I'm not surprised what they are charging, and on the more expensive coins their guarantees are the best in the business with market makers offering to buy them at higher prices. if I were trying to make these the best and most competitive, I'd try to make every feature better including photography, turn-around times, and the cac trading platforms. The inflation and labor costs could make make it a hard uphill challenge.
The word 'historic' is getting way overused these days IMO. How can something be historic when it has not even happened yet? I suppose everything is historic in varying degrees but I doubt folks will be sitting around talking about these and the impact they had on coin collecting 10 years from now! Could be wrong but probably not.
@logger7 said:
I'm not surprised what they are charging, and on the more expensive coins their guarantees are the best in the business with market makers offering to buy them at higher prices. if I were trying to make these the best and most competitive, I'd try to make every feature better including photography, turn-around times, and the cac trading platforms. The inflation and labor costs could make make it a hard uphill challenge.
There's already a CAC Exchange. PCGS doesn't even have one, do they?
@FrankH said: I still scratch my head at this decision to replace a simple examination and piece of decal with a full grading service and encapsulation factory. I suppose the principals have thought this out.
What the "principles" (sic) have thought out is that the original game has just about been played out, the "sticker game" has just about come to a close. Now they figure there are enough suckers out there who will send all the CAC stickered coins in for a CACG encapsulation fee. When that is played out it'll be time for JA to move on to another endeavor with his shears in-hand.
@Maywood said: @FrankH said: I still scratch my head at this decision to replace a simple examination and piece of decal with a full grading service and encapsulation factory. I suppose the principals have thought this out.
What the "principles" (sic) have thought out is that the original game has just about been played out, the "sticker game" has just about come to a close. Now they figure there are enough suckers out there who will send all the CAC stickered coins in for a CACG encapsulation fee. When that is played out it'll be time for JA to move on to another endeavor with his shears in-hand.
It's not just that though. To achieve volume, CACG has to either create a new collector base who wants only or mainly CACG slabs or convert existing PCGS & NGC & other TPG collectors, both of which will be an uphill battle. It depends how the registry game plays out, but but most PCGS-only/mainly and NGC-only/mainly collectors will be loathe to start buying CACG slabs that won't match their existing registries or collections and will probably be reluctant to convert. I'm projecting my personal thoughts onto the general collector population here so I could be way off base, but I would reckon most PCGS and NGC collectors are happy with these services and holders and have no real incentive or desire to change. To put it another way, I don't think there are groups of collectors that are clamoring for another alternative, ready to jump ship. There are some no-doubt, but I'd be surprised if there are a lot of them.
Yes and no, NGC said back in Jan (I think that was when but don't hold me to that) the NGC registry would be accepting the new CACG slabs in just as they do with PCGS slabs. I have not heard if PCGS has said anything in this regard, perhaps CAC slabs will be allowed into the CAC sets, although I have my doubts on that.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
@coinbuf said:
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think it will be difficult to determine what slab has the “best market performance”.
I think many market participants expect that a CACG coin at a certain grade will sell for more than another TPG coin at the same grade. If CACG implements tighter grading standards than this will likely be true.
But, if I submit a coin to CACG and it comes back AU58 and I submit it to a different TPG and it comes back MS62, what will that mean for value? Does the same coin in an AU58 holder from CACG sell for more than the same coin in another holder at MS62?
Determining CACG values against other TPGs will be more difficult than today’s exercise placing a value on CAC stickered coins vs. non-stickered coins at the same grade.
There’s going to be confusion and uncertainty in the marketplace - I don’t think it will be clear how to maximize value for a particular coin anytime soon.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
100% agree that at the same grade, CACG coins will likely be the winner.
But my question is around how to maximize the value of a specific coin. If I own that slider 34-S Peace, am I better off in a CACG 58 holder or an NGC 62 holder?
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I haven't noticed this to be the case. I know that CAC coins sell for more than non-CAC, but CAC coins appreciating at a faster rate is specious as there is a theoretical upper limit. That is because coin pricing is all relative to grade, higher grade = higher money. A solid MS65 PCGS CAC will sell for more than a solid MS65 no-CAC. But if the MS65 PCGS CAC appreciates at a faster rate, at some point the collector observes that they can buy a low or solid MS66 no-CAC for the same money and no one is going to buy the 65 CAC if priced like a 66. While there are CAC disciples out there who won't even consider a coin without a sticker, a collector would be a fool (IMHO) to choose the 65 CAC over the solid 66 No-CAC if pricing is similar. Thus, the market provides a built in mechanism which will keep CAC and non-CAC coin pricing relative to each other within the same grade. And again, TPG arbitrage will keep the market from overvaluing superficial traits like holders. In the end it is the coin that determines the value, not the holder.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Maybe it does, and maybe it means nothing. Everyone is assuming CACG will work the same way that CAC did, although all indications are that it will just be another TPG ("First Delivery"?).
If it's just another TPG, why is anyone assuming they will be tighter than their peers, or that coins that wouldn't sticker at a given grade won't be given that very same grade, if that's the grade they objectively deserve?
If I am right, CACG coins should not carry a premium. And if I am wrong, they still might not carry a premium because, as @Project Numismatics astutely points out, there is no reason for a CACG coin at a given grade to sell at a premium to the exact coin in another holder with a higher grade.
No reason at all, since JA has made clear that a CACG slab will not be a sticker. People either aren't listening or aren't believing it, but they also seem to be surprised by every single thing that JA has said he was going to do that he is actually doing -- phasing out stickers, grading moderns, meeting the market with nonsensical labels on slabs, etc.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
@NJCoin said:
If it's just another TPG, why is anyone assuming they will be tighter than their peers, or that coins that wouldn't sticker at a given grade won't be given that very same grade, if that's the grade they objectively deserve?
Because if a coin isn't "solid for the grade" it doesn't get a sticker, and it has been well discussed that JA says they will not slab "C" coins (or some wording to that effect) which to me means that coin drops to the next grade. I'm not sure that leaves many no-CAC coins that would cross at the same grade.
@NJCoin said:
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
They (PCGS) absolutely do grade tighter. So far this year I have purchased several PF70 coins that I have had to return because they had very easily seen nicks and scratches. While I'm sure PCGS makes mistakes, they wouldn't have graded these coins as 70's.
Further I submitted several NGC coins for crossover this year from Morgans to Roosevelt dimes, many time at "cross at any grade" and almost always lose 1 or 2 points.
See https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1090979/gtg-roosevelt-dime-ngc-crackouts-revealed#latest
Here's one of the PF70's:
@NJCoin said:
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
The absolutely do grade tighter. So far this year I have purchased several PF70 coins that I have had to return because they had very easily seen nicks and scratches. While I'm sure PCGS makes mistakes, they wouldn't have graded these coins as 70's.
Rurther I submitted several NGC coins for crossover this year from Morgans to Roosevelt dimes, many time at "cross at any grade" and almost always lose 1 or 2 points.
Likewise, if you submitted a group of PCGS coins to NGC at “cross at any grade”, you would likely lose points that way, too.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm thinking that people who send in raw coins to the new cac outfit when they allow that are going to have some less than salubrious surprises with lower grades than expected.
@NJCoin said:
If it's just another TPG, why is anyone assuming they will be tighter than their peers, or that coins that wouldn't sticker at a given grade won't be given that very same grade, if that's the grade they objectively deserve?
Because if a coin isn't "solid for the grade" it doesn't get a sticker, and it has been well discussed that JA says they will not slab "C" coins (or some wording to that effect) which to me means that coin drops to the next grade. I'm not sure that leaves many no-CAC coins that would cross at the same grade.
I'll guess we'll have to see. If there are not a lot of non-CAC coins that will cross, then I guess they won't have much of a crossing business, since there also won't be much reason to cross stickered coins, with the stickering business going away. Long term, most people with CAC stickered coins will be far better off keeping what they have, rather than giving those guys even more money to lose the sticker and pick up a slab.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
1)If Cac will continue it's sticker program, indefinitely, then I'm not clear why they would grade tighter than any other TPG?.
2)IF the goal is to phase out their sticker program, then I would suspect that their grading would be tighter than the other TPG's . The price of their slabbed coins, under scenario 2 should sell at a premium to any other TPG (assuming both slabs are the same grade). The question is whether a CACG slabbed 63+ should sell for a higher priced or equal in price to a rival TPG slabbed 64? MY guess, equal price?
As I've said before, I would pay a premium for a TPG graded + CAC sticker than I would for a CACG slab. Conversely, I would pay more for a CACG slab with another TPG offering a sticker service. 2 opinions should always sell at a premium.
Many collectors already participate in the PCGS Registry program. PCGS should offer a stickering service for CACG and NGC coins for a fee. If your coin earns the coveted PCGS bean, your CACG or NGC slabbed coin would then be allowed to be included in the PCGS Registry. This would be an easy revenue stream for PCGS.
This is good idea and could work if their fees were less than the fees charged for their crossover service.
One unknown is whether someone will fill the void that is being created by CAC stickering intentionally making themselves lose market share. I could see a real opportunity for a reputable third party to come on and continue with CAC’s business model. If they can keep the same high standards, then it would be interesting to see what happens.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
1)If Cac will continue it's sticker program, indefinitely, then I'm not clear why they would grade tighter than any other TPG?.
2)IF the goal is to phase out their sticker program, then I would suspect that their grading would be tighter than the other TPG's . The price of their slabbed coins, under scenario 2 should sell at a premium to any other TPG (assuming both slabs are the same grade). The question is whether a CACG slabbed 63+ should sell for a higher priced or equal in price to a rival TPG slabbed 64? MY guess, equal price?
As I've said before, I would pay a premium for a TPG graded + CAC sticker than I would for a CACG slab. Conversely, I would pay more for a CACG slab with another TPG offering a sticker service. 2 opinions should always sell at a premium.
2 cts from a very inexperienced collector.
Question for you (and anyone else who cares to answer, for that matter)
You have 3 coins in 3 different holders. For this purpose, lets just say the coins are basically identical or equal in quality.
@logger7 said:
I'm thinking that people who send in raw coins to the new cac outfit when they allow that are going to have some less than salubrious surprises with lower grades than expected.
I could see cacg going belly up quick if they grade tight and remain that way. I can’t see people (especially dealers) taking hits on the grades they receive and wanting to continue to use this company. Big money could get lost with coins getting hit with 1-2 point lower grades than in a pcgs holder. A lot of people know how to grade, and know how the current grading companies (NGC pcgs icg ANACS) grade, and they’re used to that. Throwing a new wrench into this model could disappoint the coin community.
Think about this: how many of you have sent coins to cac stickering and got 100% of the coins to sticker every single time? Figure that those coins that didn’t sticker will drop a grade in a cacg holder. Are you ok having that coin you paid full market value for just drop a grade? Did your collection just have value added to it because it’s in a lower grade plastic holder?
@logger7 said:
I'm thinking that people who send in raw coins to the new cac outfit when they allow that are going to have some less than salubrious surprises with lower grades than expected.
I could see cacg going belly up quick if they grade tight and remain that way. I can’t see people (especially dealers) taking hits on the grades they receive and wanting to continue to use this company. Big money could get lost with coins getting hit with 1-2 point lower grades than in a pcgs holder. A lot of people know how to grade, and know how the current grading companies (NGC pcgs icg ANACS) grade, and they’re used to that. Throwing a new wrench into this model could disappoint the coin community.
Think about this: how many of you have sent coins to cac stickering and got 100% of the coins to sticker every single time? Figure that those coins that didn’t sticker will drop a grade in a cacg holder. Are you ok having that coin you paid full market value for just drop a grade? Did your collection just have value added to it because it’s in a lower grade plastic holder?
CACG + grades should be the big winner generating huge interest. They will all be perceived as "A" coins for their grade and be readily available.
Not to mention the initial feeding frenzy that occurs in the 2nd half of 2023. IMO there is nearly zero chance of cash flow problems in their first year of grading.
No incentive me submit to CACG if get lower grades. Will remain PCGS submitter anyhow. PCGS my choice - Coin Facts, and Inventory Manager a huge plus.
Mainly have not been a buyer of (more expensive) stickered coins. Would have bought one but passed - noticeable tick on slab. Have had some CAC but sold out. Offers off bourse have been zero.
As far as the L thing no preference at this time. It’s the coin that matters to me. My bid / offer based on the coin and potential move it quickly with positive P&L.
CACG slabs offered to me in future at shows - Negotiable based on my assessment of the coin and the deal. If the wholesaler has some might look at them. He is usually abt 5 pct over bid. Never seen any CAC material at his table - perhaps back at the shop at CPG retail. So any CAC product acquired in future wb CACG (take it current CAC CPG pricing infrastructure for both stickered and CACG slabs). Will people off bourse even pay the extra money for them? Almost always counter offer from them.
If CACG not accepted by eBay as a TPG then no go for me on their stuff.
Very concerned about the market, not been much of a buyer at this time unless deal really there.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
1)If Cac will continue it's sticker program, indefinitely, then I'm not clear why they would grade tighter than any other TPG?.
2)IF the goal is to phase out their sticker program, then I would suspect that their grading would be tighter than the other TPG's . The price of their slabbed coins, under scenario 2 should sell at a premium to any other TPG (assuming both slabs are the same grade). The question is whether a CACG slabbed 63+ should sell for a higher priced or equal in price to a rival TPG slabbed 64? MY guess, equal price?
As I've said before, I would pay a premium for a TPG graded + CAC sticker than I would for a CACG slab. Conversely, I would pay more for a CACG slab with another TPG offering a sticker service. 2 opinions should always sell at a premium.
2 cts from a very inexperienced collector.
Question for you (and anyone else who cares to answer, for that matter)
You have 3 coins in 3 different holders. For this purpose, lets just say the coins are basically identical or equal in quality.
@Cougar1978 said:
1. No incentive me submit to CACG if get lower grades. Will remain PCGS submitter anyhow. PCGS my choice - Coin Facts, and Inventory Manager a huge plus.
2. Mainly have not been a buyer of (more expensive) stickered coins. Would have bought one but passed - noticeable tick on slab. Have had some CAC but sold out. Offers off bourse have been zero.
3. I could care less about the L thing.
4. CACG slabs offered to me in future at shows - Negotiable based on my assessment of the coin and the deal. If the wholesaler has some might look at them. He is usually abt 5 pct over bid. Never seen any CAC material at his table - perhaps back at the shop at CPG retail. So any CAC product acquired in future wb CACG (take it current CAC CPG pricing infrastructure for both stickered and CACG slabs). Will people off bourse even pay the extra money for them? Almost always counter offer from them.
5. If CACG not accepted by eBay as a TPG then no go for me on their stuff.
Very concerned about the market, not been much of a buyer unless deal really there.
I try to buy slabbed coins that I believe are higher quality for the grade, however my track record isn't great so In the end I weight TpG opinions more than my own.
I will spend quite a bit of time observing how the CACG prices for the grade fare relative to other TPG prices. Once i believe I have a handle on the selling price I will understand where I need to be. I recognize that I won't be early but others are far more clever than I am.
@Cougar1978 said:
1. No incentive me submit to CACG if get lower grades. Will remain PCGS submitter anyhow. PCGS my choice - Coin Facts, and Inventory Manager a huge plus.
2. Mainly have not been a buyer of (more expensive) stickered coins. Would have bought one but passed - noticeable tick on slab. Have had some CAC but sold out. Offers off bourse have been zero.
3. As far as the L thing no preference at this time. It’s the coin that matters to me. My bid / offer based on the coin and potential move it quickly with positive P&L.
4. CACG slabs offered to me in future at shows - Negotiable based on my assessment of the coin and the deal. If the wholesaler has some might look at them. He is usually abt 5 pct over bid. Never seen any CAC material at his table - perhaps back at the shop at CPG retail. So any CAC product acquired in future wb CACG (take it current CAC CPG pricing infrastructure for both stickered and CACG slabs). Will people off bourse even pay the extra money for them? Almost always counter offer from them.
5. If CACG not accepted by eBay as a TPG then no go for me on their stuff.
Very concerned about the market, not been much of a buyer unless deal really there.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
1)If Cac will continue it's sticker program, indefinitely, then I'm not clear why they would grade tighter than any other TPG?.
2)IF the goal is to phase out their sticker program, then I would suspect that their grading would be tighter than the other TPG's . The price of their slabbed coins, under scenario 2 should sell at a premium to any other TPG (assuming both slabs are the same grade). The question is whether a CACG slabbed 63+ should sell for a higher priced or equal in price to a rival TPG slabbed 64? MY guess, equal price?
As I've said before, I would pay a premium for a TPG graded + CAC sticker than I would for a CACG slab. Conversely, I would pay more for a CACG slab with another TPG offering a sticker service. 2 opinions should always sell at a premium.
2 cts from a very inexperienced collector.
Question for you (and anyone else who cares to answer, for that matter)
You have 3 coins in 3 different holders. For this purpose, lets just say the coins are basically identical or equal in quality.
As far as that choice - I would not rank coins of the holders above as CACG not out. I would rank them based on the coin and it’s demand, potential move, etc.
All are 64 plus. So from there - My offer basis on what can sell for. In that instance refer to PCGS CF / auc history. Would also refer to CPG but don’t believe they have 64 plus at this time. I don’t have a position on the L thing at this time. YMMV.
How do you think Logan Roy from the series Succession would handle that question? What would he tell them on the L thing?
I would like for you to rank them, in order from most to least, with respect to the amount of money you would pay for the coin.
Not to be flippant or dismissive, but my first answer is that I would pay the same for each. As the part of the answer you're looking for is that I don't really care about these designations.
My more analytical answer is that once I can discern any differences in resale values for these, my offer price would vary proportionately to however I perceive "the market" to value them.
Edited:
Had to edit my reply. I would pay more for the PCGS 64+ CAC. If I buy the CACG I would have to cross it back to PCGS so I would want a discount to account for that expense. Assumes a CACG coin is not recognized in my registry set.
I would like for you to rank them, in order from most to least, with respect to the amount of money you would pay for the coin.
Not to be flippant or dismissive, but my first answer is that I would pay the same for each. As the part of the answer you're looking for is that I don't really care about these designations.
My more analytical answer is that once I can discern any differences in resale values for these, my offer price would vary proportionately to however I perceive "the market" to value them.
I agree whole heartily. You nailed how I play the game. With that said, I was willing to commit to an answer based on my current assumptions since I wasn't committing any real money. New info= rethink and possible new answer.
I need assurance. Coin grading is my weakness. Speculating on what price I should pay puts me in an area I know a little more.
The question I would ask is would anyone pay much more for any of the coins below?
@jkrk said:
And in my current thinking 9Assuming... I would pay more for a CACG 64 Than another third party slab with the same grade.> @ProofCollection said:
I would like for you to rank them, in order from most to least, with respect to the amount of money you would pay for the coin.
Not to be flippant or dismissive, but my first answer is that I would pay the same for each. As the part of the answer you're looking for is that I don't really care about these designations.
My more analytical answer is that once I can discern any differences in resale values for these, my offer price would vary proportionately to however I perceive "the market" to value them.
I agree whole heartily. You nailed how I play the game. With that said, I was willing to commit to an answer based on my current assumptions since I wasn't committing any real money. New info= rethink and possible new answer.
I need assurance. Coin grading is my weakness. Speculating on what price I should pay puts me in an area I know a little more.
The question I would ask is would anyone pay much more for any of the coins below?
Based on both of your answers, you both value pcgs opinion over CAC and that’s ok. I personally value CACs opinion more so I would prefer a coin deemed a + coin by CAC, rather than a 64+ by pcgs that cac may feel is a b coin. Down the line, my answer may change depending on market values more.
Cacg 64+ legacy (I know pcgs saw this coin as at least 64, but I trust cac to designate as an A coin, rather than pcgs + where I feel I’ve seen pcgs + examples that were B coins in my opinion
CACG 64+ non legacy - so this coin was either submitted raw, or downgraded from pcgs or NGC 65. I’m not getting a pcgs 65 for cac 64+ price (that price is yet to be determined but imo will be strong)
Pcgs 64+ cac - this coin is guaranteed to cross to cacg as a 64, but no guarantee of a 64+, and as I said I trust CAC over pcgs to designate what an A coin really is, but in addition to that the eye appeal is what matter most. If the pcgs 64+ cac appears to be better looking than both the CACG coins, then I would choose this one. That being said, I thing CACg + will quickly surpass pcgs 64+ cac with respect to sale prices and that’s just my opinion.
@DeplorableDan said:
Based on both of your answers, you both value pcgs opinion over CAC and that’s ok. I personally value CACs opinion more so I would prefer a coin deemed a + coin by CAC, rather than a 64+ by pcgs that cac may feel is a b coin. Down the line, my answer may change depending on market values my answer would be.
I'm not sure that's an accurate take. I may may be misunderstanding but I was told that any coin with a CAC sticker on it will cross to CAC at the same grade. So in this case a PCGS coin (even a +) with a CAC sticker is the same opinion. My other assumption with your question was that it was the same coin in all 3 scenarios, so that even if the policy I just referenced doesn't apply to the +, I assumed the coin was a CAC 64+ and would have no problem getting a + from CAC.
What I value is not the PCGS opinion over CAC, but rather the ability of the PCGS coin to go into my PCGS registry.
I believe that's the same coingeek video I posted here a day or two ago.
@DeplorableDan said:
Based on both of your answers, you both value pcgs opinion over CAC and that’s ok. I personally value CACs opinion more so I would prefer a coin deemed a + coin by CAC, rather than a 64+ by pcgs that cac may feel is a b coin. Down the line, my answer may change depending on market values my answer would be.
I'm not sure that's an accurate take. I may may be misunderstanding but I was told that any coin with a CAC sticker on it will cross to CAC at the same grade. So in this case a PCGS coin (even a +) with a CAC sticker is the same opinion. My other assumption with your question was that it was the same coin in all 3 scenarios, so that even if the policy I just referenced doesn't apply to the +, I assumed the coin was a CAC 64+ and would have no problem getting a + from CAC.
What I value is not the PCGS opinion over CAC, but rather the ability of the PCGS coin to go into my PCGS registry.
I believe that's the same coingeek video I posted here a day or two ago.
The PCGS registry is another huge part of the equation and I completely respect your hesitance to cross to CACG for that reason, for me its a non issue. I never really got involved with the registries so that has no bearing on my decision.
You probably did post the coin geek video, I just visit so many forums and coin places I didn't remember, but that was where they pivoted with the legacy + decision which imo was a detrimental decision that would have stunted their growth. I just watched both of them yesterday and thought they were relevant to this thread,
The way I explained the crossovers for + coins is accurate. CAC has always ignored the + from P or N, so in a crossover scenario they will still be ignoring them. They will only award a + to the coins they consider A coins (which JA previously stated he thought around 25% of the coins they've stickered), and to the non cac approved crossovers that downgrade. For example, most pcgs 65 that CACG won't holder as a 65 will be downgraded to 64+. Some will probably downgrade to 64, and the rest wouldn't holder for one reason or another (cleaning, scratch, doctoring, etc). CACG + will be the only non ambiguous "A" coins that have been identified, in the opinion of CAC.
@jkrk said:
And in my current thinking 9Assuming... I would pay more for a CACG 64 Than another third party slab with the same grade.> @ProofCollection said:
I would like for you to rank them, in order from most to least, with respect to the amount of money you would pay for the coin.
Not to be flippant or dismissive, but my first answer is that I would pay the same for each. As the part of the answer you're looking for is that I don't really care about these designations.
My more analytical answer is that once I can discern any differences in resale values for these, my offer price would vary proportionately to however I perceive "the market" to value them.
I agree whole heartily. You nailed how I play the game. With that said, I was willing to commit to an answer based on my current assumptions since I wasn't committing any real money. New info= rethink and possible new answer.
I need assurance. Coin grading is my weakness. Speculating on what price I should pay puts me in an area I know a little more.
The question I would ask is would anyone pay much more for any of the coins below?
Based on both of your answers, you both value pcgs opinion over CAC and that’s ok. I personally value CACs opinion more so I would prefer a coin deemed a + coin by CAC, rather than a 64+ by pcgs that cac may feel is a b coin. Down the line, my answer may change depending on market values my answer would be.
Cacg 64+ legacy (I know pcgs saw this coin as at least 64, but I trust cac to designate as an A coin, rather than pcgs + where I feel I’ve seen pcgs + examples that were B coins in my opinion
CACG 64+ non legacy - so this coin was either submitted raw, or downgraded from pcgs or NGC 65. I’m not getting a pcgs 65 for cac 64+ price (that price is yet to be determined but imo will be strong)
Pcgs 64+ cac - this coin is guaranteed to cross to cacg as a 64, but no guarantee of a 64+, and as I said I trust CAC over pcgs to designate what an A coin really is, but in addition to that the eye appeal is what matter most. If the pcgs 64+ cac appears to be better looking than both the CACG coins, then I would choose this one. That being said, I thing CACg + will quickly surpass pcgs 64+ cac with respect to sale prices and that’s just my opinion.
Confused, I am said Yoda. Maybe it's my reading comprehension?
Maybe I didn't understand the question? Were you asking whether I would pay more for a CACG 64+ then I would from another TPG grading co? Yes, with the assumption that CACG grading will be tighter. If my assumption proves incorrect then I would pay the same. I would pay more for two opinions (1 cac in either case) than CACG only.
In the first example.. by issuing a sticker Cac confirmed that the PCGS 64+ was an "A" coin. Did it not? I now have 2 opinions confirming.
In your 2nd & third example PCGS was not involved. You are solely relying on one party grading (which might be tighter? ) I'm not sure I understand why one party grading should sell for more than than 2 (confirming each other) . Unless one believes that CAC never errs? If true, then you might be advocating for buying the slab not the coin?
1)CAC legacy 64+ - Would have grade at least 64 under PCGS? With no CAC sticker on the slab? To me odds very much against. Are you expecting CACG often to grade higher than PCGS?
2)Due my my limited experience , dealing with slabbed DE's only, I assume that a very high percentage of coins I buy from dealers/auctions have been looked at by pros and have been sent to CAC? Could a MS 65 be sent from NGC/PCGS tp CACG and downgraded? I wouldn't be surprised.
3)PCGS 64+ CAC ... IF it crosses as a CACG 64 then I believe I wasted my money sending the coin in for a sticker. I always bought into the. fact that CAC was saying it was an A coin based on pCGS grade.
Why get caught up in whether a PCGS+ CAC or CACG+ coin in the same grade is worth more? Seems like a very academic exercise. It’s going to take a ton of data to figure out if it’s even discernible. The answer may not be the same across various coin series.
For the very best top pop coins, it will still come down to how the particular coin compares to other specific coins that are in contention for best known.
The far more interesting and relevant question for both dealers and collectors is how to maximize the value of a given coin. Reusing the same example, where do you send a slider 34-S Peace dollar to max out value? If it comes back CACG 58+, PCGS 62 and NGC 63, which outcome is worth the most?
I believe the CACG Legacy coins will mostly be NGC coins. A PCGS CAC stickered coin will ultimately be the most highly prized coin of all. The market already prices PCGS coins higher than NGC. The CAC factory ended on June 5...CAC stickered coins after June 5 are not guaranteed to cross into CACG holders...mmmmm..why is that? JA has his reasons and I believe ...JA hints at this in his interview..that he wants to ultimately get out of the coin business entirely and the stickers had the JA cache'. The new CACG will have hundreds of thousands of coins going through its grading process with worker bees churning out 69 or 70 on moderns making the big $$$ just like our host and NGC. JA can step away any time and pocket big $$$ when he leaves CACG....he wouldn't have been able to do that with the stickers. That's the real reason behind CACG in my opinion. It's all about the Benjamins.
@PerryHall said:
Many collectors participate in the PCGS registry program. What incentive do they have to buy coins in the CACG slabs?
Definitely "A" (PLUS) coin collectors. CACG confirms the plus designation.
CACG is attractive to collectors who believe they have a "+" coin as well as those who believe their coin should be upgraded and like CACG's one stop service. A CACG graded coin is automatically considered a stickered coin.
@RLSnapper said:
I believe the CACG Legacy coins will mostly be NGC coins. A PCGS CAC stickered coin will ultimately be the most highly prized coin of all. The market already prices PCGS coins higher than NGC. The CAC factory ended on June 5...CAC stickered coins after June 5 are not guaranteed to cross into CACG holders...mmmmm..why is that? JA has his reasons and I believe ...JA hints at this in his interview..that he wants to ultimately get out of the coin business entirely and the stickers had the JA cache'. The new CACG will have hundreds of thousands of coins going through its grading process with worker bees churning out 69 or 70 on moderns making the big $$$ just like our host and NGC. JA can step away any time and pocket big $$$ when he leaves CACG....he wouldn't have been able to do that with the stickers. That's the real reason behind CACG in my opinion. It's all about the Benjamins.
I thought the June 5th cutoff date pertained to CAC coins crossing to CACG not bearing the “L” (Legacy) designation in their new CACG holders after that date. And that CAC coins wI’ll automatically cross to CACG holders, with no cutoff date.
Please point me to where it was stated that CAC coins won’t automatically cross to CACG holders.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
A PCGS CAC stickered coin will ultimately be the most highly prized coin of all.
>
Actually a CACG+ coin would be considered better than a PCGS CAC+ coin.
In the first example.. by issuing a sticker Cac confirmed that the PCGS 64+ was an "A" coin. Did it not?
No this is incorrect, CAC ignores the + that PCGS awarded, so the green bean means that the coin is at least solid or better than the 64 grade. That means it could be an "A" coin, but it may only be just solid, (i.e. a "B" coin) in the view of CAC. Again, a green bean on a + graded coin (PCGS or NGC) does not automatically equate to an "A" coin.
Comments
I'm not surprised what they are charging, and on the more expensive coins their guarantees are the best in the business with market makers offering to buy them at higher prices. if I were trying to make these the best and most competitive, I'd try to make every feature better including photography, turn-around times, and the cac trading platforms. The inflation and labor costs could make make it a hard uphill challenge.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
The word 'historic' is getting way overused these days IMO. How can something be historic when it has not even happened yet? I suppose everything is historic in varying degrees but I doubt folks will be sitting around talking about these and the impact they had on coin collecting 10 years from now! Could be wrong but probably not.
K
There's already a CAC Exchange. PCGS doesn't even have one, do they?
I think this thread has jumped the shark...
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
@FrankH said: I still scratch my head at this decision to replace a simple examination and piece of decal with a full grading service and encapsulation factory. I suppose the principals have thought this out.
What the "principles" (sic) have thought out is that the original game has just about been played out, the "sticker game" has just about come to a close. Now they figure there are enough suckers out there who will send all the CAC stickered coins in for a CACG encapsulation fee. When that is played out it'll be time for JA to move on to another endeavor with his shears in-hand.
Reported.
The RCTV ad copy has changed. There is no more reference to the first group of coins graded by CACG.
Link: https://www.rarecollectiblestv.com/2023-w-1oz-american-gold-eagle-cac-pf70-dcam.html
Yes and no, NGC said back in Jan (I think that was when but don't hold me to that) the NGC registry would be accepting the new CACG slabs in just as they do with PCGS slabs. I have not heard if PCGS has said anything in this regard, perhaps CAC slabs will be allowed into the CAC sets, although I have my doubts on that.
I think that collectors will gravitate towards the slab that has the best market performance over time, if CACG slabs start selling for way more than any other slabs at auction I think there are many (collectors and especially dealers) who will jump ship really quick.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I think it will be difficult to determine what slab has the “best market performance”.
I think many market participants expect that a CACG coin at a certain grade will sell for more than another TPG coin at the same grade. If CACG implements tighter grading standards than this will likely be true.
But, if I submit a coin to CACG and it comes back AU58 and I submit it to a different TPG and it comes back MS62, what will that mean for value? Does the same coin in an AU58 holder from CACG sell for more than the same coin in another holder at MS62?
Determining CACG values against other TPGs will be more difficult than today’s exercise placing a value on CAC stickered coins vs. non-stickered coins at the same grade.
There’s going to be confusion and uncertainty in the marketplace - I don’t think it will be clear how to maximize value for a particular coin anytime soon.
I think "market performance" is probably an illusion. If CACG coins sell for more, they will also cost more to buy, but I'm not sure they will appreciate at a different rate than PCGS or NGC coins of the same equivalent grade. And the same equivalent grade may be NGC 64 to CACG 63. And if you're grading raw coins, collectors will probably have the choice of a CACG 64 or a PCGS or NGC 65 for a given coin based on my experience of coins that were denied CAC stickers (I assume all CAC-denied coins will grade at CACG at a grade lower). I will still be surprised if the market develops where a CACG 64 is worth more than a PCGS 65 (for example). Disclaimer: Short term hype for the new CACG coins may result in what I would expect to be a temporary price premium for CACG coins. After all, if price differences change too much, arbitraging should keep things in relative check.
The performance of CAC stickered coins disproves this.
Does it? I agree that a MS64 CAC stickered coin will generally sell for more than an MS64 without a sticker. But it’s not obvious that translates to CACG. Stickers affirm the grade in the existing holder - CACG is a new grading event.
If I submit the same coin to CACG and NGC and the grade at NGC comes back higher, which holder will bring the higher the price?
For example, how will a CACG AU58 34-S Peace compare to an NGC MS62 34-S Peace? I think it’s TBD.
That's true. However, the point is that CAC coins have performed better than non CAC coins. That means that it is at least possible that CACG coins will perform better than PCGS coins or vice versa. There is a reason why there is a marketplace preference NOW and it's at least possible that the marketplace preference will change going forward.
Only time will tell...
100% agree that at the same grade, CACG coins will likely be the winner.
But my question is around how to maximize the value of a specific coin. If I own that slider 34-S Peace, am I better off in a CACG 58 holder or an NGC 62 holder?
I haven't noticed this to be the case. I know that CAC coins sell for more than non-CAC, but CAC coins appreciating at a faster rate is specious as there is a theoretical upper limit. That is because coin pricing is all relative to grade, higher grade = higher money. A solid MS65 PCGS CAC will sell for more than a solid MS65 no-CAC. But if the MS65 PCGS CAC appreciates at a faster rate, at some point the collector observes that they can buy a low or solid MS66 no-CAC for the same money and no one is going to buy the 65 CAC if priced like a 66. While there are CAC disciples out there who won't even consider a coin without a sticker, a collector would be a fool (IMHO) to choose the 65 CAC over the solid 66 No-CAC if pricing is similar. Thus, the market provides a built in mechanism which will keep CAC and non-CAC coin pricing relative to each other within the same grade. And again, TPG arbitrage will keep the market from overvaluing superficial traits like holders. In the end it is the coin that determines the value, not the holder.
Maybe it does, and maybe it means nothing. Everyone is assuming CACG will work the same way that CAC did, although all indications are that it will just be another TPG ("First Delivery"?).
If it's just another TPG, why is anyone assuming they will be tighter than their peers, or that coins that wouldn't sticker at a given grade won't be given that very same grade, if that's the grade they objectively deserve?
If I am right, CACG coins should not carry a premium. And if I am wrong, they still might not carry a premium because, as @Project Numismatics astutely points out, there is no reason for a CACG coin at a given grade to sell at a premium to the exact coin in another holder with a higher grade.
No reason at all, since JA has made clear that a CACG slab will not be a sticker. People either aren't listening or aren't believing it, but they also seem to be surprised by every single thing that JA has said he was going to do that he is actually doing -- phasing out stickers, grading moderns, meeting the market with nonsensical labels on slabs, etc.
I respectfully disagree. (What else is new?)
CAC coins sell at a premium because every coin submitted does not receive a sticker. So those that do are special.
There will be no way to know which coins in a CACG slab would have stickered and which wouldn't have, unless, as people are speculating, they grade tighter than the competition. In which case CACG coins will sell at a premium, but to coins in a lower grade slabs.
@Project Numismatics is right, and it is extremely doubtful those coins will sell at premiums to the EXACT SAME COIN in a higher grade NGC or PCGS slab. TBD, but a CACG slab is simply not going to be a CAC sticker.
People who don't believe it will be in for a shock when JA doesn't make sight unseen markets in CACG slabs, because the grading standards, and the grading business, is not meant to be a replacement for the sticker business. What about PR 70 First Delivery of a 2023 gold coin don't people understand? It's not a gold sticker MS 65 St. Gaudens, and once RCTV is done with them, there will be no reason for them to be worth any more than a PCGS PR 70 First Strike, because the coin won't be any different.
I guess I could be wrong, because there is also no reason for the PCGS coin to be worth more than its NGC counterpart, and yet it is. But that's because PCGS has a reputation for grading classics a little tighter than NGC, and that reputation carries over to moderns where they really don't grade any tighter.
It really is TBD with a new grading service, and people are making assumption based on a sticker business that they have said is separate and distinct. But it's worth pointing out that everything they have done so far is consistent with that being absolutely true.
Because if a coin isn't "solid for the grade" it doesn't get a sticker, and it has been well discussed that JA says they will not slab "C" coins (or some wording to that effect) which to me means that coin drops to the next grade. I'm not sure that leaves many no-CAC coins that would cross at the same grade.
They (PCGS) absolutely do grade tighter. So far this year I have purchased several PF70 coins that I have had to return because they had very easily seen nicks and scratches. While I'm sure PCGS makes mistakes, they wouldn't have graded these coins as 70's.
Further I submitted several NGC coins for crossover this year from Morgans to Roosevelt dimes, many time at "cross at any grade" and almost always lose 1 or 2 points.
See https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1090979/gtg-roosevelt-dime-ngc-crackouts-revealed#latest
Here's one of the PF70's:
Likewise, if you submitted a group of PCGS coins to NGC at “cross at any grade”, you would likely lose points that way, too.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm thinking that people who send in raw coins to the new cac outfit when they allow that are going to have some less than salubrious surprises with lower grades than expected.
I'll guess we'll have to see. If there are not a lot of non-CAC coins that will cross, then I guess they won't have much of a crossing business, since there also won't be much reason to cross stickered coins, with the stickering business going away. Long term, most people with CAC stickered coins will be far better off keeping what they have, rather than giving those guys even more money to lose the sticker and pick up a slab.
Damn it, I misplaced my thesaurus!😂😉
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
1)If Cac will continue it's sticker program, indefinitely, then I'm not clear why they would grade tighter than any other TPG?.
2)IF the goal is to phase out their sticker program, then I would suspect that their grading would be tighter than the other TPG's . The price of their slabbed coins, under scenario 2 should sell at a premium to any other TPG (assuming both slabs are the same grade). The question is whether a CACG slabbed 63+ should sell for a higher priced or equal in price to a rival TPG slabbed 64? MY guess, equal price?
As I've said before, I would pay a premium for a TPG graded + CAC sticker than I would for a CACG slab. Conversely, I would pay more for a CACG slab with another TPG offering a sticker service. 2 opinions should always sell at a premium.
2 cts from a very inexperienced collector.
This is good idea and could work if their fees were less than the fees charged for their crossover service.
One unknown is whether someone will fill the void that is being created by CAC stickering intentionally making themselves lose market share. I could see a real opportunity for a reputable third party to come on and continue with CAC’s business model. If they can keep the same high standards, then it would be interesting to see what happens.
Question for you (and anyone else who cares to answer, for that matter)
You have 3 coins in 3 different holders. For this purpose, lets just say the coins are basically identical or equal in quality.
1, PCGS 64+ CAC
2. CACG 64+ Legacy
3. CACG 64+ (non legacy)
I would like for you to rank them, in order from most to least, with respect to the amount of money you would pay for the coin.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I could see cacg going belly up quick if they grade tight and remain that way. I can’t see people (especially dealers) taking hits on the grades they receive and wanting to continue to use this company. Big money could get lost with coins getting hit with 1-2 point lower grades than in a pcgs holder. A lot of people know how to grade, and know how the current grading companies (NGC pcgs icg ANACS) grade, and they’re used to that. Throwing a new wrench into this model could disappoint the coin community.
Think about this: how many of you have sent coins to cac stickering and got 100% of the coins to sticker every single time? Figure that those coins that didn’t sticker will drop a grade in a cacg holder. Are you ok having that coin you paid full market value for just drop a grade? Did your collection just have value added to it because it’s in a lower grade plastic holder?
CACG + grades should be the big winner generating huge interest. They will all be perceived as "A" coins for their grade and be readily available.
Not to mention the initial feeding frenzy that occurs in the 2nd half of 2023. IMO there is nearly zero chance of cash flow problems in their first year of grading.
Many collectors participate in the PCGS registry program. What incentive do they have to buy coins in the CACG slabs?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Very concerned about the market, not been much of a buyer at this time unless deal really there.
1)PCGS 64+ CAC
2)CACG 64+ Legacy
3)CacG 64+ (Non legacy)
I try to buy slabbed coins that I believe are higher quality for the grade, however my track record isn't great so In the end I weight TpG opinions more than my own.
I will spend quite a bit of time observing how the CACG prices for the grade fare relative to other TPG prices. Once i believe I have a handle on the selling price I will understand where I need to be. I recognize that I won't be early but others are far more clever than I am.
1)PCGS 64+ CAC
2)CACG 64+ Legacy
3)CACG 64+ (non Legacy)
As far as that choice - I would not rank coins of the holders above as CACG not out. I would rank them based on the coin and it’s demand, potential move, etc.
All are 64 plus. So from there - My offer basis on what can sell for. In that instance refer to PCGS CF / auc history. Would also refer to CPG but don’t believe they have 64 plus at this time. I don’t have a position on the L thing at this time. YMMV.
How do you think Logan Roy from the series Succession would handle that question? What would he tell them on the L thing?
Not to be flippant or dismissive, but my first answer is that I would pay the same for each. As the part of the answer you're looking for is that I don't really care about these designations.
My more analytical answer is that once I can discern any differences in resale values for these, my offer price would vary proportionately to however I perceive "the market" to value them.
Edited:
Had to edit my reply. I would pay more for the PCGS 64+ CAC. If I buy the CACG I would have to cross it back to PCGS so I would want a discount to account for that expense. Assumes a CACG coin is not recognized in my registry set.
And in my current thinking 9Assuming... I would pay more for a CACG 64 Than another third party slab with the same grade.> @ProofCollection said:
I agree whole heartily. You nailed how I play the game. With that said, I was willing to commit to an answer based on my current assumptions since I wasn't committing any real money. New info= rethink and possible new answer.
I need assurance. Coin grading is my weakness. Speculating on what price I should pay puts me in an area I know a little more.
The question I would ask is would anyone pay much more for any of the coins below?
1)PCGS 64 + CAC
2)CACG 64 + no sticker
3)CACG 64+ TPG sticker
Because of holder, etc. - No
Based on both of your answers, you both value pcgs opinion over CAC and that’s ok. I personally value CACs opinion more so I would prefer a coin deemed a + coin by CAC, rather than a 64+ by pcgs that cac may feel is a b coin. Down the line, my answer may change depending on market values more.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Here’s a recent interview from John Albanese with Kenny Duncan and the coin shop podcast.
Here’s an interview with Ben the coin geek, some interesting commentary on here about pivoting in their Decision from a few days ago.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I'm not sure that's an accurate take. I may may be misunderstanding but I was told that any coin with a CAC sticker on it will cross to CAC at the same grade. So in this case a PCGS coin (even a +) with a CAC sticker is the same opinion. My other assumption with your question was that it was the same coin in all 3 scenarios, so that even if the policy I just referenced doesn't apply to the +, I assumed the coin was a CAC 64+ and would have no problem getting a + from CAC.
What I value is not the PCGS opinion over CAC, but rather the ability of the PCGS coin to go into my PCGS registry.
I believe that's the same coingeek video I posted here a day or two ago.
The PCGS registry is another huge part of the equation and I completely respect your hesitance to cross to CACG for that reason, for me its a non issue. I never really got involved with the registries so that has no bearing on my decision.
You probably did post the coin geek video, I just visit so many forums and coin places I didn't remember, but that was where they pivoted with the legacy + decision which imo was a detrimental decision that would have stunted their growth. I just watched both of them yesterday and thought they were relevant to this thread,
The way I explained the crossovers for + coins is accurate. CAC has always ignored the + from P or N, so in a crossover scenario they will still be ignoring them. They will only award a + to the coins they consider A coins (which JA previously stated he thought around 25% of the coins they've stickered), and to the non cac approved crossovers that downgrade. For example, most pcgs 65 that CACG won't holder as a 65 will be downgraded to 64+. Some will probably downgrade to 64, and the rest wouldn't holder for one reason or another (cleaning, scratch, doctoring, etc). CACG + will be the only non ambiguous "A" coins that have been identified, in the opinion of CAC.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Confused, I am said Yoda. Maybe it's my reading comprehension?
Maybe I didn't understand the question? Were you asking whether I would pay more for a CACG 64+ then I would from another TPG grading co? Yes, with the assumption that CACG grading will be tighter. If my assumption proves incorrect then I would pay the same. I would pay more for two opinions (1 cac in either case) than CACG only.
In the first example.. by issuing a sticker Cac confirmed that the PCGS 64+ was an "A" coin. Did it not? I now have 2 opinions confirming.
In your 2nd & third example PCGS was not involved. You are solely relying on one party grading (which might be tighter? ) I'm not sure I understand why one party grading should sell for more than than 2 (confirming each other) . Unless one believes that CAC never errs? If true, then you might be advocating for buying the slab not the coin?
1)CAC legacy 64+ - Would have grade at least 64 under PCGS? With no CAC sticker on the slab? To me odds very much against. Are you expecting CACG often to grade higher than PCGS?
2)Due my my limited experience , dealing with slabbed DE's only, I assume that a very high percentage of coins I buy from dealers/auctions have been looked at by pros and have been sent to CAC? Could a MS 65 be sent from NGC/PCGS tp CACG and downgraded? I wouldn't be surprised.
3)PCGS 64+ CAC ... IF it crosses as a CACG 64 then I believe I wasted my money sending the coin in for a sticker. I always bought into the. fact that CAC was saying it was an A coin based on pCGS grade.
Trying to learn from the pros on the boards.
The video helped.
TY
Why get caught up in whether a PCGS+ CAC or CACG+ coin in the same grade is worth more? Seems like a very academic exercise. It’s going to take a ton of data to figure out if it’s even discernible. The answer may not be the same across various coin series.
For the very best top pop coins, it will still come down to how the particular coin compares to other specific coins that are in contention for best known.
The far more interesting and relevant question for both dealers and collectors is how to maximize the value of a given coin. Reusing the same example, where do you send a slider 34-S Peace dollar to max out value? If it comes back CACG 58+, PCGS 62 and NGC 63, which outcome is worth the most?
I believe the CACG Legacy coins will mostly be NGC coins. A PCGS CAC stickered coin will ultimately be the most highly prized coin of all. The market already prices PCGS coins higher than NGC. The CAC factory ended on June 5...CAC stickered coins after June 5 are not guaranteed to cross into CACG holders...mmmmm..why is that? JA has his reasons and I believe ...JA hints at this in his interview..that he wants to ultimately get out of the coin business entirely and the stickers had the JA cache'. The new CACG will have hundreds of thousands of coins going through its grading process with worker bees churning out 69 or 70 on moderns making the big $$$ just like our host and NGC. JA can step away any time and pocket big $$$ when he leaves CACG....he wouldn't have been able to do that with the stickers. That's the real reason behind CACG in my opinion. It's all about the Benjamins.
Definitely "A" (PLUS) coin collectors. CACG confirms the plus designation.
CACG is attractive to collectors who believe they have a "+" coin as well as those who believe their coin should be upgraded and like CACG's one stop service. A CACG graded coin is automatically considered a stickered coin.
I thought the June 5th cutoff date pertained to CAC coins crossing to CACG not bearing the “L” (Legacy) designation in their new CACG holders after that date. And that CAC coins wI’ll automatically cross to CACG holders, with no cutoff date.
Please point me to where it was stated that CAC coins won’t automatically cross to CACG holders.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
A PCGS CAC stickered coin will ultimately be the most highly prized coin of all.
>
Actually a CACG+ coin would be considered better than a PCGS CAC+ coin.
No this is incorrect, CAC ignores the + that PCGS awarded, so the green bean means that the coin is at least solid or better than the 64 grade. That means it could be an "A" coin, but it may only be just solid, (i.e. a "B" coin) in the view of CAC. Again, a green bean on a + graded coin (PCGS or NGC) does not automatically equate to an "A" coin.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.