I could have missed it, but I did not see anything in the CMQ FAQs about 'zero/discounted' fees for coins that failed to sticker.
Edited to Add: The "discount" information above is wrong. SBG plans to only charge 50% of the service level price for coins that fail to sticker. See the post from SBG immediately below this one.
@DisneyFan said:
CAC doesn't charge collectors on the first 20 coins that don't sticker each year. Does CMQ also intend to follow that practice?
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
@Maywood said: @skier07 said: it’s impossible to know the history of a 150-200 year old coin.
Back around 2003-4 when the "original surfaces" debate really started to ramp up at this forum an old-time member, @pmh1nic, used to say precisely that same thing and he was pretty much dismissed. Time has proven him to be correct although some will still claim to know "originality" when they really don't.
That member defines "original" differently than the rest of the numismatic community.
I leave for a few weeks and come back to this...lol.
Well we do know it's not quite "the rest" of the numismatic community.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@Maywood said: @skier07 said: it’s impossible to know the history of a 150-200 year old coin.
Back around 2003-4 when the "original surfaces" debate really started to ramp up at this forum an old-time member, @pmh1nic, used to say precisely that same thing and he was pretty much dismissed. Time has proven him to be correct although some will still claim to know "originality" when they really don't.
That member defines "original" differently than the rest of the numismatic community.
I leave for a few weeks and come back to this...lol.
Well we do know it's not quite "the rest" of the numismatic community.
You don't consider "original" to include toning. It's 98% of the numismatic community.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
I think that the popularity and success of CMQ will largely come down to their advertising budget. If it's even half as much as what CAC spent on advertising, they'll do quite well.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@Maywood said: @skier07 said: it’s impossible to know the history of a 150-200 year old coin.
Back around 2003-4 when the "original surfaces" debate really started to ramp up at this forum an old-time member, @pmh1nic, used to say precisely that same thing and he was pretty much dismissed. Time has proven him to be correct although some will still claim to know "originality" when they really don't.
That member defines "original" differently than the rest of the numismatic community.
I leave for a few weeks and come back to this...lol.
Well we do know it's not quite "the rest" of the numismatic community.
You don't consider "original" to include toning. It's 98% of the numismatic community.
And you took that survey when?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
Steve
I also have to wonder how much FOMO and "gotta have one of the first CACG holders" hype was a factor in those results. Like the US mint products always re-sell for higher amounts on ebay within the first few days of release and then gradually come down.
Not to mention, the CACG coins probably had more attention and more people watching which is also going to typically lead to more bidder interest.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
Steve
In any and every auction, you can pick out coins that sold for more (and less) than expected. If that is their best handful, I am not impressed.
That said, over time, I would not be surprised if CACG coins do carry a premium, but this will be determined by many thousands of transactions over all auction formats and private treaty sales, not by a handful of one-offs.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
Steve
In any and every auction, you can pick out coins that sold for more (and less) than expected. If that is their best handful, I am not impressed.
That said, over time, I would not be surprised if CACG coins do carry a premium, but this will be determined by many thousands of transactions over all auction formats and private treaty sales, not by a handful of one-offs.
I agree one can always pick and choose. You're implying DLRC did that with this small sample. I challenge you to look at their results and show a similar small sample of five sales that show the opposite.
Regardless, I fully agree, as I mentioned in bold at the top of my point earlier, that this is a small sample. We agree time will tell with more sales. We also agree there will always be "one-offs", so it will be the bulk of future sales that determine the "answer" of market value.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
What makes you think you're meant to be?
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
Steve
In any and every auction, you can pick out coins that sold for more (and less) than expected. If that is their best handful, I am not impressed.
That said, over time, I would not be surprised if CACG coins do carry a premium, but this will be determined by many thousands of transactions over all auction formats and private treaty sales, not by a handful of one-offs.
I don’t know now many other CACG coins were in the sale or how they did. That information would go a long way in determining how impressive the sample’s results were.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Maywood said: @skier07 said: it’s impossible to know the history of a 150-200 year old coin.
Back around 2003-4 when the "original surfaces" debate really started to ramp up at this forum an old-time member, @pmh1nic, used to say precisely that same thing and he was pretty much dismissed. Time has proven him to be correct although some will still claim to know "originality" when they really don't.
That member defines "original" differently than the rest of the numismatic community.
I leave for a few weeks and come back to this...lol.
Well we do know it's not quite "the rest" of the numismatic community.
You don't consider "original" to include toning. It's 98% of the numismatic community.
And you took that survey when?
Do you really think that any significant number of coin people take "original" to mean "as struck"?
@DisneyFan said:
CAC doesn't charge collectors on the first 20 coins that don't sticker each year. Does CMQ also intend to follow that practice?
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
The 20 free rejections is for CURRENT CAC collector legacy members. I don't believe there has been any communication whether that will continue whenever membership opens up.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@DisneyFan said:
CAC doesn't charge collectors on the first 20 coins that don't sticker each year. Does CMQ also intend to follow that practice?
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
The 20 free rejections is for CURRENT CAC collector legacy members. I don't believe there has been any communication whether that will continue whenever membership opens up.
They should discontinue it for all members. It's funny that nobody calls this a conflict of interest.
@DisneyFan said:
CAC doesn't charge collectors on the first 20 coins that don't sticker each year. Does CMQ also intend to follow that practice?
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
The 20 free rejections is for CURRENT CAC collector legacy members. I don't believe there has been any communication whether that will continue whenever membership opens up.
I am NOT a CAC expert. And, I could be wrong. But, I also believe that:
~ the 20 (grandfathered) freebies are limited to the economy tier;
~ and, for the rest, there is a 25% discount for coins that do not sticker.
@DisneyFan said:
CAC doesn't charge collectors on the first 20 coins that don't sticker each year. Does CMQ also intend to follow that practice?
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
The 20 free rejections is for CURRENT CAC collector legacy members. I don't believe there has been any communication whether that will continue whenever membership opens up.
I am NOT a CAC expert. And, I could be wrong. But, I also believe that:
~ the 20 (grandfathered) freebies are limited to the economy tier;
~ and, for the rest, there is a 25% discount for coins that do not sticker.
The 20 freebies is just a conciliation effort for their change in pricing model. I wouldn't expect CMQ to do the same.
@jmlanzaf said:
They should discontinue it for all members. It's funny that nobody calls this a conflict of interest.
One could make the same argument about our hosts charging the 1% value premium on upgrades.
And regrades... The regrades is really the one that gets me. If PCGS changes a grade they are admitting to "getting it wrong" the first time, and they have the nerve to charge extra 1% GP for making us resubmit them to get the correct grade. To me, a regrade resulting in a grade improvement should be free as they are correcting a mistake. But that's another discussion for another day.
@jmlanzaf said:
They should discontinue it for all members. It's funny that nobody calls this a conflict of interest.
One could make the same argument about our hosts charging the 1% value premium on upgrades.
I don't disagree. But I've heard people make that argument. I've never heard anyone say it about the CAC freebies, probably because they like the freebies
Here is a discussion after CAC sent out the email about new rates and 25% off for those that do not sticker. This is related to if the collector would be getting the 20 submissions with no charge for ones that did not sticker.
I was never sure if it was the first 20 submissions or the first 20 failures.
Question and then answer from cac_team
For clarification purposes, am I correct in my understanding that legacy CAC collector members will be able to submit 20 coins per year at the economy tier with 100% rebates for coins that don’t sticker?
Yes. These 2 policies are independent of each other.
Thanks!
Is it up to 20 coins at one time, or 20 coins spread over the whole year? Thanks
20 coins for the year. We'll keep track for you!
.
.
Also it was stated in August 2022 (JACAC) that cac submissions were 174,685 from collectors and 1,341,001. from dealers.
Do not know the comparison rate today but from the above the 'no charge' would have applied to less than 12% of submissions (and then whatever failure rate was on those submissions).
FYI - that overall failure rate was stated as a little over 600K approved and about 900K failed.
And regrades... The regrades is really the one that gets me. If PCGS changes a grade they are admitting to "getting it wrong" the first time, and they have the nerve to charge extra 1% GP for making us resubmit them to get the correct grade. To me, a regrade resulting in a grade improvement should be free as they are correcting a mistake. But that's another discussion for another day.
>
The exception to your good point about correcting a mistake would be when a regrade results in a "plus" for a old holder coin.
This is only one more small piece of data for CACG auction prices realized.
So I watched part of the HA auction (noted above, link) and then checked back on the two commems. For the 2 walkers, 1 Morgan and 1 Peace I looked up the PC price guide and then did the pcgs auction records for pcgs cac and last 3 sold for comparison. In some cases there were some NGC CAC also auctioned (which some were lower) but I did not record. Only PCGS CAC below. Also other guide numbers may be somewhat different but I didn't spend the time to look them up.
The first two numbers are the hammer and then all in (+20%) - - - then PC $ and Auction numbers for PCGS CAC
3319 CACG 50c 1942 D 67+ 1850 / 2220 - - - PC 5000 / SB 4320 / SB 3840 / SB 3840
3320 CACG 50c 1943 D 67+ 2500 / 3000 - - - PC 3250 / most recent two were in 2021 - HA 1920 / L 2233
3353 CACG $1 1879 P 66+ 4200 / 5040 - - - PC 6500 / most recent three were in 2021 - HA 5640 / HA 5040 / HA 6600
3435 CACG $1 Peace 1921 66 9000 / 10,800 - - - PC 11,000 (red down from 12K) / HA 21,600 / SB 24,000 / L 19,975 (in 2021)
The other two I did not look up (they can have a lot of variance due to often toned) any information but were:
3616 CACG 50c 1951 BTW 67+ 3840 all in
3617 CACG 50c 1936 Wisconsin 68 4080 all in
@FistFullOfDollars said:
I wonder if they grade beer coolers, mine needs another sticker.
Be a lot cooler if you did
I'd be happy if they'd just "grade" ANACS slabbed coins. ANACS is a legitimate grading service and it's been around for a long time.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I'd be happy if they'd just "grade" ANACS slabbed coins. ANACS is a legitimate grading service and it's been around for a long time.
This is a long thread, and it's not the only one about CMQ. So, I am not sure if you have seen this post from SBG. It explains their rationale for excluding ANACS from the CMQ program.
Note - I am not discounting your 'opinion/desire'. Just pointing out that it appears SBG has already considered it.
OK, so my results are in! As a recap, I sent my coins last Tuesday, they arrived on Friday and were acknowledged on Monday and today Friday I have my results, so turn around time is good.
Of the 20 coins I sent, I got 7 CMQs, 2 CMQ-X's and 11 rejects. I wouldn't make too much of these results as there's a lot of selection bias here. Some of the coins were just random coins from my collection to see if I could get a sticker. Probably the most interesting data point is the 12 CAC rejects I submitted to CMQ, 4 got CMQ stickers and 1 got CMQ-X.
Here is the CMQ-X that CAC rejected:
Note this is not a real PCGS trueview, it was taken by PCGS before they really started doing Trueviews.
1878-S MS63+DMPL
The other CMQ-X that hasn't been sent to CAC:
1881-S MS65.
Here are other CAC rejects that CMQ'd:
1880-O MS62DMPL:
1880-S MS64+DMPL:
1893-P MS61PL:
1921-D MS63PL (my pictures aren't great):
Further commentary. The one coin I didn't expect the 1921-D 63PL to CAC, and am a little surprised by the CMQ. As for the others, I would be curious if anyone has any opinions on why they didn't CAC as I do feel they are all "solid" for their grades.
@ProofCollection said:
Further commentary. The one coin I didn't expect the 1921-D 63PL to CAC, and am a little surprised by the CMQ. As for the others, I would be curious if anyone has any opinions on why they didn't CAC as I do feel they are all "solid" for their grades.
The one coin that stands out as one I thought would get the CAC sticker is the 1881-S. Just a guess but perhaps the fingerprints on both sides is what caused the CAC reject.
So, both David Hall and Greg Roberts individually reviewed your coins, so that you could receive your results, within 5 days of reception. Amazing service. Am I missing something?
@ProofCollection said:
Further commentary. The one coin I didn't expect the 1921-D 63PL to CAC, and am a little surprised by the CMQ. As for the others, I would be curious if anyone has any opinions on why they didn't CAC as I do feel they are all "solid" for their grades.
The one coin that stands out as one I thought would get the CAC sticker is the 1881-S. Just a guess but perhaps the fingerprints on both sides is what caused the CAC reject.
Sorry it was confusing, CAC never looked at the 1881-S MS65 rattler. The price point of that coin makes it a questionable submission. I would not have expected an X sticker, I don't remember it being that nice.
So, both David Hall and Greg Roberts individually reviewed your coins, so that you could receive your results, within 5 days of reception. Amazing service. Am I missing something?
I'm not sure who reviewed it as I'm not sure I read anywhere that they personally are reviewing coins.
But yes I am reporting that the turnaround time is good, pretty similar to what I've experienced with CAC.
@ProofCollection said:
[...] I'm not sure who reviewed it as I'm not sure I read anywhere that they personally are reviewing coins.
But yes I am reporting that the turnaround time is good, pretty similar to what I've experienced with CAC.
@ProofCollection said:
Sorry it was confusing, CAC never looked at the 1881-S MS65 rattler. The price point of that coin makes it a questionable submission. I would not have expected an X sticker, I don't remember it being that nice.
Comments
Source: https://cmq.stacksbowers.com/faqs.php
I could have missed it, but I did not see anything in the CMQ FAQs about 'zero/discounted' fees for coins that failed to sticker.
Edited to Add:
The "discount" information above is wrong. SBG plans to only charge 50% of the service level price for coins that fail to sticker. See the post from SBG immediately below this one.
Any coin that doesnt sticker will be charged at 50% of the service level price.
Good information. Thanks for sharing it.
Please consider adding this to your CMQ microsite to promote awareness.
That's a pretty important piece of info that greatly changes/improves the value proposition!
I think that’s fair IF****you make it clear what the requirements are to sticker. As it sits now, I’m not sure everyone agrees it’s clear.
But are we really clear on what the CAC requirements are?
Crystal...clear.
there's room for more
Maybe not but they give you 20 free changes to figure it out. Stacks plans to charge you half price for every failed attempt as they have mentioned, so I think it’s right to be very clear on requirements up front.
I leave for a few weeks and come back to this...lol.
Well we do know it's not quite "the rest" of the numismatic community.
What makes you think you're meant to be?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
You don't consider "original" to include toning. It's 98% of the numismatic community.
I'm not the one clamoring for clarity on sticker requirements, @johnny010 is. CAC and CMQ stickers represent an opinion of quality. Their opinions are based on qualitative assessments and judgements and you either value that opinion or you don't.
CAC had it's share of naysayers when they started. This will be no different. CMQ will have to prove and establish themselves and we will get to know them by the quality of the work, just like with CAC.
To be clear I’m not “clamoring for clarity”, nor did I attack your position. If you want to send your coins for a potential sticker without knowing the requirements and having to pay half of full price if you don’t get a sticker that’s your choice. My logic remains.
I reserve judgement. I am waiting to see how the market values the new endeavor. If it doesn’t add any real value to the coin I will stick with CAC only. If
I think that the popularity and success of CMQ will largely come down to their advertising budget. If it's even half as much as what CAC spent on advertising, they'll do quite well.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Yes, admittedly the following comes from a positive bias, AND it's a small sample, and it's early, but the following did indeed happen with collectors money, in arms length transactions. The following is from the DLRC Weekly Newsletter "Coins We Love":
We have already been able to push quite a few CACG coins through our weekly online auctions and have been impressed by the spirited bidding and strong results.
Below are a few highlights of our first CACG auction records:
1898 25C CACG PR68DCAM realized $27,000. Typical auction results range from $11,000-$23,000!
1933-S 50C CACG MS63 realized $1,450. Typical auction results range from $900-$1400!
1885-CC $1 CACG MS61 realized $803. Typical auction results range from $550-$625!
1938-S Arkansas 50c CACG AU Details (Cleaned) realized $240. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $155!
1936 Texas 50c CACG MS Details (Cleaned) realized $303. Greysheet bid for an MS63 is $150!
These numbers are impressive and show the high demand for accurately graded coins. CACG coins are indeed selling for record prices!
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
And you took that survey when?
I also have to wonder how much FOMO and "gotta have one of the first CACG holders" hype was a factor in those results. Like the US mint products always re-sell for higher amounts on ebay within the first few days of release and then gradually come down.
Not to mention, the CACG coins probably had more attention and more people watching which is also going to typically lead to more bidder interest.
Crystal...clear.
> @winesteven said:
In any and every auction, you can pick out coins that sold for more (and less) than expected. If that is their best handful, I am not impressed.
That said, over time, I would not be surprised if CACG coins do carry a premium, but this will be determined by many thousands of transactions over all auction formats and private treaty sales, not by a handful of one-offs.
I agree one can always pick and choose. You're implying DLRC did that with this small sample. I challenge you to look at their results and show a similar small sample of five sales that show the opposite.
Regardless, I fully agree, as I mentioned in bold at the top of my point earlier, that this is a small sample. We agree time will tell with more sales. We also agree there will always be "one-offs", so it will be the bulk of future sales that determine the "answer" of market value.
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 don’t know now many other CACG coins were in the sale or how they did. That information would go a long way in determining how impressive the sample’s results were.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I trust David Hall's eyes as much as I do JA's. We all just need to open our eyes.
Do you really think that any significant number of coin people take "original" to mean "as struck"?
I'll take a survey.
The 20 free rejections is for CURRENT CAC collector legacy members. I don't believe there has been any communication whether that will continue whenever membership opens up.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
They should discontinue it for all members. It's funny that nobody calls this a conflict of interest.
Oh boy,
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
I am NOT a CAC expert. And, I could be wrong. But, I also believe that:
~ the 20 (grandfathered) freebies are limited to the economy tier;
~ and, for the rest, there is a 25% discount for coins that do not sticker.
One could make the same argument about our hosts charging the 1% value premium on upgrades.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
The 20 freebies is just a conciliation effort for their change in pricing model. I wouldn't expect CMQ to do the same.
And regrades... The regrades is really the one that gets me. If PCGS changes a grade they are admitting to "getting it wrong" the first time, and they have the nerve to charge extra 1% GP for making us resubmit them to get the correct grade. To me, a regrade resulting in a grade improvement should be free as they are correcting a mistake. But that's another discussion for another day.
I don't disagree. But I've heard people make that argument. I've never heard anyone say it about the CAC freebies, probably because they like the freebies
And ditto for an extra fee for successful crossovers.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Some info related to some of the post I read above.
Here are 6 more CACG auctioning in a couple hours at HA.
https://coins.ha.com/c/search-results.zx?N=3183+793+794+791+1577+792+2088+4294935380+2678+2682&Nf=&Ntk=SI_Titles-Desc&Nty=1&Ntt=cacg&ic4=KeywordSearch-A-071316
Here is a discussion after CAC sent out the email about new rates and 25% off for those that do not sticker. This is related to if the collector would be getting the 20 submissions with no charge for ones that did not sticker.
I was never sure if it was the first 20 submissions or the first 20 failures.
Question and then answer from cac_team
For clarification purposes, am I correct in my understanding that legacy CAC collector members will be able to submit 20 coins per year at the economy tier with 100% rebates for coins that don’t sticker?
Yes. These 2 policies are independent of each other.
Thanks!
Is it up to 20 coins at one time, or 20 coins spread over the whole year? Thanks
20 coins for the year. We'll keep track for you!
.
.
Also it was stated in August 2022 (JACAC) that cac submissions were 174,685 from collectors and 1,341,001. from dealers.
Do not know the comparison rate today but from the above the 'no charge' would have applied to less than 12% of submissions (and then whatever failure rate was on those submissions).
FYI - that overall failure rate was stated as a little over 600K approved and about 900K failed.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_KWVk0XeB9o - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Piece Of My Heart
.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=D0FPxuQv2ns - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Maybe I'm Amazed
RLJ 1958 - 2023
>
The exception to your good point about correcting a mistake would be when a regrade results in a "plus" for a old holder coin.
This is only one more small piece of data for CACG auction prices realized.
So I watched part of the HA auction (noted above, link) and then checked back on the two commems. For the 2 walkers, 1 Morgan and 1 Peace I looked up the PC price guide and then did the pcgs auction records for pcgs cac and last 3 sold for comparison. In some cases there were some NGC CAC also auctioned (which some were lower) but I did not record. Only PCGS CAC below. Also other guide numbers may be somewhat different but I didn't spend the time to look them up.
The first two numbers are the hammer and then all in (+20%) - - - then PC $ and Auction numbers for PCGS CAC
3319 CACG 50c 1942 D 67+ 1850 / 2220 - - - PC 5000 / SB 4320 / SB 3840 / SB 3840
3320 CACG 50c 1943 D 67+ 2500 / 3000 - - - PC 3250 / most recent two were in 2021 - HA 1920 / L 2233
3353 CACG $1 1879 P 66+ 4200 / 5040 - - - PC 6500 / most recent three were in 2021 - HA 5640 / HA 5040 / HA 6600
3435 CACG $1 Peace 1921 66 9000 / 10,800 - - - PC 11,000 (red down from 12K) / HA 21,600 / SB 24,000 / L 19,975 (in 2021)
The other two I did not look up (they can have a lot of variance due to often toned) any information but were:
3616 CACG 50c 1951 BTW 67+ 3840 all in
3617 CACG 50c 1936 Wisconsin 68 4080 all in
Hopefully no typos.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_KWVk0XeB9o - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Piece Of My Heart
.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=D0FPxuQv2ns - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Maybe I'm Amazed
RLJ 1958 - 2023
I wonder if they grade beer coolers, mine needs another sticker.
Be a lot cooler if you did
I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it - Clint Eastwood
I'd be happy if they'd just "grade" ANACS slabbed coins. ANACS is a legitimate grading service and it's been around for a long time.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
This is a long thread, and it's not the only one about CMQ. So, I am not sure if you have seen this post from SBG. It explains their rationale for excluding ANACS from the CMQ program.
Note - I am not discounting your 'opinion/desire'. Just pointing out that it appears SBG has already considered it.
OK, so my results are in! As a recap, I sent my coins last Tuesday, they arrived on Friday and were acknowledged on Monday and today Friday I have my results, so turn around time is good.
Of the 20 coins I sent, I got 7 CMQs, 2 CMQ-X's and 11 rejects. I wouldn't make too much of these results as there's a lot of selection bias here. Some of the coins were just random coins from my collection to see if I could get a sticker. Probably the most interesting data point is the 12 CAC rejects I submitted to CMQ, 4 got CMQ stickers and 1 got CMQ-X.
Here is the CMQ-X that CAC rejected:
Note this is not a real PCGS trueview, it was taken by PCGS before they really started doing Trueviews.
1878-S MS63+DMPL
The other CMQ-X that hasn't been sent to CAC:
1881-S MS65.
Here are other CAC rejects that CMQ'd:
1880-O MS62DMPL:
1880-S MS64+DMPL:
1893-P MS61PL:
1921-D MS63PL (my pictures aren't great):
Further commentary. The one coin I didn't expect the 1921-D 63PL to CAC, and am a little surprised by the CMQ. As for the others, I would be curious if anyone has any opinions on why they didn't CAC as I do feel they are all "solid" for their grades.
ProofCollection: Maybe you could post a few pics of your CMQ stickered when you have them in hand? It would be cool to see what they look like.
Your hobby is supposed to be your therapy, not the reason you need it.
The one coin that stands out as one I thought would get the CAC sticker is the 1881-S. Just a guess but perhaps the fingerprints on both sides is what caused the CAC reject.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
@ProofCollection
So, both David Hall and Greg Roberts individually reviewed your coins, so that you could receive your results, within 5 days of reception. Amazing service. Am I missing something?
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Sorry it was confusing, CAC never looked at the 1881-S MS65 rattler. The price point of that coin makes it a questionable submission. I would not have expected an X sticker, I don't remember it being that nice.
I'm not sure who reviewed it as I'm not sure I read anywhere that they personally are reviewing coins.
But yes I am reporting that the turnaround time is good, pretty similar to what I've experienced with CAC.
Source: https://cmq.stacksbowers.com/faqs.php
This is starting to remind me of the guy who wears suspenders AND a belt because he doesn't trust either one............. ;-)
To me the 1881 s ms65 is borderline gold bean but I am a horrible grader.
My bad, I meant the 80-S and typed 81 instead.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
To me the 81-S has blotchy toning( bad rinse?) and something going on in front of the obverse eye. Might be a 65 but will never bean.
Man I miss my ibuprofen!
I'm on a blood thinner😪
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso