Certainly, there are lots of NGC- and PCGS-certified coins that are "strong for the grade," but have not been submitted to CAC.
Equally certainly, as a group, coins with a green bean likely are "strong for the grade."
I buy coins based on a combination of what I think of them (ignoring the holder), and how the coin is priced given my impression of the condition and attractiveness of the coin.
I am happy to buy a coin without a green bean, and I am happy to buy a coin with a green bean.
Why anyone would have strong feelings against CAC escapes me; it's a service many find valuable, and those who don't find it valuable can ignore it.
@Cougar1978 said:
Yes your entitled to your opinion too. However “their holder” CACG is not on the bourse yet is it? What about the CAC gold stickered coin that goes bad in the holder.
What about the PCGS or NGC coin that goes bad in the holder? It’s irrelevant to the basis of this discussion, your example was about $20 lib. We weren’t talking about a red wheat cent that turned brown.
That’s ok but in this one will just drop you with an F.
I had an acctg student once who would debate anything. When I finally told him to shut up he countered “what are you going to report me for talking?” No - told him will drop him with an F. He shut up.
@Cougar1978 said:
That’s ok but in this one will just drop you with an F.
I had an acctg student once who would debate anything. When I finally told him to shut up he countered “what are you going to report me for talking?” No - told him will drop him with an F. He shut up.
Please let me know the next time you teach a course, so I can make sure I don’t sign up.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
@johnny010 said:
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
Why do we need grading companies or auction houses? Why do we need the internet? No one is forcing us to use anything, we pay for the service because it has value.
Yes I wonder same thing Johnny. I guess it’s an industry.
In RCI there are a lot of diverse players simply working their angle. Remember the Sopranos where Tony and Christopher would have lunch at Satriales meat co?
At a recent show guy setup next to me had 4 VF nice looking seated Liberty halves in ICG holders for $42 each. Wish now had bought them probably the best deal in the room considering how much many spend on sticker thing. Would just mark up sell as is.
@johnny010 said:
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
Why do we need grading companies or auction houses? Why do we need the internet? No one is forcing us to use anything, we pay for the service because it has value.
Understand but in this scenario I’ve already paid once to have someone look at it and grade it. Then I send to CAC to have them look at it and validate the company I picked/trusted in the first place to let me know if the coin is either graded correctly (to which degree CAC won’t take a position on other than not awarding a sticker) or I get a sticker that says they agree it’s a B or A for the grade, or it’s under-graded in their opinion. Sounds like CAC opening their own grading company is the smart thing to do.
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
@johnny010 said:
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
Why do we need grading companies or auction houses? Why do we need the internet? No one is forcing us to use anything, we pay for the service because it has value.
Understand but in this scenario I’ve already paid once to have someone look at it and grade it. Then I send to CAC to have them look at it and validate the company I picked/trusted in the first place to let me know if the coin is either graded correctly (to which degree CAC won’t take a position on other than not awarding a sticker) or I get a sticker that says they agree it’s a B or A for the grade, or it’s under-graded in their opinion. Sounds like CAC opening their own grading company is the smart thing to do.
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
As you put it, it only makes sense for them to open a grading service now so one doesn’t have to send a coin all around the country. That being said, no one is forced to use grading services or CAC, but the current state of the market dictates that it’s a sensible decision to do so.
Let’s use the example of a 1928 Saint in 67. The coin is raw, and you now want to sell it. Are you gonna sell it raw for ms65-66 money or are you gonna try to get it into a 67 slab where it can bring 15k? Once it’s in the 67 slab are you gonna sell it for 15k or try to CAC it first and sell it for 40k instead?
I don’t know about you, but I’ll be having the coin graded and sending to CAC first. A $35 investment that could net an extra 25k, one of the only bargains in numismatics. A greysheet widget dealer might not find value in the service, but I understand that and It doesn’t affect me at all. Are the premiums sustainable? I have no idea, but there are other things that I don’t collect and I personally wouldn’t pay a premium for, but I don’t go onto those threads and disparage the people that do. (Not saying that you did that Johnny, but just seems to be a recurring theme on this forum lately)
Yes Johnny I have doubts too - especially if the public coming into a show would pay the extra premium for CAC material. Don’t really give much of a hoot about the holder or sticker game and never would pay above the grade on the holder. Let them get that from the sticker guy or a CAC investor.
When CAC graded coins come into the market place will be interesting see how they perform. If can buy them right might pick up a few.
As far as a 1928 67 Saint few people can afford this (most priced out) let alone the public coming in the bourse room doing good have $100 to spend. Paying over $15 k for a coin is a risky investment imo. It could go bad in the holder or market drop. That money would buy a lot of nice Classic Commems which most can afford in 64 and higher. Or a lot of slabbed 69 and 70 bullion silver (ASE, Mexico Libertads) & gold AGB, AGE. Buy it right / buy it smart. Or graded currency - NBN, large size.
IF CAC opens their own grading division, who determines if THEIR stuff is solid for the grade?
We need another sticker...to fill the obvious void. So I give you...
This shows that you have a ** SUPER QUALITY UBER AWESOME COIN** for the grade.
Copyright telephoto1 LLC
@Cougar1978 said:
Yes Johnny I have doubts too - especially if the public coming into a show would pay the extra premium for CAC material. Don’t really give much of a hoot about the holder or sticker game and never would pay above the grade on the holder. Let them get that from the sticker guy or a CAC investor.
When CAC graded coins come into the market place will be interesting see how they perform. If can buy them right might pick up a few.
As far as a 1928 67 Saint few people can afford this (most priced out) let alone the public coming in the bourse room doing good have $100 to spend. Paying over $15 k for a coin is a risky investment imo. It could go bad in the holder or market drop. That money would buy a lot of nice Classic Commems which most can afford in 64 and higher. Or a lot of slabbed 69 and 70 bullion silver (ASE, Mexico Libertads) & gold AGB, AGE. Buy it right / buy it smart. Or graded currency - NBN, large size.
No one ever advocated for a collector walking the bourse with $100 to prioritize or even worry about CAC. The conversation was about coins with significant value discrepancies within a grade. My example about the 67 saint was also in regards to being the selling party, not the buyer.
That being said, I agree that "investing" 15k into anything is risky, and no one ever knows what the market will do in the future. If I pay that much for a coin, its because I love the coin and I want to enjoy it in my collection. However, if you had 15k and a time machine to go back 10 years and you had to pick between 3 choices, would you "invest" in Classic Commems, Silver bullion, or the nicest saint in 67 that you could find? Side note - Can you point me to an example of a classic gold coin that "went bad in the holder" that was not puttied? I'm genuinely curious. What are we talking about here, copper toning?
Btw, it’s considered bad form to go back and add content to your comments after the fact, in an active discussion. It’s one thing to correct grammar, but it’s another to use a comment as a placeholder and modify your points and examples. I've noticed you've been doing this with all of your comments throughout this discussion.
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@johnny010 said:
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
Why do we need grading companies or auction houses? Why do we need the internet? No one is forcing us to use anything, we pay for the service because it has value.
Understand but in this scenario I’ve already paid once to have someone look at it and grade it. Then I send to CAC to have them look at it and validate the company I picked/trusted in the first place to let me know if the coin is either graded correctly (to which degree CAC won’t take a position on other than not awarding a sticker) or I get a sticker that says they agree it’s a B or A for the grade, or it’s under-graded in their opinion. Sounds like CAC opening their own grading company is the smart thing to do.
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
How is that any different than paying for a second opinion before scheduling surgery? More information is always better.
@Catbert said:
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
The newer slabs (last 15 to 20 years) are much less prone to things turning than the original holders which were not as air tight.
@Catbert said:
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
I wonder if the people who worry about that sort of thing caution the people they sell those coins to about the risk and price the coins lower to account for it.
@Catbert said:
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
I wonder if the people who worry about that sort of thing caution the people they sell those coins to about the risk and price the coins lower to account for it.
Given that Cougar has been quite open about his pricing strategy, I suspect that he simply can't buy them at a price that he can mark them up.
Anyone who sells slabbed coins and is only worried about CAC coins turning clearly lacks objectivity.
@Catbert said:
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
I wonder if the people who worry about that sort of thing caution the people they sell those coins to about the risk and price the coins lower to account for it.
Given that Cougar has been quite open about his pricing strategy, I suspect that he simply can't buy them at a price that he can mark them up.
Anyone who sells slabbed coins and is only worried about CAC coins turning clearly lacks objectivity.
I would use different adjectives than the ones you've selected that better reflect his view of customers and the hobby generally. I think there are many here who wouldn't spend a time at his table even if he had something desirable.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Clackamas1 said:
Same coins e.g. date, denomination, PCGS grade and type. One of these merits a CAC sticker, the other does not. Vote on which one is the CAC coin. Mind you, both are the same grade and this is a rare coin My point is CAC means something, you get the advice of the best coin graders on the plant with the sticker
Perfect example, which is very clear even to inexperienced collectors! Thanks for sharing!
Based on the pics the 1st coin is 63/64. The second 58/62. From your guys comments the 1st must be CAC. Is the 1st coin net graded, or under graded, perhaps with a gold bean?
Actually, I disagree, in that I do think it is indeed a perfect example. His point is made since PCGS graded each coin the same grade as each other. CAC felt one of those two coins was solid for the grade, and the other one wasn’t! Is there anyone here that can’t determine which one of those two coins CAC deemed merited their sticker? By the way, the poster of that reply only mentioned a CAC sticker, so I must assume it was green and not gold.
Steve
Actually, I disagree as well.
We do not disagree on the value of CAC.
I have always enjoyed your posts, coins, and enthusiasm Steve.
@DeplorableDan said:
Btw, it’s considered bad form to go back and add content to your comments after the fact, in an active discussion. It’s one thing to correct grammar, but it’s another to use a comment as a placeholder and modify your points and examples. I've noticed you've been doing this with all of your comments throughout this discussion.
If you quote a comment and the poster comes back to edit it later, the original comment will remain in your quote.
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
I think it is sustainable, but not necessarily in a good way. I would not be at all surprised to see the "real" prices in a lot of grades and a lot of series be considered the prices for CAC coins while coins without stickers becoming (sometimes heavily) discounted.
I would not be at all surprised to see the "real" prices in a lot of grades and a lot of series be considered the prices for CAC coins while coins without stickers becoming (sometimes heavily) discounted.
>
That would be hard to justify. The population of CAC coins can be very small relative to the population of TPG coins even with thousand dollar coins. For example only 12% of PCGS MS64 Hawaiians have stickers. The percentage is even lower when you add in NGC Hawaiians.
Except you claimed that CAC ignores strike which is very different.
I did say "Apparently" because of my personal experience, but admittedly, I only work with a few specific series. For me, in the series that I work with, strike is the first thing I look at. We can debate it all day, but I stand by my original statement. CAC stickers do not impress me. You seem to be a fan, so, I apologize if my opinion bothers you.
If you see one of those beaned coins where the strike doesn't meet your expectations have you ever bothered to call John on the phone and ask him why an apparently weak strike was given his blessing? He's always willing to discuss coins that have stickered.
Really?! I'd love to discuss some of his stickered coins with him and how he judges the trade-off between originality and corrosion.
CAC is a very small percentage of PCGS, NGC coins on eBay. Anacs, ICG have been excluded from CAC. Furthermore it is only focused in US Classic Coins. So no don’t see it dominating price guides. CAC prices currently are only reflected in CPG not NN, CF, CW. The other question what percentage of buyers will pay more for the stickered coins. Where will the market go?
As I am sold out of US Classic coins at this time (been there done that) more focused in other areas. I believe CAC demand is high especially among big ticket investors. It will be interesting see the situation when the CAC TPG hits the scene.
Like the Jovian system the overall market is very diverse and not just one of the moons.
Yes certainly there are quote trolls (griefers) in here. Even if one blocks them their quotes can show up I believe. A bummer. And yes if they quote you before you modify post the original shows up.
@johnny010 said:
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
Sustainable in what respect? Many collectors have always paid more for PQ or “A” coins. There is a lot of overlap between CAC and PQ material.
Comments
Top one is CAC
I'll chime in (a bit late, I know).
I find the CAC green sticker to be useful.
Certainly, there are lots of NGC- and PCGS-certified coins that are "strong for the grade," but have not been submitted to CAC.
Equally certainly, as a group, coins with a green bean likely are "strong for the grade."
I buy coins based on a combination of what I think of them (ignoring the holder), and how the coin is priced given my impression of the condition and attractiveness of the coin.
I am happy to buy a coin without a green bean, and I am happy to buy a coin with a green bean.
Why anyone would have strong feelings against CAC escapes me; it's a service many find valuable, and those who don't find it valuable can ignore it.
What about the PCGS or NGC coin that goes bad in the holder? It’s irrelevant to the basis of this discussion, your example was about $20 lib. We weren’t talking about a red wheat cent that turned brown.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
That’s ok but in this one will just drop you with an F.
I had an acctg student once who would debate anything. When I finally told him to shut up he countered “what are you going to report me for talking?” No - told him will drop him with an F. He shut up.
Please let me know the next time you teach a course, so I can make sure I don’t sign up.
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
Why do we need so many parties reviewing coins. Makes me think I need to start another company, hire an expert or ten, and put cool stickers on everything.
Why do we need grading companies or auction houses? Why do we need the internet? No one is forcing us to use anything, we pay for the service because it has value.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Yes I wonder same thing Johnny. I guess it’s an industry.
In RCI there are a lot of diverse players simply working their angle. Remember the Sopranos where Tony and Christopher would have lunch at Satriales meat co?
At a recent show guy setup next to me had 4 VF nice looking seated Liberty halves in ICG holders for $42 each. Wish now had bought them probably the best deal in the room considering how much many spend on sticker thing. Would just mark up sell as is.
Understand but in this scenario I’ve already paid once to have someone look at it and grade it. Then I send to CAC to have them look at it and validate the company I picked/trusted in the first place to let me know if the coin is either graded correctly (to which degree CAC won’t take a position on other than not awarding a sticker) or I get a sticker that says they agree it’s a B or A for the grade, or it’s under-graded in their opinion. Sounds like CAC opening their own grading company is the smart thing to do.
I’m only commenting because I’m seeing the price disparity for CAC coins now and I’m not sure the value the market is paying is sustainable.
As you put it, it only makes sense for them to open a grading service now so one doesn’t have to send a coin all around the country. That being said, no one is forced to use grading services or CAC, but the current state of the market dictates that it’s a sensible decision to do so.
Let’s use the example of a 1928 Saint in 67. The coin is raw, and you now want to sell it. Are you gonna sell it raw for ms65-66 money or are you gonna try to get it into a 67 slab where it can bring 15k? Once it’s in the 67 slab are you gonna sell it for 15k or try to CAC it first and sell it for 40k instead?
I don’t know about you, but I’ll be having the coin graded and sending to CAC first. A $35 investment that could net an extra 25k, one of the only bargains in numismatics. A greysheet widget dealer might not find value in the service, but I understand that and It doesn’t affect me at all. Are the premiums sustainable? I have no idea, but there are other things that I don’t collect and I personally wouldn’t pay a premium for, but I don’t go onto those threads and disparage the people that do. (Not saying that you did that Johnny, but just seems to be a recurring theme on this forum lately)
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Yes Johnny I have doubts too - especially if the public coming into a show would pay the extra premium for CAC material. Don’t really give much of a hoot about the holder or sticker game and never would pay above the grade on the holder. Let them get that from the sticker guy or a CAC investor.
When CAC graded coins come into the market place will be interesting see how they perform. If can buy them right might pick up a few.
As far as a 1928 67 Saint few people can afford this (most priced out) let alone the public coming in the bourse room doing good have $100 to spend. Paying over $15 k for a coin is a risky investment imo. It could go bad in the holder or market drop. That money would buy a lot of nice Classic Commems which most can afford in 64 and higher. Or a lot of slabbed 69 and 70 bullion silver (ASE, Mexico Libertads) & gold AGB, AGE. Buy it right / buy it smart. Or graded currency - NBN, large size.
IF CAC opens their own grading division, who determines if THEIR stuff is solid for the grade?
We need another sticker...to fill the obvious void. So I give you...
This shows that you have a ** SUPER QUALITY UBER AWESOME COIN** for the grade.
Copyright telephoto1 LLC
(Investors Wanted)
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
No one ever advocated for a collector walking the bourse with $100 to prioritize or even worry about CAC. The conversation was about coins with significant value discrepancies within a grade. My example about the 67 saint was also in regards to being the selling party, not the buyer.
That being said, I agree that "investing" 15k into anything is risky, and no one ever knows what the market will do in the future. If I pay that much for a coin, its because I love the coin and I want to enjoy it in my collection. However, if you had 15k and a time machine to go back 10 years and you had to pick between 3 choices, would you "invest" in Classic Commems, Silver bullion, or the nicest saint in 67 that you could find? Side note - Can you point me to an example of a classic gold coin that "went bad in the holder" that was not puttied? I'm genuinely curious. What are we talking about here, copper toning?
Btw, it’s considered bad form to go back and add content to your comments after the fact, in an active discussion. It’s one thing to correct grammar, but it’s another to use a comment as a placeholder and modify your points and examples. I've noticed you've been doing this with all of your comments throughout this discussion.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Cougar also has this fixation about coins going bad in the holder to justify his position. He repeats this in many of his comments. Of course, on rare occasions it happens, however, in the decades i've been in the hobby, I've not had any issue with slabbed coins "turning bad" that I've owned (and I have all the metal types).
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
How is that any different than paying for a second opinion before scheduling surgery? More information is always better.
The newer slabs (last 15 to 20 years) are much less prone to things turning than the original holders which were not as air tight.
I wonder if the people who worry about that sort of thing caution the people they sell those coins to about the risk and price the coins lower to account for it.
Given that Cougar has been quite open about his pricing strategy, I suspect that he simply can't buy them at a price that he can mark them up.
Anyone who sells slabbed coins and is only worried about CAC coins turning clearly lacks objectivity.
I would use different adjectives than the ones you've selected that better reflect his view of customers and the hobby generally. I think there are many here who wouldn't spend a time at his table even if he had something desirable.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Actually, I disagree as well.
We do not disagree on the value of CAC.
I have always enjoyed your posts, coins, and enthusiasm Steve.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Wow griefer city in here lol.
I have a right to modify my comments, edit them as allowed by this blog. If that bothers u - Take a flying leap.
If you quote a comment and the poster comes back to edit it later, the original comment will remain in your quote.
Just sayin'.
I think it is sustainable, but not necessarily in a good way. I would not be at all surprised to see the "real" prices in a lot of grades and a lot of series be considered the prices for CAC coins while coins without stickers becoming (sometimes heavily) discounted.
I would not be at all surprised to see the "real" prices in a lot of grades and a lot of series be considered the prices for CAC coins while coins without stickers becoming (sometimes heavily) discounted.
>
That would be hard to justify. The population of CAC coins can be very small relative to the population of TPG coins even with thousand dollar coins. For example only 12% of PCGS MS64 Hawaiians have stickers. The percentage is even lower when you add in NGC Hawaiians.
Really?! I'd love to discuss some of his stickered coins with him and how he judges the trade-off between originality and corrosion.
CAC is a very small percentage of PCGS, NGC coins on eBay. Anacs, ICG have been excluded from CAC. Furthermore it is only focused in US Classic Coins. So no don’t see it dominating price guides. CAC prices currently are only reflected in CPG not NN, CF, CW. The other question what percentage of buyers will pay more for the stickered coins. Where will the market go?
As I am sold out of US Classic coins at this time (been there done that) more focused in other areas. I believe CAC demand is high especially among big ticket investors. It will be interesting see the situation when the CAC TPG hits the scene.
Like the Jovian system the overall market is very diverse and not just one of the moons.
Yes certainly there are quote trolls (griefers) in here. Even if one blocks them their quotes can show up I believe. A bummer. And yes if they quote you before you modify post the original shows up.
Sustainable in what respect? Many collectors have always paid more for PQ or “A” coins. There is a lot of overlap between CAC and PQ material.