part of dealers.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld said:
Hopefully, you understand that if there is a “money grab” involved, it’s only on the part of dealers.😉
Of course. I have learned from reading this message board that when dealers try to get the best price they can for their coins, it's because they're being greedy. When collectors try for the same, it's because they invested their money wisely and it's only reasonable to expect they be rewarded for their effort and knowledge.
I think these debates are great, not least because there are members I like and respect on both sides of the aisle here.
My evolution with CAC was sort of the opposite of SH’s, which I think is interesting. Early on I was a fan, though I was not a submitter. CAC liked mostly original-looking coins with positive eye appeal so no issue there. I was lucky enough to have a great coin mentor as a kid who also preferred that look, so it felt natural to me.
But lately, I've started to remove the stickers from coins in my core collection. They've started to feel stifling and I noticed that I was allowing them to limit my collecting choices within my specialty. But it didn't make sense, since CAC were not specialists there. It irritated me to own literally the best possible coin for a certain variety and die state (confirmed by multiple actual specialists) and have it not CAC. This is nobody's fault but my own, but it felt like a downcheck on an unimprovable coin. My OCD could not handle it So I fixed it by removing the stickers. The record is still there in CAC database if anyone cares to look later, but I much prefer the look of my collection totally clean. And that's really the goal, right?
To JM, this is certainly not CAC hating, just the evolution of my own thinking. I think they do a good job most times and have certainly helped many people's eyes, including my own. But my collection is most fun when I feel free to be flexible with my choices, and that means I've decided not to focus on beans anymore. But I do agree with ReadyFireAim in that, if history is any guide, 100 years later only the coins (and the most famous of collectors) will remain. Contemporary TPG/dealer opinions will have long since fallen away. I try to focus on that when I can.
@scubafuel said:
I think these debates are great, not least because there are members I like and respect on both sides of the aisle here.
My evolution with CAC was sort of the opposite of SH’s, which I think is interesting. Early on I was a fan, though I was not a submitter. CAC liked mostly original-looking coins with positive eye appeal so no issue there. I was lucky enough to have a great coin mentor as a kid who also preferred that look, so it felt natural to me.
But lately, I've started to remove the stickers from coins in my core collection. They've started to feel stifling and I noticed that I was allowing them to limit my collecting choices within my specialty. But it didn't make sense, since CAC were not specialists there. It irritated me to own literally the best possible coin for a certain variety and die state (confirmed by multiple actual specialists) and have it not CAC. This is nobody's fault but my own, but it felt like a downcheck on an unimprovable coin. My OCD could not handle it So I fixed it by removing the stickers. The record is still there in CAC database if anyone cares to look later, but I much prefer the look of my collection totally clean. And that's really the goal, right?
To JM, this is certainly not CAC hating, just the evolution of my own thinking. I think they do a good job most times and have certainly helped many people's eyes, including my own. But my collection is most fun when I feel free to be flexible with my choices, and that means I've decided not to focus on beans anymore. Maybe I've gotten a bit less insecure about my own collecting choices. Not sure. But I do agree with ReadyFireAim in that, if history is any guide, 100 years later only the coins (and the most famous of collectors) will remain. Contemporary TPG/dealer opinions will have long since fallen away. I try to focus on that when I can.
I think it’s great that you collect as you please, and in a manner which beings you peace.
We don’t yet have a 100 year history, as a guide, to let us know whether TPG opinions “will have long since fallen away”. But my guess is that in many cases, such opinions will not meet with that fate.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Hi Mark, I said "contemporary TPG opinions", which is an important qualifier. And if you look at how many Anacs photoseals are left after only 30-odd years, or what a Breen opinion letter is worth nowadays, you may start to see my point.
“Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this”.
@scubafuel said:
Hi Mark, I said "contemporary TPG opinions", which is an important qualifier. And if you look at how many Anacs photoseals are left after only 30-odd years, or what a Breen opinion letter is worth nowadays, you may start to see my point.
Got it - thanks. That said, I don’t think ANACS photo seals and Breen letters are a valid comparison to leading TPG grades/opinions, which are encased in sonically sealed holders with the coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have searched and I will sell any better or best coins I have through Great Collection as they will send them to CAC for me, being CAC is not accepting any new people. I will send to PCGS first for my own collection, then any that I don't have to have will go to eBay if I don't think they'll CAC. Most likely the coins will be sold through Great Collection.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say... ) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
Going to alot of shows and spending time on this forum does not equal nearly 50 years of experience that JA has (and each of his coin evaluators) on looking at hundreds of coins probably nearly every day IN HAND. Again, send your coins to CAC and let us know how your coins did and whether you learned something, or maybe don't ridicule those of us who like this service.
SH
I never claimed my experience equaled that of JA (or dozens of other high end dealers and collectors on this board). I merely pointed out that I've developed a good eye and working knowledge of coins over the last twenty years, including going to shows and viewing tons of coins in hand. I have stated that CAC provides a valuable service (to some) and have not criticized people who use it. I have criticized the attitudes of some of those users toward others here. There's a difference.
Your final statement sort of reinforces my point. The implied assumption is that ALL coins must be viewed by CAC or else they are "suspect". The other implied assumption is that CAC is the one and only arbiter of a coin's worthiness. Sorry, I'm not buying either argument.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say... ) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
Going to alot of shows and spending time on this forum does not equal nearly 50 years of experience that JA has (and each of his coin evaluators) on looking at hundreds of coins probably nearly every day IN HAND. Again, send your coins to CAC and let us know how your coins did and whether you learned something, or maybe don't ridicule those of us who like this service.
SH
I never claimed my experience equaled that of JA (or dozens of other high end dealers and collectors on this board). I merely pointed out that I've developed a good eye and working knowledge of coins over the last twenty years, including going to shows and viewing tons of coins in hand. I have stated that CAC provides a valuable service (to some) and have not criticized people who use it. I have criticized the attitudes of some of those users toward others here. There's a difference.
Your final statement sort of reinforces my point. The implied assumption is that ALL coins must be viewed by CAC or else they are "suspect". The other implied assumption is that CAC is the one and only arbiter of a coin's worthiness. Sorry, I'm not buying either argument.
The two of you strike me as knowledgeable, well mannered, level headed collectors. I get the sense that you are debating something, about which in large part, you actually agree upon. And that for some reason, your remarks are not coming across to each other, as intended.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@scubafuel said:
I think these debates are great, not least because there are members I like and respect on both sides of the aisle here.
My evolution with CAC was sort of the opposite of SH’s, which I think is interesting. Early on I was a fan, though I was not a submitter. CAC liked mostly original-looking coins with positive eye appeal so no issue there. I was lucky enough to have a great coin mentor as a kid who also preferred that look, so it felt natural to me.
But lately, I've started to remove the stickers from coins in my core collection. They've started to feel stifling and I noticed that I was allowing them to limit my collecting choices within my specialty. But it didn't make sense, since CAC were not specialists there. It irritated me to own literally the best possible coin for a certain variety and die state (confirmed by multiple actual specialists) and have it not CAC. This is nobody's fault but my own, but it felt like a downcheck on an unimprovable coin. My OCD could not handle it So I fixed it by removing the stickers. The record is still there in CAC database if anyone cares to look later, but I much prefer the look of my collection totally clean. And that's really the goal, right?
To JM, this is certainly not CAC hating, just the evolution of my own thinking. I think they do a good job most times and have certainly helped many people's eyes, including my own. But my collection is most fun when I feel free to be flexible with my choices, and that means I've decided not to focus on beans anymore. But I do agree with ReadyFireAim in that, if history is any guide, 100 years later only the coins (and the most famous of collectors) will remain. Contemporary TPG/dealer opinions will have long since fallen away. I try to focus on that when I can.
FANTASTIC post!!! Getting assistance in improving one's knowledge of grading by submitting to CAC is wonderful for a lot of folks. But it would drive me crazy to let anyone besides myself make the ultimate decisions as to what coins end up in my collection.
@fiftysevener said:
Many experienced collectors seem to forget (or overlook) the idea that TPG's are appraisers and CAC opinions are really offers to buy.
CAC opinions are not offers to buy. Additionally, they grade countless coins for which they would have no interest, whatsoever.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say... ) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
Going to alot of shows and spending time on this forum does not equal nearly 50 years of experience that JA has (and each of his coin evaluators) on looking at hundreds of coins probably nearly every day IN HAND. Again, send your coins to CAC and let us know how your coins did and whether you learned something, or maybe don't ridicule those of us who like this service.
SH
I never claimed my experience equaled that of JA (or dozens of other high end dealers and collectors on this board). I merely pointed out that I've developed a good eye and working knowledge of coins over the last twenty years, including going to shows and viewing tons of coins in hand. I have stated that CAC provides a valuable service (to some) and have not criticized people who use it. I have criticized the attitudes of some of those users toward others here. There's a difference.
Your final statement sort of reinforces my point. The implied assumption is that ALL coins must be viewed by CAC or else they are "suspect". The other implied assumption is that CAC is the one and only arbiter of a coin's worthiness. Sorry, I'm not buying either argument.
The two of you strike me as knowledgeable, well mannered, level headed collectors. I get the sense that you are debating something, about which in large part, you actually agree upon. And that for some reason, your remarks are not coming across to each other, as intended.
Thanks for your input, Mark. I certainly hope this discussion isn't being taken personally by anyone. It certainly isn't by me. The tone of my original post was perhaps a bit snarky, and for that I apologize. Hopefully a few people also found it amusing, as it was intended to be.
“Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this”.
+1
I would amend the statement to read: "If you buy coins online (without an unconditional return policy) and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned."
Buying a CAC coin from images without a return policy is something I'd never consider doing, nor recommend to anyone else. YMMV.
Well..., are the beans tantamount to ironclad offers to buy? Not really--they don't come with any such paperwork, much less a guaranteed buy price. There have been some instances when no buy offer was extended.
What is important, I think, is that CAC opinions are totally independent of PCGS opinions--there is an element of comfort when they agree, IMO, that I don't necessarily get with a + on the insert. The TPGs and CAC make coins that have passed more liquid in the marketplace. Without these, coins would still have values, likely lower and harder to agree upon in a sales transaction. However, due to the subjective nature of grading, what does one grade determination mean (or two)? Another Forum member, Roadrunner (I think), once opined that about 10 separate grading attempts would be needed to arrive at the 'correct' grades of many coins.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
@fiftysevener said:
Many experienced collectors seem to forget (or overlook) the idea that TPG's are appraisers and CAC opinions are really offers to buy.
CAC will make offers on all CAC coins. However, there is no guarantee as to what that offer might be. JA himself has said that he is not always the higher buyer.
@fiftysevener said:
Many experienced collectors seem to forget (or overlook) the idea that TPG's are appraisers and CAC opinions are really offers to buy.
CAC opinions are not offers to buy. Additionally, they grade countless coins for which they would have no interest, whatsoever.
It has been my understanding that CAC makes a market for coins they sticker. That said you may not like their offers to buy but it is no different than your offer to buy. Also we cannot forget the crazy notion that grade on the holder is a technical grade because if it were I doubt CAC would have a market share.
CAC does not appear to be for just one group of players in my view.
A dealer will have incentive get coin CAC where there material jump from non CAC bid to CAC bid like a 1892-CC MS65 CC dollar 6100 CAC bid vs 4750 non CAC bid. But on coins like 1887 MS64 dollar where difference just $4 no. The CAC 1892-CC MS65 sell will now be around $7500.
A sharp, savvy player will pickoff coins which have CAC potential, send them in , and then if CAC will likely increase price to CAC MV. Good for him. Then all needed buyer who will pay the money (CAC Rare Coin Market Review). For me everything negotiable depending on how show going, market conditions, and how much room I have in item.
There is no free ride or room for whiners in RCI. Good players develop a strategy, marketing plan, learn how work and execute their angle.
GC offers submitters option have their coins CAC I believe.
@fiftysevener said:
Many experienced collectors seem to forget (or overlook) the idea that TPG's are appraisers and CAC opinions are really offers to buy.
CAC opinions are not offers to buy. Additionally, they grade countless coins for which they would have no interest, whatsoever.
It has been my understanding that CAC makes a market for coins they sticker. That said you may not like their offers to buy but it is no different than your offer to buy. Also we cannot forget the crazy notion that grade on the holder is a technical grade because if it were I doubt CAC would have a market share.
There are many types of coins which are eligible for CAC submission, but for which CAC doesn’t make markets (in any or all grades). If you had such a coin, would they be willing to make an offer? My guess is probably so, but that’s very different from making a market.
For the record, my comments are in no way intended as a criticism of CAC.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have searched and I will sell any better or best coins I have through Great Collection as they will send them to CAC for me, being CAC is not accepting any new people. I will send to PCGS first for my own collection, then any that I don't have to have will go to eBay if I don't think they'll CAC. Most likely the coins will be sold through Great Collection.
Join LSCC and you can get a CAC membership as an LSCC member right away.
Comments
I largely do. If a coin I want has a sticker, fine. If it doesn’t I don’t care. My whole point is that the industry seems to care about one person’s grade above and beyond anything else. It’s silly. CAC was controversial when first conceived and it still is.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
How much of the weight and value is based on the opinion and how much is based on the coins themselves?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Actually, it is completely proportionate. The Market decides what it likes. If you disagree, you are free to do so.
Impossible to answer, really.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
It is not silly. There are luminaries in every field from numismatics to medicine to art whose opinions are valued. Are they fallible? Of course. Do people disagree with them? Of course.
Would you say that Einstein's reputation in physics was beyond silly because people put too much stock in what one person thought?
Would you say that Davinci's voice was amplified to the point of silliness because other artists revered him?
What is silly is for one person (maybe you) to think that the collective wisdom of thousands of people is silly.
I’ve been around long enough to know the market is fickle. I’ll exit this round robin of opinions about opinions about opinions now.
Except to add that it’s hilarious that you would compare CAC’s opinion to research by Einstein...
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
I total agree about market fickleness. I remember when toning was a think to be avoided not embraced. I remember when NGC and PCGS were more equal in the eyes of the market. Heck, I remember a time before anyone cared what PCGS thought at all. I only object to you considering the opinion of an expert to be "silly".
If you have a piece of art, do you not send it to an expert for expertization? That is never silly. It is, however, always only one or two people's opinion. If you don't value provenance, you don't need to. But if the art market demands the opinion of a recognized authority, you do so at your own peril.
Eww....smells like algebra. Catbert scampers away from math.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I missed CAC coming to exsistance. In the 90's when I started there was PCGS that everybody excepted. They use to body bag coins but ANACS would give them a "details" grade. I would send the coins to ANACS and they would agree with PCGS and then I would sell on eBay. I used PCGS and ANACS quite frequently. CAC is not taking new people at this time so I will stay with PCGS. CAC has an opinion like PCGS does and it is just another opinion.
I would challenge you - send all of your unbeaned coins into CAC for evaluation. When they come back give each one a thorough evaluation yourself and try to see why one beaned and another did not. For anyone, this would aid in learning how to grade from the opinion of JA and his team (It is not just JA, he is just the finalizer), and also learn what is important in grading. Keep in mind that JA was foundational in both PCGS and NGC. Dude and his team does really know how to grade as good as anyone. HST, if I could send all of my coins to another 10 or so folks (Bush, Jones, Agre, and others) that also have lifelong experience in grading I would, but they don't have companies doing this and I don't have the funds for so many shipments.
And yes, many 'mere mortal coin collectors' would indeed greatly benefit and realize they are "fooling themselves" (i.e. don't know how to grade as well as they think) if they sent their coins to CAC.
HST.2, do I agree with CAC on every coin? Of course not, I think we are agreeable 70-80% of the time. But that is because of what I learned about grading from sending my coins to CAC. In fact I have coins that failed CAC that I love anyway.
Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this.
Yup I guess that makes me a CAC proselytizer and know I am much better off for it. Those who know me know that I was very skeptical at first, but was won over with time.
Best, SH
Possibly, but here's some anecdotal evidence for you. I pretty much abandoned collecting US type a few years after the advent of CAC to focus on my Roosie collection and Darkside (mostly British), neither of which CAC evaluates. It was clear that the market generally wasn't going to pay up for nice coins without that bean and I didn't want to deal with all of the extra overhead. Plus, I think stickers are ugly and distracting.
I'm not saying CAC isn't a valuable service. Clearly, it is for a lot of collectors. JA's credentials are beyond reproach and he appears to be a great person to boot. This is all well and good. But don't make CAC into the "one true way". Lots of collections were built pre-CAC where almost every coin got a sticker when later submitted. The expertise was available before CAC came on the scene, and it didn't reside with any single person.
What does this have to do with anything? Your analogy breaks down at every level. No one ever claims an Eliasberg provenance means the coin is "superior" to coins he didn't own.
The point is that people value the Eliasberg coins. That is a market fact. If you are a dealer, you can pay more for an Eliasberg coin than an equivalent non-Eliasberg coin because you can sell it for more. Some people won't pay more, so they aren't buyers. That is their choice. But that doesn't mean the Eliasberg cachet doesn't have marketplace value.
The point is that people value the CAC coins. That is a market fact. If you are a dealer, you can pay more for an CAC coin than an equivalent non-CAC coin because you can sell it for more. Some people won't pay more, so they aren't buyers. That is their choice. But that doesn't mean the CAC cachet doesn't have marketplace value.
Does that help?
That is all true. But it doesn't really explain the CAC hatred.
Again, substitute PCGS for CAC in your text and it still makes sense. Yet people don't hate PCGS the way they do CAC. Most of the legendary collections were built raw. You could still build nice raw collections. But good luck getting fair value trying to sell that collection raw. Yet I don't hear people yelling and screaming about PCGS.
PCGS also pretty much drove out ANACS and PCI and has subordinated NGC. If you have a premium collection and want full value, you need to cross it to PCGS (we'll ignore CAC). Yet I don't hear people yelling about how PCGS has ruined the coin market.
I don't know how old you are or when you started. But if you built a nice collection in the 1980s, you would be forced to slab everything to get it to market even before CAC came along. All the arguments you make about CAC apply to ANY 3rd party opinion, whether it is a PCGS slab, a letter from Breen, a photocert from ANACS, or a CAC sticker. Yet CAC is what makes people mad.
And the people who support PCGS yet seem to hate CAC don't see this. Or ignore it, anyway. It's curious, to be sure.
Not a worry for me.
To keep it simple for a CAC and Pcgs plus coin (both) - my MV basis for spreadsheet higher of CAC MV (Cac market report) or PCGS Plus MV per CF. Then a note in seperate column for basis. For Pcgs plus coin I know did not CAC then the value for Pcgs plus goes in the spreadsheet. Not going to lose sleep over it but will make note in comments column. The premium for plus designation by Pcgs can vary considerably and rightfully so if big bump up in MV to next grade. Don’t leave money on the table.
Different grader / sticker players have their own thing. Grading is subjective, a point in time, and YMMV.
A Pcgs plus coin gives good marketing push in terms of pop / number higher. Can be considerably scarcer than non plus issue same grade (pop wise). I am pursuing these.
The other thing is for A material, coins I consider PQ (whether CAC or not) I may price higher especially if cost plus dictates, certainly if low pop.
I've sent a grand total of two coins to CAC, through a dealer many years ago. I had been trying to sell both and not getting any nibbles at the prices I wanted. Long story short, I fully expected one to CAC and knew the other was just average for the grade. End result: the PQ coin got a sticker and the other one didn't. That allowed me to sell the PQ coin for what I paid, and I just took a loss on the other. What did I learn? Basically that I knew a nice coin (in my areas of expertise!) when I saw one, but most buyers out there probably didn't.
OTOH, I probably wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. Why? Because I'm outside my comfort zone there and the value of the coins makes them more likely to have been monkeyed with.
One last thought. I go to a lot of shows and spend a lot of time (too much, many people would say...
) on this forum, where there is a vast amount of knowledge available. The point is that there are many venues and resources available to become a better evaluator of coins. I don't find one expert's binary stamp of approval to be the optimal one for me. YMMV.
No worries, but don't humorize/denigrate those that do use this evaluation expert please as you did in your post I responded to.
Best, SH
I don't dispute that you know a nice coin when you see it, but submitting two coins is a pretty small data set to start drawing conclusions from.
Apart from that, and on an unrelated note, like CAC or hate it, I hope whoever is selling coins for me tries them for stickers first.
Right or wrong, founded or unfounded, the market has spoken and is still speaking.
Yeah, I figured someone would call me on the small sample size, but I've seen thousands of stickered coins at shows and generally don't find myself scratching my head a whole lot. This subject has been beaten to death (and then some) so I'm not going to get back into a debate about the merits of stickers. I likely would have ignored this thread (as a participant, anyway) except that a question was posed which I felt I could shed some light on.
Collect how and what you want, with whatever certifications make you happy. Cheers.
In 100 years nobody will know who JA was but the coins will still be here.
It's all a dealer money grab.
Trust your judgment.
My Saint Set
Going to alot of shows and spending time on this forum does not equal nearly 50 years of experience that JA has (and each of his coin evaluators) on looking at hundreds of coins probably nearly every day IN HAND. Again, send your coins to CAC and let us know how your coins did and whether you learned something, or maybe don't ridicule those of us who like this service.
SH
Nope, I would not trust my judgement over someone with a half century of expertise most of the time. And I can get his and his evaluating teams opinion for $15 a coin (the price of lunch at a fast food restaurant these days) - worth every penny and more. Come to think of it, if I send in 20 coins that means I have to skip 20 fast food lunches and be more healthier for it.
And yes it is a brilliant marketing plan by CAC, but it only works because of the quality of the evaluating team. You can call that a 'money grab' if you want, but it gives many numismatists with less grading skills than CAC evaluators a way to get a top level opinion on the quality of a coin.
RFA - have you sent your coins into CAC, or?
Best, SH
Well said. And based on his posts, he sent a number of his Saints to CAC and fared poorly.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
How about "Futuresellable?"
Would you prefer to get more $ or fewer $ for your coins when you sell? Why would anyone suppose dealers would be any different?
Sellers (dealers and collectors) wouldn't send their coins to CAC if buyers didn't express a preference for them by their willingness to pay more for coins with the sticker than without. Clearly, there's enough of a demand for the service to make providing it practical. What's wrong with doing so, for those who want the service? After all, nobody is forced to send their coins to CAC for evaluation.
Hopefully, you understand that if there is a “money grab” involved, it’s only on the part of dealers.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Of course. I have learned from reading this message board that when dealers try to get the best price they can for their coins, it's because they're being greedy. When collectors try for the same, it's because they invested their money wisely and it's only reasonable to expect they be rewarded for their effort and knowledge.
I think these debates are great, not least because there are members I like and respect on both sides of the aisle here.
My evolution with CAC was sort of the opposite of SH’s, which I think is interesting. Early on I was a fan, though I was not a submitter. CAC liked mostly original-looking coins with positive eye appeal so no issue there. I was lucky enough to have a great coin mentor as a kid who also preferred that look, so it felt natural to me.
But lately, I've started to remove the stickers from coins in my core collection. They've started to feel stifling and I noticed that I was allowing them to limit my collecting choices within my specialty. But it didn't make sense, since CAC were not specialists there. It irritated me to own literally the best possible coin for a certain variety and die state (confirmed by multiple actual specialists) and have it not CAC. This is nobody's fault but my own, but it felt like a downcheck on an unimprovable coin. My OCD could not handle it
So I fixed it by removing the stickers. The record is still there in CAC database if anyone cares to look later, but I much prefer the look of my collection totally clean. And that's really the goal, right?
To JM, this is certainly not CAC hating, just the evolution of my own thinking. I think they do a good job most times and have certainly helped many people's eyes, including my own. But my collection is most fun when I feel free to be flexible with my choices, and that means I've decided not to focus on beans anymore. But I do agree with ReadyFireAim in that, if history is any guide, 100 years later only the coins (and the most famous of collectors) will remain. Contemporary TPG/dealer opinions will have long since fallen away. I try to focus on that when I can.
I think it’s great that you collect as you please, and in a manner which beings you peace.
We don’t yet have a 100 year history, as a guide, to let us know whether TPG opinions “will have long since fallen away”. But my guess is that in many cases, such opinions will not meet with that fate.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Hi Mark, I said "contemporary TPG opinions", which is an important qualifier. And if you look at how many Anacs photoseals are left after only 30-odd years, or what a Breen opinion letter is worth nowadays, you may start to see my point.
@spacehayduke said
“Finally, if you buy coins online and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned. CAC adds some (not all) protection from this”.
+1
Got it - thanks. That said, I don’t think ANACS photo seals and Breen letters are a valid comparison to leading TPG grades/opinions, which are encased in sonically sealed holders with the coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Does everyone here really believe that only John looks at the coins to say yes or no to the sticker??
It’s not just, John, who looks at the coins, but he’s the only one with the final say regarding each one that gets stickered.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have searched and I will sell any better or best coins I have through Great Collection as they will send them to CAC for me, being CAC is not accepting any new people. I will send to PCGS first for my own collection, then any that I don't have to have will go to eBay if I don't think they'll CAC. Most likely the coins will be sold through Great Collection.
I never claimed my experience equaled that of JA (or dozens of other high end dealers and collectors on this board). I merely pointed out that I've developed a good eye and working knowledge of coins over the last twenty years, including going to shows and viewing tons of coins in hand. I have stated that CAC provides a valuable service (to some) and have not criticized people who use it. I have criticized the attitudes of some of those users toward others here. There's a difference.
Your final statement sort of reinforces my point. The implied assumption is that ALL coins must be viewed by CAC or else they are "suspect". The other implied assumption is that CAC is the one and only arbiter of a coin's worthiness. Sorry, I'm not buying either argument.
The two of you strike me as knowledgeable, well mannered, level headed collectors. I get the sense that you are debating something, about which in large part, you actually agree upon. And that for some reason, your remarks are not coming across to each other, as intended.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Many experienced collectors seem to forget (or overlook) the idea that TPG's are appraisers and CAC opinions are really offers to buy.
FANTASTIC post!!! Getting assistance in improving one's knowledge of grading by submitting to CAC is wonderful for a lot of folks. But it would drive me crazy to let anyone besides myself make the ultimate decisions as to what coins end up in my collection.
CAC opinions are not offers to buy. Additionally, they grade countless coins for which they would have no interest, whatsoever.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks for your input, Mark. I certainly hope this discussion isn't being taken personally by anyone. It certainly isn't by me. The tone of my original post was perhaps a bit snarky, and for that I apologize. Hopefully a few people also found it amusing, as it was intended to be.
I would amend the statement to read: "If you buy coins online (without an unconditional return policy) and don't see in hand and trust your purchasing ability from just images, you are asking to get burned."
Buying a CAC coin from images without a return policy is something I'd never consider doing, nor recommend to anyone else. YMMV.
Well..., are the beans tantamount to ironclad offers to buy? Not really--they don't come with any such paperwork, much less a guaranteed buy price. There have been some instances when no buy offer was extended.
What is important, I think, is that CAC opinions are totally independent of PCGS opinions--there is an element of comfort when they agree, IMO, that I don't necessarily get with a + on the insert. The TPGs and CAC make coins that have passed more liquid in the marketplace. Without these, coins would still have values, likely lower and harder to agree upon in a sales transaction. However, due to the subjective nature of grading, what does one grade determination mean (or two)? Another Forum member, Roadrunner (I think), once opined that about 10 separate grading attempts would be needed to arrive at the 'correct' grades of many coins.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
CAC will make offers on all CAC coins. However, there is no guarantee as to what that offer might be. JA himself has said that he is not always the higher buyer.
It has been my understanding that CAC makes a market for coins they sticker. That said you may not like their offers to buy but it is no different than your offer to buy. Also we cannot forget the crazy notion that grade on the holder is a technical grade because if it were I doubt CAC would have a market share.
CAC does not appear to be for just one group of players in my view.
A dealer will have incentive get coin CAC where there material jump from non CAC bid to CAC bid like a 1892-CC MS65 CC dollar 6100 CAC bid vs 4750 non CAC bid. But on coins like 1887 MS64 dollar where difference just $4 no. The CAC 1892-CC MS65 sell will now be around $7500.
A sharp, savvy player will pickoff coins which have CAC potential, send them in , and then if CAC will likely increase price to CAC MV. Good for him. Then all needed buyer who will pay the money (CAC Rare Coin Market Review). For me everything negotiable depending on how show going, market conditions, and how much room I have in item.
There is no free ride or room for whiners in RCI. Good players develop a strategy, marketing plan, learn how work and execute their angle.
GC offers submitters option have their coins CAC I believe.
There are many types of coins which are eligible for CAC submission, but for which CAC doesn’t make markets (in any or all grades). If you had such a coin, would they be willing to make an offer? My guess is probably so, but that’s very different from making a market.
For the record, my comments are in no way intended as a criticism of CAC.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Join LSCC and you can get a CAC membership as an LSCC member right away.
Best, SH