How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
Perhaps not, but if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the beaned stuff usually gets a look before, if not instead of the non beaned versions. CAC even states that their sticker "doesn't add value", but value guides and prices realized in the real world say otherwise. Not that I agree with it mind you. The coin should stand or fall on its own merit IMO but the true believers often can't see beyond a label or bean.
What CAC is implying is indeed the value guides and prices realized are higher, not because of the sticker, but because they’re nicer coins, and being they’re nicer coins is why the stickers were applied! See the difference?
Steve
Steve - I'd like to wager that if you have a CAC'd coin and solicited bids and then removed the sticker and solicited bids again, I bet CAC's assertion would be disproven when comparing the bids.
Does this mean that an exact identical coin. "Non-cac" versus a "cac" version would get the same bids? Based on my limited experience on primarily 2k or less mostly morgans this is absolutely not what I have experienced.
Yes, same coin, but different results. So, your experience underscores my point.
@dollarfan said:
Does this mean that an exact identical coin. "Non-cac" versus a "cac" version would get the same bids? Based on my limited experience on primarily 2k or less mostly morgans this is absolutely not what I have experienced.
Yes, same coin, but different results. So, your experience underscores my point.
There are people who won't pay cac prices for non-cac coins, so the demand for the exact same coin is lower (fewer interested buyers) without a sticker than with it. Prices reflect demand.
How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog? https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that CAC brings premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
What CAC is implying is indeed the value guides and prices realized are higher, not because of the sticker, but because they’re nicer coins, and being they’re nicer coins is why the stickers were applied! See the difference?
How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog? https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that the bring premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
There is the inference by CAC that the coins with CAC stickers are nicer, hence they point out that “CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023”, etc., etc.
YOU’RE WELCOME.
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Lets try a different angle. Lets say I want to buy a nice mint state 1911 Indian $5 with no major distractions and some color. CPG is as follows:
64 - 3500
64+ - 5000
65 - 22,500
So anyways, I have up to $5000 to spend, because I don't want to spend 65 money. I can afford, and want to find the nicest 64 possible before the huge price jump. In theory, I'm looking for a coin that's 64.7 or better with fantastic eye appeal. Do I have a better chance of finding a coin like that in the group of coins that failed to sticker, or in the group of stickered coins?
IF you believe that the sticker doesn't add anything except CACs opinion you could theoretically find it in either group of coins, or in the 3rd group...coins not yet sent to CAC.
@winesteven said:
There is the inference by CAC that the coins with CAC stickers are nicer, hence they point out that “CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023”, etc., etc.
YOU’RE WELCOME.
The THANK YOU was a response to Proof Collections' post.
What CAC is implying is indeed the value guides and prices realized are higher, not because of the sticker, but because they’re nicer coins, and being they’re nicer coins is why the stickers were applied! See the difference?
How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog? https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that the bring premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
THANK YOU.
Good grief, who cares? Big deal, they have a blog stating that CAC coins are bringing premiums, are they wrong? It's called marketing and all the TPGs do it, and I don't even understand why you guys insist on fixating on semantics while ignoring the actual point I was making. Supply and demand, end of story.
@ProofCollection I thought we had finally made it on to the same page. I even agreed with your last comment in entirety, but you couldn't help yourself from finding a nit to pick. We're just going in circles now, you two can carry on without me.
Lets try a different angle. Lets say I want to buy a nice mint state 1911 Indian $5 with no major distractions and some color. CPG is as follows:
64 - 3500
64+ - 5000
65 - 22,500
So anyways, I have up to $5000 to spend, because I don't want to spend 65 money. I can afford, and want to find the nicest 64 possible before the huge price jump. In theory, I'm looking for a coin that's 64.7 or better with fantastic eye appeal. Do I have a better chance of finding a coin like that in the group of coins that failed to sticker, or in the group of stickered coins?
IF you believe that the sticker doesn't add anything except CACs opinion you could theoretically find it in either group of coins, or in the 3rd group...coins not yet sent to CAC.
Here’s the problem with the point you’re still trying to make:
The second group of gold coins (the group that failed), failed for a reason - either they are low end for the grade, overgraded, or have surface issues that in the opinion of CAC are defects. Dan nor I want gold coins with any of those issues/problems, but be my guest.
I agree that in theory in the the third group, some of the gold coins that have not been submitted to CAC, can indeed be defect-free coins and are solid for the grade. Due to so few gold coins meriting CAC stickers because of surface issues, there is a large premium for those gold coins without those issues. Since it’s relatively inexpensive to have CAC check, there’s probably not a solid percentage of gold coins in that third group without those problems. Your skills are probably better than mine, so I truly wish you well in finding those defect-free gold coins that are solid for the grade that haven’t yet been sent to CAC. I can guarantee you should be able to buy those coins for less than Dan and I pay.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Lets try a different angle. Lets say I want to buy a nice mint state 1911 Indian $5 with no major distractions and some color. CPG is as follows:
64 - 3500
64+ - 5000
65 - 22,500
So anyways, I have up to $5000 to spend, because I don't want to spend 65 money. I can afford, and want to find the nicest 64 possible before the huge price jump. In theory, I'm looking for a coin that's 64.7 or better with fantastic eye appeal. Do I have a better chance of finding a coin like that in the group of coins that failed to sticker, or in the group of stickered coins?
IF you believe that the sticker doesn't add anything except CACs opinion you could theoretically find it in either group of coins, or in the 3rd group...coins not yet sent to CAC.
Here’s the problem with the point you’re still trying to make:
The second group of gold coins (the group that failed), failed for a reason - either they are low end for the grade, overgraded, or have surface issues that in the opinion of CAC are defects. Dan nor I want gold coins with any of those issues/problems, but be my guest.
I agree that in theory in the the third group, some of the gold coins that have not been submitted to CAC, can indeed be defect-free coins and are solid for the grade. Due to so few gold coins meriting CAC stickers because of surface issues, there is a large premium for those gold coins without those issues. Since it’s relatively inexpensive to have CAC check, there’s probably not a solid percentage of gold coins in that third group without those problems. Your skills are probably better than mine, so I truly wish you well in finding those defect-free gold coins that are solid for the grade that haven’t yet been sent to CAC. I can guarantee you should be able to buy those coins for less than Dan and I pay.
Steve
The only points I've tried to make here are a) that CAC is not a panacea, b) that it can be demonstrably proven that stickers, though claimed to not add value, most assuredly add COST at a minimum, and c) that many buyers believe they are and do.
With that I think this horse has been beaten enough. Peace.
@winesteven said:
There is the inference by CAC that the coins with CAC stickers are nicer, hence they point out that “CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023”, etc., etc.
YOU’RE WELCOME.
The THANK YOU was a response to Proof Collections' post.
“Oh, I see”, said the blind man. My error in misinterpretation. Thanks for the clarification.👌
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
What CAC is implying is indeed the value guides and prices realized are higher, not because of the sticker, but because they’re nicer coins, and being they’re nicer coins is why the stickers were applied! See the difference?
How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog? https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that the bring premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
THANK YOU.
Good grief, who cares? Big deal, they have a blog stating that CAC coins are bringing premiums, are they wrong? It's called marketing and all the TPGs do it, and I don't even understand why you guys insist on fixating on semantics while ignoring the actual point I was making. Supply and demand, end of story.
@ProofCollection I thought we had finally made it on to the same page. I even agreed with your last comment in entirety, but you couldn't help yourself from finding a nit to pick. We're just going in circles now, you two can carry on without me.
I'm not trying to argue with you but when you make the bold statement, "CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq" and there is direct contradictory evidence, it warrants mentioning doesn't it? Or should we all overlook it so as not to step on your toes? I'm not saying it's a big deal, just that there is evidence that contradicts your assertion.
What CAC is implying is indeed the value guides and prices realized are higher, not because of the sticker, but because they’re nicer coins, and being they’re nicer coins is why the stickers were applied! See the difference?
How does my statement defy logic? CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”.
In the case of a gold bean, that's EXACTLY what it means, at least in CAC's opinion.
NO ONE ever said anything about gold stickers. We were talking about green, which do NOT indicate the coin is "Special/PQ"
There are plenty of non-beaned slabs that are nice coins that the sticker crowd simply pass on, thinking that absence of one means inferior quality and/or lesser value. So what does that imply to you?
It implies that people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value. Some collectors choose to patronize PCGS and skip over NGC coins, others buy PCGS/NGC but choose to skip over ICG and Anacs holders. Does it bother you that collectors have preferences and buy what they like? If other collectors are skipping over coins without CAC, then there's less competition for you to buy them if they're that nice, right?
This isn't about having more for higher info buyers to acquire, though that statement is essentially true. Obviously people buy what they like. But- you yourself just stated it perfectly... "people choose to pay for what they perceive to be of value". And people perceive the bean to indicate that the coin is, in fact, "special" or "PQ" versus a non-bean example, otherwise the service would not still exist.
Ok, but what is the point you're making? CAC doesn't claim that beaned coins are special or PQ. Public perception may be otherwise. What is the issue?
facepalm...you're the one saying "CAC approval doesn’t mean “special/pq”." I simply pointed out that it DOES mean that to a LOT of collectors, and many dealers for that matter. And then you just agreed...
CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who operates with the perception that a CAC coin is automatically PQ, and I talk to a lot of "CAC guys", quite regularly I might add. CAC is merely a tool, and I might look at 50 examples with CAC stickers before I pull the trigger on one. It's not like I come across the first coin with a CAC sticker and think "Ooooh this must be PQ, I'll take it!" LOL
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog? https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that the bring premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
THANK YOU.
Good grief, who cares? Big deal, they have a blog stating that CAC coins are bringing premiums, are they wrong? It's called marketing and all the TPGs do it, and I don't even understand why you guys insist on fixating on semantics while ignoring the actual point I was making. Supply and demand, end of story.
@ProofCollection I thought we had finally made it on to the same page. I even agreed with your last comment in entirety, but you couldn't help yourself from finding a nit to pick. We're just going in circles now, you two can carry on without me.
I'm not trying to argue with you but when you make the bold statement, "CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq" and there is direct contradictory evidence, it warrants mentioning doesn't it? Or should we all overlook it so as not to step on your toes? I'm not saying it's a big deal, just that there is evidence that contradicts your assertion.
Ok, perhaps I could have changed my wording said CAC does not market their product on the basis that all stickered coins are special/pq (B coins). Is that better? Regardless, supply and demand and market perception are what really matters, not the marketing fluff on their website.
The only points I've tried to make here are a) that CAC is not a panacea, b) that it can be demonstrably proven that stickers, though claimed to not add value, most assuredly add COST at a minimum, and c) that many buyers believe they are and do.
In today's market environment, coins are regularly bought and sold on the basis of pictures, not in-hand inspections. Even in-hand inspections at a brick and mortar coin shop, coin show, or auction house room cannot duplicate CAC's perfect lighting conditions for evaluating coins That is the value of a CAC.
While a CAC sticker does cost at least $16 (plus the cost of mailings), the CAC price guide often values coins less than PCGS or NGC price guides.
@JoeLewis said:
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think you get what they’re doing.
I get what they're doing. I disagree with how it's said to work and I think it's misleading how they describe it.
@JoeLewis said:
There will be no “low end for the grade” coins in their holders.
Regardless of whatever grade you call it, there is a transition point from one grade to the next. This cannot be avoided. The coins just above that point are low end. There will always be low end for the grade coins. Saying they don't exist is ignoring reality.
@JoeLewis said:
That B coin is solid for that grade [65]. A few more bag marks, and then it would not be solid for the grade [65].
No. Under the proposed system, it would not even be a 65. It would be a 64. I don't know how you can get any more low end than having a couple of bagmarks drop a coin from a 65 to a 64.
[ ] - my edits to quote above
@JoeLewis said:
So it would bump to the next lower grade where it would be upper end for THAT grade.
Yes.
So if they refused to holder the C coins, and mailed them back raw to the submitter, would you then say that the B coins are now low end for that grade?
Yes because the grading scale has changed such that those no longer meet the new grading standard. Then we need a sticker to identify which CACG coins are the new liner coins. Then rinse and repeat. In the end, maybe it will become obvious that the coin is the coin and as long as the price is right, the rest is largely semantic fluff.
@shish said:
Relax! JA has promised to continue applying stickers to coins for 10 years. However, the sticker prices will be increased, the exact prices have yet to be determined.
This thread is a A learning experience.
Quite anumber of intelligent posts. All sides are covered.
I'm watching and waiting attempting to figure out how to play the new game. Life is a game and I'm still working on that one.
So, with the new grading company... I'm wondering if we are looking at the potential for sticker shock?
In the process of building a PCGS 12 piece and buying the coins I like but with the caveat that they have to be 65s and have high(er) rarity scores. Keeping it very simple. Prefer no bag marks on the face. Just picked up a coin from Hansen’s past that doesn’t have the luster I normally prefer but has the appeal of an ugly dog that you just like right away “for some reason”. No sticker, and I’m sure it’s been sent.
I wish CAC continued success since I want American business to succeed and I agree with many here that he’s not being greedy / genuinely wants to help the industry. Don’t love the idea of 65s being turned into 64s. Wouldn’t be interested in a 64+ set either, which I think is the uphill battle for CAC.
Step 1: search for 65s
Step 2: compare rarity (yes this could be step one for efficiency but I like looking at as many 65s as possible to build my skill set)
Step 3: compare eye appeal on potential coins
Step 4: consider value proposition (where CAC currently has an edge)
Step 5: buy
I believe CACG downgrading coins can, in the short term, create value for PCGS coins because you have PCGS rarity scores that will go up after a certain percentage of 65s come out of the total available 65 population (one of the rarity lines PCGS reports on). Seems 65c would be the better play for CAC. Maybe long term PCGS moves rarity to 64 and up. Time will tell.
Comments
Yes, same coin, but different results. So, your experience underscores my point.
There are people who won't pay cac prices for non-cac coins, so the demand for the exact same coin is lower (fewer interested buyers) without a sticker than with it. Prices reflect demand.
My point was to contest CAC's assertion (and Steve's echo) that their sticker does "not add value".
I beg to differ. Have you seen the CAC blog?
https://www.caccoin.com/news/
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in January 2023
CAC Coins Bring Premiums in December 2022
etc.
etc.
So while the claim that CAC brings premiums does not mean that their coins are special/pq per se, there is a strong inference.
THANK YOU.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
There is the inference by CAC that the coins with CAC stickers are nicer, hence they point out that “CAC Coins Bring Premiums in February 2023”, etc., etc.
YOU’RE WELCOME.
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
IF you believe that the sticker doesn't add anything except CACs opinion you could theoretically find it in either group of coins, or in the 3rd group...coins not yet sent to CAC.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
The THANK YOU was a response to Proof Collections' post.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Good grief, who cares? Big deal, they have a blog stating that CAC coins are bringing premiums, are they wrong? It's called marketing and all the TPGs do it, and I don't even understand why you guys insist on fixating on semantics while ignoring the actual point I was making. Supply and demand, end of story.
@ProofCollection I thought we had finally made it on to the same page. I even agreed with your last comment in entirety, but you couldn't help yourself from finding a nit to pick. We're just going in circles now, you two can carry on without me.
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
Here’s the problem with the point you’re still trying to make:
Steve
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 only points I've tried to make here are a) that CAC is not a panacea, b) that it can be demonstrably proven that stickers, though claimed to not add value, most assuredly add COST at a minimum, and c) that many buyers believe they are and do.
With that I think this horse has been beaten enough. Peace.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
“Oh, I see”, said the blind man. My error in misinterpretation. Thanks for the clarification.👌
Steve
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'm not trying to argue with you but when you make the bold statement, "CAC does not market their product on the basis that the stickered coins are special/pq" and there is direct contradictory evidence, it warrants mentioning doesn't it? Or should we all overlook it so as not to step on your toes? I'm not saying it's a big deal, just that there is evidence that contradicts your assertion.
Ok, perhaps I could have changed my wording said CAC does not market their product on the basis that all stickered coins are special/pq (B coins). Is that better? Regardless, supply and demand and market perception are what really matters, not the marketing fluff on their website.
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
In today's market environment, coins are regularly bought and sold on the basis of pictures, not in-hand inspections. Even in-hand inspections at a brick and mortar coin shop, coin show, or auction house room cannot duplicate CAC's perfect lighting conditions for evaluating coins That is the value of a CAC.
While a CAC sticker does cost at least $16 (plus the cost of mailings), the CAC price guide often values coins less than PCGS or NGC price guides.
Yes because the grading scale has changed such that those no longer meet the new grading standard. Then we need a sticker to identify which CACG coins are the new liner coins. Then rinse and repeat. In the end, maybe it will become obvious that the coin is the coin and as long as the price is right, the rest is largely semantic fluff.
This thread is a A learning experience.
Quite anumber of intelligent posts. All sides are covered.
I'm watching and waiting attempting to figure out how to play the new game. Life is a game and I'm still working on that one.
So, with the new grading company... I'm wondering if we are looking at the potential for sticker shock?
Pretty good read.
In the process of building a PCGS 12 piece and buying the coins I like but with the caveat that they have to be 65s and have high(er) rarity scores. Keeping it very simple. Prefer no bag marks on the face. Just picked up a coin from Hansen’s past that doesn’t have the luster I normally prefer but has the appeal of an ugly dog that you just like right away “for some reason”. No sticker, and I’m sure it’s been sent.
I wish CAC continued success since I want American business to succeed and I agree with many here that he’s not being greedy / genuinely wants to help the industry. Don’t love the idea of 65s being turned into 64s. Wouldn’t be interested in a 64+ set either, which I think is the uphill battle for CAC.
Step 1: search for 65s
Step 2: compare rarity (yes this could be step one for efficiency but I like looking at as many 65s as possible to build my skill set)
Step 3: compare eye appeal on potential coins
Step 4: consider value proposition (where CAC currently has an edge)
Step 5: buy
I believe CACG downgrading coins can, in the short term, create value for PCGS coins because you have PCGS rarity scores that will go up after a certain percentage of 65s come out of the total available 65 population (one of the rarity lines PCGS reports on). Seems 65c would be the better play for CAC. Maybe long term PCGS moves rarity to 64 and up. Time will tell.