@DelawareDoons said:
I honestly don't think it's about the money for JA. He's been highly successful in the hobby for decades... He could probably comfortably retire now if he wanted to. I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby, and as a side benefit, he can use CAC to help take care of some of his family. I don't know for sure, but I think they might be one fo those families where the hobby just runs in their blood. If I remember correctly from about 3-4 years ago, JA is on the record as saying they don't make a ton off stickering fees, most of their income comes from making a wholesale market in beaned coins.
At some point, with the ability to do what you enjoy and spend time with family, the money is just a fringe benefit.
A possibility that some people simply can't grasp.......
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
Who said that “JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins”? Saying “I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby.” isn’t remotely close to the same thing as what you implied was said.
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
@DelawareDoons said:
I honestly don't think it's about the money for JA. He's been highly successful in the hobby for decades... He could probably comfortably retire now if he wanted to. I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby, and as a side benefit, he can use CAC to help take care of some of his family. I don't know for sure, but I think they might be one fo those families where the hobby just runs in their blood. If I remember correctly from about 3-4 years ago, JA is on the record as saying they don't make a ton off stickering fees, most of their income comes from making a wholesale market in beaned coins.
At some point, with the ability to do what you enjoy and spend time with family, the money is just a fringe benefit.
A possibility that some people simply can't grasp.......
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
Who said that “JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins”? Saying “I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby.” isn’t remotely close to the same thing as what you implied was said.
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
“Passion for the hobby” (as was surmised by @DelawareDoons) isn’t remotely close to the same thing as being “that passionate about sub-$200 coins”, as you implied.
I have no issue with your opinions, only with your twisting another poster’s words in order to make your point about “capitalizing on the opportunity” or “a smart business move”. And your “luxury electric car” sarcasm doesn’t inspire confidence in your sincerity.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Catbert said:
There can be no doubt that with the CAC choke point being reached twice in a matter of months that this service is here to stay (and after 14 years in business, of course). The bifurcation in the market has been cemented and it's a no brainer for dealers and collectors to send in coins to capture the premium assigned to those coins who get the bean.
@DelawareDoons said:
I honestly don't think it's about the money for JA. He's been highly successful in the hobby for decades... He could probably comfortably retire now if he wanted to. I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby, and as a side benefit, he can use CAC to help take care of some of his family. I don't know for sure, but I think they might be one fo those families where the hobby just runs in their blood. If I remember correctly from about 3-4 years ago, JA is on the record as saying they don't make a ton off stickering fees, most of their income comes from making a wholesale market in beaned coins.
At some point, with the ability to do what you enjoy and spend time with family, the money is just a fringe benefit.
A possibility that some people simply can't grasp.......
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
Who said that “JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins”? Saying “I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby.” isn’t remotely close to the same thing as what you implied was said.
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
“Passion for the hobby” (as was surmised by @DelawareDoons) isn’t remotely close to the same thing as being “that passionate about sub-$200 coins”, as you implied.
I have no issue with your opinions, only with your twisting another poster’s words in order to make your point about “capitalizing on the opportunity” or “a smart business move”. And your “luxury electric car” sarcasm doesn’t inspire confidence in your sincerity.
Passion for the hobby doesn’t necessarily require that CAC accept widget coins. There must be some reason he accepts them. Altruism and passion for the hobby just seem a bit far fetched to me. The coin world literally is all about money. Maybe I’m looking at it the wrong way, but there would be no need to look at common date aspiring gold bean coin candidates if there wasn’t a financial reward in it. I just don’t understand the “it’s not about the money” rhetoric when you look at the type of material that contributes significantly to the backlog.
With this said, I’m genuinely surprised there isn’t a price floor of some sort. No coins worth less than $XXXX dollars or coins below $XXXX are assessed a surcharge. When you assume a position of enormous power or influence to the point you can make a trinket worth multiple times its current value, you set yourself up for this recurring issue unless you limit what you accept. Reviewing thousands of proof Franklin half dollars or gem 1938-D nickels doesn’t promote CAC’s interest and detracts its attention from coins where there is value for CAC.
"Assume a position of enormous power or influence"? Sounds ominous. Maybe someone else should assume such a position in opposition? A cage match could even be arranged on pay-per-view.
CAC offers a service that people find has value. If they didn't, they wouldn't send their coins in. Simple as that.
@MasonG said:
CAC offers a service that people find has value. If they didn't, they wouldn't send their coins in. Simple as that.
Which is all the more reason why capitalizing on the demand with higher submission fees makes sense from a business perspective. I find it odd that my initial post to this thread proved to be so controversial.
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
_
It may be time for CAC to define a "widget" coin that is no longer acceptable for submission. In doing so, the current clientele can be reduced in order to focus on "expensive advanced collector/investor coins".
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
ANA LM
LSCC
EAC
FUN
@DelawareDoons said:
I honestly don't think it's about the money for JA. He's been highly successful in the hobby for decades... He could probably comfortably retire now if he wanted to. I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby, and as a side benefit, he can use CAC to help take care of some of his family. I don't know for sure, but I think they might be one fo those families where the hobby just runs in their blood. If I remember correctly from about 3-4 years ago, JA is on the record as saying they don't make a ton off stickering fees, most of their income comes from making a wholesale market in beaned coins.
At some point, with the ability to do what you enjoy and spend time with family, the money is just a fringe benefit.
A possibility that some people simply can't grasp.......
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
Who said that “JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins”? Saying “I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby.” isn’t remotely close to the same thing as what you implied was said.
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
“Passion for the hobby” (as was surmised by @DelawareDoons) isn’t remotely close to the same thing as being “that passionate about sub-$200 coins”, as you implied.
I have no issue with your opinions, only with your twisting another poster’s words in order to make your point about “capitalizing on the opportunity” or “a smart business move”. And your “luxury electric car” sarcasm doesn’t inspire confidence in your sincerity.
Passion for the hobby doesn’t necessarily require that CAC accept widget coins. There must be some reason he accepts them. Altruism and passion for the hobby just seem a bit far fetched to me. The coin world literally is all about money. Maybe I’m looking at it the wrong way, but there would be no need to look at common date aspiring gold bean coin candidates if there wasn’t a financial reward in it. I just don’t understand the “it’s not about the money” rhetoric when you look at the type of material that contributes significantly to the backlog.
With this said, I’m genuinely surprised there isn’t a price floor of some sort. No coins worth less than $XXXX dollars or coins below $XXXX are assessed a surcharge. When you assume a position of enormous power or influence to the point you can make a trinket worth multiple times its current value, you set yourself up for this recurring issue unless you limit what you accept. Reviewing thousands of proof Franklin half dollars or gem 1938-D nickels doesn’t promote CAC’s interest and detracts its attention from coins where there is value for CAC.
Have you considered the possibility that CAC accepts lower-value coins, simply because a lot of collectors have lower value coins that they’d like to submit and that JA cares about collectors? I can only imagine how many complaints and accusations there’d be that CAC favored dealers, if they wouldn’t accept lower value coins.
As I’m sure you know, CAC doesn’t “make a trinket worth multiple times its current value”. The marketplace determines value.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@DelawareDoons said:
I honestly don't think it's about the money for JA. He's been highly successful in the hobby for decades... He could probably comfortably retire now if he wanted to. I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby, and as a side benefit, he can use CAC to help take care of some of his family. I don't know for sure, but I think they might be one fo those families where the hobby just runs in their blood. If I remember correctly from about 3-4 years ago, JA is on the record as saying they don't make a ton off stickering fees, most of their income comes from making a wholesale market in beaned coins.
At some point, with the ability to do what you enjoy and spend time with family, the money is just a fringe benefit.
A possibility that some people simply can't grasp.......
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
Who said that “JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins”? Saying “I think he runs CAC out of a passion for the hobby.” isn’t remotely close to the same thing as what you implied was said.
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
“Passion for the hobby” (as was surmised by @DelawareDoons) isn’t remotely close to the same thing as being “that passionate about sub-$200 coins”, as you implied.
I have no issue with your opinions, only with your twisting another poster’s words in order to make your point about “capitalizing on the opportunity” or “a smart business move”. And your “luxury electric car” sarcasm doesn’t inspire confidence in your sincerity.
Passion for the hobby doesn’t necessarily require that CAC accept widget coins. There must be some reason he accepts them. Altruism and passion for the hobby just seem a bit far fetched to me. The coin world literally is all about money. Maybe I’m looking at it the wrong way, but there would be no need to look at common date aspiring gold bean coin candidates if there wasn’t a financial reward in it. I just don’t understand the “it’s not about the money” rhetoric when you look at the type of material that contributes significantly to the backlog.
With this said, I’m genuinely surprised there isn’t a price floor of some sort. No coins worth less than $XXXX dollars or coins below $XXXX are assessed a surcharge. When you assume a position of enormous power or influence to the point you can make a trinket worth multiple times its current value, you set yourself up for this recurring issue unless you limit what you accept. Reviewing thousands of proof Franklin half dollars or gem 1938-D nickels doesn’t promote CAC’s interest and detracts its attention from coins where there is value for CAC.
Have you considered the possibility that CAC accepts lower-value coins, simply because a lot of collectors have lower value coins that they’d like to submit and that JA cares about collectors? I can only imagine how many complaints and accusations there’d be that CAC favored dealers, if they wouldn’t accept lower value coins.
Comments
Do you think he chooses to review ultra widgets for passion or altruism (when the submission fee totals the coin’s value) that created the back log? I don’t. The most plausible reason then is money hence my comments about capitalizing on the opportunity. Businesses exist to make money and CAC is no different. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Everything else is going up, and unlike coin values, the CAC sticker keeps up with inflation. I think it is a smart business move.
Maybe JA will buy a new luxury electric car (Mercedes EQS) to help say the planet or at least buy CAC a generator (there was mention of a power outage creating back log in other threads).
“Passion for the hobby” (as was surmised by @DelawareDoons) isn’t remotely close to the same thing as being “that passionate about sub-$200 coins”, as you implied.
I have no issue with your opinions, only with your twisting another poster’s words in order to make your point about “capitalizing on the opportunity” or “a smart business move”. And your “luxury electric car” sarcasm doesn’t inspire confidence in your sincerity.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Well said Catbert.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
Passion for the hobby doesn’t necessarily require that CAC accept widget coins. There must be some reason he accepts them. Altruism and passion for the hobby just seem a bit far fetched to me. The coin world literally is all about money. Maybe I’m looking at it the wrong way, but there would be no need to look at common date aspiring gold bean coin candidates if there wasn’t a financial reward in it. I just don’t understand the “it’s not about the money” rhetoric when you look at the type of material that contributes significantly to the backlog.
With this said, I’m genuinely surprised there isn’t a price floor of some sort. No coins worth less than $XXXX dollars or coins below $XXXX are assessed a surcharge. When you assume a position of enormous power or influence to the point you can make a trinket worth multiple times its current value, you set yourself up for this recurring issue unless you limit what you accept. Reviewing thousands of proof Franklin half dollars or gem 1938-D nickels doesn’t promote CAC’s interest and detracts its attention from coins where there is value for CAC.
"Assume a position of enormous power or influence"? Sounds ominous. Maybe someone else should assume such a position in opposition? A cage match could even be arranged on pay-per-view.
CAC offers a service that people find has value. If they didn't, they wouldn't send their coins in. Simple as that.
Which is all the more reason why capitalizing on the demand with higher submission fees makes sense from a business perspective. I find it odd that my initial post to this thread proved to be so controversial.
Do you think JA is really that passionate about sub $200 coins? I don’t. I could believe that for more expensive advanced collector/investor coins, but not the widgets.
_
It may be time for CAC to define a "widget" coin that is no longer acceptable for submission. In doing so, the current clientele can be reduced in order to focus on "expensive advanced collector/investor coins".
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
ANA LM
LSCC
EAC
FUN
Have you considered the possibility that CAC accepts lower-value coins, simply because a lot of collectors have lower value coins that they’d like to submit and that JA cares about collectors? I can only imagine how many complaints and accusations there’d be that CAC favored dealers, if they wouldn’t accept lower value coins.
As I’m sure you know, CAC doesn’t “make a trinket worth multiple times its current value”. The marketplace determines value.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
>
Fair points.