@panexpoguy said:
Buy the coin in the grade/plastic/sticker you want at the price you think is fair and just know the person you eventually sell to will be doing the same.
Is buyer perception equivalent to reality when buying collectibles? In many cases, if not most, the answer is no.
I am not too clear on what you are saying or asking. Can you state it in a different way? Thanks
My comment concerns something that I have repeatedly noticed over the years. Coin buyers frequently do not understand what they are buying. A grade/plastic/sticker does not always mean the truth. Roadrunner once noted that you sometimes don't get an accurate grade until you submit a coin multiple times and then analyze the results. What a buyer thinks and what is real, regarding a coin transaction, don't always coincide. This is how people get burned, especially if the coin is not sold until many years later.
The whole perception/reality quandary always takes me back to most stupid boss I ever had to support. A more phony and incompetent person you will never find. She used to try and rationalize her ham handed leadership by telling how she grew up in a family of eight and when they had chicken for dinner she had to be aggressive or she would always end up with a wing. All she managed to accomplish each time she told the story was to leave a room full of the same people wishing that a chicken only cut up into seven pieces....
Anyhow, she loved to say ‘perception is reality’ without really understanding what it meant. What she didn’t grasp was that one person’s perception is THAT person’s reality. So you have a combo coin/plastic/sticker and you have, say, four different collectors/dealers assessing it. The coin, grade, plastic and sticker are what they are, but the coin has five different ‘realities’. Each party has a reality and each is based on the reality that PCGS or NGC had when they graded it and CAC had when they graded it.
To my point, if you like raw coins, buy them, but plan on selling it to someone who also prefers raw coins. If you prefer a specific TPG and CAC or no CAC, look for those with the same perceptions when you go to sell or you will find you that you have spent money on realities that your buyer won’t perceive.
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
This is not uncommon. It happens all the time. The exact coin goes for far more money because the label is on the holder has changed. A PCGS coin sells in a 63 holder and shows up later in the 64 holder and sometimes even later in a 65 holder. Like it or not, this is not unique to the coin in the OP---same coin but different label matters to price
As ive said before, many sharp dealers have told me CAC is an opportunity for those with the best eyes. Many coins arrive at auction houses at the last minute and some will slip through the cracks and not go to CAC. If you can find such a coin, your sharp eye will be rewarded.
The auction price of the coin in the OP with CAC approval makes perfect sense. There are price guides for CAC coins and the price it sold for is consistent. JA is incredibly selective with his stickering of gold and especially the gem Indian series. If you want a gem 1914-D approved by CAC that is the price the market calls for. If you could care less about CAC there are plenty of examples without the sticker that you can pay half the price.
There are many people that collect quarter eagle indians (a very popular series). There are also many people who try to collect coins with CAC approval (you dont have to agree but that is a fact). If you want to build a gem series of indian quarter eagles in cac ---there are only 4 available. That means only 4 collectors can build a set of QE indians in pcgs 65 CaC (there are more 1911-d in 65 cac than 1914-d) The coin in the OP is one of them. My guess is that number will not change much and the price paid for 1914-D CaC will be a bargain down the road.
I'm going to agree with you and add that there are no 66's. That essentially makes those 4 CAC coins tied for "finest known"
Wow, @jmlanzaf agreeing with @Gazes ! THAT’s a true rarity (LOL).
On a more serious note, two points:
1. The differential (premium) for a coin that merits a CAC versus one without a CAC is almost always greater if the percentage of coins in that particular grade with a CAC is small. For example, if a particular date coin graded MS64 has 25% of coins in that grade with CAC’s, the premium paid for that coin with a CAC will typically be much less than another coin where only 6% of coins in that grade have a CAC. That latter coin will typically then have a much larger CAC “premium” over a non CAC coin in that same date/grade. 66 Saints is a good example, in general, of large premiums, as so few merit a CAC.
2. LIKE IT OR NOT, a clear two-tier market has developed over the past few years. As a generalization, coins eligible for a CAC but without one have been dropping in value, often significantly, while those coins with CAC’s have either dropped less, held their own, or have even increased in value over this same period of time.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
IMHO Nice coins Have always brought a premium. Most folks that buy nice coins and pay a premium are experienced enough to not need a CAC sticker. I'm thinking CAC premiums are following the same path when the TPG's started in the late 80's. As an example the Commem market was outrageous as well as the Morgan Dollar market and many others. All CAC is doing is creating the same scenario...drawing in folks hoping to make a buck that don't know how to grade...and placing their bets. This will crash... as it did before!
I've always thought of third-party grading as a Beauty Contest.
You have a coin you like. You assess by past beauty pageants the stuff they're looking for, and prepare. You parade it by X judge(s) on Y date, and hope for the best. If those particular judges on that particular date don't care for your coin, well, you can always wait for the next pageant.
But wow. If you score and you get the crown, scepter and robes, here come the endorsement deals and public speaking engagements.
Same coin? Yes. Other coins are prettier, but didn't get the flashbulbs and the "Miss Coin" song? Yes. But your coin gets all the attention ( and premium upon resale).
Sure, you like the coin. But the payoff by entering the contest is enormous.
@amwldcoin said:
IMHO Nice coins Have always brought a premium. Most folks that buy nice coins and pay a premium are experienced enough to not need a CAC sticker.
OK, you’re saying (and I agree) that there are many among us who can see a premium coin that doesn’t yet have a CAC, and then buy that coin without paying up as if it actually had a CAC. That’s good.
But my question then is, once you now have that lovely coin, why in world would you not spend $15 sending it in to get the CAC sticker that it supposedly merits? After all, if that lovely coin did succeed in getting the sticker, when the time came for you (or your heirs) to sell, it would be easier to sell, and as noted with this post, would sell for a lot more than $15 extra than had it not had the CAC?
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Because enough is enough! So now a person has to pay twice to make his coin market acceptable? I guess I'm finally old enough to say I'm old school. If you want a coin I have, Raw, graded by whoever, or CAC'd...you are going to pay what I want or you won't get the coin. There are more than just me out there with this stance!
PS Don't bring the when I die sht into the conversation because I don't give a sht!
@amwldcoin said:
IMHO Nice coins Have always brought a premium. Most folks that buy nice coins and pay a premium are experienced enough to not need a CAC sticker.
OK, you’re saying (and I agree) that there are many among us who can see a premium coin that doesn’t yet have a CAC, and then buy that coin without paying up as if it actually had a CAC. That’s good.
But my question then is, once you now have that lovely coin, why in world would you not spend $15 sending it in to get the CAC sticker that it supposedly merits? After all, if that lovely coin did succeed in getting the sticker, when the time came for you (or your heirs) to sell, it would be easier to sell, and as noted with this post, would sell for a lot more than $15 extra than had it not had the CAC?
@TurtleCat said:
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
@CoinJunkie said:
CAC as a brand will be sold before it would simply close up shop. IMHO, of course.
Now we’re getting off topic, but if you read the interview of JA from a little more than a year ago, you would know that his concern is that in his opinion that of coins eligible for CAC’s, they’ve seen about 90% of the coins that will come in. He believes that a lot of coins they’re seeing now are coins that are being cracked out and resubmitted, and others sent in for regrades. It appears that the majority of their revenue does not come from stickering coins, but instead comes from them making a market in CAC’d coins. Hence, his comment about possibly stopping stickering coins in a few years, and then only making a market in CAC’d coins. Time will tell. But if @Gazes is right, and they do stop stickering coins, the differential that some don’t like will, in all likelihood get higher.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@santinidollar said:
The CAC tax is different from other taxes — we determine whether and when we want to pay it.
Not true. It's the same as a sales tax---if you don't want to pay the 8% sales tax then you don't have to buy the product.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
One post on this, and I am done. I am done with buying U.S. coins that cost more than a couple hundred dollars because of CAC. I love the U.S. coins I have and don’t plan on selling them soon, but when one man controls the market and controls the selection of coins that should be added to your collection, it’s time to go.
I hope and pray that CAC will leave the market for hammered British and Imperial Roman coins alone. Many collectors in those areas prefer raw coins, myself included, in any case. Maybe that will discourage the spread of the virus.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@BillJones said:
One post on this, and I am done. I am done with buying U.S. coins that cost more than a couple hundred dollars because of CAC. I love the U.S. coins I have and don’t plan on selling them soon, but when one man controls the market and controls the selection of coins that should be added to your collection, it’s time to go.
I hope and pray that CAC will leave the market for hammered British and Imperial Roman coins alone. Many collectors in those areas prefer raw coins, myself included, in any case. Maybe that will discourage the spread of the virus.
One man doesn’t control the market or “the selection of coins that should be added to your collection”. And CAC won’t be evaluating British or Imperial Roman coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@BillJones said:
One post on this, and I am done. I am done with buying U.S. coins that cost more than a couple hundred dollars because of CAC. I love the U.S. coins I have and don’t plan on selling them soon, but when one man controls the market and controls the selection of coins that should be added to your collection, it’s time to go.
I hope and pray that CAC will leave the market for hammered British and Imperial Roman coins alone. Many collectors in those areas prefer raw coins, myself included, in any case. Maybe that will discourage the spread of the virus.
Im guessing that for every collector who has stopped buying coins just because of CAC, there are 20 collectors who have decided to keep buying coins because of CAC since they now have more assurance of getting a coin that has not been messsed with and is solid for the grade.
@TurtleCat said:
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
@CoinJunkie said:
CAC as a brand will be sold before it would simply close up shop. IMHO, of course.
Now we’re getting off topic, but if you read the interview of JA from a little more than a year ago, you would know that his concern is that in his opinion that of coins eligible for CAC’s, they’ve seen about 90% of the coins that will come in. He believes that a lot of coins they’re seeing now are coins that are being cracked out and resubmitted, and others sent in for regrades. It appears that the majority of their revenue does not come from stickering coins, but instead comes from them making a market in CAC’d coins. Hence, his comment about possibly stopping stickering coins in a few years, and then only making a market in CAC’d coins. Time will tell. But if @Gazes is right, and they do stop stickering coins, the differential that some don’t like will, in all likelihood get higher.
90%? I would imagine it would be hard to evaluate the correctness of the statement. Unless, of course, he’s referring to $10K coins and up. As an example, years ago I bought a 09 VDB in 65RD that’s CAC. It looks the same as one I bought years before in 65RD. Was it worth it to the person who submitted it years ago? I don’t know. Same with a 1903-S MS63 $5 coin I have that’s ~$600. Someone submitted it there and got the sticker. Perhaps the lower value coins will be their future when people submit them? If so, then that 90% will probably be more like 20%. Will it impact the perceived value of CAC? Who knows?
@TurtleCat said:
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
@CoinJunkie said:
CAC as a brand will be sold before it would simply close up shop. IMHO, of course.
Now we’re getting off topic, but if you read the interview of JA from a little more than a year ago, you would know that his concern is that in his opinion that of coins eligible for CAC’s, they’ve seen about 90% of the coins that will come in. He believes that a lot of coins they’re seeing now are coins that are being cracked out and resubmitted, and others sent in for regrades. It appears that the majority of their revenue does not come from stickering coins, but instead comes from them making a market in CAC’d coins. Hence, his comment about possibly stopping stickering coins in a few years, and then only making a market in CAC’d coins. Time will tell. But if @Gazes is right, and they do stop stickering coins, the differential that some don’t like will, in all likelihood get higher.
90%? I would imagine it would be hard to evaluate the correctness of the statement. Unless, of course, he’s referring to $10K coins and up. As an example, years ago I bought a 09 VDB in 65RD that’s CAC. It looks the same as one I bought years before in 65RD. Was it worth it to the person who submitted it years ago? I don’t know. Same with a 1903-S MS63 $5 coin I have that’s ~$600. Someone submitted it there and got the sticker. Perhaps the lower value coins will be their future when people submit them? If so, then that 90% will probably be more like 20%. Will it impact the perceived value of CAC? Who knows?
The JA interview Winesteven referred to is worth listening to. JA seems careful with his words and his comment about the percentage of coins CAC has seen was to me the biggest revelation of the interview. I have no reason to not believe his estimate (i thought it was 80% but regardleas it was huge %). At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
@Gazes said:
At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
Even if CAC has seen 100% of all slabbed coins, that doesn't account for ones that aren't slabbed. I think a lot of people underestimate the number of coins that are still raw.
@Gazes said:
At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
Even if CAC has seen 100% of all slabbed coins, that doesn't account for ones that aren't slabbed. I think a lot of people underestimate the number of coins that are still raw.
Keep in mind two things:
1. Many of the raw coins are low in value;
2. Of the raw coins that are not low in value, do you really believe most of the owners of those coins who have had reasons to not even submit them for TPG grading (perhaps out of the psychological fear that it might indeed come back at a lower grade than they purchased it at) will all of a sudden decide to submit their coins for grading AND then separately submit them to CAC?
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@TurtleCat said:
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
@CoinJunkie said:
CAC as a brand will be sold before it would simply close up shop. IMHO, of course.
Now we’re getting off topic, but if you read the interview of JA from a little more than a year ago, you would know that his concern is that in his opinion that of coins eligible for CAC’s, they’ve seen about 90% of the coins that will come in. He believes that a lot of coins they’re seeing now are coins that are being cracked out and resubmitted, and others sent in for regrades. It appears that the majority of their revenue does not come from stickering coins, but instead comes from them making a market in CAC’d coins. Hence, his comment about possibly stopping stickering coins in a few years, and then only making a market in CAC’d coins. Time will tell. But if @Gazes is right, and they do stop stickering coins, the differential that some don’t like will, in all likelihood get higher.
90%? I would imagine it would be hard to evaluate the correctness of the statement. Unless, of course, he’s referring to $10K coins and up. As an example, years ago I bought a 09 VDB in 65RD that’s CAC. It looks the same as one I bought years before in 65RD. Was it worth it to the person who submitted it years ago? I don’t know. Same with a 1903-S MS63 $5 coin I have that’s ~$600. Someone submitted it there and got the sticker. Perhaps the lower value coins will be their future when people submit them? If so, then that 90% will probably be more like 20%. Will it impact the perceived value of CAC? Who knows?
The JA interview Winesteven referred to is worth listening to. JA seems careful with his words and his comment about the percentage of coins CAC has seen was to me the biggest revelation of the interview. I have no reason to not believe his estimate (i thought it was 80% but regardleas it was huge %). At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
No way JA can know for sure the exact percentage of coins he has seen compared to what is out there. But I believe he can get fairly close comparing the pop reports from pcgs and ngc against his database. I would venture to guess the percentage of coins he has seen in the series I collect (Seated & Trade dollars) is much higher than other series such as Lincoln penny’s and Morgan dollars just because of the value of the coins and the huge difference in availability.
JA has provided a great service for collectors and once a member of CAC he will evaluate your coins for a very fair price and won’t even charge you if he doesn’t care for the coins. How is that not a positive thing. He actually looses money offering this service. As mentioned before his money is made buying and selling coins.
When purchasing 4 figure coins and above online that you can’t see in person and sometimes can’t return (if purchased via auction) the assurance that JA has seen it in hand thinks it’s at least a B coin is reassuring. Coin photography online varies and is sometimes tough to catch issues. There are a ton of problem coins in straight holders and it’s helpful to have his opinion based on an in hand inspection.
If you don’t want to pay what it takes for a CAC approved coin....Don’t!!! If you have been doing this for most of your life and feel you don’t need or want JAs service.... more power to you. For me I have learned a great deal about coin surfaces from comparing the non CAC compared to the CAC approved examples. As a fairly newer collector(5 years) who collects 4 to 5 figure coins I’m still learning and I am damn thankful for the service he brought to this market.
This is not uncommon. It happens all the time. The exact coin goes for far more money because the label is on the holder has changed. A PCGS coin sells in a 63 holder and shows up later in the 64 holder and sometimes even later in a 65 holder. Like it or not, this is not unique to the coin in the OP---same coin but different label matters to price
As ive said before, many sharp dealers have told me CAC is an opportunity for those with the best eyes. Many coins arrive at auction houses at the last minute and some will slip through the cracks and not go to CAC. If you can find such a coin, your sharp eye will be rewarded.
The auction price of the coin in the OP with CAC approval makes perfect sense. There are price guides for CAC coins and the price it sold for is consistent. JA is incredibly selective with his stickering of gold and especially the gem Indian series. If you want a gem 1914-D approved by CAC that is the price the market calls for. If you could care less about CAC there are plenty of examples without the sticker that you can pay half the price.
There are many people that collect quarter eagle indians (a very popular series). There are also many people who try to collect coins with CAC approval (you dont have to agree but that is a fact). If you want to build a gem series of indian quarter eagles in cac ---there are only 4 available. That means only 4 collectors can build a set of QE indians in pcgs 65 CaC (there are more 1911-d in 65 cac than 1914-d) The coin in the OP is one of them. My guess is that number will not change much and the price paid for 1914-D CaC will be a bargain down the road.
I'm going to agree with you and add that there are no 66's. That essentially makes those 4 CAC coins tied for "finest known"
Wow, @jmlanzaf agreeing with @Gazes ! THAT’s a true rarity (LOL).
On a more serious note, two points:
1. The differential (premium) for a coin that merits a CAC versus one without a CAC is almost always greater if the percentage of coins in that particular grade with a CAC is small. For example, if a particular date coin graded MS64 has 25% of coins in that grade with CAC’s, the premium paid for that coin with a CAC will typically be much less than another coin where only 6% of coins in that grade have a CAC. That latter coin will typically then have a much larger CAC “premium” over a non CAC coin in that same date/grade. 66 Saints is a good example, in general, of large premiums, as so few merit a CAC.
2. LIKE IT OR NOT, a clear two-tier market has developed over the past few years. As a generalization, coins eligible for a CAC but without one have been dropping in value, often significantly, while those coins with CAC’s have either dropped less, held their own, or have even increased in value over this same period of time.
We always agree on CAC. It's the "investment" nature of coins that always gets him shouting at me.
@Gazes said:
At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
Even if CAC has seen 100% of all slabbed coins, that doesn't account for ones that aren't slabbed. I think a lot of people underestimate the number of coins that are still raw.
Keep in mind two things:
1. Many of the raw coins are low in value;
2. Of the raw coins that are not low in value, do you really believe most of the owners of those coins who have had reasons to not even submit them for TPG grading (perhaps out of the psychological fear that it might indeed come back at a lower grade than they purchased it at) will all of a sudden decide to submit their coins for grading AND then separately submit them to CAC?
This is wrong.
A LOT of old collections are still out there. They are raw because the collectors don't value the TPG's as much as you do. They are raw because the collections have been static, in many cases for 20 or 30 years and the owner doesn't want to sink money into a slab that has no value to him.
I have seen some tremendous raw collections. A huge majority of our coin club are old-timers whose collections are largely raw.
Last year I saw a collection of UK copper that was worth several hundred thousand dollars. 100% raw.
Most SVDB cents (yes, the real ones) and 16-D dimes that come into the local B&Ms are still raw coins. They get slabbed before that get resold these days, but they are currently still raw.
If you want "proof" or at least food for thought. The survivorship of S-VDB cents should be 80-90%. They were rapidly pulled from circulation when their scarcity was realized. So there should be 200,000+ of those coins still floating around. PCGS has certified less than 20,000. NGC less than 10,000. Throw in another 10,000 for ANACS, PCI etc. (generous) and you have 20% of the S-VDB cents in slabs.
The percentage is probably higher for $10k coins. But, the volume of the market is made up of S-VDB and lower material
A trusted name goes in to a trusted acronym. We could call it a "Lust" tax and a day ! For wanting, we pay more. Period. Either we are wading in the shallow end with minnows or swimming the deep with sharks ( & whales). But I like most how Bajjerfan sees it.
We don't disagree as to the amount of raw coins out there, including those of higher value. My point is that since those people have reasons to not have them graded, do you really think they'll send them in to be graded and then sent to CAC separately once graded, or is JA possibly right that he has seen in his opinion about 90% of the coins he's going to see?
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven said:
Keep in mind two things:
1. Many of the raw coins are low in value;
Of course that's true. Who is going to spend money slabbing an inexpensive coin and then spend more to have CAC look at it?
@winesteven said:
2. Of the raw coins that are not low in value, do you really believe most of the owners of those coins who have had reasons to not even > submit them for TPG grading (perhaps out of the psychological fear that it might indeed come back at a lower grade than they purchased it > at) will all of a sudden decide to submit their coins for grading AND then separately submit them to CAC?
I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed. Do you really believe most of the owners of raw coins don't have anything worth slabbing?
@BAJJERFAN said:
The best thing about CACSUS TAXUS is that it's 100% voluntary and optional.
Not really. Unless you as a seller decide you want to take a LOT less money for your coins. And for decent looking NGC coins it's almost imperative to get them looked at by CAC. The price spreads can be quite large. Anyone who is thinking of recouping the most they can, pretty much have to do this. It was not such an issue into mid-2008 when NGC coins brought within 5-15% of PCGS coins. Now with PCGS to NGC spreads at 10-40% for non-generics (stickered or not), it's almost a necessity for your $500 and up MS/PF coins make a visit to CAC.
I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed. Do you really believe most of the owners of raw coins don't have anything worth slabbing?
No, I do believe many raw coins are worth slabbing. I did not say I believed they were not worth slabbing. I said I don't believe the owners will choose to pay to slab the coins, and then pay again to have them sent to CAC.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven said:
I said I don't believe the owners will choose to pay to slab the coins, and then pay again to have them sent to CAC.
Which is what I said above:
"I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed."
@topstuf said:
There's no reason to get a sticker on a coin unless you want people other than yourself to see it as maybe in the top third of the assigned grade.
Or you want your collection to be valued/worth much less than it could be.
Also, CAC is like an insurance policy for your heirs. When it's time for them to sell your collection, non collectors won't know about CAC. Many unscrupulous dealers look for these opportunities to buy coins and make money on the "CAC-spread."
@winesteven said:
We don't disagree as to the amount of raw coins out there, including those of higher value. My point is that since those people have reasons to not have them graded, do you really think they'll send them in to be graded and then sent to CAC separately once graded, or is JA possibly right that he has seen in his opinion about 90% of the coins he's going to see?
It mostly depends on how they are being sold. If they go to auction, the auction company will, where appropriate, do that.
@winesteven said:
I said I don't believe the owners will choose to pay to slab the coins, and then pay again to have them sent to CAC.
Which is what I said above:
"I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed."
And then the new buyers will send them to CAC.
Or the auction company will do it before they sell them.
@BAJJERFAN said:
The best thing about CACSUS TAXUS is that it's 100% voluntary and optional.
Not really. Unless you as a seller decide you want to take a LOT less money for your coins. And for decent looking NGC coins it's almost imperative to get them looked at by CAC. The price spreads can be quite large. Anyone who is thinking of recouping the most they can, pretty much have to do this. It was not such an issue into mid-2008 when NGC coins brought within 5-15% of PCGS coins. Now with PCGS to NGC spreads at 10-40% for non-generics (stickered or not), it's almost a necessity for your $500 and up MS/PF coins make a visit to CAC.
I was referring to collector buyers since 99% of the bitching here comes from them.
@topstuf said:
There's no reason to get a sticker on a coin unless you want people other than yourself to see it as maybe in the top third of the assigned grade.
Seriously? How about for comfort and future sale value? security?
CAC is here to stay, it is a market, and has saved many from pitfalls. While maybe not totally fool proof I totally agree in the concept, and its acceptance is unquestionable.
Lets just say had it not been for CAC, I, and others I know would no longer touch this hobby in any serious way.
Not sure why there is so much push against it here - wondering if those detractors really want to get burnt?, know there collection/wares would never pass muster? OR simply don't want some added protection for heirs or/and themselves.
@marcmoish said:
Not sure why there is so much push against it here -
CAC provides a level of safety for those who are not confident in their grading abilities, making it easier for them to buy coins they might not have considered otherwise and increasing the number of collectors interested in such coins. People who aren't depending on a third party to identify better coins for them are now having to compete with more potential buyers than they were used to doing in "the good old days", often leading to higher prices. And most buyers don't care much for higher prices.
I always tell myself not to wade into these waters (again), but here I go...
For all of the folks claiming that CAC will provide "safety", wasn't that the same argument used for putting coins in plastic in the first place? Just as there are greater and lesser coins at any assigned TPG grade, there are greater and lesser coins with stickers at any assigned grade. Those who cannot tell the difference themselves will ultimately lose money versus those who can.
@marcmoish said:
Not sure why there is so much push against it here -
CAC provides a level of safety for those who are not confident in their grading abilities, making it easier for them to buy coins they might not have considered otherwise and increasing the number of collectors interested in such coins. People who aren't depending on a third party to identify better coins for them are now having to compete with more potential buyers than they were used to doing in "the good old days", often leading to higher prices. And most buyers don't care much for higher prices.
Just a thought...
While i agree with your first point, I believe you're ignoring the reality that even for those that are top notch graders, some/many of them like having their solid coins having that CAC sticker. They recognize it makes it easier to sell at fair value when they (or their heirs) go to sell. That's because instead of limiting the sale to that much smaller base of sharp graders who recognize the quality of those coins without the CAC to pay the higher price, they instead would have a much larger base of potential buyers to sell to if their coins have CAC's.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@panexpoguy said:
Buy the coin in the grade/plastic/sticker you want at the price you think is fair and just know the person you eventually sell to will be doing the same.
Is buyer perception equivalent to reality when buying collectibles? In many cases, if not most, the answer is no.
I am not too clear on what you are saying or asking. Can you state it in a different way? Thanks
My comment concerns something that I have repeatedly noticed over the years. Coin buyers frequently do not understand what they are buying. A grade/plastic/sticker does not always mean the truth. Roadrunner once noted that you sometimes don't get an accurate grade until you submit a coin multiple times and then analyze the results. What a buyer thinks and what is real, regarding a coin transaction, don't always coincide. This is how people get burned, especially if the coin is not sold until many years later.
I believe the above paragraph is the most salient point on this entire thread. Ignore it at your own risk.
We have seen numerous threads about people who have done this in the past, and I personally, have had some anecdotal experiences to this end on my own.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@marcmoish said:
Not sure why there is so much push against it here -
CAC provides a level of safety for those who are not confident in their grading abilities, making it easier for them to buy coins they might not have considered otherwise and increasing the number of collectors interested in such coins. People who aren't depending on a third party to identify better coins for them are now having to compete with more potential buyers than they were used to doing in "the good old days", often leading to higher prices. And most buyers don't care much for higher prices.
@marcmoish said:
Not sure why there is so much push against it here -
CAC provides a level of safety for those who are not confident in their grading abilities, making it easier for them to buy coins they might not have considered otherwise and increasing the number of collectors interested in such coins. People who aren't depending on a third party to identify better coins for them are now having to compete with more potential buyers than they were used to doing in "the good old days", often leading to higher prices. And most buyers don't care much for higher prices.
Just a thought...
It's not just people who lack confidence in their grading abilities. I find it really helpful when buying coins sight unseen. It essentially gives met two expert opinions on the coin so I don't have to simply trust my ability to decipher photos. I will always bid more for a 65 CAC than a 65 NO CAC for that reason.
@CoinJunkie said:
I always tell myself not to wade into these waters (again), but here I go...
For all of the folks claiming that CAC will provide "safety", wasn't that the same argument used for putting coins in plastic in the first place? Just as there are greater and lesser coins at any assigned TPG grade, there are greater and lesser coins with stickers at any assigned grade. Those who cannot tell the difference themselves will ultimately lose money versus those who can.
CAC is a second expert opinion.
If a doctor told you that you had 2 weeks to live and there was nothing to do, might you not want a second opinion?
TPG' grading, rather than just authentication, really rose to allow for a sight unseen market to exist. CAC gives a second opinion on the coin which further assists in the sight unseen or online coin market.
TPG's and CAC are less relevant in a sight seen transaction where you can trust your eyes. You can never 100% trust photos to discern subtle differences.
@winesteven said:
While i agree with your first point, I believe you're ignoring the reality that even for those that are top notch graders, some/many of them like having their solid coins having that CAC sticker. They recognize it makes it easier to sell at fair value when they (or their heirs) go to sell. That's because instead of limiting the sale to that much smaller base of sharp graders who recognize the quality of those coins without the CAC to pay the higher price, they instead would have a much larger base of potential buyers to sell to if their coins have CAC's.
I agree with everything you wrote except for the "ignoring" part, as my previous post wasn't about why people like CAC.
@CoinJunkie said:
I always tell myself not to wade into these waters (again), but here I go...
For all of the folks claiming that CAC will provide "safety", wasn't that the same argument used for putting coins in plastic in the first place? Just as there are greater and lesser coins at any assigned TPG grade, there are greater and lesser coins with stickers at any assigned grade. Those who cannot tell the difference themselves will ultimately lose money versus those who can.
CAC is a second expert opinion.
If a doctor told you that you had 2 weeks to live and there was nothing to do, might you not want a second opinion?
TPG' grading, rather than just authentication, really rose to allow for a sight unseen market to exist. CAC gives a second opinion on the coin which further assists in the sight unseen or online coin market.
TPG's and CAC are less relevant in a sight seen transaction where you can trust your eyes. You can never 100% trust photos to discern subtle differences.
Um, OK. I don't really disagree with anything you've written above. OTOH, it doesn't really address (or refute) my post.
Comments
The best thing about CACSUS TAXUS is that it's 100% voluntary and optional.
CAC as a brand will be sold before it would simply close up shop. IMHO, of course.
The whole perception/reality quandary always takes me back to most stupid boss I ever had to support. A more phony and incompetent person you will never find. She used to try and rationalize her ham handed leadership by telling how she grew up in a family of eight and when they had chicken for dinner she had to be aggressive or she would always end up with a wing. All she managed to accomplish each time she told the story was to leave a room full of the same people wishing that a chicken only cut up into seven pieces....
Anyhow, she loved to say ‘perception is reality’ without really understanding what it meant. What she didn’t grasp was that one person’s perception is THAT person’s reality. So you have a combo coin/plastic/sticker and you have, say, four different collectors/dealers assessing it. The coin, grade, plastic and sticker are what they are, but the coin has five different ‘realities’. Each party has a reality and each is based on the reality that PCGS or NGC had when they graded it and CAC had when they graded it.
To my point, if you like raw coins, buy them, but plan on selling it to someone who also prefers raw coins. If you prefer a specific TPG and CAC or no CAC, look for those with the same perceptions when you go to sell or you will find you that you have spent money on realities that your buyer won’t perceive.
As far as CAC sticking around or not... my understanding is JA is the finalizer but he has trained people to grade by his standards if he retires or otherwise loses interest, it would probably be someone from within who would take over. The only issue is whether they have the established clout JA has earned.
I think the first sign of a transition would be if someone who works at CAC suddenly gets more face time in articles and such. If you see JA speaking well of them and laudatory praises.
Wow, @jmlanzaf agreeing with @Gazes ! THAT’s a true rarity (LOL).
On a more serious note, two points:
1. The differential (premium) for a coin that merits a CAC versus one without a CAC is almost always greater if the percentage of coins in that particular grade with a CAC is small. For example, if a particular date coin graded MS64 has 25% of coins in that grade with CAC’s, the premium paid for that coin with a CAC will typically be much less than another coin where only 6% of coins in that grade have a CAC. That latter coin will typically then have a much larger CAC “premium” over a non CAC coin in that same date/grade. 66 Saints is a good example, in general, of large premiums, as so few merit a CAC.
2. LIKE IT OR NOT, a clear two-tier market has developed over the past few years. As a generalization, coins eligible for a CAC but without one have been dropping in value, often significantly, while those coins with CAC’s have either dropped less, held their own, or have even increased in value over this same period of time.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
IMHO Nice coins Have always brought a premium. Most folks that buy nice coins and pay a premium are experienced enough to not need a CAC sticker. I'm thinking CAC premiums are following the same path when the TPG's started in the late 80's. As an example the Commem market was outrageous as well as the Morgan Dollar market and many others. All CAC is doing is creating the same scenario...drawing in folks hoping to make a buck that don't know how to grade...and placing their bets. This will crash... as it did before!
Makes me wonder if anyone at Stacks or the initial consignment (if any) didn't attempt to sticker the coin first?
Great comments here.
I've always thought of third-party grading as a Beauty Contest.
You have a coin you like. You assess by past beauty pageants the stuff they're looking for, and prepare. You parade it by X judge(s) on Y date, and hope for the best. If those particular judges on that particular date don't care for your coin, well, you can always wait for the next pageant.
But wow. If you score and you get the crown, scepter and robes, here come the endorsement deals and public speaking engagements.
Same coin? Yes. Other coins are prettier, but didn't get the flashbulbs and the "Miss Coin" song? Yes. But your coin gets all the attention ( and premium upon resale).
Sure, you like the coin. But the payoff by entering the contest is enormous.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
OK, you’re saying (and I agree) that there are many among us who can see a premium coin that doesn’t yet have a CAC, and then buy that coin without paying up as if it actually had a CAC. That’s good.
But my question then is, once you now have that lovely coin, why in world would you not spend $15 sending it in to get the CAC sticker that it supposedly merits? After all, if that lovely coin did succeed in getting the sticker, when the time came for you (or your heirs) to sell, it would be easier to sell, and as noted with this post, would sell for a lot more than $15 extra than had it not had the CAC?
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Because enough is enough! So now a person has to pay twice to make his coin market acceptable? I guess I'm finally old enough to say I'm old school. If you want a coin I have, Raw, graded by whoever, or CAC'd...you are going to pay what I want or you won't get the coin. There are more than just me out there with this stance!
PS Don't bring the when I die sht into the conversation because I don't give a sht!
Now we’re getting off topic, but if you read the interview of JA from a little more than a year ago, you would know that his concern is that in his opinion that of coins eligible for CAC’s, they’ve seen about 90% of the coins that will come in. He believes that a lot of coins they’re seeing now are coins that are being cracked out and resubmitted, and others sent in for regrades. It appears that the majority of their revenue does not come from stickering coins, but instead comes from them making a market in CAC’d coins. Hence, his comment about possibly stopping stickering coins in a few years, and then only making a market in CAC’d coins. Time will tell. But if @Gazes is right, and they do stop stickering coins, the differential that some don’t like will, in all likelihood get higher.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
The CAC tax is different from other taxes — we determine whether and when we want to pay it.
Interesting no problem or dichotomy like this on the darkside.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Not true. It's the same as a sales tax---if you don't want to pay the 8% sales tax then you don't have to buy the product.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
One post on this, and I am done. I am done with buying U.S. coins that cost more than a couple hundred dollars because of CAC. I love the U.S. coins I have and don’t plan on selling them soon, but when one man controls the market and controls the selection of coins that should be added to your collection, it’s time to go.
I hope and pray that CAC will leave the market for hammered British and Imperial Roman coins alone. Many collectors in those areas prefer raw coins, myself included, in any case. Maybe that will discourage the spread of the virus.
One man doesn’t control the market or “the selection of coins that should be added to your collection”. And CAC won’t be evaluating British or Imperial Roman coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Im guessing that for every collector who has stopped buying coins just because of CAC, there are 20 collectors who have decided to keep buying coins because of CAC since they now have more assurance of getting a coin that has not been messsed with and is solid for the grade.
If I could convince JA to put 2 cacs on my slab would the coin then be worth twice as much as slabbed with 1 sticker?
Don't know, but for sure the market value will be higher than your coins that don't merit a single CAC (LOL)
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
90%? I would imagine it would be hard to evaluate the correctness of the statement. Unless, of course, he’s referring to $10K coins and up. As an example, years ago I bought a 09 VDB in 65RD that’s CAC. It looks the same as one I bought years before in 65RD. Was it worth it to the person who submitted it years ago? I don’t know. Same with a 1903-S MS63 $5 coin I have that’s ~$600. Someone submitted it there and got the sticker. Perhaps the lower value coins will be their future when people submit them? If so, then that 90% will probably be more like 20%. Will it impact the perceived value of CAC? Who knows?
The JA interview Winesteven referred to is worth listening to. JA seems careful with his words and his comment about the percentage of coins CAC has seen was to me the biggest revelation of the interview. I have no reason to not believe his estimate (i thought it was 80% but regardleas it was huge %). At a minimum it means we will not see huge changes in the CAC census.
Even if CAC has seen 100% of all slabbed coins, that doesn't account for ones that aren't slabbed. I think a lot of people underestimate the number of coins that are still raw.
Keep in mind two things:
1. Many of the raw coins are low in value;
2. Of the raw coins that are not low in value, do you really believe most of the owners of those coins who have had reasons to not even submit them for TPG grading (perhaps out of the psychological fear that it might indeed come back at a lower grade than they purchased it at) will all of a sudden decide to submit their coins for grading AND then separately submit them to CAC?
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
No way JA can know for sure the exact percentage of coins he has seen compared to what is out there. But I believe he can get fairly close comparing the pop reports from pcgs and ngc against his database. I would venture to guess the percentage of coins he has seen in the series I collect (Seated & Trade dollars) is much higher than other series such as Lincoln penny’s and Morgan dollars just because of the value of the coins and the huge difference in availability.
JA has provided a great service for collectors and once a member of CAC he will evaluate your coins for a very fair price and won’t even charge you if he doesn’t care for the coins. How is that not a positive thing. He actually looses money offering this service. As mentioned before his money is made buying and selling coins.
When purchasing 4 figure coins and above online that you can’t see in person and sometimes can’t return (if purchased via auction) the assurance that JA has seen it in hand thinks it’s at least a B coin is reassuring. Coin photography online varies and is sometimes tough to catch issues. There are a ton of problem coins in straight holders and it’s helpful to have his opinion based on an in hand inspection.
If you don’t want to pay what it takes for a CAC approved coin....Don’t!!! If you have been doing this for most of your life and feel you don’t need or want JAs service.... more power to you. For me I have learned a great deal about coin surfaces from comparing the non CAC compared to the CAC approved examples. As a fairly newer collector(5 years) who collects 4 to 5 figure coins I’m still learning and I am damn thankful for the service he brought to this market.
We always agree on CAC. It's the "investment" nature of coins that always gets him shouting at me.
It might get sold...but that's the same as closing up shop. The CAC premium is John Albanese's eyes.
CAC will have to evolve and probably change the sticker to prevent collectors simply rejecting them wholesale.
This is wrong.
A LOT of old collections are still out there. They are raw because the collectors don't value the TPG's as much as you do. They are raw because the collections have been static, in many cases for 20 or 30 years and the owner doesn't want to sink money into a slab that has no value to him.
I have seen some tremendous raw collections. A huge majority of our coin club are old-timers whose collections are largely raw.
Last year I saw a collection of UK copper that was worth several hundred thousand dollars. 100% raw.
Most SVDB cents (yes, the real ones) and 16-D dimes that come into the local B&Ms are still raw coins. They get slabbed before that get resold these days, but they are currently still raw.
If you want "proof" or at least food for thought. The survivorship of S-VDB cents should be 80-90%. They were rapidly pulled from circulation when their scarcity was realized. So there should be 200,000+ of those coins still floating around. PCGS has certified less than 20,000. NGC less than 10,000. Throw in another 10,000 for ANACS, PCI etc. (generous) and you have 20% of the S-VDB cents in slabs.
The percentage is probably higher for $10k coins. But, the volume of the market is made up of S-VDB and lower material
A trusted name goes in to a trusted acronym. We could call it a "Lust" tax and a day ! For wanting, we pay more. Period. Either we are wading in the shallow end with minnows or swimming the deep with sharks ( & whales). But I like most how Bajjerfan sees it.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
We don't disagree as to the amount of raw coins out there, including those of higher value. My point is that since those people have reasons to not have them graded, do you really think they'll send them in to be graded and then sent to CAC separately once graded, or is JA possibly right that he has seen in his opinion about 90% of the coins he's going to see?
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Remember when "widget" was a new word?
How about "dreck?"
No conclusions. Well, maybe a few. Many??
Of course that's true. Who is going to spend money slabbing an inexpensive coin and then spend more to have CAC look at it?
I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed. Do you really believe most of the owners of raw coins don't have anything worth slabbing?
Not really. Unless you as a seller decide you want to take a LOT less money for your coins. And for decent looking NGC coins it's almost imperative to get them looked at by CAC. The price spreads can be quite large. Anyone who is thinking of recouping the most they can, pretty much have to do this. It was not such an issue into mid-2008 when NGC coins brought within 5-15% of PCGS coins. Now with PCGS to NGC spreads at 10-40% for non-generics (stickered or not), it's almost a necessity for your $500 and up MS/PF coins make a visit to CAC.
No, I do believe many raw coins are worth slabbing. I did not say I believed they were not worth slabbing. I said I don't believe the owners will choose to pay to slab the coins, and then pay again to have them sent to CAC.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Which is what I said above:
"I believe a good number of them will never get their coins slabbed. When they pass away and their heirs sell the collection, the new buyers will get them slabbed."
And then the new buyers will send them to CAC.
There's no reason to get a sticker on a coin unless you want people other than yourself to see it as maybe in the top third of the assigned grade.
Or you want your collection to be valued/worth much less than it could be.
Also, CAC is like an insurance policy for your heirs. When it's time for them to sell your collection, non collectors won't know about CAC. Many unscrupulous dealers look for these opportunities to buy coins and make money on the "CAC-spread."
It mostly depends on how they are being sold. If they go to auction, the auction company will, where appropriate, do that.
Or the auction company will do it before they sell them.
Or that, yes.
I was referring to collector buyers since 99% of the bitching here comes from them.
,
Seriously? How about for comfort and future sale value? security?
CAC is here to stay, it is a market, and has saved many from pitfalls. While maybe not totally fool proof I totally agree in the concept, and its acceptance is unquestionable.
Lets just say had it not been for CAC, I, and others I know would no longer touch this hobby in any serious way.
Not sure why there is so much push against it here - wondering if those detractors really want to get burnt?, know there collection/wares would never pass muster? OR simply don't want some added protection for heirs or/and themselves.
CAC provides a level of safety for those who are not confident in their grading abilities, making it easier for them to buy coins they might not have considered otherwise and increasing the number of collectors interested in such coins. People who aren't depending on a third party to identify better coins for them are now having to compete with more potential buyers than they were used to doing in "the good old days", often leading to higher prices. And most buyers don't care much for higher prices.
Just a thought...
I always tell myself not to wade into these waters (again), but here I go...
For all of the folks claiming that CAC will provide "safety", wasn't that the same argument used for putting coins in plastic in the first place? Just as there are greater and lesser coins at any assigned TPG grade, there are greater and lesser coins with stickers at any assigned grade. Those who cannot tell the difference themselves will ultimately lose money versus those who can.
While i agree with your first point, I believe you're ignoring the reality that even for those that are top notch graders, some/many of them like having their solid coins having that CAC sticker. They recognize it makes it easier to sell at fair value when they (or their heirs) go to sell. That's because instead of limiting the sale to that much smaller base of sharp graders who recognize the quality of those coins without the CAC to pay the higher price, they instead would have a much larger base of potential buyers to sell to if their coins have CAC's.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I believe the above paragraph is the most salient point on this entire thread. Ignore it at your own risk.
We have seen numerous threads about people who have done this in the past, and I personally, have had some anecdotal experiences to this end on my own.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
It's not just people who lack confidence in their grading abilities. I find it really helpful when buying coins sight unseen. It essentially gives met two expert opinions on the coin so I don't have to simply trust my ability to decipher photos. I will always bid more for a 65 CAC than a 65 NO CAC for that reason.
CAC is a second expert opinion.
If a doctor told you that you had 2 weeks to live and there was nothing to do, might you not want a second opinion?
TPG' grading, rather than just authentication, really rose to allow for a sight unseen market to exist. CAC gives a second opinion on the coin which further assists in the sight unseen or online coin market.
TPG's and CAC are less relevant in a sight seen transaction where you can trust your eyes. You can never 100% trust photos to discern subtle differences.
I agree with everything you wrote except for the "ignoring" part, as my previous post wasn't about why people like CAC.
Um, OK. I don't really disagree with anything you've written above. OTOH, it doesn't really address (or refute) my post.
100!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"