@winesteven said:
Ken - PCGS says when they do a "Regrade", they crack it out of the holder so the graders treat it as a raw coin, then assign a grade. That grade will not be allowed any lower than the original grade, BUT the key point is that when it goes in the brand new holder, regardless if the grade is the same or higher, it gets a NEW cert #. Your photos above have the same cert number, even though the photo is new. That leads me to believe they did a Reconsideration, which RETAINS the SAME cert #.
Steve
I do believe on a reconsideration, if they do change the grade you get a new cert number.
Absolutely NOT true! I've been playing the Reconsideration game for years, as the coins I submit have CAC stickers, and it's so much easier getting CAC to automatically reapply their sticker to a coin that gets a plus added to the whole grade if the cert number remained the same. Without exception, EVERY time I got an upgrade, the cert number remained unchanged.
@DeplorableDan , you are incorrect as well. On the very rare occasion when I would get an upgrade of a whole grade via Reconsideration, the cert number also remained unchanged. However, in that case, getting the CAC sticker reapplied is NOT automatic, as CAC has to then determine if the coin is solid at that new higher whole grade!
While I often "hedge" many of my comments, no need for that in these two cases.
Steve
What you say makes sense. Getting old is tough, I have had a few successful reconsiderations but it's been a while and I could have sworn it resulted in a new cert but I must have destroyed those brain cells already. Thanks for the info.
Welcome to my world regarding losing brain cells, lol. I'm 73.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@DeplorableDan said:
I stand corrected! As you can tell, I don’t have much experience jumping to the next grade via reconsideration 😅.
Not many of us do. My experience is it's EXTREMELY tough to get to the next higher whole grade via Reconsideration. While not easy with a Regrade, my sense is that is an "easier" route, but still tough.
I jumped a full grade on a Recon once, and surprisingly it was from a blue/modern holder, not an OGH. That was cool, although what I was really hoping for was a PL designation, which it didn't get. I also lost CAC approval in the process, as JA did not sticker it at the new higher grade.
@DeplorableDan said:
I stand corrected! As you can tell, I don’t have much experience jumping to the next grade via reconsideration 😅.
Not many of us do. My experience is it's EXTREMELY tough to get to the next higher whole grade via Reconsideration. While not easy with a Regrade, my sense is that is an "easier" route, but still tough.
I jumped a full grade on a Recon once, and surprisingly it was from a blue/modern holder, not an OGH. That was cool, although what I was really hoping for was a PL designation, which it didn't get. I also lost CAC approval in the process, as JA did not sticker it at the new higher grade.
If you liked the coin, who cares? I made a cash and trade deal for this "1861 Confederate Restrike half dollar" knowing full well that it had flunked at CAC. The money I had in it after the deal made the transaction reasonable, and I liked the piece.
For those who are not familiar with these pieces, the Confederate half dollar die surfaced a decade plus after the war. The coiner at the New Orleans Mint during the war had it. He sold it to the Scott Company in New York City. They made some of these medals with it, which were in white metal, which softer than silver. The die was rusted and not in the best of shape.
After the Scott company made the white metal pieces, they made 500 "Confederate Half Dollar Restrikes." They took 500, 1861-O, a common date in the series, planed off the reverse and struck them with the Confederate die. The obverses were flattened and are not really gradable. The reverse is the grading side. PCGS graded the half dollar shown above MS-62.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@DeplorableDan said:
I stand corrected! As you can tell, I don’t have much experience jumping to the next grade via reconsideration 😅.
Not many of us do. My experience is it's EXTREMELY tough to get to the next higher whole grade via Reconsideration. While not easy with a Regrade, my sense is that is an "easier" route, but still tough.
I jumped a full grade on a Recon once, and surprisingly it was from a blue/modern holder, not an OGH. That was cool, although what I was really hoping for was a PL designation, which it didn't get. I also lost CAC approval in the process, as JA did not sticker it at the new higher grade.
If you liked the coin, who cares? I made a cash and trade deal for this "1861 Confederate Restrike half dollar" knowing full well that it had flunked at CAC. The money I had in it after the deal made the transaction reasonable, and I liked the piece.
Bill, I love the coin and it's still my type example ($20 Lib). At the time, I was hoping to have my entire 12-piece gold type set CAC approved, although it wasn't a big enough deal to put a max grade on the PCGS submission. I have plenty of non-CAC coins and coins I acquired knowing they had failed, including the centerpiece (and single most expensive item) of my collection.
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
Maybe because CACG does not issue coins in details holders?
At any rate, if I had these coins, I would not have bothered to submit any of them except for maybe the Trade Dollar because counterfeits a such a problem with those pieces.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
@BillJones said:
Maybe because CACG does not issue coins in details holders?
At any rate, if I had these coins, I would not have bothered to submit any of them except for maybe the Trade Dollar because counterfeits a such a problem with those pieces.
@BillJones said:
Maybe because CACG does not issue coins in details holders?
At any rate, if I had these coins, I would not have bothered to submit any of them except for maybe the Trade Dollar because counterfeits a such a problem with those pieces.
CACG loves to slab coins in Details holders.
Good to know. I don't have any CACG holders. I saw a couple at Winter FUN, but the prices were high. The coins were PQ for the grade assigned, but not THAT PQ.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
Thank you. That is good to know. I did not realize a coin that's polished, has graffiti, has been mounted or has any other of the numerous problems listed would not be authenticated at CACG.
That is food For thought when submitting to CACG for authentication. Be ready to receive bodybags in return for your grading fees. The above submitter lost $200. I guess it could have been worse.
With all due respect to our host, but I am a single buyer and am buying coins, not holders and the attendant grading opinions of others. Sure, the stinking herd will follow marketing propaganda pretty reliably. But I don't care if the coin is in a stickered or not PCGS or NGC, a CACG, ANACS, or ICG holder. The merits of the coin is ultimately 90%+ of what matters. Registry gamers probably differ with me intensely. So be it.
@Proofmorgan said:
My self disclosed bias is collecting early gold with significant price deviations between CAC and non CAC coins and >also being a niche participant of this form.
What "early gold" coins do you collect ?
Draped and Capped bust gold QEs and HEs
Collector of Original Early Gold with beginnings in Proof Morgan collecting.
I had a very lucky shot with just getting 4/4 of my key Lincolns crossed over. I went with that route rather than just stickers due to the summer special where you don't pay as much if they don't make it. But now I need some kind of sticker on the CACG holders, CMQ perhaps? They are all MS.
Obviously, CAC and CACG matter depending on the coin...inflection points regarding price....and the pop census at each level where the price moves bigtime.
I'm sure CAC/CACG is more forgiving with a Saint at MS-63 than MS-67.
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@leothelyon said:
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
Just because you place more emphasis on strike than CACG (and many others do) doesn’t mean they’re not strict in their grading.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@leothelyon said:
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
It appears you’re mixing up two separate concepts - CACG strict grading standards, and coins allowed in their Registry. Their Registry is available to all collectors of coins in holders of CACG, PCGS, and NGC. This makes their Registry widely available. It doesn’t mean they agree that all of those coins are solid for the grades on their labels, and it doesn’t detract from the grading standards they have for coins residing in CACG holders!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@leothelyon said:
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
I would be surprised if anyone other than yourself expected coins with imperfect strikes to be excluded from registry sets.
@leothelyon said:
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
Sounds like that would be the Jefferson Nickel Full Hair and Full Windows designation only set.
@BillJones said:
Good to know. I don't have any CACG holders. I saw a couple at Winter FUN, but the prices were high. The coins were PQ for the grade assigned, but not THAT PQ.
Er, inflation? Even the cost of PQ coins are going up.............
@Cougar1978 said:
Any CACG even out there at decent price? My high offer or bid - 10 pct behind CDN bid.
At last show attended guy had some but so overpriced at first thought it some kind of joke. People actually pay that?
If it makes any sense cougar, I paid 2x more than I would for my gold cac norris in ms60 than I would have paid for a typical ms61 without a sticker.
To clarify for those that need it, I believe what you’re saying is the reason you paid that is because: a) that coin demanded it and b) the market simply demands a premium for CAC’ed coins and you feel comfortable knowing you’ll retain or increase your investment?
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
@Cougar1978 said:
Any CACG even out there at decent price? My high offer or bid - 10 pct behind CDN bid.
At last show attended guy had some but so overpriced at first thought it some kind of joke. People actually pay that?
If it makes any sense cougar, I paid 2x more than I would for my gold cac norris in ms60 than I would have paid for a typical ms61 without a sticker.
To clarify for those that need it, I believe what you’re saying is the reason you paid that is because: a) that coin demanded it and b) the market simply demands a premium for CAC’ed coins and you feel comfortable knowing you’ll retain or increase your investment?
Sure, much less of the latter than the former, but I wasn’t really trying to make any profound statements. It was an attempt to make Cougar try to think introspectively for once, but I’m confident it fell on deaf ears.
Confession: I paid 1.25 to 1.30 CAC CPG MV just to have a few early on (advertising display) but down the line unless really have to have / super deal been there done that for that particular inventory class.
As far as somebody else acquiring them it’s their money, hobby; have fun.
Please update your will it CAC / CACG stuff I like seeing how that turns out. Keep them coming. It gives me something more positive than the doomsday blogs on u tube. Do you have a WW3 plan? Very bullish on bullion right now.
@DeplorableDan said:
If it makes any sense cougar, I paid 2x more than I would for my gold cac norris in ms60 than I would have paid for a typical ms61 without a sticker.
I’d blow that one out on the Bay, Dan. Looks like it turned in holder. Invest in something better.
Here is an interesting message from a somewhat prolific seller. I sold a proof Seated coin in a CACG. I disagree with his opinion, maybe he was throwing some misdirection, anyway I think it's too early to make out any definitive trends yet.
@Cougar1978 said:
Any CACG even out there at decent price? My high offer or bid - 10 pct behind CDN bid.
At last show attended guy had some but so overpriced at first thought it some kind of joke. People actually pay that?
If it makes any sense cougar, I paid 2x more than I would for my gold cac norris in ms60 than I would have paid for a typical ms61 without a sticker.
To clarify for those that need it, I believe what you’re saying is the reason you paid that is because: a) that coin demanded it and b) the market simply demands a premium for CAC’ed coins and you feel comfortable knowing you’ll retain or increase your investment?
Sure, much less of the latter than the former, but I wasn’t really trying to make any profound statements. It was an attempt to make Cougar try to think introspectively for once, but I’m confident it fell on deaf ears.
Hence my, “to clarify for those that need it.” 👍🏻😉
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
what ever happened to buying the coin and not the holder?
I have seen ugly coins in all the TPG holders. To me eye appeal is the most important factor. To me an eye popping coin with a hairline or small nick is mush nicer than a bland coin that is technically better.
I have seen plenty of bland coins in holders or with CAC stickers.
@Beatty said:
what ever happened to buying the coin and not the holder?
I have seen ugly coins in all the TPG holders. To me eye appeal is the most important factor. To me an eye popping coin with a hairline or small nick is mush nicer than a bland coin that is technically better.
I have seen plenty of bland coins in holders or with CAC stickers.
No one has said otherwise. This point doesn't need to be made as it is a counter to a point no one has made.
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
so will they sticker a PCGS/NGC details coin if it is an approved type of details?
Sorry, I do not know.
Hopefully, someone else will post the answer.
Edited to Add:
I just conducted a QUICK search on GC.
There are over 1K "details" coins currently available (i.e., auction and 'buy now').
Found several 'details' coins holdered by CACG, but 0 stickered by CAC.
Based on this, I am going to speculate that the answer to your question is no.
@Relaxn said:
I believe CAC stickering has become a moving target... I believe they have become very inconsistent with the stickering.
I believe this is being done to drive collectors who want the stickers to put their coins into CaCG holders. Had a gorgeous 10$ Indian in a rattler not sticker as well as an old holder 10$. I did not believe they deserved stickering just because of the old holder but becauelse they are significantly under graded.
I have been a huge CAC fan but in the last 12 months feel like the stickering has become blatantly inconsistent.
Just my random 2 cents... aka
Frustrated in Texas
I have seen that also, I’ve kept it to myself, but you completely nailed it. I have seen it both ways, nice stuff being rejected for sticker and then stuff that’s just awful with the sticker, it’s drastically changed my opinion lately.
Often a coin a collector thinks is PQ for the grade is actually silently net graded for a problem the collector simply can’t recognize
@Relaxn said:
I believe CAC stickering has become a moving target... I believe they have become very inconsistent with the stickering.
I believe this is being done to drive collectors who want the stickers to put their coins into CaCG holders. Had a gorgeous 10$ Indian in a rattler not sticker as well as an old holder 10$. I did not believe they deserved stickering just because of the old holder but becauelse they are significantly under graded.
I have been a huge CAC fan but in the last 12 months feel like the stickering has become blatantly inconsistent.
Just my random 2 cents... aka
Frustrated in Texas
I have seen that also, I’ve kept it to myself, but you completely nailed it. I have seen it both ways, nice stuff being rejected for sticker and then stuff that’s just awful with the sticker, it’s drastically changed my opinion lately.
Often a coin a collector thinks is PQ for the grade is actually silently net graded for a problem the collector simply can’t recognize
@Cougar1978 said:
Confession: I paid 1.25 to 1.30 CAC CPG MV just to have a few early on (advertising display) but down the line unless really have to have / super deal been there done that for that particular inventory class.
As far as somebody else acquiring them it’s their money, hobby; have fun.
Please update your will it CAC / CACG stuff I like seeing how that turns out. Keep them coming. It gives me something more positive than the doomsday blogs on u tube. Do you have a WW3 plan? Very bullish on bullion right now.
IMO, "money" is eclipsing "hobby" very quickly. "SEEMS" that people are trying to "collect" ....status... via coins.
@FrankH said: "SEEMS" that people are trying to "collect" ....status... via coins.
Respectfully, hasn’t that always been the case? Why else would the wealthy spend millions of dollars on a single coin? Why do collectors compete in Registry sets? It is human nature.
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
@winesteven said:
Ken - PCGS says when they do a "Regrade", they crack it out of the holder so the graders treat it as a raw coin, then assign a grade. That grade will not be allowed any lower than the original grade, BUT the key point is that when it goes in the brand new holder, regardless if the grade is the same or higher, it gets a NEW cert #. Your photos above have the same cert number, even though the photo is new. That leads me to believe they did a Reconsideration, which RETAINS the SAME cert #.
Steve
I do believe on a reconsideration, if they do change the grade you get a new cert number.
Absolutely NOT true! I've been playing the Reconsideration game for years, as the coins I submit have CAC stickers, and it's so much easier getting CAC to automatically reapply their sticker to a coin that gets a plus added to the whole grade if the cert number remained the same. Without exception, EVERY time I got an upgrade, the cert number remained unchanged.
@DeplorableDan , you are incorrect as well. On the very rare occasion when I would get an upgrade of a whole grade via Reconsideration, the cert number also remained unchanged. However, in that case, getting the CAC sticker reapplied is NOT automatic, as CAC has to then determine if the coin is solid at that new higher whole grade!
While I often "hedge" many of my comments, no need for that in these two cases.
Steve
In my scenario, I have not submitted many PCGS coins for reconsideration due to five main reasons:
1) I possibly have the most gold stickered PCGS slabs.
2) I probably have the most NGC 1.0 black holdered coins which are at least green stickered if not gold stickered by CAC.
3) I definitely have the most NGC 2.1 and 2.0 white label holdered coins which all of them have at least a green if not gold CAC sticker.
4) Most of my PCGS slabs are OGH or older generation. Over 99% are stickered.
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
so will they sticker a PCGS/NGC details coin if it is an approved type of details?
The Devil is in the Details!
No, CAC does not sticker coins that are not straight-graded.
Is it written anywhere?
I'd sure like to know if that's true
Also
What is PCGS/NGC approved type of details?
I know of no such list
From CAC's website: If you wish to see whether your third-party graded coin meets or exceeds CAC standards for the grade, submit to our stickering service.
A third-party graded coin must be in a straight-graded holder. Details holders from PCGS and NGC are not graded, they have been authenticated as genuine and may have an estimated "details" grade on the label.
@VanHalen said:
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
so will they sticker a PCGS/NGC details coin if it is an approved type of details?
The Devil is in the Details!
No, CAC does not sticker coins that are not straight-graded.
Is it written anywhere?
I'd sure like to know if that's true
Also
What is PCGS/NGC approved type of details?
I know of no such list
From CAC's website: If you wish to see whether your third-party graded coin meets or exceeds CAC standards for the grade, submit to our stickering service.
A third-party graded coin must be in a straight-graded holder. Details holders from PCGS and NGC are not graded, they have been authenticated as genuine and may have an estimated "details" grade on the label.
IMO, "money" is eclipsing "hobby" very quickly. "SEEMS" that people are trying to "collect" ....status... via coins.
I get where you’re coming from, but I think this is a situation where it becomes very easy to lump everyone into the same basket. There is unquestionably some folks playing the vanity game. To what extent, this too differs. To some it’s 100% about a registry set and bragging rights. To others is the bragging rights and also the fire and pride inside, kindled by a true hobbyist’s soul. Some here are 100% dealers and don’t even keep a collection. Coins pay their bills, put their kids through college, and keep their bellies filled with mustard dogs.
The great many of us are not big money guys and do it for the love of the coins. But, that doesn’t mean we’re all going to walk around ignorant to the stored values of our collection. Nor does it mean we won’t leverage and position ourselves to recoup the most value when we eventually sell by presently utilizing market trends like the value increases present for CGC material.
Bottom line: Being a hobbyist shouldn’t have to mandate a reconciliation to loss.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
Comments
Welcome to my world regarding losing brain cells, lol. I'm 73.
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 jumped a full grade on a Recon once, and surprisingly it was from a blue/modern holder, not an OGH. That was cool, although what I was really hoping for was a PL designation, which it didn't get. I also lost CAC approval in the process, as JA did not sticker it at the new higher grade.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
If you liked the coin, who cares? I made a cash and trade deal for this "1861 Confederate Restrike half dollar" knowing full well that it had flunked at CAC. The money I had in it after the deal made the transaction reasonable, and I liked the piece.
For those who are not familiar with these pieces, the Confederate half dollar die surfaced a decade plus after the war. The coiner at the New Orleans Mint during the war had it. He sold it to the Scott Company in New York City. They made some of these medals with it, which were in white metal, which softer than silver. The die was rusted and not in the best of shape.
After the Scott company made the white metal pieces, they made 500 "Confederate Half Dollar Restrikes." They took 500, 1861-O, a common date in the series, planed off the reverse and struck them with the Confederate die. The obverses were flattened and are not really gradable. The reverse is the grading side. PCGS graded the half dollar shown above MS-62.
Bill, I love the coin and it's still my type example ($20 Lib). At the time, I was hoping to have my entire 12-piece gold type set CAC approved, although it wasn't a big enough deal to put a max grade on the PCGS submission. I have plenty of non-CAC coins and coins I acquired knowing they had failed, including the centerpiece (and single most expensive item) of my collection.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
@winesteven:
Steve - I think grading guru & grading navigator are BOTH correct!
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Below are CACG results for coins summited for grading that were not authenticated or holdered? Can someone explain, based on this limited sample, why a submitter's coins were returned in bodybags? Some were submitted knowing there were problems but wanting them slabbed as genuine.
Maybe because CACG does not issue coins in details holders?
At any rate, if I had these coins, I would not have bothered to submit any of them except for maybe the Trade Dollar because counterfeits a such a problem with those pieces.
CACG holders some 'details codes', but not others.
Reference: https://www.cacgrading.com/doc/cac-grading-details-code-breakdown/
CACG loves to slab coins in Details holders.
Good to know. I don't have any CACG holders. I saw a couple at Winter FUN, but the prices were high. The coins were PQ for the grade assigned, but not THAT PQ.
Thank you. That is good to know. I did not realize a coin that's polished, has graffiti, has been mounted or has any other of the numerous problems listed would not be authenticated at CACG.
That is food For thought when submitting to CACG for authentication. Be ready to receive bodybags in return for your grading fees. The above submitter lost $200. I guess it could have been worse.
With all due respect to our host, but I am a single buyer and am buying coins, not holders and the attendant grading opinions of others. Sure, the stinking herd will follow marketing propaganda pretty reliably. But I don't care if the coin is in a stickered or not PCGS or NGC, a CACG, ANACS, or ICG holder. The merits of the coin is ultimately 90%+ of what matters. Registry gamers probably differ with me intensely. So be it.
I have had some coins upgrade after I sold them - I usually find that out when I look through old submissions.
Draped and Capped bust gold QEs and HEs
I had a very lucky shot with just getting 4/4 of my key Lincolns crossed over. I went with that route rather than just stickers due to the summer special where you don't pay as much if they don't make it. But now I need some kind of sticker on the CACG holders, CMQ perhaps? They are all MS.
Obviously, CAC and CACG matter depending on the coin...inflection points regarding price....and the pop census at each level where the price moves bigtime.
I'm sure CAC/CACG is more forgiving with a Saint at MS-63 than MS-67.
Jefferson nickels with poor/weak strikes, coins with missing details such as missing hair details and missing or weak in detail Monticello windows, etc; coins should not be allowed in their CACG Registry sets ......but guess what....it's already happening!
So much for all their touting that they'll have higher stricter standards! I really hope this is something they overlooked. Go look into it yourself. This is all I can say.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Just because you place more emphasis on strike than CACG (and many others do) doesn’t mean they’re not strict in their grading.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It appears you’re mixing up two separate concepts - CACG strict grading standards, and coins allowed in their Registry. Their Registry is available to all collectors of coins in holders of CACG, PCGS, and NGC. This makes their Registry widely available. It doesn’t mean they agree that all of those coins are solid for the grades on their labels, and it doesn’t detract from the grading standards they have for coins residing in CACG holders!
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 would be surprised if anyone other than yourself expected coins with imperfect strikes to be excluded from registry sets.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
Sounds like that would be the Jefferson Nickel Full Hair and Full Windows designation only set.
Does the coin inside have anything to do with it ?
Er, inflation? Even the cost of PQ coins are going up.............
Any CACG even out there at decent price? My high offer or bid - 10 pct behind CDN bid.
At last show attended guy had some but so overpriced at first thought it some kind of joke. People actually pay that?
Yes, people tend to pay up for coins that are truly nice.
Coin Photographer.
If it makes any sense cougar, I paid 2x more than I would for my gold cac norris in ms60 than I would have paid for a typical ms61 without a sticker.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Not unexpected. That’s what it takes to buy premium coins.
To clarify for those that need it, I believe what you’re saying is the reason you paid that is because: a) that coin demanded it and b) the market simply demands a premium for CAC’ed coins and you feel comfortable knowing you’ll retain or increase your investment?
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
Sure, much less of the latter than the former, but I wasn’t really trying to make any profound statements. It was an attempt to make Cougar try to think introspectively for once, but I’m confident it fell on deaf ears.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Confession: I paid 1.25 to 1.30 CAC CPG MV just to have a few early on (advertising display) but down the line unless really have to have / super deal been there done that for that particular inventory class.
As far as somebody else acquiring them it’s their money, hobby; have fun.
Please update your will it CAC / CACG stuff I like seeing how that turns out. Keep them coming. It gives me something more positive than the doomsday blogs on u tube. Do you have a WW3 plan? Very bullish on bullion right now.
I’d blow that one out on the Bay, Dan. Looks like it turned in holder. Invest in something better.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Here is an interesting message from a somewhat prolific seller. I sold a proof Seated coin in a CACG. I disagree with his opinion, maybe he was throwing some misdirection, anyway I think it's too early to make out any definitive trends yet.
Hence my, “to clarify for those that need it.” 👍🏻😉
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
what ever happened to buying the coin and not the holder?
I have seen ugly coins in all the TPG holders. To me eye appeal is the most important factor. To me an eye popping coin with a hairline or small nick is mush nicer than a bland coin that is technically better.
I have seen plenty of bland coins in holders or with CAC stickers.
No one has said otherwise. This point doesn't need to be made as it is a counter to a point no one has made.
so will they sticker a PCGS/NGC details coin if it is an approved type of details?
Sorry, I do not know.
Hopefully, someone else will post the answer.
Edited to Add:
I just conducted a QUICK search on GC.
There are over 1K "details" coins currently available (i.e., auction and 'buy now').
Found several 'details' coins holdered by CACG, but 0 stickered by CAC.
Based on this, I am going to speculate that the answer to your question is no.
Often a coin a collector thinks is PQ for the grade is actually silently net graded for a problem the collector simply can’t recognize
Or is willing to overlook...
IMO, "money" is eclipsing "hobby" very quickly.
"SEEMS" that people are trying to "collect" ....status... via coins.
Respectfully, hasn’t that always been the case? Why else would the wealthy spend millions of dollars on a single coin? Why do collectors compete in Registry sets? It is human nature.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
The Devil is in the Details!
No, CAC does not sticker coins that are not straight-graded.
In my scenario, I have not submitted many PCGS coins for reconsideration due to five main reasons:
1) I possibly have the most gold stickered PCGS slabs.
2) I probably have the most NGC 1.0 black holdered coins which are at least green stickered if not gold stickered by CAC.
3) I definitely have the most NGC 2.1 and 2.0 white label holdered coins which all of them have at least a green if not gold CAC sticker.
4) Most of my PCGS slabs are OGH or older generation. Over 99% are stickered.
5) I am too lazy.
I would believe numbers 1-4, not #5. You don't get what you got by being lazy
Nice!
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
Is it written anywhere?
I'd sure like to know if that's true
Also
What is PCGS/NGC approved type of details?
I know of no such list
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
PCGS: Holder vs. No Holder (click "No Grades");
NGC: Details Grading, and Reasons to NOT Encapsulate.
From CAC's website: If you wish to see whether your third-party graded coin meets or exceeds CAC standards for the grade, submit to our stickering service.
A third-party graded coin must be in a straight-graded holder. Details holders from PCGS and NGC are not graded, they have been authenticated as genuine and may have an estimated "details" grade on the label.
Thank you
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
I just called CAC, and asked about this issue.
While the response was verbal, as opposed to written, the rep told me that CAC policy is to NOT sticker encapsulated coins with "details" grades.
I get where you’re coming from, but I think this is a situation where it becomes very easy to lump everyone into the same basket. There is unquestionably some folks playing the vanity game. To what extent, this too differs. To some it’s 100% about a registry set and bragging rights. To others is the bragging rights and also the fire and pride inside, kindled by a true hobbyist’s soul. Some here are 100% dealers and don’t even keep a collection. Coins pay their bills, put their kids through college, and keep their bellies filled with mustard dogs.
The great many of us are not big money guys and do it for the love of the coins. But, that doesn’t mean we’re all going to walk around ignorant to the stored values of our collection. Nor does it mean we won’t leverage and position ourselves to recoup the most value when we eventually sell by presently utilizing market trends like the value increases present for CGC material.
Bottom line: Being a hobbyist shouldn’t have to mandate a reconciliation to loss.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.