Different sets of eyes at CAC sticker and CACG. It seems their reject systems are not in synch. I wonder what JA would think of this? Someone should post a link of this thread on the CACG board. Seems to me that the boys at CACG were told to tighten the screws way down on the grades and crosses.....all in the effort to make a branding statement. What a joke!
Well played @Crepidodera .
@RLSnapper said:
Different sets of eyes at CAC sticker and CACG. It seems their reject systems are not in synch. I wonder what JA would think of this? Someone should post a link of this thread on the CACG board. Seems to me that the boys at CACG were told to tighten the screws way down on the grades and crosses.....all in the effort to make a branding statement. What a joke!
Well played @Crepidodera .
I don't think any hasty generalizations can be made based on a single example of discrepancy between Virginia beach and NJ. This was bound to happen at some point, and will continue to happen in the future. Two separate teams of graders in different locations can't be perfectly in sync on thousands of coins, some judgement calls that are right on the line will result in situations such as this. However, I'm surprised to see the Virginia beach guys be the ones that are too tight.
JA will admit that he is not infallible, nor is any other human grader. Would PCGS be a "joke" if they graded a coin MS62 in one instance, gets cracked out and regraded as Unc details? Because that happens all the time...
I don't intend to send the coin back to CACG. When I first started this thread, the coin was just back from grading at PCGS.
I was very disappointed by the results at CACG and I wanted verification that the coin was a solid example. So, after receiving the coin back from PCGS, I decided to have a friend send it to CAC for sticker review. I thought there was maybe a 10% chance the coin would sticker. I was shocked with the result. CACG considered the coin unworthy of any straight grade, and JA identified the coin as A or B quality.
I don't think the results are a joke. I think PCGS and JA are very good at what they do. But I also believe CACG is being hyper
conservative in their evaluations. As DeplorableDan stated, the human element is a factor. Grading coins is more art than science.
The 1873-S quarter was one of three coins that I sent raw to CACG in October. Only one of the three coins was graded, an 1860-O quarter in VF30. The other coin that failed to grade, also an 1860-O quarter, is now in a PCGS VF35 holder with a CAC sticker!
@DeplorableDan and @Crepidodera the joke is that CACG is marketed as the next level, exclusive club, waiting list TPG. The exclusive grading sets that JA has trained his staff on....coins graded by CACG have the true grade is the implication. Then we find out CACG rejects can get a CAC sticker. What a bunch of horse manure. I will stick with our hosts thank you very much. Don't drink the Kool Aid from the man behind the curtain.
There is an easy solution to JA's quandary....kill the sticker business...then what happened in this instance will never happen again.
@RLSnapper said: @DeplorableDan and @Crepidodera the joke is that CACG is marketed as the next level, exclusive club, waiting list TPG. The exclusive grading sets that JA has trained his staff on....coins graded by CACG have the true grade is the implication. Then we find out CACG rejects can get a CAC sticker. What a bunch of horse manure.I will stick with our hosts thank you very much. Don't drink the Kool Aid from the man behind the curtain.
There is an easy solution to JA's quandary....kill the sticker business...then what happened in this instance will never happen again.
Your statement I made bold is a bit contradictory.
NO ONE, not any individual, not any grading company or organization, will ever have that much precision that their “true grade” is going to be exactly the same, every time. With human graders, it is impossible. We don’t have to marry a tpg either, use whichever one that you agree with more, or find the most value at that time.
Also, CAC does not market themselves as an "exclusive club”. The waiting list was likely a consequence of policy decisions, and after all the kinks get straightened out I wouldn’t be surprised if it became a distant memory in a few years.
On the surface I would think so since it’s the same company. However YMMV and any TPG coin can develop a worse tarnish look over time. People seem to forget any sticker opinion is a point in time not to mention reaction of the atmosphere on coinage surfaces is an ongoing process. For that reason many (including myself) will prefer CACG coins (vs stickered) going forward. Been wondering if they shut down the sticker service if that will speed up CACG material in the marketplace.
Well you can now send the coin with the sticker back to CACG for a pretty much guaranteed crossover. I would love to see the facial expression if the same grader reviews the coin and remembers it. Lol.
Comments
Different sets of eyes at CAC sticker and CACG. It seems their reject systems are not in synch. I wonder what JA would think of this? Someone should post a link of this thread on the CACG board. Seems to me that the boys at CACG were told to tighten the screws way down on the grades and crosses.....all in the effort to make a branding statement. What a joke!
Well played @Crepidodera .
I don't think any hasty generalizations can be made based on a single example of discrepancy between Virginia beach and NJ. This was bound to happen at some point, and will continue to happen in the future. Two separate teams of graders in different locations can't be perfectly in sync on thousands of coins, some judgement calls that are right on the line will result in situations such as this. However, I'm surprised to see the Virginia beach guys be the ones that are too tight.
JA will admit that he is not infallible, nor is any other human grader. Would PCGS be a "joke" if they graded a coin MS62 in one instance, gets cracked out and regraded as Unc details? Because that happens all the time...
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
@Crepidodera .
So now the coin has a CAC stricker, do you plan on sending it back to CACG?
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
I don't intend to send the coin back to CACG. When I first started this thread, the coin was just back from grading at PCGS.
I was very disappointed by the results at CACG and I wanted verification that the coin was a solid example. So, after receiving the coin back from PCGS, I decided to have a friend send it to CAC for sticker review. I thought there was maybe a 10% chance the coin would sticker. I was shocked with the result. CACG considered the coin unworthy of any straight grade, and JA identified the coin as A or B quality.
I don't think the results are a joke. I think PCGS and JA are very good at what they do. But I also believe CACG is being hyper
conservative in their evaluations. As DeplorableDan stated, the human element is a factor. Grading coins is more art than science.
The 1873-S quarter was one of three coins that I sent raw to CACG in October. Only one of the three coins was graded, an 1860-O quarter in VF30. The other coin that failed to grade, also an 1860-O quarter, is now in a PCGS VF35 holder with a CAC sticker!
Doug
@DeplorableDan and @Crepidodera the joke is that CACG is marketed as the next level, exclusive club, waiting list TPG. The exclusive grading sets that JA has trained his staff on....coins graded by CACG have the true grade is the implication. Then we find out CACG rejects can get a CAC sticker. What a bunch of horse manure. I will stick with our hosts thank you very much. Don't drink the Kool Aid from the man behind the curtain.
There is an easy solution to JA's quandary....kill the sticker business...then what happened in this instance will never happen again.
Your statement I made bold is a bit contradictory.
NO ONE, not any individual, not any grading company or organization, will ever have that much precision that their “true grade” is going to be exactly the same, every time. With human graders, it is impossible. We don’t have to marry a tpg either, use whichever one that you agree with more, or find the most value at that time.
Also, CAC does not market themselves as an "exclusive club”. The waiting list was likely a consequence of policy decisions, and after all the kinks get straightened out I wouldn’t be surprised if it became a distant memory in a few years.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
2 looks like a 150 yr old coin should
On the surface I would think so since it’s the same company. However YMMV and any TPG coin can develop a worse tarnish look over time. People seem to forget any sticker opinion is a point in time not to mention reaction of the atmosphere on coinage surfaces is an ongoing process. For that reason many (including myself) will prefer CACG coins (vs stickered) going forward. Been wondering if they shut down the sticker service if that will speed up CACG material in the marketplace.
Well you can now send the coin with the sticker back to CACG for a pretty much guaranteed crossover. I would love to see the facial expression if the same grader reviews the coin and remembers it. Lol.
An interesting conundrum! You could always just ask specifically about this coin as to why they wouldn't slab it.
Bottom line though Doug, you sure have some pretty coins -- thanks for sharing them!
Thank you for the kind words!
Doug