@jkrk said:
If I need to mark down some percentage of coins, 2 or more grades, then I become suspect of all coins in slabs. >Remember, this is all relatively new to me so my concerns might be totally overblown? Am I unique? My point is I > >am unsure how CACG entrance into the biz affects the hobby? Until I can gather more data, I'm still interested in >buying coins but at a somewhat lower price. All i am saying is if others are equally uncertain there may be some >slowdown in demand and prices will slip a bit.
No, you are NOT alone. I've been an on-and-off collector (not someone who is FT or as dedicated as many here) and while I am not really concerned with the market prices of coins I buy, should I buy more expensive coins down the road, I certainly would not want them to lose 30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate.
Ultimately, since this hobby for most of us is not a business, we don't worry too much about the P&L. Still, we expect there are certain rules to the game and to the extent that the rules change midstream, that is naturally a concern.
Let's hope we have more clarity by the end of the year. I think we will.
@Coinscratch said: @DollarAfterDollar said: Now CACG comes along and says that won't fly.
They didn’t just come along right they’ve been turning down grades since their inception. So anything other than >what they’re currently doing would only undermine their whole strategy in the first place.
is going to be bigger than what a lot of people may think. As long as they keep the pedal down it will be a slow > >motion checkmate. At least upon a niche portion of the market.
I would agree with this. I think what wasn't known as much was the extent to which the TPGs could be off on grades, like 2-3 increments AND the entire MS vs. AU debate.
Take Saints (a series I am more familiar with). We all know that JA/CAC tend to be a "tougher" grader on gold coins in general and Saints in particular. Maybe it has to do with the volume of coins available...maybe it's because gold is a softer metal and JA/CAC are meticulous in sticking to their standards.
Whatever...the end result is that while many thought that their Saints were just average or maybe at worst 1 grade too high, now they realize there's a good chance that the discoloaration on the high points is rub/wear and the MS coin they have is really AU. They may have overpaid a bit on the purchase but when they sell unless it's a rarity or a scarce coin they'll take a bath on the sale as they get AU $$$.
When they bought their coin/Saint....and maybe even if they submitted it to CAC and it didn't sticker....they just assumed it wasn't up to snuff, not that their MS coin was really AU.
@silviosi said:
For me something smell bad. How come my friend coin MS 65 PCGS CAC stiker come back AU 58??? Are two >entities?
Unless I'm confused and have it wrong again (could be !! ), I was told that a CAC-stickered TPG coin would (automatically) cross at the same grade with CACG (unless the coin changed in the holder). Right ?
Do you have more details on your friend's coin that went from MS-65 CAC to AU-58 ? That would appear to be an oulier.
@jkrk said:
If I need to mark down some percentage of coins, 2 or more grades, then I become suspect of all coins in slabs. >Remember, this is all relatively new to me so my concerns might be totally overblown? Am I unique? My point is I > >am unsure how CACG entrance into the biz affects the hobby? Until I can gather more data, I'm still interested in >buying coins but at a somewhat lower price. All i am saying is if others are equally uncertain there may be some >slowdown in demand and prices will slip a bit.
No, you are NOT alone. I've been an on-and-off collector (not someone who is FT or as dedicated as many here) and while I am not really concerned with the market prices of coins I buy, should I buy more expensive coins down the road, I certainly would not want them to lose 30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate.
Ultimately, since this hobby for most of us is not a business, we don't worry too much about the P&L. Still, we expect there are certain rules to the game and to the extent that the rules change midstream, that is naturally a concern.
Let's hope we have more clarity by the end of the year. I think we will.
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
Answer - you couldn’t.
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
About 30 years ago, I was discussing the grading of MS Standing Liberty Quarters with a principal of NGC. He told me that the key to determine whether an SLQ was gem or less primarily involved the rounded knee or the slight flat spot above the knee. Marks, luster and strike quality were secondary factors. Look at a mint state 1926d quarter in 65 and above and the strike will likely be awful. There are other dates as well. Try finding a 1926d with full head and shield rivets.
At the time I was discussing this with NGC, I had sent some 64’s in for evaluation. One was a gorgeous 1930 s with a rounded knee and booming luster. He told me that a staple scratch on the reverse, that I had missed, was the reason for the 64 grade. I swore the coin was a 67. I quit collecting ms standing liberty quarters. I have a complete circulated collection of these quarters right now. Most of them are in 55 and 58 pcgs holders. Originality, strike (shield rivets, head and breast) are important to me. I steer completely clear of 58 pcgs quarters that are blast white. Pcgs loves them and I don’t. I have a couple of these quarters, one graded 55 and another in 50 that have full heads that are not designated on the holder. Neither is a close call. Collect what you like and don’t get focused on the number.
@MFeld said:
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before >making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Well, I did take a bit of hyperbole license, Mark. Let me be a bit clearer.
If someone purchased a pricey coin graded MS-66 (condition rarity grade) but no CAC sticker.... and you paid nice $$$ for it...but that coin series in that grade needs CACG or a CAC sticker to get Big $$$....you could pay MS-66 $$$ based on pre-CACG pricing and get AU-58 $$$ down the line.
I'm not saying this is going to happen or likely to happen...but it certainly CAN happen and we have had some people who appear to be good graders suddenly finding out their coins are AU and not MS (because of the wear/rub issue).
I agree...things are NEW and in FLUX so we need time to sort this out. I'm willing to be patient and I think most people here are, too.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
I hope to purchase an MCMVII HR down the line (saving up, so not anytime soon !) and obviously that's a very big purcha$$$e decision (for me, at least ). No idea if I will be looking at a low-60's MS or an AU coin when the time arrives, but either way I'm going to be laser-focused on the high points and how the strike on the High Reliefs may or may not look like wear/rub/friction.
At the same time, I realize I'm going to be flying semi-blind if only because compared to experts I haven't seen hundreds/thousands of the coins over the years/decades in-hand.
-Grading is subjective and it will remain subjective even after the wheel is reinvented or goal posts are moved... again and again;
-Not all coins at the same grade level are created equal. Moving the goal posts does not change that and never will;
-Coins within a series have their signature dates/mints that define and capture the quality and design that makes the series what it is. An example of quality would be the 1879-s through 1881-s Morgan Dollar. The 1904 is more problematic. And don't expect those dates to look alike at the same grade level. They simply don't.
-Rub and quality of the strikes for WLH and SLQ coins. Understand the difference in the progression of the design changes and how that factors into grading. Rub is not always rub. Instead, coins may exhibit natural aging overtime attributable to storage and even climate. Learn to see if you can identify the difference-obviously it is not easy and it is a developed skill.
-TPG has provided guidance and a measure of stability to how coins are graded, how they should be graded and more importantly, how grades are perceived. While it has not been perfect, the hobby remains better off with it than without it until that perception changes.
-And if the plan is to reinvent the wheel or move the goal posts, what is the ultimate goal as well as the consequences in doing so? The risk of undermining confidence and what has acceptance based on the ongoing subjective nature of grading may not be worth a new wave that is equally subjective.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@MFeld said:
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before >making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Well, I did take a bit of hyperbole license, Mark. Let me be a bit clearer.
If someone purchased a pricey coin graded MS-66 (condition rarity grade) but no CAC sticker.... and you paid nice $$$ for it...but that coin series in that grade needs CACG or a CAC sticker to get Big $$$....you could pay MS-66 $$$ based on pre-CACG pricing and get AU-58 $$$ down the line.
I'm not saying this is going to happen or likely to happen...but it certainly CAN happen and we have had some people who appear to be good graders suddenly finding out their coins are AU and not MS (because of the wear/rub issue).
I agree...things are NEW and in FLUX so we need time to sort this out. I'm willing to be patient and I think most people here are, too.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
I hope to purchase an MCMVII HR down the line (saving up, so not anytime soon !) and obviously that's a very big purcha$$$e decision (for me, at least ). No idea if I will be looking at a low-60's MS or an AU coin when the time arrives, but either way I'm going to be laser-focused on the high points and how the strike on the High Reliefs may or may not look like wear/rub/friction.
At the same time, I realize I'm going to be flying semi-blind if only because compared to experts I haven't seen hundreds/thousands of the coins over the years/decades.
I’m confused. Let’s circle back to your hypothetical.
Joe Schmoe (sorry @jmlanzaf) buys a non cac P66 walker. Presumably, he pays a non cac P66 price. As we know, coins with CAC approval trade significantly higher, but if Joe was reasonably informed he would not be paying CAC levels for a non cac example If he decides to sell the coin down the line, presumably, Joe will receive non cac P66 money, less expenses and whatever profit spread the dealer intends to make, which is usually far less than 30-60%.
The market is mature and efficient, and there is simply not going to be an overnight epiphany that a P66 without a sticker should trade for cac 58 money, There are established price spreads between cac and non cac, and of course they are subject to change over time. JA has declined to sticker coins because of friction for years, but the grade on the holder remains the same and there are plenty of prospective buyers out there who take no issue with market grading.
And, word of advice on your future HR saint- either find a nice ms63 or otherwise just get a 58. This is a coin you want to buy with a bean, the spread isn’t crazy and the stickered ones are incredibly liquid and much easier to sell.
@silviosi said:
For me something smell bad. How come my friend coin MS 65 PCGS CAC stiker come back AU 58??? Are two entities?
I bet that didn’t happen, the walkers being downgraded to 58 were unstickered coins. They are technically separate entities, but not really.
Could have been cracked.
Let's view every MS Walker with a CAC sticker. It will take a while.
Now, did every MS Walker w/CAC sticker meet CACG's "new" standard?
If it were cracked, then it's just a raw coin and no longer a 65 cac. I welcome Silviosi to provide evidence, otherwise I call poppycock on that story.
And CACG doesn’t have a “new” standard, all of the stickered coins are guaranteed to cross at grade. This doesn’t include the rare instances where a coin might have turned in the holder, or JA might have changed his tune on a specific type of toning.
It's also a little odd to hear David Hall opining in what TPGs are doing incorrectly since he was running one not so long ago. If he felt it was so wrong to grade SLQs that way, I'd like to know why he chose to grade SLQs that way.
Very few dates / mintmarks of the SLQ series were fully struck. That includes the head, shield, rivulets on the shield, and sometimes the knee. I think the above comment about SLQs was more confusing than helpful. He knew this when he made the comment.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@MFeld said:
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before >making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Well, I did take a bit of hyperbole license, Mark. Let me be a bit clearer.
If someone purchased a pricey coin graded MS-66 (condition rarity grade) but no CAC sticker.... and you paid nice $$$ for it...but that coin series in that grade needs CACG or a CAC sticker to get Big $$$....you could pay MS-66 $$$ based on pre-CACG pricing and get AU-58 $$$ down the line.
I'm not saying this is going to happen or likely to happen...but it certainly CAN happen and we have had some people who appear to be good graders suddenly finding out their coins are AU and not MS (because of the wear/rub issue).
I agree...things are NEW and in FLUX so we need time to sort this out. I'm willing to be patient and I think most people here are, too.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
I hope to purchase an MCMVII HR down the line (saving up, so not anytime soon !) and obviously that's a very big purcha$$$e decision (for me, at least ). No idea if I will be looking at a low-60's MS or an AU coin when the time arrives, but either way I'm going to be laser-focused on the high points and how the strike on the High Reliefs may or may not look like wear/rub/friction.
At the same time, I realize I'm going to be flying semi-blind if only because compared to experts I haven't seen hundreds/thousands of the coins over the years/decades.
And, word of advice on your future HR saint- either find a nice ms63 or otherwise just get a 58. This is a coin you want to buy with a bean, the spread isn’t crazy and the stickered ones are incredibly liquid and much easier to sell.
Just to put an exclamation mark on this...I had a very lovely 58 CAC HR Saint. If not for a touch of rub on the breast and knee, it would have been at least a 63 but more likely 64 IMO. I sold it a few days ago for full retail (CPG) in less than a day. I'm not a dealer, just a collector.
It's also a little odd to hear David Hall opining in what TPGs are doing incorrectly since he was running one not so long ago. If he felt it was so wrong to grade SLQs that way, I'd like to know why he chose to grade SLQs that way.
Very few dates / mintmarks of the SLQ series were fully struck. That includes the head, shield, rivulets on the shield, and sometimes the knee. I think the above comment about SLQs was more confusing than helpful. He knew this when he made the comment.
I agree. That's why I really wish there were a follow up question or two.
@MFeld said:
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before >making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Well, I did take a bit of hyperbole license, Mark. Let me be a bit clearer.
If someone purchased a pricey coin graded MS-66 (condition rarity grade) but no CAC sticker.... and you paid nice $$$ for it...but that coin series in that grade needs CACG or a CAC sticker to get Big $$$....you could pay MS-66 $$$ based on pre-CACG pricing and get AU-58 $$$ down the line.
I'm not saying this is going to happen or likely to happen...but it certainly CAN happen and we have had some people who appear to be good graders suddenly finding out their coins are AU and not MS (because of the wear/rub issue).
I agree...things are NEW and in FLUX so we need time to sort this out. I'm willing to be patient and I think most people here are, too.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
I hope to purchase an MCMVII HR down the line (saving up, so not anytime soon !) and obviously that's a very big purcha$$$e decision (for me, at least ). No idea if I will be looking at a low-60's MS or an AU coin when the time arrives, but either way I'm going to be laser-focused on the high points and how the strike on the High Reliefs may or may not look like wear/rub/friction.
At the same time, I realize I'm going to be flying semi-blind if only because compared to experts I haven't seen hundreds/thousands of the coins over the years/decades.
I’m confused. Let’s circle back to your hypothetical.
Joe Schmoe (sorry @jmlanzaf) buys a non cac P66 walker. Presumably, he pays a non cac P66 price. As we know, coins with CAC approval trade significantly higher, but if Joe was reasonably informed he would not be paying CAC levels for a non cac example If he decides to sell the coin down the line, presumably, Joe will receive non cac P66 money, less expenses and whatever profit spread the dealer intends to make, which is usually far less than 30-60%.
The market is mature and efficient, and there is simply not going to be an overnight epiphany that a P66 without a sticker should trade for cac 58 money, There are established price spreads between cac and non cac, and of course they are subject to change over time. JA has declined to sticker coins because of friction for years, but the grade on the holder remains the same and there are plenty of prospective buyers out there who take no issue with market grading.
And, word of advice on your future HR saint- either find a nice ms63 or otherwise just get a 58. This is a coin you want to buy with a bean, the spread isn’t crazy and the stickered ones are incredibly liquid and much easier to sell.
You should have seen the dreck that Danny Dimes was buying. 😉
My main point it is Albanese will try to change the way of grading??? I have no Idea.
Me from a few years I say that Classic coins, Modern Coins and New era coins must be analyse distinctive. Three different periods of technologies, metals and etc.
This was my point about grading. For me now till new news from CACG I can not step on. Till now do not convince me except summit raw classic coins.
Me I do not look for market value. This it is volatile. So CACG must be analize by acts and not by current value or future values. As collectors we have let the prices for dealers and consumers, they will never enjoy an series or a collection.
Seem for me now we have PCGS and CACG leader competition on grading. To follow the outcome.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE. MARK TWAIN
@coinkat said:
An example of quality would be the 1879-s through 1881-s Morgan Dollar. The 1904 is more problematic. And don't >expect those dates to look alike at the same grade level. They simply don't.
As I am not an expert on Morgans, can you or someone just give more color on why the 1879-81's are considered "quality" -- is that relative to other coins in the series or in absolute terms ? Bowers' says the Eagles breast on the reverse tends to be flattish though overall he consideres it well-struck, so I just want to know what you are referencing. Thanks !
Rub and quality of the strikes for WLH and SLQ coins. Understand the difference in the progression of the design >changes and how that factors into grading. Rub is not always rub. Instead, coins may exhibit natural aging overtime >attributable to storage and even climate. Learn to see if you can identify the difference-obviously it is not easy and it >is a developed skill.
Excellent points...but if you have 2 experts and one says it's poor strike or aging or other non-circulation factors...and the other insists it is regular wear/rub/friction....seems to me that's a prescription for an endless debate, no ?
TPG has provided guidance and a measure of stability to how coins are graded, how they should be graded and >more importantly, how grades are perceived. While it has not been perfect, the hobby remains better off with it >than without it until that perception changes.
Most definitely agree. Biggest problem is that what used to be a duopoly is now a triopoly (is that a word ?)
And if the plan is to reinvent the wheel or move the goal posts, what is the ultimate goal as well as the >consequences in doing so? The risk of undermining confidence and what has acceptance based on the ongoing >subjective nature of grading may not be worth a new wave that is equally subjective.
I wasn't active at the time, but I suspect that the change from dealer/collector grading pre-1986 to the TPGs in the late-1980's had to be similarly wrenching, right ?
The market is mature and efficient, and there is simply not going to be an overnight epiphany that a P66 without a >sticker should trade for cac 58 money, There are established price spreads between cac and non cac, and of course >they are subject to change over time. JA has declined to sticker coins because of friction for years, but the grade on > the holder remains the same and there are plenty of prospective buyers out there who take no issue with market > >grading.
No argument, DD...and I agree that there will no overnight ephiphany involving MS-66's trading down to AU-58 monies.
But at least here on the long CACG Thread you had some people submit to CACG some coins without CAC stickers and while they may have been disappointed if their coin goes down 1 grade or didn't cross....for some of those who got dropped into the AU bucket, it seems to have been a shocker. So I'm assuming they missed the high-point rub/wear issue and maybe are more accustomed to market, net, or other more forgiving forms of grading.
And, word of advice on your future HR saint- either find a nice ms63 or otherwise just get a 58. This is a coin you
want to buy with a bean, the spread isn’t crazy and the stickered ones are incredibly liquid and much easier to sell.
Thanks for the heads up, DD -- and I agree. My research indicated as such but I like the fact that a veteran like you chimed in with similar thoughts. In fact, I almost purchased a very nice AU-58 CAC MCMVII HR at FUN 2020. But as it was my first time at FUN, I really wanted to add some other Saints and some commemoratives and make 4-5 modest purchases rather than 1 big one. No regrets, as I did get some nice coins.
@Elcontador said:
Very few dates / mintmarks of the SLQ series were fully struck. That includes the head, shield, rivulets on the >shield, and sometimes the knee. I think the above comment about SLQs was more confusing than helpful. He >knew this when he made the comment.
For those of us with little or no knowledge about SLQ's, what was the cause of the series being notoriously poorly struck (or not "fully struck" as your wrote) ?
@silviosi said:
For me something smell bad. How come my friend coin MS 65 PCGS CAC stiker come back AU 58??? Are two entities?
I bet that didn’t happen, the walkers being downgraded to 58 were unstickered coins. They are technically separate entities, but not really.
Could have been cracked.
Let's view every MS Walker with a CAC sticker. It will take a while.
Now, did every MS Walker w/CAC sticker meet CACG's "new" standard?
If it were cracked, then it's just a raw coin and no longer a 65 cac. I welcome Silviosi to provide evidence, otherwise I call poppycock on that story.
And CACG doesn’t have a “new” standard, all of the stickered coins are guaranteed to cross at grade. This doesn’t include the rare instances where a coin might have turned in the holder, or JA might have changed his tune on a specific type of toning.
There are several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers. Plenty of those 63 & 64s have flatness and discoloration in the head, breast, hand or gown. A quick look on eBay or any auction archive will confirm that. That's all I'm trying to convey.
Sure CACG guarantees them to cross at grade, they have to. Doesn't mean that they meet the CACG requirements for MS Walkers as has been discussed ad nauseam.
Several CU board members (message board) have a vested interest in CACG's success and will continue to defend JA & CACG. That's understandable. But this is the world's #1 TPG's message board. Expect some pushback.
I hope CU Forumscontinues to allow this discourse.
Take a look at the graded surviving populations for the 1879-s , 1880-s and 1881-s Morgans at NGC and PCGS in MS65 and higher. Include PL and DMPL graded coins. I think you will find evidence to support that these coins were the finest in terms of quality of any other date and mint in the Morgan series.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
At one time I was collecting 1916 - 1933 Walkers in MS64 . This was before CAC became popular. I had about half of them and I realized the rest were too expensive for me. So I sold them through Legend which had CAC review them. Half stickered. I then noticed that basically 10% of the Early Walkers' PCGS population had stickers. I shared that with a Greysheet editor who commented "That's because they are over graded!"
Here is an example, 335 1918-D in PCGS MS64 - 20 CAC. Interestingly, at the time of the auction there were 363 PCGS MS64 & 25 CAC. What does that tell you? A lot of them had been resubmitted hoping for a higher grade?
It tells me that there are several factors to consider:
The 1918-D WLH I believe is the first of the series that have the designers initials that were noticeably removed as part of the ongoing die prep in an effort to get the maximum usage out of the dies. I have one such 1918-D graded by ANACS as an AU53 from back in the day when no TPG was willing to acknowledge this variety even though the first reports of this date back to 1962. It was graded at least 25 years ago.
The 1918-D WLH, as many others from the earlier time frame within the life of the series, feature a weak center missing the thumb and skirt lines that are not bold are rarely visible. This is part of the earlier design which is different and must be looked at through a different lens. Sadly, few seem to be willing to accept the obvious as well as what is well documented in terms of of the design and how those WLH's look including up to the 1923-s and earlier.
It tells me many have not been submitted to CAC. It tells me that there is so much to do in connection with managing expectations and insuring that the complete design history is understood.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
How to tell the difference is all over the chat forums. I learned at a Summer Seminar about twenty years ago and I'm no expert either. It became easy with good instruction and good examples. Basically (this is too simplified so do more reading), the knee and brest of a Saint or the top of the wings and brest of the eagle will have either one or two colors when compared with the surface around those two areas. If the high point surface has one color with the sourounding surface, the coin is either full mint state (frosty looking) or it has been cleaned, polished or chemically altered. Knowing what original MS luster looks like should eliminate the bad coins. If there are two colors, with the high points being different, the coin has either stacking compression (shiny) or friction wear (dull w/micro scratches). If the surface is original but dull on the high points and not struck up, the weak strike luster will be dull and a different color than the sourounding surface. In order to see these color changes the best you need to learn using incandescent and fluorescent light but not at the same time. We used scopes in class with incandescent lights but the instructor had his scope set up with only fluorsecnt light so we could see the difference and what to look for. I highly recommend taking an ANA grading class.
I only own one Saint in a gold type set. I bought the coin from Heritage at a Chicago ANA. They were nice enough to let me look at 20 MS-62 slabs from a major TPGS. Using what I just posted, I found three coins out of that group (at the same price) that were absolutly 100% original! Each had full mint luster and not a trace of rubbing anywhere. The only breaks in the surface luster were bag marks so I picked the MS-62 with the least amount of hits. Fully original MS Saints are out for the plucking in each grade range. It appears that CACG may end up with most of them so you better look now before they cost more that the others.
@FredS said:
So what happens if the rubbed Walker is in a 64 holder with a sticker, and they want to cross to CACG? Is that not supposed to be an automatic cross?
It’s very unlikely that this scenario would happen as CAC doesn’t bean coins with high point friction. JA told me himself that all CAC SLQ will not exhibit wear on the knee
This is JA position as stated in an interview.
To me, if I see a Walking Liberty half with a little bit of friction on the skirt line and on the breast, to me, it’s AU58, I don’t care what the holder says. The coin could be a Gem otherwise. There are some that say, “Well, you have to call it a 63.” Well, no, you don’t. It’s AU. It is Almost Uncirculated and that’s that.
@silviosi said:
For me something smell bad. How come my friend coin MS 65 PCGS CAC stiker come back AU 58??? Are two entities?
I bet that didn’t happen, the walkers being downgraded to 58 were unstickered coins. They are technically separate entities, but not really.
Could have been cracked.
Let's view every MS Walker with a CAC sticker. It will take a while.
Now, did every MS Walker w/CAC sticker meet CACG's "new" standard?
If it were cracked, then it's just a raw coin and no longer a 65 cac. I welcome Silviosi to provide evidence, otherwise I call poppycock on that story.
And CACG doesn’t have a “new” standard, all of the stickered coins are guaranteed to cross at grade. This doesn’t include the rare instances where a coin might have turned in the holder, or JA might have changed his tune on a specific type of toning.
There are several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers. Plenty of those 63 & 64s have flatness and discoloration in the head, breast, hand or gown. A quick look on eBay or any auction archive will confirm that. That's all I'm trying to convey.
Sure CACG guarantees them to cross at grade, they have to. Doesn't mean that they meet the CACG requirements for MS Walkers as has been discussed ad nauseam.
Several CU board members (message board) have a vested interest in CACG's success and will continue to defend JA & CACG. That's understandable. But this is the world's #1 TPG's message board. Expect some pushback.
I hope CU Forumscontinues to allow this discourse.
I guess than it’s caveat empor. I would personally only buy a Walker with a frosty rounded breast, frosty hand, gown etc. I have the luxury of buying type so I buy only original roll fresh look with extreme luster and no discoloration or flatness
There are several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers. Plenty of those 63 & 64s have flatness and discoloration in the head, breast, hand or gown. A quick look on eBay or any auction archive will confirm that. That's all I'm trying to convey.
"Several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers?" I think it's important to distinguish between pre1934 Walkers and later date Walkers. Yes, there are 3250+ MS64 Walkers that have CACs spread over 65 coins from 1916 to 1947, an average of 50 coins per issue. But starting with 1933 and on, the vast majority of CAC Walkers are MS65 and upwards. Those pre 1934 MS64 stickers were hard fought for.
I know that the FUN folks recorded Scott Traver's talk with David Hall and the CAC grading team. It worth listening to and hearing JA and David Hall talk about grading - the experts!
@Elcontador said:
Very few dates / mintmarks of the SLQ series were fully struck. That includes the head, shield, rivulets on the >shield, and sometimes the knee. I think the above comment about SLQs was more confusing than helpful. He >knew this when he made the comment.
For those of us with little or no knowledge about SLQ's, what was the cause of the series being notoriously poorly struck (or not "fully struck" as your wrote) ?
I don't know. I'm guessing they were trying to put too much detail on a planchet. That said, the 1917 P Type I is probably the best struck of the series. You can find the early P mint Type II SLQs, say 1917 - 1921 with full strike details. You will rarely find any branch mint SLQ with full strike details. I have a 28 S. It's the only one I've seen (that said, I may have seen 100 branch mint SLQs designated FH).
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@GoldFinger1969 said:
Sorry to bother you all...does anybody have the link for the 38-40 page CAC or CACG Thread that started mid-2023 ? For some reason, I can't find it.
Sorry to bother everyone, but I am halfway through it and really wanted to finish it.
Great link thanks. Down near the bottom there is a pic of JA at his desk with coins. And, there are those dreaded round & red stickers that come back on 'not CAC' coins where JA writes in a small note to what the problem was - 'cleaned long ago' or 'obverse friction', or an arrow pointing to a problem....... Sheets of them LOL........................
Great link thanks. Down near the bottom there is a pic of JA at his desk with coins. And, there are those dreaded round & red stickers that come back on 'not CAC' coins where JA writes in a small note to what the problem was - 'cleaned long ago' or 'obverse friction', or an arrow pointing to a problem....... Sheets of them LOL........................
I haven't seen any coins for sale with the red sticker. Is there any way to check their database for coins that DID NOT get CAC sticker?
Great link thanks. Down near the bottom there is a pic of JA at his desk with coins. And, there are those dreaded round & red stickers that come back on 'not CAC' coins where JA writes in a small note to what the problem was - 'cleaned long ago' or 'obverse friction', or an arrow pointing to a problem....... Sheets of them LOL........................
I haven't seen any coins for sale with the red sticker. Is there any way to check their database for coins that DID NOT get CAC sticker?
@EastonCollection said:
I know that the FUN folks recorded Scott Traver's talk with David Hall and the CAC grading team. It worth listening to and hearing JA and David Hall talk about grading - the experts!
@EastonCollection said:
I know that the FUN folks recorded Scott Traver's talk with David Hall and the CAC grading team. It worth listening to and hearing JA and David Hall talk about grading - the experts!
Comments
Good interview with JA that touches on market grading vs technical in his own words..
https://coinweek.com/a-cac-grading-service-coinweek-interview-with-john-albanese/
No, you are NOT alone. I've been an on-and-off collector (not someone who is FT or as dedicated as many here) and while I am not really concerned with the market prices of coins I buy, should I buy more expensive coins down the road, I certainly would not want them to lose 30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate.
Ultimately, since this hobby for most of us is not a business, we don't worry too much about the P&L. Still, we expect there are certain rules to the game and to the extent that the rules change midstream, that is naturally a concern.
Let's hope we have more clarity by the end of the year. I think we will.
I would agree with this. I think what wasn't known as much was the extent to which the TPGs could be off on grades, like 2-3 increments AND the entire MS vs. AU debate.
Take Saints (a series I am more familiar with). We all know that JA/CAC tend to be a "tougher" grader on gold coins in general and Saints in particular. Maybe it has to do with the volume of coins available...maybe it's because gold is a softer metal and JA/CAC are meticulous in sticking to their standards.
Whatever...the end result is that while many thought that their Saints were just average or maybe at worst 1 grade too high, now they realize there's a good chance that the discoloaration on the high points is rub/wear and the MS coin they have is really AU. They may have overpaid a bit on the purchase but when they sell unless it's a rarity or a scarce coin they'll take a bath on the sale as they get AU $$$.
When they bought their coin/Saint....and maybe even if they submitted it to CAC and it didn't sticker....they just assumed it wasn't up to snuff, not that their MS coin was really AU.
I bet that didn’t happen, the walkers being downgraded to 58 were unstickered coins. They are technically separate entities, but not really.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Unless I'm confused and have it wrong again (could be !!
), I was told that a CAC-stickered TPG coin would (automatically) cross at the same grade with CACG (unless the coin changed in the holder). Right ?
Do you have more details on your friend's coin that went from MS-65 CAC to AU-58 ? That would appear to be an oulier.
How could you lose “30-60% (or more !) right out of the gate” unless you either 1) didn’t do your research before making your purchase or 2) did something foolish (like crack the coin out afterwards)?
Answer - you couldn’t.
It’s good to have your eyes wide open and to exercise caution. It’s another to get carried away.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
About 30 years ago, I was discussing the grading of MS Standing Liberty Quarters with a principal of NGC. He told me that the key to determine whether an SLQ was gem or less primarily involved the rounded knee or the slight flat spot above the knee. Marks, luster and strike quality were secondary factors. Look at a mint state 1926d quarter in 65 and above and the strike will likely be awful. There are other dates as well. Try finding a 1926d with full head and shield rivets.
At the time I was discussing this with NGC, I had sent some 64’s in for evaluation. One was a gorgeous 1930 s with a rounded knee and booming luster. He told me that a staple scratch on the reverse, that I had missed, was the reason for the 64 grade. I swore the coin was a 67. I quit collecting ms standing liberty quarters. I have a complete circulated collection of these quarters right now. Most of them are in 55 and 58 pcgs holders. Originality, strike (shield rivets, head and breast) are important to me. I steer completely clear of 58 pcgs quarters that are blast white. Pcgs loves them and I don’t. I have a couple of these quarters, one graded 55 and another in 50 that have full heads that are not designated on the holder. Neither is a close call. Collect what you like and don’t get focused on the number.
Just my thoughts. Mh
Well, I did take a bit of hyperbole license, Mark.
Let me be a bit clearer.
If someone purchased a pricey coin graded MS-66 (condition rarity grade) but no CAC sticker.... and you paid nice $$$ for it...but that coin series in that grade needs CACG or a CAC sticker to get Big $$$....you could pay MS-66 $$$ based on pre-CACG pricing and get AU-58 $$$ down the line.
I'm not saying this is going to happen or likely to happen...but it certainly CAN happen and we have had some people who appear to be good graders suddenly finding out their coins are AU and not MS (because of the wear/rub issue).
I agree...things are NEW and in FLUX so we need time to sort this out. I'm willing to be patient and I think most people here are, too.
I'm not as proficient at grading as you and other experts are here, Mark. At the same time, I don't just rely on the holder and grade. I look at the coin and have a bunch of "tells" for every coin that I am looking at to make sure a big mistake wasn't made. But as you can tell, this whole rub/wear issue on the high points is very tough for a novice/interemdiate grader like myself.
I hope to purchase an MCMVII HR down the line (saving up, so not anytime soon !) and obviously that's a very big purcha$$$e decision (for me, at least
). No idea if I will be looking at a low-60's MS or an AU coin when the time arrives, but either way I'm going to be laser-focused on the high points and how the strike on the High Reliefs may or may not look like wear/rub/friction.
At the same time, I realize I'm going to be flying semi-blind if only because compared to experts I haven't seen hundreds/thousands of the coins over the years/decades in-hand.
Just some comments to add perspective-
-Grading is subjective and it will remain subjective even after the wheel is reinvented or goal posts are moved... again and again;
-Not all coins at the same grade level are created equal. Moving the goal posts does not change that and never will;
-Coins within a series have their signature dates/mints that define and capture the quality and design that makes the series what it is. An example of quality would be the 1879-s through 1881-s Morgan Dollar. The 1904 is more problematic. And don't expect those dates to look alike at the same grade level. They simply don't.
-Rub and quality of the strikes for WLH and SLQ coins. Understand the difference in the progression of the design changes and how that factors into grading. Rub is not always rub. Instead, coins may exhibit natural aging overtime attributable to storage and even climate. Learn to see if you can identify the difference-obviously it is not easy and it is a developed skill.
-TPG has provided guidance and a measure of stability to how coins are graded, how they should be graded and more importantly, how grades are perceived. While it has not been perfect, the hobby remains better off with it than without it until that perception changes.
-And if the plan is to reinvent the wheel or move the goal posts, what is the ultimate goal as well as the consequences in doing so? The risk of undermining confidence and what has acceptance based on the ongoing subjective nature of grading may not be worth a new wave that is equally subjective.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Could have been cracked.
Let's view every MS Walker with a CAC sticker. It will take a while.
Now, did every MS Walker w/CAC sticker meet CACG's "new" standard?
I’m confused. Let’s circle back to your hypothetical.
Joe Schmoe (sorry @jmlanzaf) buys a non cac P66 walker. Presumably, he pays a non cac P66 price. As we know, coins with CAC approval trade significantly higher, but if Joe was reasonably informed he would not be paying CAC levels for a non cac example If he decides to sell the coin down the line, presumably, Joe will receive non cac P66 money, less expenses and whatever profit spread the dealer intends to make, which is usually far less than 30-60%.
The market is mature and efficient, and there is simply not going to be an overnight epiphany that a P66 without a sticker should trade for cac 58 money, There are established price spreads between cac and non cac, and of course they are subject to change over time. JA has declined to sticker coins because of friction for years, but the grade on the holder remains the same and there are plenty of prospective buyers out there who take no issue with market grading.
And, word of advice on your future HR saint- either find a nice ms63 or otherwise just get a 58. This is a coin you want to buy with a bean, the spread isn’t crazy and the stickered ones are incredibly liquid and much easier to sell.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
If it were cracked, then it's just a raw coin and no longer a 65 cac. I welcome Silviosi to provide evidence, otherwise I call poppycock on that story.
And CACG doesn’t have a “new” standard, all of the stickered coins are guaranteed to cross at grade. This doesn’t include the rare instances where a coin might have turned in the holder, or JA might have changed his tune on a specific type of toning.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Very few dates / mintmarks of the SLQ series were fully struck. That includes the head, shield, rivulets on the shield, and sometimes the knee. I think the above comment about SLQs was more confusing than helpful. He knew this when he made the comment.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Just to put an exclamation mark on this...I had a very lovely 58 CAC HR Saint. If not for a touch of rub on the breast and knee, it would have been at least a 63 but more likely 64 IMO. I sold it a few days ago for full retail (CPG) in less than a day. I'm not a dealer, just a collector.
I agree. That's why I really wish there were a follow up question or two.
You should have seen the dreck that Danny Dimes was buying. 😉
Dan I will ask all the photos and prouves.
My main point it is Albanese will try to change the way of grading??? I have no Idea.
Me from a few years I say that Classic coins, Modern Coins and New era coins must be analyse distinctive. Three different periods of technologies, metals and etc.
This was my point about grading. For me now till new news from CACG I can not step on. Till now do not convince me except summit raw classic coins.
Me I do not look for market value. This it is volatile. So CACG must be analize by acts and not by current value or future values. As collectors we have let the prices for dealers and consumers, they will never enjoy an series or a collection.
Seem for me now we have PCGS and CACG leader competition on grading. To follow the outcome.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.
FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.
THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
MARK TWAIN
As I am not an expert on Morgans, can you or someone just give more color on why the 1879-81's are considered "quality" -- is that relative to other coins in the series or in absolute terms ? Bowers' says the Eagles breast on the reverse tends to be flattish though overall he consideres it well-struck, so I just want to know what you are referencing. Thanks !
Excellent points...but if you have 2 experts and one says it's poor strike or aging or other non-circulation factors...and the other insists it is regular wear/rub/friction....seems to me that's a prescription for an endless debate, no ?
Most definitely agree. Biggest problem is that what used to be a duopoly is now a triopoly (is that a word
?)
I wasn't active at the time, but I suspect that the change from dealer/collector grading pre-1986 to the TPGs in the late-1980's had to be similarly wrenching, right ?
No argument, DD...and I agree that there will no overnight ephiphany involving MS-66's trading down to AU-58 monies.
But at least here on the long CACG Thread you had some people submit to CACG some coins without CAC stickers and while they may have been disappointed if their coin goes down 1 grade or didn't cross....for some of those who got dropped into the AU bucket, it seems to have been a shocker. So I'm assuming they missed the high-point rub/wear issue and maybe are more accustomed to market, net, or other more forgiving forms of grading.
Thanks for the heads up, DD -- and I agree. My research indicated as such but I like the fact that a veteran like you chimed in with similar thoughts. In fact, I almost purchased a very nice AU-58 CAC MCMVII HR at FUN 2020. But as it was my first time at FUN, I really wanted to add some other Saints and some commemoratives and make 4-5 modest purchases rather than 1 big one. No regrets, as I did get some nice coins.
For those of us with little or no knowledge about SLQ's, what was the cause of the series being notoriously poorly struck (or not "fully struck" as your wrote) ?
There are several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers. Plenty of those 63 & 64s have flatness and discoloration in the head, breast, hand or gown. A quick look on eBay or any auction archive will confirm that. That's all I'm trying to convey.
Sure CACG guarantees them to cross at grade, they have to. Doesn't mean that they meet the CACG requirements for MS Walkers as has been discussed ad nauseam.
Several CU board members (message board) have a vested interest in CACG's success and will continue to defend JA & CACG. That's understandable. But this is the world's #1 TPG's message board. Expect some pushback.
I hope CU Forumscontinues to allow this discourse.
@GoldFinger1969
Take a look at the graded surviving populations for the 1879-s , 1880-s and 1881-s Morgans at NGC and PCGS in MS65 and higher. Include PL and DMPL graded coins. I think you will find evidence to support that these coins were the finest in terms of quality of any other date and mint in the Morgan series.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
At one time I was collecting 1916 - 1933 Walkers in MS64 . This was before CAC became popular. I had about half of them and I realized the rest were too expensive for me. So I sold them through Legend which had CAC review them. Half stickered. I then noticed that basically 10% of the Early Walkers' PCGS population had stickers. I shared that with a Greysheet editor who commented "That's because they are over graded!"
Here is an example, 335 1918-D in PCGS MS64 - 20 CAC. Interestingly, at the time of the auction there were 363 PCGS MS64 & 25 CAC. What does that tell you? A lot of them had been resubmitted hoping for a higher grade?
It tells me that there are several factors to consider:
The 1918-D WLH I believe is the first of the series that have the designers initials that were noticeably removed as part of the ongoing die prep in an effort to get the maximum usage out of the dies. I have one such 1918-D graded by ANACS as an AU53 from back in the day when no TPG was willing to acknowledge this variety even though the first reports of this date back to 1962. It was graded at least 25 years ago.
The 1918-D WLH, as many others from the earlier time frame within the life of the series, feature a weak center missing the thumb and skirt lines that are not bold are rarely visible. This is part of the earlier design which is different and must be looked at through a different lens. Sadly, few seem to be willing to accept the obvious as well as what is well documented in terms of of the design and how those WLH's look including up to the 1923-s and earlier.
It tells me many have not been submitted to CAC. It tells me that there is so much to do in connection with managing expectations and insuring that the complete design history is understood.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
This was my PCGS MS64 CAC
Here's my 1917-S Obverse PCGS MS 64 CAC (Yes the picture doesn't show the "S" very well, but , it is there).
And it seems the pictures illustrate my commentary- Thank you for sharing the images
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
How to tell the difference is all over the chat forums. I learned at a Summer Seminar about twenty years ago and I'm no expert either. It became easy with good instruction and good examples. Basically (this is too simplified so do more reading), the knee and brest of a Saint or the top of the wings and brest of the eagle will have either one or two colors when compared with the surface around those two areas. If the high point surface has one color with the sourounding surface, the coin is either full mint state (frosty looking) or it has been cleaned, polished or chemically altered. Knowing what original MS luster looks like should eliminate the bad coins. If there are two colors, with the high points being different, the coin has either stacking compression (shiny) or friction wear (dull w/micro scratches). If the surface is original but dull on the high points and not struck up, the weak strike luster will be dull and a different color than the sourounding surface. In order to see these color changes the best you need to learn using incandescent and fluorescent light but not at the same time. We used scopes in class with incandescent lights but the instructor had his scope set up with only fluorsecnt light so we could see the difference and what to look for. I highly recommend taking an ANA grading class.
I only own one Saint in a gold type set. I bought the coin from Heritage at a Chicago ANA. They were nice enough to let me look at 20 MS-62 slabs from a major TPGS. Using what I just posted, I found three coins out of that group (at the same price) that were absolutly 100% original! Each had full mint luster and not a trace of rubbing anywhere. The only breaks in the surface luster were bag marks so I picked the MS-62 with the least amount of hits. Fully original MS Saints are out for the plucking in each grade range. It appears that CACG may end up with most of them so you better look now before they cost more that the others.
It’s very unlikely that this scenario would happen as CAC doesn’t bean coins with high point friction. JA told me himself that all CAC SLQ will not exhibit wear on the knee
This is JA position as stated in an interview.
To me, if I see a Walking Liberty half with a little bit of friction on the skirt line and on the breast, to me, it’s AU58, I don’t care what the holder says. The coin could be a Gem otherwise. There are some that say, “Well, you have to call it a 63.” Well, no, you don’t. It’s AU. It is Almost Uncirculated and that’s that.
I guess than it’s caveat empor. I would personally only buy a Walker with a frosty rounded breast, frosty hand, gown etc. I have the luxury of buying type so I buy only original roll fresh look with extreme luster and no discoloration or flatness
"Several thousand sub-MS65 unc Walkers with CAC stickers?" I think it's important to distinguish between pre1934 Walkers and later date Walkers. Yes, there are 3250+ MS64 Walkers that have CACs spread over 65 coins from 1916 to 1947, an average of 50 coins per issue. But starting with 1933 and on, the vast majority of CAC Walkers are MS65 and upwards. Those pre 1934 MS64 stickers were hard fought for.
I know that the FUN folks recorded Scott Traver's talk with David Hall and the CAC grading team. It worth listening to and hearing JA and David Hall talk about grading - the experts!
I don't know. I'm guessing they were trying to put too much detail on a planchet. That said, the 1917 P Type I is probably the best struck of the series. You can find the early P mint Type II SLQs, say 1917 - 1921 with full strike details. You will rarely find any branch mint SLQ with full strike details. I have a 28 S. It's the only one I've seen (that said, I may have seen 100 branch mint SLQs designated FH).
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Sorry to bother you all...does anybody have the link for the 38-40 page CAC or CACG Thread that started mid-2023 ? For some reason, I can't find it.
Sorry to bother everyone, but I am halfway through it and really wanted to finish it.
This one?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1088858/cac-stickers-have-numbered-days-send-in-now-or-forever-hold-your-peace
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
CAC can bark all they want to but they have nowhere near the quantity of material in the marketplace PCGS and NGC have. Like an asteroid vs Jupiter.
I read the CAC recent article about going into CACG MS69-70 ASE. Interesting. Would you pay them more for them to get to get their product?
Dan, others...my apologies. I found the thread. It's over at the CAC Forum -- my bad.
Great link thanks. Down near the bottom there is a pic of JA at his desk with coins. And, there are those dreaded round & red stickers that come back on 'not CAC' coins where JA writes in a small note to what the problem was - 'cleaned long ago' or 'obverse friction', or an arrow pointing to a problem....... Sheets of them LOL........................
I haven't seen any coins for sale with the red sticker. Is there any way to check their database for coins that DID NOT get CAC sticker?
No, and for good reason.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Do you have a link to this?
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Not yet available but will share when available.