Recent CAC Statistics

Catbert

This data was obtained by listening to a CAC presentation made via the NNP Symposium held recently. The presenter had received this info directly from CAC.

To date number of coins reviewed (as of about 2 weeks ago) comprising 14 years in operation.

626,775 coins received the Green Sticker (41.8%)
7,573 Gold Sticker (.5%)
865,652 rejected or passed for a sticker (57.7%)

Total 1.5M coins reviewed

DelawareDoons

Huh, fun to compare that to mine.

51% Green

4.7% Gold

44.3% Reject

Catbert

I assume your stats involve a learning curve and will continue to skew upward toward sticker success.

JBN

Their data provides a refreshing of TPG populations.
CAC populations report the successful submissions, which are less likely to be cracked out.
Interesting to get a look at the unsuccessful rate.

alaura22

@Catbert said:
This data was obtained by listening to a CAC presentation made via the NNP Symposium held recently. The presenter had received this info directly from CAC.

To date number of coins reviewed (as of about 2 weeks ago) comprising 14 years in operation.

626,775 coins received the Green Sticker (41.8%)
7,573 Gold Sticker (.5%)
865,652 rejected or passed for a sticker (57.7%)

Total 1.5M coins reviewed

****865,652 rejected or passed for a sticker (57.7%) ****?????
You mean 865,652 Rejected...........

Catbert

"passed" is their terminology for rejection. EDIT: This is incorrect. See later post.

ctf_error_coins

Were the 1.5 million coins all seen by just one person?

DelawareDoons

@Catbert said:
I assume your stats involve a learning curve and will continue to skew upward toward sticker success.

I submit a lotta stuff I don't think will bean. Generally, the stuff I do think will bean hits at about 80%. I also submit for other people as well who are also not so discriminating in what they send. All in, we've sent almost 1700 coins over.

Torey

@Catbert said:
"passed" is their terminology for rejection.

It's funny because their terminology in the CAC portal shows "Passed" as a green sticker, "Not CAC" is rejected, and "Exceeded" is gold.
Interesting results, I wonder if the coins reviewed total also includes duplicate rejects that are sent in.

Catbert

I stand corrected. Thanks @CoinConsign

Broadstruck

I'm surprised at the rejection percentage as it seemed they became like Oprah "This gets a sticker; everything gets a sticker"

Walkerguy21D

@DelawareDoons said:

@Catbert said:
I assume your stats involve a learning curve and will continue to skew upward toward sticker success.

I submit a lotta stuff I don't think will bean. Generally, the stuff I do think will bean hits at about 80%. I also submit for other people as well who are also not so discriminating in what they send. All in, we've sent almost 1700 coins over.

This is surprising.
I “assumed” the vast majority of submissions were of nicer coins sent in by knowledgeable and discriminating collectors and dealers. Which led me to believe that a ~58% fail rate was pretty bad; if a random cross selection of coins not cherry-picked beforehand were submitted, it could be considerably worse.
But it sounds like perhaps this really isn’t the case.

logger7

I'd like to see stats on resubmission percentages, how many coins have been sent in 2, 3, 4 or more times?

Maurice Rosen had an article on cac pass rates for different grade ranges; it seemed that the MS66 coins, etc. had a higher success rate than lower grades, which led me to believe that the grading services are tougher on assigning higher grades.

alaura22

@Catbert said:
I stand corrected. Thanks @CoinConsign

That's the point I was trying to make
It's all good.............now

alaura22

@logger7 said:
I'd like to see stats on resubmission percentages, how many coins have been sent in 2, 3, 4 or more times?

Maurice Rosen had an article on cac pass rates for different grade ranges; it seemed that the MS66 coins, etc. had a higher success rate than lower grades, which led me to believe that the grading services are tougher on assigning higher grades.

I would like to see that as well.
I would also like CAC to adapt another service.
The service would be like this:
For a fee, you could submit the cert number of your coin and they would look it up and see if they have already seen the coin. It would save a lot of time shipping the coin back and forth and would save CAC a lot of time not having to get the coin and review it again.
Now, there are some times where you just want to send it in for another review.
JA, are you listening..............

lilolme

@CoinConsign That is an interesting question.

Don't know if they double (or triple...) up the rejects when resubmitted later with same cert #. But if they do, then here is one way to gauge it.

Don't know number of resubmit rejections but can make an assumption to see potential impact.
Assume 10% of total submissions are previously submitted rejects.
Note this is just an assumption and any real number is unknown. Used to just visualize potential impact.

First the reported numbers (and they add up to 1,500,000.)
Next line with assumed 10% of the total submissions being previously submitted rejects and then removed from the total submitted and rejected (removing 150,000 previous rejects).

Submitted... Rejected... Approved... Gold
1,500,000.... 865,652..... 626,775...... 7573.
........................57.7%..........41.8%........0.5%

1,350,000.... 715,652..... 626,775...... 7573.
........................ 53.0%......... 46.4%...... 0.56%

barberkeys

alaura22 - good idea.

lilolme

@Walkerguy21D

This is a relatively small number but several years back I went thru some raw Morgans and sent to PCGS to get graded. These probably had an average value of $500 or so and almost all of them white. They all straight graded and I decided to just sent them all to CAC.

55 sent to CAC
28 Approved
27 Rejected
Zero Gold

Aspie_Rocco

My success rate to date is 75% with getting green beans. I am fairly sure this will change drastically after my most recent 18 coin submission. Looking for gold beans on my 43/2 and 39 ddr, and a few scattered greens. I would honestly be thrilled with even 20% success on the current order.

fathom

The most compelling aspect of that data is the gold sticker rate IMO.

JW77

@alaura22 said:

@logger7 said:
I'd like to see stats on resubmission percentages, how many coins have been sent in 2, 3, 4 or more times?

Maurice Rosen had an article on cac pass rates for different grade ranges; it seemed that the MS66 coins, etc. had a higher success rate than lower grades, which led me to believe that the grading services are tougher on assigning higher grades.

I would like to see that as well.
I would also like CAC to adapt another service.
The service would be like this:
For a fee, you could submit the cert number of your coin and they would look it up and see if they have already seen the coin. It would save a lot of time shipping the coin back and forth and would save CAC a lot of time not having to get the coin and review it again.
Now, there are some times where you just want to send it in for another review.
JA, are you listening..............

I think this is a fabulous suggestion.

brocmitchell

This is interesting to see the global rates and be able to compare to individual:

Total Coins Submitted: 155
Stickered #: 98
Stickered %: 63.22%
Gold #: 13
Gold %: 8.38%

I submit mostly old holders I feel are unlikely to have been submitted before. I have another 40 going through the pipes and frankly speaking, similar to @Aspie_Rocco, I feel it will have a negative impact on my personal statistics... I feel I may be a little rusty after the service interruption, or just irrationally anxious... I'm hoping for the later!

winesteven

Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

BryceM

I'd love to see the data by type. Sticker rates for classic gold are obviously much lower.

Also, for some reason, it seems like 50% of the gold CAC stickers I've seen have been on Merc dimes.

lilolme

@brocmitchell It sounds like you are buying what you believe are nice coins (and in older holders) and then submitting to CAC. This would yield a different success rate versus a global success rate since you are buying the nice material and sending it in.

There are dealers who submit regularly to CAC and don't necessarily prescreen. Sometimes they are submitting slab buys or regrades but can also be raw coins they had graded and then submit to CAC. They submit a lot. Their success rate should be lower.

And as @BryceM noted it will also vary from series to series.

Check the current Legend auction and the Dale Friend bust dollars. 6 CAC out of 31. Are bust dollars tougher? Asking as I don't know.

coinbuf

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This would go against much of what JA has said in the past. Doing so would put a stigma on those coins already seen and they would become almost unsellable unless at a heavy discount. JA does not release the data on the coin that failed to sticker for a very good reason and many collectors would be financially harmed if he was to do what you and alaura22 are suggesting. In fact I think if JA began to sell that data it could very easily lead to a huge class action lawsuit.

Bochiman

@coinbuf said:

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This would go against much of what JA has said in the past. Doing so would put a stigma on those coins already seen and they would become almost unsellable unless at a heavy discount. JA does not release the data on the coin that failed to sticker for a very good reason and many collectors would be financially harmed if he was to do what you and alaura22 are suggesting. In fact I think if JA began to sell that data it could very easily lead to a huge class action lawsuit.

Exactly, but, many people only think about what they want, and they impose that into everything else.
They don't think about the decisions already made by the business or the overall impact it would have.
In this case, it was already communicated as you had stated, and that was the decision made by the business.

Your way of doing it is a valid path. It's not the way I look at the coins, as I look at them all as if I would want to own them, at the price they are, or not. Not everyone can submit, or easily find someone to submit.
Also, not everyone knows about CAC, as I discovered when I played dealer behind a table a couple weekends ago. I was explaining CAC and the sticker to some. Others knew it. But, it did show me how large the collector base is and how small the overall % of those that know as much as most that find their way to these forums.

lilolme

@coinbuf I agree and I was also wondering why would CAC reverse their decision of non-disclosure to promote other dealers activity and sales and activity at auction houses as suggested in the other post. I don't see the benefit to CAC.

alaura22

@coinbuf said:

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This would go against much of what JA has said in the past. Doing so would put a stigma on those coins already seen and they would become almost unsellable unless at a heavy discount. JA does not release the data on the coin that failed to sticker for a very good reason and many collectors would be financially harmed if he was to do what you and alaura22 are suggesting. In fact I think if JA began to sell that data it could very easily lead to a huge class action lawsuit.

Not what I suggested.
I suggested a service where you can submit the cert number to find out weather it has been through CAC.
NOTE: You have to own the coin and show proof that you own the coin and for a fee, they can tell you
Steve is suggesting something else

logger7

@alaura22 said:

@coinbuf said:

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This would go against much of what JA has said in the past. Doing so would put a stigma on those coins already seen and they would become almost unsellable unless at a heavy discount. JA does not release the data on the coin that failed to sticker for a very good reason and many collectors would be financially harmed if he was to do what you and alaura22 are suggesting. In fact I think if JA began to sell that data it could very easily lead to a huge class action lawsuit.

Not what I suggested.
I suggested a service where you can submit the cert number to find out weather it has been through CAC.
NOTE: You have to own the coin and show proof that you own the coin and for a fee, they can tell you
Steve is suggesting something else

Chances are any coin over a certain value level that has not been sequestered away in a collection for 15 years has been to cac, so one can assume a high likelihood of that. It never hurts to include a few extra coins you don't know whether they have seen as they are refunding a lot of resubmit failure coins.

ricko

WOW!!! Reading the OP, I see that CAC has now been in business for 14 YEARS!! How time flies. I remember here on the forum when CAC was formed and introduced..... What an amazing amount of posts and opinions. Of course, it still garners a great deal of commentary, but not like back then. 14 years... Wow... I am getting old faster than ever before. Cheers, RickO

coinbuf

@alaura22 said:

@coinbuf said:

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This would go against much of what JA has said in the past. Doing so would put a stigma on those coins already seen and they would become almost unsellable unless at a heavy discount. JA does not release the data on the coin that failed to sticker for a very good reason and many collectors would be financially harmed if he was to do what you and alaura22 are suggesting. In fact I think if JA began to sell that data it could very easily lead to a huge class action lawsuit.

Not what I suggested.
I suggested a service where you can submit the cert number to find out weather it has been through CAC.
NOTE: You have to own the coin and show proof that you own the coin and for a fee, they can tell you
Steve is suggesting something else

Your suggestion is not all that much different, how do you prove you own the coin? There are many people that are very good with photoshop and it would not be all that difficult to impose a photo of a coin that is for sale somewhere onto todays newspaper.

And what would stop someone from buying a coin off say ebay, getting the coin in hand then finding out it has been seen and then returning the coin to the seller. In that situation the window shopper buyer could even file a SNAD claim because the seller did not disclose that the coin had been seen by CAC.

I understand what you want and are asking for, but even that creates far too many possible issues simply because there are a lot of people in the coin community who have no morals or ethics.

Often times forum members have praised the few sellers that have disclosed the coins they sent in and failed to pass. But even that honest action can have some unintended consciences because some collectors are keeping track of information like that which could come into play if/when a coin comes back around to auction. Sure the number of coins affected by this now is very small, but as more of that information gets out the more impact it can have.

I do not know if you were around a few years ago before PCGS wiped the information off of coin facts, the reason that was done is because people were using that information to point out the effects of gradeflation. Some dealers and collectors objected because it was (at least to them) hurting their business or auction results of some very expensive coins.

My point is that full disclosure is great, but it can also create some unintended collateral damage, this may be a case where less is more.

lusterlover

@BryceM said:
I'd love to see the data by type. Sticker rates for classic gold are obviously much lower.

Also, for some reason, it seems like 50% of the gold CAC stickers I've seen have been on Merc dimes.

Totally agree so I did some poking around. Actually 12% of the gold stickers are for mercs. Of those, a lot of them are for $60 coins that would be $75-$100 coins at the next grade up....

To your first point, certain stickers are more valuable and impressive depending on the grade and series.

lilolme

@lusterlover
To your point about more valuable sticker. Absolutely. In the Morgan series there are many cac that are 2X a non-cac.

I just went to coinfacts and auction prices and it didn't take long to find one.
92 O MS65
non-cac the last 8 or so have sold 2500 to 3600
cac 8400, 8100 and then on GC 7100, 7400, 9100
So a solid 2X and really more
note: the GC 9100 and 7100 is the same coin first selling for 9100 and 2 months later 7100 which shows how sensitive prices can be.

vplite99

14 years! It seems like they just started.

Desert Moon

@logger7 said:
I'd like to see stats on resubmission percentages, how many coins have been sent in 2, 3, 4 or more times?

My experience whatever it is worth is that maybe 1 in 5 of the very pq ones I just can't understand why it does not sticker, will sticker the 2nd or 3rd time. So I have had maybe 4 or 5 of 25 reconsiderations be successful. But these were truly super great coins, most of the rejects once they come back it is pretty obvious why, and usually I knew that going in.

Best, SH

DelawareDoons

@spacehayduke said:

@logger7 said:
I'd like to see stats on resubmission percentages, how many coins have been sent in 2, 3, 4 or more times?

My experience whatever it is worth is that maybe 1 in 5 of the very pq ones I just can't understand why it does not sticker, will sticker the 2nd or 3rd time. So I have had maybe 4 or 5 of 25 reconsiderations be successful. But these were truly super great coins, most of the rejects once they come back it is pretty obvious why, and usually I knew that going in.

Best, SH

I've never gotten a coin to sticker on reconsideration. Have tried several times too. I have a box tucked aside of coins I think deserve gold stickers. Not many, only about 5 coins. But still... Will try those someday.

Floridafacelifter

Thanks for this thread- I’m bidding on a coin without a CAC sticker at David Lawrence and this thread motivated me to email them to inquire- and sure enough they promptly responded that the coin had been sent and did not sticker- props to David Lawrence for their transparency- and I still plan to be in it to win it!

DollarAfterDollar

I feel honored to own 6 gold stickered CAC coins. As a collector I've always strived to only send them the coins I really think deserve beans, so as not to abuse their funds returned policy. That said I have resubmitted 3 coins that didn't bean hoping for reconsideration. None have passed.

The grading services are currently as as strict as ever, accordingly many coins go straight to CAC for consideration.

Without looking it up I think my submission success is around 65+ %.

jkrk

So I'm sitting here wondering....

What percentage of coins going through the first year received green stickers vs coins going through last year?

I would imagine that by definition the percentage passed has to keep getting smaller?

MFeld

@jkrk said:
So I'm sitting here wondering....

What percentage of coins going through the first year received green stickers vs coins going through last year?

I would imagine that by definition the percentage passed has to keep getting smaller?

Why? Maybe submitters tend to be more selective and/or better equipped to know what to submit, now.

BAJJERFAN

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
Were the 1.5 million coins all seen by just one person?

I think that there are 2 "graders" and JA is the finalizer.

lilolme

@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

MFeld

@lilolme said:
@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

Who and what are you referring to at PCGS shows?

lilolme

Sorry the two CAC "graders" that he mentioned.

shorecoll

To a comment above, I'll bet bust dollars are tougher in CAC because those big babies just scream to the crackout artists to try and improve them. I used to see lots of beautiful XF/AU toners when few people were collecting them, so now they're either locked away or have been processed (I mean improved). Could also be they got whacked with the gradeflation hammer and JA doesn't like them at their new grades.

coinbuf

@lilolme said:
@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

@lilolme said:
@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

I have never heard of this, what show did you see that at?

MFeld

@coinbuf said:

@lilolme said:
@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

@lilolme said:
@BAJJERFAN
That is my basic understanding but sometimes a substitute grader. Pre-covid if you went to pcgs show they were often there (maybe still). It was said they could use a green, yellow or red sticker on your slab and if you got a red one, then you were not going to get a green one.

I have never heard of this, what show did you see that at?

He mentioned PCGS shows, but I haven’t heard of that, either.

lilolme

I am getting lost. I am saying that pre-covid (I have not been since Jan 2020 so don't know about since then) that one or both of the noted CAC "graders" would often attend the PCGS show (I only went to the ones in LV). To be clear they were Not there as a representative of CAC but on their on stuff. Is this what the question was about?

oldabeintx

@winesteven said:
Taking @alaura22 ’s idea one step further, you can pay the nominal fee to submit the cert number on a coin you DON’T own, but are considering buying, whether from a dealer or in an auction! I truly believe if you had confidence that the coin (at least in the holder with that cert number) had never been submitted, more dealer sales, and more active auction bidding, would take place, with the buyer willing to take the risk that it may CAC or not. Right now, with no information, I pass on all of those non-CAC coins unless I’m willing to have that coin in my collection knowing that it doesn’t merit a CAC.

Steve

This wont happen unless JA changes his philosophy regarding disclosing coins that didn't bean, which is highly unlikely. Simply adding a fee doesn't matter. Also, without sending a coin in how would JA verify that you DID or DIDN't own the coin?

lilolme

Hope this helps some more. Link to shows on the pcgs website and the noted pcgs members only shows.
https://www.pcgs.com/shows