@winesteven said:
Based on your results, I DON’T see CMQ showing us there are a lot more quality and accurately graded coins out there than CAC would have you believe.Based on your sampling, my interpretation is it’s the very opposite - they sticker coins that JA would not, and they refuse to sticker coins that JA does! As I indicated, grading is subjective, but CMQ is polar opposite!
One can choose to vote for their candidate, and I strongly vote for JA. These results reflect a much worse image of CMQ than I would have guessed in my wildest dreams!
Steve
Agreed but we are still looking at a small sample size.
Absolutely it’s a small sample size, but so far we haven’t seen additional data, which will come with time. As I said in a reply of mine above, I’m open minded, and with additional data I’m very willing to change my opinion. But initially, of the coins that failed getting CAC stickers that a forum member generously submitted, seeing almost half of those getting stickered by CMQ, and also seeing a coin that also failed at CAC getting the highly coveted CMQ-X, I’m quite surprised in a negative fashion. Are you surprised too, or is this what you expected? We’ll see what happens down the road.
Steve
You also seem to be applying CAC standards to CMQ. CMQ's stated standard is not he same as CAC's ("A" and "B" coins, solid for the grade, etc), so naturally there will be coins that qualify for one and not the other.
I fully agree. As I heard an opinion from another collector, It's possible that CMQ decided for marketing reasons it would be best to have standards DIFFERENT from CAC, either tighter or looser. Tighter would not be good, so apparently they may have chosen to be looser. IF that's the case, that could then easily explain those early but very limited results. Further, IF that turns out to be true, the market should then recognize and accept that decision/policy as part of evaluating the many factors involved in buying a coin.
My interpretation of the stated goals of each service is that CMQ's standards will result in a "looser" standard than CAC. Yes, time will tell how market values that sticker. CMQ's goal of facilitating sight unseen transactions to me means that if I buy a coin without seeing it, when it arrives I should be happy with it. Ie., it won't be over graded or have any issues. That doesn't mean it will be pleasing to the eye and meet winesteven's high standards. Basically using Dan's standards above I think it will include A, B, and C coins and not include D and E coins. Based on this CMQ stickered coins won't be as valuable as CAC stickered coins, but they should still command somewhat of a premium as it will give buyers more confidence.
This is slightly off topic but if I was going to consign a coin that I thought was nice to an auction house that didn’t sticker at CAC I would send it to SB for a griff. If it passes I would consign it with SB. Otherwise I would consign it elsewhere.
As noted by my clicks on the above two replies, I agree with both.
As @skier07 implies, coins in Stacks auctions eligible for a CMQ sticker but does not have one, nor has a CAC sticker, in my opinion will suffer compared to stickered coins by CAC or CMQ.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
I have a problem with CACG. I can't use them in my Registry sets PCGS or NGC. Changing services you lose stickers.
MORE expense to try and cross or Crack out and potentially lose value . Much time lost in the service black hole.
This game always favors the house. You will lose money overall likely.
@krueger said:
I have a problem with CACG. I can't use them in my Registry sets PCGS or NGC. Changing services you lose stickers.
MORE expense to try and cross or Crack out and potentially lose value . Much time lost in the service black hole.
This game always favors the house. You will lose money overall likely.
So I recently visited the SB site to view some high grade proof trade dollars up for auction. My initial reaction to the ones with the new stickers was ‘ok, but have they been to CAC or not?’ And my reaction to the one with neither sticker was ‘well is this dog crap or what?’ Most confusing and I probably won’t play.
@tradedollarnut said:
So I recently visited the SB site to view some high grade proof trade dollars up for auction. My initial reaction to the ones with the new stickers was ‘ok, but have they been to CAC or not?’ And my reaction to the one with neither sticker was ‘well is this dog crap or what?’ Most confusing and I probably won’t play.
I was surprised that there wasn't more CMQ material on the current auction but I didn't browse everything. But that was my thought too... how much was evaluated for a sticker and how much wasn't? I think going forward buying on SB you almost have to assume it didn't qualify for a sticker if it's in their auction and doesn't have one.
@tradedollarnut said:
So I recently visited the SB site to view some high grade proof trade dollars up for auction. My initial reaction to the ones with the new stickers was ‘ok, but have they been to CAC or not?’ And my reaction to the one with neither sticker was ‘well is this dog crap or what?’ Most confusing and I probably won’t play.
I was surprised that there wasn't more CMQ material on the current auction but I didn't browse everything. But that was my thought too... how much was evaluated for a sticker and how much wasn't? I think going forward buying on SB you almost have to assume it didn't qualify for a sticker if it's in their auction and doesn't have one.
.ABSOLUTELY!!!!!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Update!
So as you all know, I made two submissions. The first I believe arrived on 9/18 and I just got them back today. I believe there was a delay because I asked for an offer on my coins which they provided. I ended up selling 3 of them to SB. They are not in the current auction. The second submission was mailed Oct 2 and I have them back today on Oct 11 and that includes 1 CIM video. 9 day turnaround including shipping both ways not bad at all!
But here's the big news. There is what I am going to call a "Gen 1" sticker and a "Gen 2" sticker. They must have taken the feedback to heart and made a smaller sticker! The new size is MUCH better and more comparable to the CAC bean. Here they are side by side. This is just a quick photo from my phone to show sticker size.
@ProofCollection said:
Update!
So as you all know, I made two submissions. The first I believe arrived on 9/18 and I just got them back today. I believe there was a delay because I asked for an offer on my coins which they provided. I ended up selling 3 of them to SB. They are not in the current auction. The second submission was mailed Oct 2 and I have them back today on Oct 11 and that includes 1 CIM video. 9 day turnaround including shipping both ways not bad at all!
But here's the big news. There is what I am going to call a "Gen 1" sticker and a "Gen 2" sticker. They must have taken the feedback to heart and made a smaller sticker! The new size is MUCH better and more comparable to the CAC bean. Here they are side by side. This is just a quick photo from my phone to show sticker size.
Now people will have to buy the sticker not the coin
Some additional tidbits:
I asked a CMQ rep if a Stacks auction coin doesn't have a CMQ sticker on it, does that mean it failed and they clarified that coins sent to auction are only reviewed for CMQ if the seller requests/orders it.
Also, CMQ updated their website and the pictures are much better now. The quality is similar to their auction photos.
Some additional tidbits:
I asked a CMQ rep if a Stacks auction coin doesn't have a CMQ sticker on it, does that mean it failed and they clarified that coins sent to auction are only reviewed for CMQ if the seller requests/orders it.
Also, CMQ updated their website and the pictures are much better now. The quality is similar to their auction photos.
While technically what they said is correct, ask yourself - if YOU were submitting coins to a Stacks auction anyway, since the additional cost of applying for a CMQ is only a few dollars, why wouldn’t you do just that? I’d be shocked if virtually not every submitter did just that! As such, when I browse Stacks lots, right or wrong, I assume any Stacks lot without their CMQ failed to get one!
Separately, earlier in this thread a generous collector submitted a small but relevant sample of coins for CMQ stickering. Several with CAC stickers failed getting a CMQ, several that failed getting CAC stickers managed getting CMQ’s, and surprisingly, one of those CAC failures got the coveted CMQ-X. Make of this what you will. I know what I make of it!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Some additional tidbits:
I asked a CMQ rep if a Stacks auction coin doesn't have a CMQ sticker on it, does that mean it failed and they clarified that coins sent to auction are only reviewed for CMQ if the seller requests/orders it.
Also, CMQ updated their website and the pictures are much better now. The quality is similar to their auction photos.
While technically what they said is correct, ask yourself - if YOU were submitting coins to a Stacks auction anyway, since the additional cost of applying for a CMQ is only a few dollars, why wouldn’t you do just that? I’d be shocked if virtually not every submitter did just that! As such, when I browse Stacks lots, right or wrong, I assume any Stacks lot without their CMQ failed to get one!
I wouldn't read too much into it now. Back when CAC first came out, I'm sure quite a few on this board would have declined to have their coins stickered prior to auction. It's an extra delay, extra cost, and uncertain benefit so there's a great chance that most sellers decline. Even in the past few years I have sent coins to sell on GC where they offer to send the coins to CAC prior to listing and I have declined that service.
Separately, earlier in this thread a generous collector submitted a small but relevant sample of coins for CMQ stickering. Several with CAC stickers failed getting a CMQ, several that failed getting CAC stickers managed getting CMQ’s, and surprisingly, one of those CAC failures got the coveted CMQ-X. Make of this what you will. I know what I make of it!
Yeah, that was me.
As discussed, it's clear that the standards are different. You think anything that doesn't have CAC's blessing is trash which is in line for a purist/perfectionist approach to coin collecting. This is fine, but very few have the patience or budget to support that approach. NGC, PCGS, and CMQ have clearly embraced "market" standards which are clearly broader and more forgiving. I'm fine with these standards as my budget goes further and the coins look fine to me.
The coin with the CMQ-X that CAC rejected is quite lovely, and no one can provide a reason why CAC rejected it. In fact, I'll post the new CMQ photos of it.
I bought a coin out of the last auction that a dealer I trust looked at we decided to bid on it before it had the CMQ sticker. I am a collector that chases CAC stickers but lately I have had to go without on a number of purchases as the CAC stickers are close to impossible to find and the premiums are to high on some of the more expensive coins. Coin is PCGS AU 53 CMQ
I can live with the coin as is without the CAC sticker. Maybe someday it will be upgraded when I finish the set but that is at least 10 years in the future.
@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.
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
Define “typical auction” range. I’d be most interested in a comparison of PCGS CAC coin values versus CACG coin values.
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
Define “typical auction” range. I’d be most interested in a comparison of PCGS CAC coin values versus CACG coin values.
Yes, and for coins that trade fairly frequently, not one-every-five year type coins where it's impossible to predict a sale price.
@winesteven said:
Based on your results, I DON’T see CMQ showing us there are a lot more quality and accurately graded coins out there than CAC would have you believe.Based on your sampling, my interpretation is it’s the very opposite - they sticker coins that JA would not, and they refuse to sticker coins that JA does! As I indicated, grading is subjective, but CMQ is polar opposite!
One can choose to vote for their candidate, and I strongly vote for JA. These results reflect a much worse image of CMQ than I would have guessed in my wildest dreams!
Steve
Agreed but we are still looking at a small sample size.
Absolutely it’s a small sample size, but so far we haven’t seen additional data, which will come with time. As I said in a reply of mine above, I’m open minded, and with additional data I’m very willing to change my opinion. But initially, of the coins that failed getting CAC stickers that a forum member generously submitted, seeing almost half of those getting stickered by CMQ, and also seeing a coin that also failed at CAC getting the highly coveted CMQ-X, I’m quite surprised in a negative fashion. Are you surprised too, or is this what you expected? We’ll see what happens down the road.
Steve
You also seem to be applying CAC standards to CMQ. CMQ's stated standard is not he same as CAC's ("A" and "B" coins, solid for the grade, etc), so naturally there will be coins that qualify for one and not the other.
So basically accurately graded coins treated as lepers by (CAC) sticker crowd can now be “saved “ by Hall’s new service? It will be interesting to see if this establishes a following in the market.
It looks like at least some (not all) of CAC’s ardent proponents don’t like competition from the newest stickering company. There is no doubt that JA is a giant in this field but so is David Hall.
@winesteven said:
Based on your results, I DON’T see CMQ showing us there are a lot more quality and accurately graded coins out there than CAC would have you believe.Based on your sampling, my interpretation is it’s the very opposite - they sticker coins that JA would not, and they refuse to sticker coins that JA does! As I indicated, grading is subjective, but CMQ is polar opposite!
One can choose to vote for their candidate, and I strongly vote for JA. These results reflect a much worse image of CMQ than I would have guessed in my wildest dreams!
Steve
Agreed but we are still looking at a small sample size.
Absolutely it’s a small sample size, but so far we haven’t seen additional data, which will come with time. As I said in a reply of mine above, I’m open minded, and with additional data I’m very willing to change my opinion. But initially, of the coins that failed getting CAC stickers that a forum member generously submitted, seeing almost half of those getting stickered by CMQ, and also seeing a coin that also failed at CAC getting the highly coveted CMQ-X, I’m quite surprised in a negative fashion. Are you surprised too, or is this what you expected? We’ll see what happens down the road.
Steve
You also seem to be applying CAC standards to CMQ. CMQ's stated standard is not he same as CAC's ("A" and "B" coins, solid for the grade, etc), so naturally there will be coins that qualify for one and not the other.
So basically accurately graded coins treated as lepers by (CAC) sticker crowd can now be “saved “ by Hall’s new service? It will be interesting to see if this establishes a following in the market.
That's what I'm saying. I'll also note that I have seen a few videos of coin dealers that have sent CAC sticker rejected coins to CACG and had them straight-cross. So not good enough for a sticker, but good enough to be slabbed... I wonder how that works?
Some additional tidbits:
I asked a CMQ rep if a Stacks auction coin doesn't have a CMQ sticker on it, does that mean it failed and they clarified that coins sent to auction are only reviewed for CMQ if the seller requests/orders it.
Also, CMQ updated their website and the pictures are much better now. The quality is similar to their auction photos.
While technically what they said is correct, ask yourself - if YOU were submitting coins to a Stacks auction anyway, since the additional cost of applying for a CMQ is only a few dollars, why wouldn’t you do just that? I’d be shocked if virtually not every submitter did just that! As such, when I browse Stacks lots, right or wrong, I assume any Stacks lot without their CMQ failed to get one!
I wouldn't read too much into it now. Back when CAC first came out, I'm sure quite a few on this board would have declined to have their coins stickered prior to auction. It's an extra delay, extra cost, and uncertain benefit so there's a great chance that most sellers decline. Even in the past few years I have sent coins to sell on GC where they offer to send the coins to CAC prior to listing and I have declined that service.
There's a big difference in the time delay between you sending a coin to an auction house, having them send it to CAC, having CAC spend a week or so to get to it, having CAC send it back to the auction house, and then for it to get in the queue to be listed. Compare that to sending a coin to Stacks for auction having checked the box to CMQ. My guess is within a day or two (or three) it'll be back in the queue to be listed in that same upcoming auction. Yes, you can try to rationalize that logic comparing the apple and orange, but I choose not to buy it.
As I asked, if YOU were to send coins to a Stacks auction, would you check the box and pay the few dollars to have it checked for passing the CMQ test? As noted, I'd be shocked if more than a few, if any consignors would not do that. Regardless, those that choose to not pay those few dollars per coin, will be at a disadvantage, as I'm sure there are others besides me that will choose to ignore those for the belief (right or wrong) that they failed to CMQ.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven said:
As I asked, if YOU were to send coins to a Stacks auction, would you check the box and pay the few dollars to have it checked for passing the CMQ test? As noted, I'd be shocked if more than a few, if any consignors would not do that. Regardless, those that choose to not pay those few dollars per coin, will be at a disadvantage, as I'm sure there are others besides me that will choose to ignore those for the belief (right or wrong) that they failed to CMQ.
I probably would but then I'm apparently one of the few on this forum to use the CMQ service so far.
I question how many Stacks auction patrons are aware of the CMQ sticker. Last week I won an unstickered coin at a Stacks auction. At some point I'll probably send it to CMQ and then maybe I'll know. But again, they just launched a few months ago, we need to give them time to gain some momentum in the marketplace.
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
Define “typical auction” range. I’d be most interested in a comparison of PCGS CAC coin values versus CACG coin values.
My GUESS (as i can't speak for John Brush or John Feigenbaum) is they were comparing CACG sales to an actual range of sales of NON-CAC coins.
Separately, MY guess is in a large study, there won't be a large difference either way between PCGS CAC and CACG sales, and if there is a difference, i think the PCGS CAC will do slightly better. However, with that said, in my opinion when comparing a CACG plus grade coin to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, I believe the CACG plus coin might do better, since CACG is saying that coin is a plus, compared to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, where all we know is that PCGS is saying the coin is a plus.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven said:
As I asked, if YOU were to send coins to a Stacks auction, would you check the box and pay the few dollars to have it checked for passing the CMQ test? As noted, I'd be shocked if more than a few, if any consignors would not do that. Regardless, those that choose to not pay those few dollars per coin, will be at a disadvantage, as I'm sure there are others besides me that will choose to ignore those for the belief (right or wrong) that they failed to CMQ.
I probably would but then I'm apparently one of the few on this forum to use the CMQ service so far.
I question how many Stacks auction patrons are aware of the CMQ sticker. Last week I won an unstickered coin at a Stacks auction. At some point I'll probably send it to CMQ and then maybe I'll know. But again, they just launched a few months ago, we need to give them time to gain some momentum in the marketplace.
I agree with you, that perhaps many of Stacks consignors have not had the CMQ concept properly introduced. That's on Stacks, but I agree with time that will happen.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Steve, my interpretation of your viewpoints based on posts in this thread:
CMQ does not have the same rigor as CAC, to the point where it isn’t to be trusted
Not having a CMQ sticker may significantly disadvantage coins in Stacks auctions
Not sure that’s accurate, but if so, how do you reconcile the two? If CMQ stickers aren’t meaningful, why care if a coin was approved by them or not?
My concern with the initial "limited" results we've seen is the apparent greater inconsistency of CMQ vs. CAC, and I admit no perfect experiment (or data) has been conducted. I'm OK with hearing that CMQ will sticker some CAC failures, but I have difficulty understanding without explanations from each professional team as why CMQ will not sticker a bunch of CAC stickered coins, and I am most concerned about the one example that CMQ gave their highly coveted CMQ-X to a coin that failed to CAC sticker! @ProofCollection agrees that it would be beneficial for the hobby if the professional teams could share their thoughts on each of those specific examples.
On your second point, at some point in time as @ProofCollection points out, the concept of the CMQ offering will be understood by the majority of Stacks consignors. Since it literally cost only a few dollars per coin, AND is done relatively very quickly with no additional round trip shipping to get the CMQ, I believe almost all Stacks lots eligible for a CMQ will be submitted for that. Then the end result is that those that don't have them will cast the knowledge they failed to CMQ, and that should give some bidders, like me, the message to avoid the lot (unless one knows the REASON for the failure to CMQ sticker, and if OK with that reason, then it should be ok to bid).
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Steve, my interpretation of your viewpoints based on posts in this thread:
CMQ does not have the same rigor as CAC, to the point where it isn’t to be trusted
Not having a CMQ sticker may significantly disadvantage coins in Stacks auctions
Not sure that’s accurate, but if so, how do you reconcile the two? If CMQ stickers aren’t meaningful, why care if a coin was approved by them or not?
Then the end result is that those that don't have them will cast the knowledge they failed to CMQ, and that should give some bidders, like me, the message to avoid the lot (unless one knows the REASON for the failure to CMQ sticker, and if OK with that reason, then it should be ok to bid).
Steve
Why might that cause you to avoid the lot if you (seemingly) don’t agree with CMQ’s standards in the first place?
Separately, MY guess is in a large study, there won't be a large difference either way between PCGS CAC and CACG sales, and if there is a difference, i think the PCGS CAC will do slightly better. However, with that said, in my opinion when comparing a CACG plus grade coin to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, I believe the CACG plus coin might do better, since CACG is saying that coin is a plus, compared to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, where all we know is that PCGS is saying the coin is a plus.
Steve
Steve,
It looks to me like CACG is sticking to their standards. I have seen scads of CACG details holdered coins so they are winnowing out the 'cleaned in the past' ones that would fail to get a CAC sticker. This means the straight graded ones will be consistent in quality with those that were stickered in other TPG holders and will hold up in value when compared. So there is no reason why one coin in a TPG holder with a sticker will outperform the prices of the same coin in a CACG holder in the same grade. Further, if you base your opinion on this because of the registry (I am only speculating here), my understanding is that the CACG registries will be allowing coins from several TPG's and over time that will be an advantage to the collector. So if so, why would anyone pay up for something in a PCGS CAC vs. a CACG holder? FWIW, once the CACG registries are started, I am putting my collection in them so my fatties and CACG coins can be in my registry. I am thinking many may do the same.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Steve, my interpretation of your viewpoints based on posts in this thread:
CMQ does not have the same rigor as CAC, to the point where it isn’t to be trusted
Not having a CMQ sticker may significantly disadvantage coins in Stacks auctions
Not sure that’s accurate, but if so, how do you reconcile the two? If CMQ stickers aren’t meaningful, why care if a coin was approved by them or not?
Then the end result is that those that don't have them will cast the knowledge they failed to CMQ, and that should give some bidders, like me, the message to avoid the lot (unless one knows the REASON for the failure to CMQ sticker, and if OK with that reason, then it should be ok to bid).
Steve
Why might that cause you to avoid the lot if you (seemingly) don’t agree with CMQ’s standards in the first place?
I'm talking about my perception of collectors in general. If a lot of Stack lots have CMQ's, I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one? If I were a consignor to Stacks, I'd be concerned if my submitted lots failed to CMQ. And finally, I also believe, if not now but in the future, there will be Stacks consignors that will submit coins and say to list for auction only those coins that pass CMQ, and return the others (presumably to be sold elsewhere). To me, this makes sense (but it wouldn't be the first time that someone said I was crazy, lol).
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Separately, MY guess is in a large study, there won't be a large difference either way between PCGS CAC and CACG sales, and if there is a difference, i think the PCGS CAC will do slightly better. However, with that said, in my opinion when comparing a CACG plus grade coin to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, I believe the CACG plus coin might do better, since CACG is saying that coin is a plus, compared to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, where all we know is that PCGS is saying the coin is a plus.
Steve
Steve,
It looks to me like CACG is sticking to their standards. I have seen scads of CACG details holdered coins so they are winnowing out the 'cleaned in the past' ones that would fail to get a CAC sticker. This means the straight graded ones will be consistent in quality with those that were stickered in other TPG holders and will hold up in value when compared. So there is no reason why one coin in a TPG holder with a sticker will outperform the prices of the same coin in a CACG holder in the same grade. Further, if you base your opinion on this because of the registry (I am only speculating here), my understanding is that the CACG registries will be allowing coins from several TPG's and over time that will be an advantage to the collector. So if so, why would anyone pay up for something in a PCGS CAC vs. a CACG holder? FWIW, once the CACG registries are started, I am putting my collection in them so my fatties and CACG coins can be in my registry. I am thinking many may do the same.
Best, SH
I'm not sure how much impact CACG's registry will have for a couple of reasons.
NGC's registry allows PCGS coins but is generally not as well thought of as PCGS 's. There are several smaller sites that have complete open architecture registries but none have had significant impact. I am a big CAC fan but their technology is woefully underdeveloped (not to point fingers, NGC's is also, and this may change).
For me, PCGS 's technology (websites and apps) is far and away the best in the industry and a huge part of the reason why I favor PCGS.
One aspect of the prospective open CACG registry will be to have a more rational point system for classic coinage. That may drive up participation to the detriment of the registry here.
Edited to correct grammar.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Separately, MY guess is in a large study, there won't be a large difference either way between PCGS CAC and CACG sales, and if there is a difference, i think the PCGS CAC will do slightly better. However, with that said, in my opinion when comparing a CACG plus grade coin to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, I believe the CACG plus coin might do better, since CACG is saying that coin is a plus, compared to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, where all we know is that PCGS is saying the coin is a plus.
Steve
Steve,
It looks to me like CACG is sticking to their standards. I have seen scads of CACG details holdered coins so they are winnowing out the 'cleaned in the past' ones that would fail to get a CAC sticker. This means the straight graded ones will be consistent in quality with those that were stickered in other TPG holders and will hold up in value when compared. So there is no reason why one coin in a TPG holder with a sticker will outperform the prices of the same coin in a CACG holder in the same grade. Further, if you base your opinion on this because of the registry (I am only speculating here), my understanding is that the CACG registries will be allowing coins from several TPG's and over time that will be an advantage to the collector. So if so, why would anyone pay up for something in a PCGS CAC vs. a CACG holder? FWIW, once the CACG registries are started, I am putting my collection in them so my fatties and CACG coins can be in my registry. I am thinking many may do the same.
Why? Easy. Fundamentally the PCGS CAC coin has two grade opinions associated with it vs. one. That's got to be worth something right?
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Steve, my interpretation of your viewpoints based on posts in this thread:
CMQ does not have the same rigor as CAC, to the point where it isn’t to be trusted
Not having a CMQ sticker may significantly disadvantage coins in Stacks auctions
Not sure that’s accurate, but if so, how do you reconcile the two? If CMQ stickers aren’t meaningful, why care if a coin was approved by them or not?
My concern with the initial "limited" results we've seen is the apparent greater inconsistency of CMQ vs. CAC, and I admit no perfect experiment (or data) has been conducted. I'm OK with hearing that CMQ will sticker some CAC failures, but I have difficulty understanding without explanations from each professional team as why CMQ will not sticker a bunch of CAC stickered coins, and I am most concerned about the one example that CMQ gave their highly coveted CMQ-X to a coin that failed to CAC sticker! @ProofCollection agrees that it would be beneficial for the hobby if the professional teams could share their thoughts on each of those specific examples.
On your second point, at some point in time as @ProofCollection points out, the concept of the CMQ offering will be understood by the majority of Stacks consignors. Since it literally cost only a few dollars per coin, AND is done relatively very quickly with no additional round trip shipping to get the CMQ, I believe almost all Stacks lots eligible for a CMQ will be submitted for that. Then the end result is that those that don't have them will cast the knowledge they failed to CMQ, and that should give some bidders, like me, the message to avoid the lot (unless one knows the REASON for the failure to CMQ sticker, and if OK with that reason, then it should be ok to bid).
Steve
Steve it seems to me that CMQ places much more emphasis on Eye appeal and luster than CAC and less on technical grading. This is my guess for the inconsistency that you mentioned. So CMQ may be more forgiving for slight rub on coins and contact marks than CAC
I think we're getting caught in the weeds. As my Speech and Debate teacher warns us "Don't get caught in the weeds!"
I think Steve is making a comparison between CAC and CACG coins as if they have the same standards. This seems like a fair assumption at a glance, but it's incorrect IMO and stems from the lack of published standards.
For example, CAC may have failed that lovely DMPL Morgan because it wasn't sufficiently DMPL for them. That doesn't make it a bad coin. CAC may have seen it as a 64PL, and still would have failed it. Is CAC wrong? Not according to their standard.
CMQ may have X'ed the coin because they saw it was good enough for DMPL AND they thought it was exceptional for a 63. Heck, they may have seen it as a 64. Is CMQ wrong? Not according to their standard.
Two perfectly valid opinions, and both are technically right - based on the individual standards. THE COLLECTOR must decide which standard is right for them. Steve may put an emphasis on the entire solidity of the coin, but I may want a strong grade rather than a strong DMPL. Again, both perfectly acceptable opinions.
With this coin, it's clear to me that CMQ is going off of market grading - that is what the market would value the coin at. That makes them slightly looser than CAC on some coins. Clearly, both CMQ and PCGS see it as a solid 63+DMPL, despite what CAC says. Looking at the coin itself, I'd say CMQ got that one right and CAC got it wrong, but as I said earlier...
I'm the collector, I have to decide what standard is for ME.
When I started collecting 36-42 Proofs and seriously started hunting CAMs, and I counted on two things. 1) I knew the TPGS would get it wrong. 2) I knew I could be consistent to what I wanted. 3) I knew there was very little attention in that sphere. It's led to me having a collection that I could only have dreamed about, and it's costed me pennies on the dollar for what it would have been if they were in CAM slabs. My standard, not theirs.
I’ll just say it’s good to have @homerunhall more actively involved in the hobby again. The good thing about the sticker is that it supports PCGS! I’m curious to see how things turn out!
FWIW, I had an expert check the two CMQ proof trade dollars that caught my eye and he rejected them both as not meeting my standards for the grade. No bids from me but I haven’t check the prices realized against normal market price for the grade
@tradedollarnut said:
FWIW, I had an expert check the two CMQ proof trade dollars that caught my eye and he rejected them both as not meeting my standards for the grade. No bids from me but I haven’t check the prices realized against normal market price for the grade
$19k and $38k prices realized vs CoinFacts price guide of $23k and $120k respectively.
@winesteven said:
I'm talking about my perception of collectors in general. If a lot of Stack lots have CMQ's, I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one? If I were a consignor to Stacks, I'd be concerned if my submitted lots failed to CMQ. And finally, I also believe, if not now but in the future, there will be Stacks consignors that will submit coins and say to list for auction only those coins that pass CMQ, and return the others (presumably to be sold elsewhere). To me, this makes sense (but it wouldn't be the first time that someone said I was crazy, lol).
Steve
And that is why it's bad for auction companies to also be grading their own coins. There will be incentives to CMQ sticker more coins so that they get to auction them or please the consignors. There's a reason why we have 3rd party grading companies that try to be impartial.
FYI—CMQ taking submissions at FUN according to this email they sent me:
_Collectible Market Qualified (CMQ), a new service identifying the highest quality graded coins in the market, will be accepting submissions at the upcoming 2024 Florida United Numismatists Convention, Wednesday, January 3 through Saturday, January 6 at Table #830.
The first 500 coins submitted before the close of the show on Thursday will be delivered on site Friday afternoon. As a further benefit, the first 100 clients who submit coins for review will receive two free CMQ submissions and two free Coins In Motion submissions._
As someone that just won a Bust half in the Stack's auction, I decided to check out the CMQ stickering service. I can say unequivocally that the auction house and CMQ are different companies. CMQ is still figuring it out. It was a bit of a challenge to get the coin I won in the auction to the CMQ service (I was trying to save shipping)
My coin was stickered and I have had it back since before Christmas. I have yet to see the coin show up in the coin look-up or received my image. The CMQ customer service has been great, but as I mentioned above they have a lot to figure out.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@winesteven said: I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one?
That's 30 year old logic that was applied to raw coins after the major TPG's started up: to wit, "there must be a reason why it's not in a holder" and then it carried forward to "there must be a reason why it doesn't have a sticker" and time has proven both lines of thought to have a simple answer --- because it wasn't submitted.
@Maywood said: @winesteven said: I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one?
That's 30 year old logic that was applied to raw coins after the major TPG's started up: to wit, "there must be a reason why it's not in a holder" and then it carried forward to "there must be a reason why it doesn't have a sticker" and time has proven both lines of thought to have a simple answer --- because it wasn't submitted.
I believe that will apply here.
So perhaps a very slight rephrasing of the question - If you (or others) are consigning coins to a Stacks auction, and for discussion purposes let's assume the coin is valued in the upper 3 figures or more, why wouldn't you incur the tiny charge of just a few dollars to get the CMQ sticker for that auction? After all, NO additional shipping costs are involved, and there will be no delay in making the auction.
So, the bottom line, I truly believe (and it's NOT unreasonable for others to believe), the majority of Stacks consignors will indeed incur the cost of just a few dollars. So when that lot comes up with NO CMQ, rightly or wrongly MANY of us will assume it was submitted and FAILED!
Result - fewer bidders! Be my guest and save those few dollars on your Stacks consignments. "Penny wise and......."
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Comments
My interpretation of the stated goals of each service is that CMQ's standards will result in a "looser" standard than CAC. Yes, time will tell how market values that sticker. CMQ's goal of facilitating sight unseen transactions to me means that if I buy a coin without seeing it, when it arrives I should be happy with it. Ie., it won't be over graded or have any issues. That doesn't mean it will be pleasing to the eye and meet winesteven's high standards. Basically using Dan's standards above I think it will include A, B, and C coins and not include D and E coins. Based on this CMQ stickered coins won't be as valuable as CAC stickered coins, but they should still command somewhat of a premium as it will give buyers more confidence.
This is slightly off topic but if I was going to consign a coin that I thought was nice to an auction house that didn’t sticker at CAC I would send it to SB for a griff. If it passes I would consign it with SB. Otherwise I would consign it elsewhere.
As noted by my clicks on the above two replies, I agree with both.
As @skier07 implies, coins in Stacks auctions eligible for a CMQ sticker but does not have one, nor has a CAC sticker, in my opinion will suffer compared to stickered coins by CAC or CMQ.
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 have a problem with CACG. I can't use them in my Registry sets PCGS or NGC. Changing services you lose stickers.
MORE expense to try and cross or Crack out and potentially lose value . Much time lost in the service black hole.
This game always favors the house. You will lose money overall likely.
Was this meant for a different thread?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
So I recently visited the SB site to view some high grade proof trade dollars up for auction. My initial reaction to the ones with the new stickers was ‘ok, but have they been to CAC or not?’ And my reaction to the one with neither sticker was ‘well is this dog crap or what?’ Most confusing and I probably won’t play.
I was surprised that there wasn't more CMQ material on the current auction but I didn't browse everything. But that was my thought too... how much was evaluated for a sticker and how much wasn't? I think going forward buying on SB you almost have to assume it didn't qualify for a sticker if it's in their auction and doesn't have one.
.ABSOLUTELY!!!!!
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
Update!
So as you all know, I made two submissions. The first I believe arrived on 9/18 and I just got them back today. I believe there was a delay because I asked for an offer on my coins which they provided. I ended up selling 3 of them to SB. They are not in the current auction. The second submission was mailed Oct 2 and I have them back today on Oct 11 and that includes 1 CIM video. 9 day turnaround including shipping both ways not bad at all!
But here's the big news. There is what I am going to call a "Gen 1" sticker and a "Gen 2" sticker. They must have taken the feedback to heart and made a smaller sticker! The new size is MUCH better and more comparable to the CAC bean. Here they are side by side. This is just a quick photo from my phone to show sticker size.
Now people will have to buy the sticker not the coin
The smaller one is just about small enough to fit in the lower corner of the slab. Would make for less clutter on the flip.
Noticed this article about CMQ value. Not sure it's all quite fair because some of the coins are CAC and CMQ. I haven't done an analysis on these sales to determine if the sticker actually adds value:
https://www.greysheet.com/news/story/spectacular-cmq-and-cmq-x-approved-numismatic-treasures-bring-record-prices-in-the-stack-s-bowers-galleries-november-rarities-night-auction
Some additional tidbits:
I asked a CMQ rep if a Stacks auction coin doesn't have a CMQ sticker on it, does that mean it failed and they clarified that coins sent to auction are only reviewed for CMQ if the seller requests/orders it.
Also, CMQ updated their website and the pictures are much better now. The quality is similar to their auction photos.
While technically what they said is correct, ask yourself - if YOU were submitting coins to a Stacks auction anyway, since the additional cost of applying for a CMQ is only a few dollars, why wouldn’t you do just that? I’d be shocked if virtually not every submitter did just that! As such, when I browse Stacks lots, right or wrong, I assume any Stacks lot without their CMQ failed to get one!
Separately, earlier in this thread a generous collector submitted a small but relevant sample of coins for CMQ stickering. Several with CAC stickers failed getting a CMQ, several that failed getting CAC stickers managed getting CMQ’s, and surprisingly, one of those CAC failures got the coveted CMQ-X. Make of this what you will. I know what I make of it!
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 wouldn't read too much into it now. Back when CAC first came out, I'm sure quite a few on this board would have declined to have their coins stickered prior to auction. It's an extra delay, extra cost, and uncertain benefit so there's a great chance that most sellers decline. Even in the past few years I have sent coins to sell on GC where they offer to send the coins to CAC prior to listing and I have declined that service.
Yeah, that was me.
As discussed, it's clear that the standards are different. You think anything that doesn't have CAC's blessing is trash which is in line for a purist/perfectionist approach to coin collecting. This is fine, but very few have the patience or budget to support that approach. NGC, PCGS, and CMQ have clearly embraced "market" standards which are clearly broader and more forgiving. I'm fine with these standards as my budget goes further and the coins look fine to me.
The coin with the CMQ-X that CAC rejected is quite lovely, and no one can provide a reason why CAC rejected it. In fact, I'll post the new CMQ photos of it.
I bought a coin out of the last auction that a dealer I trust looked at we decided to bid on it before it had the CMQ sticker. I am a collector that chases CAC stickers but lately I have had to go without on a number of purchases as the CAC stickers are close to impossible to find and the premiums are to high on some of the more expensive coins. Coin is PCGS AU 53 CMQ
I can live with the coin as is without the CAC sticker. Maybe someday it will be upgraded when I finish the set but that is at least 10 years in the future.
Words no longer have meaning in this hobby.
Another coin with a CMQ sticker that I just will have to live with until I can upgrade. 1927-S AU58 CMQ.
Define “typical auction” range. I’d be most interested in a comparison of PCGS CAC coin values versus CACG coin values.
Yes, and for coins that trade fairly frequently, not one-every-five year type coins where it's impossible to predict a sale price.
So basically accurately graded coins treated as lepers by (CAC) sticker crowd can now be “saved “ by Hall’s new service? It will be interesting to see if this establishes a following in the market.
It looks like at least some (not all) of CAC’s ardent proponents don’t like competition from the newest stickering company. There is no doubt that JA is a giant in this field but so is David Hall.
That's what I'm saying. I'll also note that I have seen a few videos of coin dealers that have sent CAC sticker rejected coins to CACG and had them straight-cross. So not good enough for a sticker, but good enough to be slabbed... I wonder how that works?
Agreed. The initial ICG for pre 1950s coinage was legitimate as well. At one point, CDN bid wasn’t far from the big two (early years).
There's a big difference in the time delay between you sending a coin to an auction house, having them send it to CAC, having CAC spend a week or so to get to it, having CAC send it back to the auction house, and then for it to get in the queue to be listed. Compare that to sending a coin to Stacks for auction having checked the box to CMQ. My guess is within a day or two (or three) it'll be back in the queue to be listed in that same upcoming auction. Yes, you can try to rationalize that logic comparing the apple and orange, but I choose not to buy it.
As I asked, if YOU were to send coins to a Stacks auction, would you check the box and pay the few dollars to have it checked for passing the CMQ test? As noted, I'd be shocked if more than a few, if any consignors would not do that. Regardless, those that choose to not pay those few dollars per coin, will be at a disadvantage, as I'm sure there are others besides me that will choose to ignore those for the belief (right or wrong) that they failed to CMQ.
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 probably would but then I'm apparently one of the few on this forum to use the CMQ service so far.
I question how many Stacks auction patrons are aware of the CMQ sticker. Last week I won an unstickered coin at a Stacks auction. At some point I'll probably send it to CMQ and then maybe I'll know. But again, they just launched a few months ago, we need to give them time to gain some momentum in the marketplace.
Steve, my interpretation of your viewpoints based on posts in this thread:
Not sure that’s accurate, but if so, how do you reconcile the two? If CMQ stickers aren’t meaningful, why care if a coin was approved by them or not?
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
My GUESS (as i can't speak for John Brush or John Feigenbaum) is they were comparing CACG sales to an actual range of sales of NON-CAC coins.
Separately, MY guess is in a large study, there won't be a large difference either way between PCGS CAC and CACG sales, and if there is a difference, i think the PCGS CAC will do slightly better. However, with that said, in my opinion when comparing a CACG plus grade coin to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, I believe the CACG plus coin might do better, since CACG is saying that coin is a plus, compared to a PCGS CAC plus grade coin, where all we know is that PCGS is saying the coin is a plus.
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 agree with you, that perhaps many of Stacks consignors have not had the CMQ concept properly introduced. That's on Stacks, but I agree with time that will happen.
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
My concern with the initial "limited" results we've seen is the apparent greater inconsistency of CMQ vs. CAC, and I admit no perfect experiment (or data) has been conducted. I'm OK with hearing that CMQ will sticker some CAC failures, but I have difficulty understanding without explanations from each professional team as why CMQ will not sticker a bunch of CAC stickered coins, and I am most concerned about the one example that CMQ gave their highly coveted CMQ-X to a coin that failed to CAC sticker! @ProofCollection agrees that it would be beneficial for the hobby if the professional teams could share their thoughts on each of those specific examples.
On your second point, at some point in time as @ProofCollection points out, the concept of the CMQ offering will be understood by the majority of Stacks consignors. Since it literally cost only a few dollars per coin, AND is done relatively very quickly with no additional round trip shipping to get the CMQ, I believe almost all Stacks lots eligible for a CMQ will be submitted for that. Then the end result is that those that don't have them will cast the knowledge they failed to CMQ, and that should give some bidders, like me, the message to avoid the lot (unless one knows the REASON for the failure to CMQ sticker, and if OK with that reason, then it should be ok to bid).
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
Why might that cause you to avoid the lot if you (seemingly) don’t agree with CMQ’s standards in the first place?
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Steve,
It looks to me like CACG is sticking to their standards. I have seen scads of CACG details holdered coins so they are winnowing out the 'cleaned in the past' ones that would fail to get a CAC sticker. This means the straight graded ones will be consistent in quality with those that were stickered in other TPG holders and will hold up in value when compared. So there is no reason why one coin in a TPG holder with a sticker will outperform the prices of the same coin in a CACG holder in the same grade. Further, if you base your opinion on this because of the registry (I am only speculating here), my understanding is that the CACG registries will be allowing coins from several TPG's and over time that will be an advantage to the collector. So if so, why would anyone pay up for something in a PCGS CAC vs. a CACG holder? FWIW, once the CACG registries are started, I am putting my collection in them so my fatties and CACG coins can be in my registry. I am thinking many may do the same.
Best, SH
I'm talking about my perception of collectors in general. If a lot of Stack lots have CMQ's, I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one? If I were a consignor to Stacks, I'd be concerned if my submitted lots failed to CMQ. And finally, I also believe, if not now but in the future, there will be Stacks consignors that will submit coins and say to list for auction only those coins that pass CMQ, and return the others (presumably to be sold elsewhere). To me, this makes sense (but it wouldn't be the first time that someone said I was crazy, lol).
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I'm not sure how much impact CACG's registry will have for a couple of reasons.
NGC's registry allows PCGS coins but is generally not as well thought of as PCGS 's. There are several smaller sites that have complete open architecture registries but none have had significant impact. I am a big CAC fan but their technology is woefully underdeveloped (not to point fingers, NGC's is also, and this may change).
For me, PCGS 's technology (websites and apps) is far and away the best in the industry and a huge part of the reason why I favor PCGS.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
@spacehayduke Glad to see you're back here.
One aspect of the prospective open CACG registry will be to have a more rational point system for classic coinage. That may drive up participation to the detriment of the registry here.
Edited to correct grammar.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Why? Easy. Fundamentally the PCGS CAC coin has two grade opinions associated with it vs. one. That's got to be worth something right?
Steve it seems to me that CMQ places much more emphasis on Eye appeal and luster than CAC and less on technical grading. This is my guess for the inconsistency that you mentioned. So CMQ may be more forgiving for slight rub on coins and contact marks than CAC
Some very interesting discussion here.
I think we're getting caught in the weeds. As my Speech and Debate teacher warns us "Don't get caught in the weeds!"
I think Steve is making a comparison between CAC and CACG coins as if they have the same standards. This seems like a fair assumption at a glance, but it's incorrect IMO and stems from the lack of published standards.
For example, CAC may have failed that lovely DMPL Morgan because it wasn't sufficiently DMPL for them. That doesn't make it a bad coin. CAC may have seen it as a 64PL, and still would have failed it. Is CAC wrong? Not according to their standard.
CMQ may have X'ed the coin because they saw it was good enough for DMPL AND they thought it was exceptional for a 63. Heck, they may have seen it as a 64. Is CMQ wrong? Not according to their standard.
Two perfectly valid opinions, and both are technically right - based on the individual standards. THE COLLECTOR must decide which standard is right for them. Steve may put an emphasis on the entire solidity of the coin, but I may want a strong grade rather than a strong DMPL. Again, both perfectly acceptable opinions.
With this coin, it's clear to me that CMQ is going off of market grading - that is what the market would value the coin at. That makes them slightly looser than CAC on some coins. Clearly, both CMQ and PCGS see it as a solid 63+DMPL, despite what CAC says. Looking at the coin itself, I'd say CMQ got that one right and CAC got it wrong, but as I said earlier...
I'm the collector, I have to decide what standard is for ME.
When I started collecting 36-42 Proofs and seriously started hunting CAMs, and I counted on two things. 1) I knew the TPGS would get it wrong. 2) I knew I could be consistent to what I wanted. 3) I knew there was very little attention in that sphere. It's led to me having a collection that I could only have dreamed about, and it's costed me pennies on the dollar for what it would have been if they were in CAM slabs. My standard, not theirs.
Coin Photographer.
I’ll just say it’s good to have @homerunhall more actively involved in the hobby again. The good thing about the sticker is that it supports PCGS! I’m curious to see how things turn out!
FWIW, I had an expert check the two CMQ proof trade dollars that caught my eye and he rejected them both as not meeting my standards for the grade. No bids from me but I haven’t check the prices realized against normal market price for the grade
$19k and $38k prices realized vs CoinFacts price guide of $23k and $120k respectively.
Uh oh!
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
Will Greysheet recognize this new sticker company? Probably not.. This is getting silly now with the stickers...
And that is why it's bad for auction companies to also be grading their own coins. There will be incentives to CMQ sticker more coins so that they get to auction them or please the consignors. There's a reason why we have 3rd party grading companies that try to be impartial.
Follow me on MyCollect!
FYI—CMQ taking submissions at FUN according to this email they sent me:
_Collectible Market Qualified (CMQ), a new service identifying the highest quality graded coins in the market, will be accepting submissions at the upcoming 2024 Florida United Numismatists Convention, Wednesday, January 3 through Saturday, January 6 at Table #830.
The first 500 coins submitted before the close of the show on Thursday will be delivered on site Friday afternoon. As a further benefit, the first 100 clients who submit coins for review will receive two free CMQ submissions and two free Coins In Motion submissions._
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
I am interested in seeing how the photography stacks up (no pun intended) to PCGS TrueView.
Realize that they are taking pictures of slabs, not raw coins. Here is a picture from my last sub:
As someone that just won a Bust half in the Stack's auction, I decided to check out the CMQ stickering service. I can say unequivocally that the auction house and CMQ are different companies. CMQ is still figuring it out. It was a bit of a challenge to get the coin I won in the auction to the CMQ service (I was trying to save shipping)
My coin was stickered and I have had it back since before Christmas. I have yet to see the coin show up in the coin look-up or received my image. The CMQ customer service has been great, but as I mentioned above they have a lot to figure out.
So, any recent thoughts on CMQ coins?
@winesteven said: I believe as potential bidders become aware of that concept, some/many will wonder why the lot they're looking at doesn't have one? What's wrong that it didn't get one?
That's 30 year old logic that was applied to raw coins after the major TPG's started up: to wit, "there must be a reason why it's not in a holder" and then it carried forward to "there must be a reason why it doesn't have a sticker" and time has proven both lines of thought to have a simple answer --- because it wasn't submitted.
I believe that will apply here.
So perhaps a very slight rephrasing of the question - If you (or others) are consigning coins to a Stacks auction, and for discussion purposes let's assume the coin is valued in the upper 3 figures or more, why wouldn't you incur the tiny charge of just a few dollars to get the CMQ sticker for that auction? After all, NO additional shipping costs are involved, and there will be no delay in making the auction.
So, the bottom line, I truly believe (and it's NOT unreasonable for others to believe), the majority of Stacks consignors will indeed incur the cost of just a few dollars. So when that lot comes up with NO CMQ, rightly or wrongly MANY of us will assume it was submitted and FAILED!
Result - fewer bidders! Be my guest and save those few dollars on your Stacks consignments. "Penny wise and......."
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