Apparently you are not a student of coin grading. This is very conceited to say but I am. So IMO, anyone who has watched the evolution of grading KNOWS FOR A FACT that a coin's strike does not carry the "grade-weight" of yesteryear! BTW, that was one of the big problems with ANACS long ago. For example, a flatly struck 1884-O dollar with no marks was as "gem" as one with no marks and a much better strike. Both were as original as struck yet the coins were not worth the same. It is all about the money. That's why everyone says that the TPGS put a value on a coin they grade.
I have said this multiple times previously. Go to a big show with an auction and view the lots. In general PCGS coins are nicer than NGC coins and CAC coins are nicer than non CAC coins. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. But for most coins I think this is true. The market ultimately decides a coins value and there’s a reason why PCGS/CAC coins sell for the most.
Because I really don't care what the resale value is of my low grade collection or will be. I actually can tell if any of mine are "choice for the grade" without having to pay to be told...
@leothelyon said:
Cgc's are supposed to put the best coins in their highe-grade holders. Poorly struck coins are not high-quality material. How else does one get his point across other than pointing out this problem with the cgc's about their inabilities of determining the best strikes on coins and making it a requirement for coins to receive the higher grades?
In my opinion, once you get passed MS-64, the quality of the strike becomes an important issue. There is no such thing as a poorly struck MS-67.
You are showing your age. The grading standards have changed. Therefore, your personal standards are great; however, they do not match those of the TPGS whose opinion YOU DON'T NEED. Thankfully, there is STILL no such thing as a poorly struck MS-67 but one day there might be.
I find its press releases, which avoid disclosure of ownership interests, problematic (e.g. press release about Hansen cross where zero mention is made of his ownership). Does not instill confidence in long term continuity at CACG. Guess only time will tell….
No idea if JA is under any kind of long-term contract there. Perhaps will come a time when CACG holders, “when JA was there” will be looked upon like early PCGS holders. Like us all, JA is mortal. Will brand carry any value after he is no longer a principle?
You're hijacking the thread. Create your own thread for this concern?
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
How about because perfection is boring? I find myself sometimes embracing flaws in the coins I purchase for my type sets. More so now that my vision is different after cataract surgery and I’m far sighted after being extremely near sighted since birth. I used to notice every little hit, scratch, weakness in strike when I was near sighted, but now that I’m far-sighted I find that overall eye appeal is far more important than the imperfections and problems in many coins. I also find that many high grade coins are boring, MS-70s and PF-70s are especially boring, I don’t think I’ll ever be drawn to collecting them as sets. It’s also why I like circulation strikes better than Proofs and a big reason I like circulated coins better than uncirculated ones.
Examples of similar thinking in art are as follows:
And here’s an example of a coin in my collection that has a flaw that MAY be the reason it doesn’t have a CAC sticker. I bought the coin in about 2020, so it very well may have been sent to CAC and failed to get a sticker because of its flaw. Of course it also may have never been sent, can’t know for sure unless CAC starts keeping public records of ones that failed to sticker. I bought it because its eye appeal looks great to me and I find I like the flaw, it makes the coin more appealing to me. Some wouldn’t ever be happy with it in their collection because of the flaw, but I like it
Likewise, only 2 of these coins has a CAC sticker. But I think they are all beautiful and I bought the 2 that have a CAC sticker because they go with and complement the other dollars that don’t have a sticker. I actually had to go check my records just now to see if any had a CAC sticker, I couldn’t remember if any did but found that 2 of them do.
@DocBenjamin said:
For a decade JA's were the only eyes that mattered. In a world of a few thousand neurosurgeons, only one guy could determine a grade. That was illogical to think that PCGS and NGC were substandard decision makers. Now I believe, you have an ex NGC fellow running the operation.
No one is perfect and I'll have to admit that every professional grader who taught classes was pretty darn good; yet some were much better than others. Besides, it is not the grader - it is the company they work for - the line. (BTW IMO, for modern dated common coins that line has become broken beyond repair.)
Several years ago in a grading discussion over on CT Forum one insider wrote that his personal standards were much different than the TPGS he worked for. He said to get a correct grade or guess the grade of an NGC or PCGS slab correctly he often had to raise his personal grade one point. One of my instructors explained it this way in private at the "Moonlight Lounge" when I questioned some of his grading in class.
He told me I was correct on many of the coins I questioned but no one grades that way! Graders need to play the game of the coin market: "Yes, this coin is not "technically" such and such but..."
I admire a person like that. He can state the 100% true grade based on what is there on a coin to a student yet nudge them over to its ACTUAL MARKET GRADE that is correct! Complicated? Yes, but that's exactly what I try to do at my coin club when asked for an opinion. We don't want to leave money on the table.
The best advice I can give anyone is to be a very strict grader. Learn to grade for yourself and then buy the "A" coins and not the "B" or "C" ones. You'll never have a problem selling a coin. It is easy advice to give but extremely hard to follow as everyone is looking for the same thing (the cream) and they don't come cheap. That's why after the authentication services added grading services, CAC was eventually needed - to protect ignorant collectors. An now , it seems grading has become more important than authentication.
Do uncirculated coins really need to be split into 31 grades? That is assuming that 70 carries no A,B or C.
Good question. For coins where thousands of mint state examples exist, yes, 31 grades is (more or less) necessary. For other coins, where only a few mint state examples exist, not so much, but it's still helpful if you can't view the coin in hand before making the purchase.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
If I were to spend a significant amount of money on a coin, I would want a bean sticker just to have another set of eyes to authenticate it's not a counterfeit as well. In fact, I would prefer some type of sticker that verified my coin was checked against being a fake. After hearing about the pricey counterfeit years ago at the FL show that fooled so many experienced people, I don't trust me eyes. Not that I purchased pricey coins, just say'n.
@Mr_Spud said:
How about because perfection is boring? I find myself sometimes embracing flaws in the coins I purchase for my type sets. More so now that my vision is different after cataract surgery and I’m far sighted after being extremely near sighted since birth. I used to notice every little hit, scratch, weakness in strike when I was near sighted, but now that I’m far-sighted I find that overall eye appeal is far more important than the imperfections and problems in many coins. I also find that many high grade coins are boring, MS-70s and PF-70s are especially boring, I don’t think I’ll ever be drawn to collecting them as sets. It’s also why I like circulation strikes better than Proofs and a big reason I like circulated coins better than uncirculated ones.
Examples of similar thinking in art are as follows:
Wabi-Sabi is also a helluva good cocktail. Had one just last week and loved it!
WABI-SABI
Belvedere Vodka flavoured with fresh wasabi, green apple, lime and fresh mint
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
You are a very lucky collector indeed because their are probably billions of flawed vintage coins for you to choose from. I'm going to gess that those beautiful coins in your set were bought when you were still nearsighted.
You are a very lucky collector indeed because their are probably billions of flawed vintage coins for you to choose from. I'm going to gess that those beautiful coins in your set were bought when you were still nearsighted.
The ones that I included pictures of in that post were all purchased in 2020 or later, after I became farsighted.
Heres some more examples, none have CAC stickers, all were purchased after 2020. The 1849 was the first one I purchased and then I purchased the others with the looks of the 1849 in mind so that they would go with each other and complement each other. They all have flaws that would turn some collectors off, and probably why they don’t have CAC stickers, but that I’m actually drawn to.
I do not have any CAC stickered coins. I know that most of them have not been sent in because I had them slabbed.
I think collecting using the CAC service is smart.
The way the coin market is structured now you could almost sell a coin sight unseen with a CAC sticker.
Someday I should send in my core collection in and give them a shot.
They sure move the needle on the price that's for sure.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
@Morgan13 said:
I do not have any CAC stickered coins. I know that most of them have not been sent in because I had them slabbed.
I think collecting using the CAC service is smart.
The way the coin market is structured now you could almost sell a coin sight unseen with a CAC sticker.
Someday I should send in my core collection in and give them a shot.
They sure move the needle on the price that's for sure.
People can and do sell coins with (and without) stickers on a daily basis. Some of those coins are 4, 5 and 6 figures.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
What is it about some people that makes them feel that it is their place to tell anybody how they should or shouldn't enjoy their hobby? What they should or shouldn't seek, buy, and enjoy the ownership of? A person's gotta be some kind of %!^#&* to exhibit that disdain toward what another collector feels is his own most satisfying approach to the hobby.
@jmlanzaf said:
Because I like it. Period. Why do I need any other reason?
As for price, CAC coins carry a premium when you both buy and sell them. Everyone knows that. We also know why. That doesn't, however, make other coins unworthy.
A coin that fails to sticker at 66, can green sticker at 65 and gold sticker at 64. Let's say. you had a gold sticker 64 and sent it in for reconsideration. It got a 66 and then failed to CAC. Would you then dump the coin in a fire sale because it was now an unworthy coin?
I liked @BillJones post right at the start of Page 1. I should have stopped there, as much of the rest was noise, but I'm going to contribute to the noise just the same, so ... whatever.
But his post started with, "I’ll turn the question around. Why should you allow one man’s opinion determine which coins get into your collection?" If you skipped it, you should read it.
Using that as a starting point for my comments (but his whole post was good), I'll say that the only man who can determine what gets into my collection is me. All of the other services (some which have come and gone) and mentors I have had have nearly taught me things. Some about grading, and attributing, and understanding things about coins ... some about marketing and how the "hobby" works in the realms I've played ... and some about a host of other things not really related to coins ...
I have a thread up on a recent submission, so I do submit to CAC. And since I have not owned some of these coins for 20+ years (there are a few I have, including a couple in that post), it means I still buy coins that do not have stickers, and/or I suspect have never been submitted. Sometimes they were raw before I sent them to our host and then off to CAC. I don't send all of my coins in to CAC. But once a year now I send 20 or so. My reasons are varied, but mostly have to with the next generation, just like my tendency to get a lot of my better coins graded by our host.
Back to the coins ... in all cases, I buy the ones I buy because I like them. Either because I see them as great coins, or because I see real value, or both. I try never to buy coins I think are unattractive. I am not obsessed with filling holes. And I still study the coin as much as I can without the bias of grade and sticker before I purchase. This has become WAY more difficult over time as we are all subconsciously influenced.
I am of the mindset that stickers in my primary series are applied more often to premium coins, and even one grade up coins, than correct and average or average-plus for the grade coins. This can open up a whole different can of worms I won't get into ... however, if the sticker is the end-all, be-all, than I can assure you you will miss many good and great coins at fair and desirable prices.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
@ms71 said:
What is it about some people that makes them feel that it is their place to tell anybody how they should or shouldn't enjoy their hobby? What they should or shouldn't seek, buy, and enjoy the ownership of? A person's gotta be some kind of %!^#&* to exhibit that disdain toward what another collector feels is his own most satisfying approach to the hobby.
I'm some people. I think some people have the EXPERIENCE to offer advice to others in different cases - like don't by damaged coins. Anyway, I sure would like to have Laura's opinion about purchasing coins and what is hot. That's what advisory letters are for. Opinions are like Butts. Everyone has one and some are prettier than others. Nevertheless, it is up to each person to collect what they like no matter what others advise. I certainly don't mind hearing the opinion of others about anything I think or collect.
Simply because I like the coin and it makes me happy.
I have many CAC'ed coins. Some I bought CAC'ed and some I had sent to CAC, but that never entered into my decision to purchase a particular coin. Sending them to CAC was just a decision for the future sale of the pieces when they no longer interest me. So I understand the value of CAC, but it DOES NOT influence my decision on whether I purchase a coin or not for my collection.
@jmlanzaf said:
Because I like it. Period. Why do I need any other reason?
As for price, CAC coins carry a premium when you both buy and sell them. Everyone knows that. We also know why. That doesn't, however, make other coins unworthy.
A coin that fails to sticker at 66, can green sticker at 65 and gold sticker at 64. Let's say. you had a gold sticker 64 and sent it in for reconsideration. It got a 66 and then failed to CAC. Would you then dump the coin in a fire sale because it was now an unworthy coin?
These coins below will NOT sticker at CAC (JA, personal communication) despite being choice coins because PCGS graders boosted the grade for their nice surfaces and eye appeal. PCGS staff literally posted here defending their grade for the 54-O for its overall quality. IMO, it is technically overgraded but understand why they loved up this coin. It has surfaces that are almost mark-free and absolutely hairline-free with such perfectly uniform toning from spending decades in an envelope that the coin is downright spooky nice. In sunlight under magnification, the coin's gray surfaces are a fine mosaic of refracted colors.
CAC has been adjusting the boundaries for grades VF20 - VF30 such that all letters of LIBERTY should be visible for VF20, and definitely strong for VF25, according to JA's comments. Many PCGS and particularly NGC coins in VF will need to be regraded first before they will ever sticker. When the time comes, these coins are going to CACG for regrading rather than hope PCGS grades these coins properly for CAC acceptance.
PCGS VF30 - IMO, VF30/VF20 - probably now a CACG F15 or VF20
PCGS VF35 - will likely drop to VF30 with CACG
While Venn diagrams of CAC grading and my grading and tastes in coins overlap considerably such that I like to look at CAC coins at shows, there are many CAC-stickered coins I will not buy because of their over infatuation with originality to the point where the coin is, IMO, badly corroded. Like @BillJones, I also have a well-populated CAC Hall of Shame. Many of these coins would become instant "details-environmental damage" coins from exposed pitting and corrosion if they ever receive a quick dip.
Edit to add: there are a lot of great coins that failed to sticker. As such, a collector can miss out on these by exclusively rejecting them. I say that as a fan of most CAC stickered coins.
Catbert nails it here, IMO. I'd add that if a "great" coin is not stickered, check to see if it's overgraded. Why pass on a great coin that is overgraded and therefore lacking a sticker when one can resubmit it to CAC at a lower grade or send to CACG? And if you really like the coin, who cares about a sticker?
You're hijacking the thread. Create your own thread for this concern?
Why would you buy a non-CAC coin?
Because I do not believe CAC will maintain a substantial premium over PCGS in the long term due to brand dilution, and, accordingly, non CAC coins may offer better long term value-- assuming they are solid for the grade.
I think you may be confusing CAC and CACG in this discussion. A CAC sticker on a PCGS coin is both CAC and PCGS and "solid for the grade" is what the sticker is taken to mean. The sticker is pretty clearly what the OP was referring to, not CACG.
@ms71 said:
What is it about some people that makes them feel that it is their place to tell anybody how they should or shouldn't enjoy their hobby? What they should or shouldn't seek, buy, and enjoy the ownership of? A person's gotta be some kind of %!^#&* to exhibit that disdain toward what another collector feels is his own most satisfying approach to the hobby.
Good question. Of course the answer will vary from person to person, but I think it’s mostly about wanting to share what we’ve learned and to help other collectors do better. Sometimes, this help seems to come out of the blue and may not be welcomed by everyone. Other times, as in this thread, it’s in response to a direct question.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
To answer the thread title question, because I know how to grade coins all by myself.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
To answer the thread title question, because I know how to grade coins all by myself.
Will you (and others that have posted and feel the same way) submit to CAC for stickering before selling (by you or your heirs) to increase your chances of getting fair value?
I recognize your point is you have no need to buy coins with CAC stickers, but I believe you may agree that when the time comes to sell, chances are in general you or your heirs will get more value for your accurately graded coins if they have CAC stickers on them.
Please advise.
Thanks.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven Yes, I’ll most likely submit my coins to CAC when it’s time to sell them. I’m planning on selling off duplicates and any MS coins I submitted raw over the years so as to continue working on my Circulated Type sets all the way til I have one of each of the classics. This will commence in about a year or so when I retire. In preparation for selling them, I already signed up for CAC membership and got accepted. I understand the premiums that CAC stickers get, and I’ve paid that premium for the 10 or so coins that I bought with CAC stickers. It’s like I don’t mind paying a bit extra for them because I know if I’m going to sell them I’ll get that premium back. Likewise, I have a whole bunch of coins I submitted myself or purchased before CAC was a thing and I know that they will be easier to sell for a better price if I submit those ones and get a sticker. But if I suspect any of my coins might not sticker, especially ones I purchased since CAC became so popular, I won’t bother submitting them.
Okay, so we’re talking about coins that failed to sticker.
I wouldn’t have any qualms about buying a coin I really liked—say something that got a bump for great eye appeal—that failed to sticker only because CAC felt it was a point overgraded.
@Mr_Spud said:
How about because perfection is boring?
And here’s an example of a coin in my collection that has a flaw that MAY be the reason it doesn’t have a CAC sticker. I bought the coin in about 2020, so it very well may have been sent to CAC and failed to get a sticker because of its flaw. Of course it also may have never been sent, can’t know for sure unless CAC starts keeping public records of ones that failed to sticker. I bought it because its eye appeal looks great to me and I find I like the flaw, it makes the coin more appealing to me. Some wouldn’t ever be happy with it in their collection because of the flaw, but I like it
Isn’t the idea of having a perfect 70 coin being able to see the full intended beauty as good as it gets? How is that boring?
The coin you posted has green corrosion on both sides and (to me) looking at coins that are or should be in detailed holders is boring.
@johnny010 said:
My initial post should have defined non-CAC which to me is a coin that was sent and failed vs a coin that has never been sent.
I’d still buy it, if I liked the coin and grade, and if it was scarce and something that I really needed, and the price was right.
@winesteven I believe I answered your question on a different thread, but here goes again:
Besides the reasons that I already mentioned, I’m not in a rush to submit. This is because-who knows what the latest market trend will be in the future? And CAC may not even be relevant anymore. The whole market dynamic may have (Probably will have) changed by then. We’ll have to wait and see. There might even be (likely) a newcomer (Company or process) that will be the latest craze.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@winesteven I believe I answered your question on a different thread, but here goes again:
Besides the reasons that I already mentioned, I’m not in a rush to submit. This is because-who knows what the latest market trend will be in the future? And CAC may not even be relevant anymore. The whole market dynamic may have (Probably will have) changed by then. We’ll have to wait and see. There might even be (likely) a newcomer (Company or process) that will be the latest craze.
And if not? If when you get closer to the time to sell, and if the CAC situation is similar to now, would you submit slabbed coins valued in the high three figures or higher to get stickered to have a higher chance of netting higher sale proceeds? This question is meant not just for you, but mainly to those who were quick to reply that they buy mostly (or only) non stickered coins.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@1madman said “Isn’t the idea of having a perfect 70 coin being able to see the full intended beauty as good as it gets? How is that boring?”
I like your post, especially if it means I can get better deal on coins like the one you quoted/posted. Perfect 70 coins and Proof coins that were carefully made and set aside and pampered just don’t do that much for me compared to a coin that was used for its intended purpose and then somehow escaped the ravages of time good enough to have good eye appeal. It’s ok that others prefer the pampered ones, I like them too but find them boring. Especially when the mint can produce them so easy these days that dealers can safely guarantee pre-sales of MS or PF 70s before they are even released. Those aren’t real coins to me anymore and it’s hard for me to get excited about them.
The whole question of CAC/no CAC is moot without consideration of price. I would buy a details coin if the price was right. But I wouldn't pay the same price for a raw details, raw wholesome, PCGS/no CAC, and PCGS/CAC.
@winesteven:
My situation is a bit different. While I’m active, I mostly trade/swap, or sell very selectively. The latter group is targeted & will require a bean only if the buyer wants me to obtain one. So far, virtually no one has, but I don’t do a lot of selling these days (the missus says I do too much buying - ha, she might be right).
When I’m gone, my grandkids are inheriting what I have. It’s up to them to maximize what I’ve left them. I’ve discussed why I’m doing it this way with their parents, who wholeheartedly approve. Of course, they’re willing to assist.
While it may look to an outsider that I’m throwing this into their respective laps for them to figure out, it’s way more than that. One, appreciating the gift (much more than a bank account would). Two, maximizing a return through their best efforts. A bank account is easy & available; overall the best or desired outcome here depends on what they put into it.
Finally, as our tour guide in Athens liked to say: and that is that!
@winesteven I believe I answered your question on a different thread, but here goes again:
Besides the reasons that I already mentioned, I’m not in a rush to submit. This is because-who knows what the latest market trend will be in the future? And CAC may not even be relevant anymore. The whole market dynamic may have (Probably will have) changed by then. We’ll have to wait and see. There might even be (likely) a newcomer (Company or process) that will be the latest craze.
And if not? If when you get closer to the time to sell, and if the CAC situation is similar to now, would you submit slabbed coins valued in the high three figures or higher to get stickered to have a higher chance of netting higher sale proceeds? This question is meant not just for you, but mainly to those who were quick to reply that they buy mostly (or only) non stickered coins.
Steve
Yes
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@johnny010 said:
My initial post should have defined non-CAC which to me is a coin that was sent and failed vs a coin that has never been sent.
And how does one know that?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@johnny010 said:
As I’ve built my Morgan set a few coins did not CAC. No matter how hard I’ve tried to justify the coins “should have stickered”, each time I’ve paid more attention and re-louped / learned and realized “I was wrong”.
Now I fully understand buying a coin two hundred plus years ago due to limited availability but most coins if you’re honest with yourself….. have been cleaned and retoned, aren’t suited for their grades etc
I’m sure there are good reasons and I dont expect all positive replies but how many of you have come to the same realization that a non-CAC coin is worth less and is an inferior coin for the grade award.
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
@johnny010 said:
As I’ve built my Morgan set a few coins did not CAC. No matter how hard I’ve tried to justify the coins “should have stickered”, each time I’ve paid more attention and re-louped / learned and realized “I was wrong”.
Now I fully understand buying a coin two hundred plus years ago due to limited availability but most coins if you’re honest with yourself….. have been cleaned and retoned, aren’t suited for their grades etc
I’m sure there are good reasons and I dont expect all positive replies but how many of you have come to the same realization that a non-CAC coin is worth less and is an inferior coin for the grade award.
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
Ultra rare, no issues to own without. Dealers typically buy back of bid so a coin that failed CAC likely sells for the same price to a dealer as one that has not been to CAC. Now do you see it?
Furthermore, I’ve used CAC grading in my Morgan’s to learn, and now I can clearly see in person on blast white coins which will and will not pass with a high degree of confidence. I do not want to pay 65 money for a 65 C coin that should really be in a 64 holder. It’s just math.
Dang. Hot thread. I only post because I won a CAC'd coin tonight. It was by far the best Morgan out of its bunch of peers and a rare VAM to boot. Still got it under PCGS retail so I feel good. Two sets of eyes can't be a bad thing.
@johnny010 said:
My initial post should have defined non-CAC which to me is a coin that was sent and failed vs a coin that has never been sent.
And how does one know that?
Because I just explained I made a mistake in not clarifying. I’ll make sure to add this thought at the correct post count number for reference.
I appreciate that this was a timely and well-intentioned clarification. My question was, if you see a coin that is slabbed but not stickered, how do you know if it was submitted to a stickering firm or not?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@johnny010 said:
As I’ve built my Morgan set a few coins did not CAC. No matter how hard I’ve tried to justify the coins “should have stickered”, each time I’ve paid more attention and re-louped / learned and realized “I was wrong”.
Now I fully understand buying a coin two hundred plus years ago due to limited availability but most coins if you’re honest with yourself….. have been cleaned and retoned, aren’t suited for their grades etc
I’m sure there are good reasons and I dont expect all positive replies but how many of you have come to the same realization that a non-CAC coin is worth less and is an inferior coin for the grade award.
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
Ultra rare, no issues to own without. Dealers typically buy back of bid so a coin that failed CAC likely sells for the same price to a dealer as one that has not been to CAC. Now do you see it?
Furthermore, I’ve used CAC grading in my Morgan’s to learn, and now I can clearly see in person on blast white coins which will and will not pass with a high degree of confidence. I do not want to pay 65 money for a 65 C coin that should really be in a 64 holder. It’s just math.
Maybe I missed some of the conversation on this thread, but the question was binary, would you buy a non-CAC coin (yes or no)? Not, 'would you buy a non-CAC coin for CAC money?' Clearly the price guides are just guides. but for the most part I assume that the posted price for coins that trade regularly is the price for a B coin which is also CAC worthy although CAC stickered coins do tend to get an additional premium. An A coin probably should be priced above guide and a C coin or a coin with issues would be pried below guide. No rocket science here.
The philosophy I disagree with is those collectors will not buy the 65 "C" coin with no sticker and no other surface or quality issues simply for the lack of a sticker even if priced accordingly and even if it is nicer than the 64 CAC in the case right next to it .
@johnny010 said:
My initial post should have defined non-CAC which to me is a coin that was sent and failed vs a coin that has never been sent.
And how does one know that?
Because I just explained I made a mistake in not clarifying. I’ll make sure to add this thought at the correct post count number for reference.
I appreciate that this was a timely and well-intentioned clarification. My question was, if you see a coin that is slabbed but not stickered, how do you know if it was submitted to a stickering firm or not?
You do not BUT I make a point every time to ask and the believe it or not, the dealers are transparent and a majority of the time will respond
1) I’ve never sent it
2) I was planning to send it since I was told it was not sent
3) it did not pass CAC
I’ve yet to run into a single dealer who I felt was being dishonest on this topic.
When I ask collectors I feel I get the same honest answers and for my rattlers there’s even been a few times where older collectors have asked me, “What is CAC” in response to my question.
@johnny010 said:
As I’ve built my Morgan set a few coins did not CAC. No matter how hard I’ve tried to justify the coins “should have stickered”, each time I’ve paid more attention and re-louped / learned and realized “I was wrong”.
Now I fully understand buying a coin two hundred plus years ago due to limited availability but most coins if you’re honest with yourself….. have been cleaned and retoned, aren’t suited for their grades etc
I’m sure there are good reasons and I dont expect all positive replies but how many of you have come to the same realization that a non-CAC coin is worth less and is an inferior coin for the grade award.
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
Ultra rare, no issues to own without. Dealers typically buy back of bid so a coin that failed CAC likely sells for the same price to a dealer as one that has not been to CAC. Now do you see it?
Furthermore, I’ve used CAC grading in my Morgan’s to learn, and now I can clearly see in person on blast white coins which will and will not pass with a high degree of confidence. I do not want to pay 65 money for a 65 C coin that should really be in a 64 holder. It’s just math.
Maybe I missed some of the conversation on this thread, but the question was binary, would you buy a non-CAC coin (yes or no)? Not, 'would you buy a non-CAC coin for CAC money?' Clearly the price guides are just guides. but for the most part I assume that the posted price for coins that trade regularly is the price for a B coin which is also CAC worthy although CAC stickered coins do tend to get an additional premium. An A coin probably should be priced above guide and a C coin or a coin with issues would be pried below guide. No rocket science here.
The philosophy I disagree with is those collectors will not buy the 65 "C" coin with no sticker and no other surface or quality issues simply for the lack of a sticker even if priced accordingly and even if it is nicer than the 64 CAC in the case right next to it
Coin: dealer acquired price $200
Coin: dealer sales price $225
Coin: did not pass CAC = not solid for the grade = downgrade one point = bad purchase
Coin: passes CAC worth $250
Spread keeps getting worse for non-cac coin owners, not better.
@johnny010 said:
As I’ve built my Morgan set a few coins did not CAC. No matter how hard I’ve tried to justify the coins “should have stickered”, each time I’ve paid more attention and re-louped / learned and realized “I was wrong”.
Now I fully understand buying a coin two hundred plus years ago due to limited availability but most coins if you’re honest with yourself….. have been cleaned and retoned, aren’t suited for their grades etc
I’m sure there are good reasons and I dont expect all positive replies but how many of you have come to the same realization that a non-CAC coin is worth less and is an inferior coin for the grade award.
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
Ultra rare, no issues to own without. Dealers typically buy back of bid so a coin that failed CAC likely sells for the same price to a dealer as one that has not been to CAC. Now do you see it?
Furthermore, I’ve used CAC grading in my Morgan’s to learn, and now I can clearly see in person on blast white coins which will and will not pass with a high degree of confidence. I do not want to pay 65 money for a 65 C coin that should really be in a 64 holder. It’s just math.
Maybe I missed some of the conversation on this thread, but the question was binary, would you buy a non-CAC coin (yes or no)? Not, 'would you buy a non-CAC coin for CAC money?' Clearly the price guides are just guides. but for the most part I assume that the posted price for coins that trade regularly is the price for a B coin which is also CAC worthy although CAC stickered coins do tend to get an additional premium. An A coin probably should be priced above guide and a C coin or a coin with issues would be pried below guide. No rocket science here.
The philosophy I disagree with is those collectors will not buy the 65 "C" coin with no sticker and no other surface or quality issues simply for the lack of a sticker even if priced accordingly and even if it is nicer than the 64 CAC in the case right next to it
Coin: dealer acquired price $200
Coin: dealer sales price $225 Coin: did not pass CAC = not solid for the grade = downgrade one point = bad purchase
Coin: passes CAC worth $250
Spread keeps getting worse for non-cac coin owners, not better.
Agree not rocket science.
You left a few details out like guide price, but "Not solid for the grade" does not mean improperly graded. JA has made that very clear. Why does that equal to "downgrade one point" if PCGS got it right?
And if you're saying a non-CAC coin is a bad purchase, why'd you start the thread if you already had the answer?
Comments
@leothelyon,
Apparently you are not a student of coin grading. This is very conceited to say but I am. So IMO, anyone who has watched the evolution of grading KNOWS FOR A FACT that a coin's strike does not carry the "grade-weight" of yesteryear! BTW, that was one of the big problems with ANACS long ago. For example, a flatly struck 1884-O dollar with no marks was as "gem" as one with no marks and a much better strike. Both were as original as struck yet the coins were not worth the same. It is all about the money. That's why everyone says that the TPGS put a value on a coin they grade.
I have said this multiple times previously. Go to a big show with an auction and view the lots. In general PCGS coins are nicer than NGC coins and CAC coins are nicer than non CAC coins. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. But for most coins I think this is true. The market ultimately decides a coins value and there’s a reason why PCGS/CAC coins sell for the most.
Because I really don't care what the resale value is of my low grade collection or will be. I actually can tell if any of mine are "choice for the grade" without having to pay to be told...
You are showing your age. The grading standards have changed. Therefore, your personal standards are great; however, they do not match those of the TPGS whose opinion YOU DON'T NEED. Thankfully, there is STILL no such thing as a poorly struck MS-67 but one day there might be.
Someone may have beaten you to it. The important thing is that you understand what others have written both about strike and tone of a post.
x
You're hijacking the thread. Create your own thread for this concern?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
How about because perfection is boring? I find myself sometimes embracing flaws in the coins I purchase for my type sets. More so now that my vision is different after cataract surgery and I’m far sighted after being extremely near sighted since birth. I used to notice every little hit, scratch, weakness in strike when I was near sighted, but now that I’m far-sighted I find that overall eye appeal is far more important than the imperfections and problems in many coins. I also find that many high grade coins are boring, MS-70s and PF-70s are especially boring, I don’t think I’ll ever be drawn to collecting them as sets. It’s also why I like circulation strikes better than Proofs and a big reason I like circulated coins better than uncirculated ones.
Examples of similar thinking in art are as follows:
And here’s an example of a coin in my collection that has a flaw that MAY be the reason it doesn’t have a CAC sticker. I bought the coin in about 2020, so it very well may have been sent to CAC and failed to get a sticker because of its flaw. Of course it also may have never been sent, can’t know for sure unless CAC starts keeping public records of ones that failed to sticker. I bought it because its eye appeal looks great to me and I find I like the flaw, it makes the coin more appealing to me. Some wouldn’t ever be happy with it in their collection because of the flaw, but I like it
Likewise, only 2 of these coins has a CAC sticker. But I think they are all beautiful and I bought the 2 that have a CAC sticker because they go with and complement the other dollars that don’t have a sticker. I actually had to go check my records just now to see if any had a CAC sticker, I couldn’t remember if any did but found that 2 of them do.
Mr_Spud
Good question. For coins where thousands of mint state examples exist, yes, 31 grades is (more or less) necessary. For other coins, where only a few mint state examples exist, not so much, but it's still helpful if you can't view the coin in hand before making the purchase.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
If I were to spend a significant amount of money on a coin, I would want a bean sticker just to have another set of eyes to authenticate it's not a counterfeit as well. In fact, I would prefer some type of sticker that verified my coin was checked against being a fake. After hearing about the pricey counterfeit years ago at the FL show that fooled so many experienced people, I don't trust me eyes. Not that I purchased pricey coins, just say'n.
Wabi-Sabi is also a helluva good cocktail. Had one just last week and loved it!
WABI-SABI
Belvedere Vodka flavoured with fresh wasabi, green apple, lime and fresh mint
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MrSpud,
You are a very lucky collector indeed because their are probably billions of flawed vintage coins for you to choose from. I'm going to gess that those beautiful coins in your set were bought when you were still nearsighted.
The ones that I included pictures of in that post were all purchased in 2020 or later, after I became farsighted.
Heres some more examples, none have CAC stickers, all were purchased after 2020. The 1849 was the first one I purchased and then I purchased the others with the looks of the 1849 in mind so that they would go with each other and complement each other. They all have flaws that would turn some collectors off, and probably why they don’t have CAC stickers, but that I’m actually drawn to.
Mr_Spud
I do not have any CAC stickered coins. I know that most of them have not been sent in because I had them slabbed.
I think collecting using the CAC service is smart.
The way the coin market is structured now you could almost sell a coin sight unseen with a CAC sticker.
Someday I should send in my core collection in and give them a shot.
They sure move the needle on the price that's for sure.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
People can and do sell coins with (and without) stickers on a daily basis. Some of those coins are 4, 5 and 6 figures.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
What is it about some people that makes them feel that it is their place to tell anybody how they should or shouldn't enjoy their hobby? What they should or shouldn't seek, buy, and enjoy the ownership of? A person's gotta be some kind of %!^#&* to exhibit that disdain toward what another collector feels is his own most satisfying approach to the hobby.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
This. The crux of the nuttiness.
Smitten with DBLCs.
I liked @BillJones post right at the start of Page 1. I should have stopped there, as much of the rest was noise, but I'm going to contribute to the noise just the same, so ... whatever.
But his post started with, "I’ll turn the question around. Why should you allow one man’s opinion determine which coins get into your collection?" If you skipped it, you should read it.
Using that as a starting point for my comments (but his whole post was good), I'll say that the only man who can determine what gets into my collection is me. All of the other services (some which have come and gone) and mentors I have had have nearly taught me things. Some about grading, and attributing, and understanding things about coins ... some about marketing and how the "hobby" works in the realms I've played ... and some about a host of other things not really related to coins ...
I have a thread up on a recent submission, so I do submit to CAC. And since I have not owned some of these coins for 20+ years (there are a few I have, including a couple in that post), it means I still buy coins that do not have stickers, and/or I suspect have never been submitted. Sometimes they were raw before I sent them to our host and then off to CAC. I don't send all of my coins in to CAC. But once a year now I send 20 or so. My reasons are varied, but mostly have to with the next generation, just like my tendency to get a lot of my better coins graded by our host.
Back to the coins ... in all cases, I buy the ones I buy because I like them. Either because I see them as great coins, or because I see real value, or both. I try never to buy coins I think are unattractive. I am not obsessed with filling holes. And I still study the coin as much as I can without the bias of grade and sticker before I purchase. This has become WAY more difficult over time as we are all subconsciously influenced.
I am of the mindset that stickers in my primary series are applied more often to premium coins, and even one grade up coins, than correct and average or average-plus for the grade coins. This can open up a whole different can of worms I won't get into ... however, if the sticker is the end-all, be-all, than I can assure you you will miss many good and great coins at fair and desirable prices.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Lots of reasons to have non-CAC Coins:
Those are just a few…
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I'm some people. I think some people have the EXPERIENCE to offer advice to others in different cases - like don't by damaged coins. Anyway, I sure would like to have Laura's opinion about purchasing coins and what is hot. That's what advisory letters are for. Opinions are like Butts. Everyone has one and some are prettier than others. Nevertheless, it is up to each person to collect what they like no matter what others advise. I certainly don't mind hearing the opinion of others about anything I think or collect.
Simply because I like the coin and it makes me happy.
I have many CAC'ed coins. Some I bought CAC'ed and some I had sent to CAC, but that never entered into my decision to purchase a particular coin. Sending them to CAC was just a decision for the future sale of the pieces when they no longer interest me. So I understand the value of CAC, but it DOES NOT influence my decision on whether I purchase a coin or not for my collection.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
x
These coins below will NOT sticker at CAC (JA, personal communication) despite being choice coins because PCGS graders boosted the grade for their nice surfaces and eye appeal. PCGS staff literally posted here defending their grade for the 54-O for its overall quality. IMO, it is technically overgraded but understand why they loved up this coin. It has surfaces that are almost mark-free and absolutely hairline-free with such perfectly uniform toning from spending decades in an envelope that the coin is downright spooky nice. In sunlight under magnification, the coin's gray surfaces are a fine mosaic of refracted colors.
CAC has been adjusting the boundaries for grades VF20 - VF30 such that all letters of LIBERTY should be visible for VF20, and definitely strong for VF25, according to JA's comments. Many PCGS and particularly NGC coins in VF will need to be regraded first before they will ever sticker. When the time comes, these coins are going to CACG for regrading rather than hope PCGS grades these coins properly for CAC acceptance.
PCGS VF30 - IMO, VF30/VF20 - probably now a CACG F15 or VF20
PCGS VF35 - will likely drop to VF30 with CACG
While Venn diagrams of CAC grading and my grading and tastes in coins overlap considerably such that I like to look at CAC coins at shows, there are many CAC-stickered coins I will not buy because of their over infatuation with originality to the point where the coin is, IMO, badly corroded. Like @BillJones, I also have a well-populated CAC Hall of Shame. Many of these coins would become instant "details-environmental damage" coins from exposed pitting and corrosion if they ever receive a quick dip.
Catbert nails it here, IMO. I'd add that if a "great" coin is not stickered, check to see if it's overgraded. Why pass on a great coin that is overgraded and therefore lacking a sticker when one can resubmit it to CAC at a lower grade or send to CACG? And if you really like the coin, who cares about a sticker?
I think you may be confusing CAC and CACG in this discussion. A CAC sticker on a PCGS coin is both CAC and PCGS and "solid for the grade" is what the sticker is taken to mean. The sticker is pretty clearly what the OP was referring to, not CACG.
Good question. Of course the answer will vary from person to person, but I think it’s mostly about wanting to share what we’ve learned and to help other collectors do better. Sometimes, this help seems to come out of the blue and may not be welcomed by everyone. Other times, as in this thread, it’s in response to a direct question.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
To answer the thread title question, because I know how to grade coins all by myself.
Will you (and others that have posted and feel the same way) submit to CAC for stickering before selling (by you or your heirs) to increase your chances of getting fair value?
I recognize your point is you have no need to buy coins with CAC stickers, but I believe you may agree that when the time comes to sell, chances are in general you or your heirs will get more value for your accurately graded coins if they have CAC stickers on them.
Please advise.
Thanks.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
My initial post should have defined non-CAC which to me is a coin that was sent and failed vs a coin that has never been sent.
@winesteven Yes, I’ll most likely submit my coins to CAC when it’s time to sell them. I’m planning on selling off duplicates and any MS coins I submitted raw over the years so as to continue working on my Circulated Type sets all the way til I have one of each of the classics. This will commence in about a year or so when I retire. In preparation for selling them, I already signed up for CAC membership and got accepted. I understand the premiums that CAC stickers get, and I’ve paid that premium for the 10 or so coins that I bought with CAC stickers. It’s like I don’t mind paying a bit extra for them because I know if I’m going to sell them I’ll get that premium back. Likewise, I have a whole bunch of coins I submitted myself or purchased before CAC was a thing and I know that they will be easier to sell for a better price if I submit those ones and get a sticker. But if I suspect any of my coins might not sticker, especially ones I purchased since CAC became so popular, I won’t bother submitting them.
Mr_Spud
Okay, so we’re talking about coins that failed to sticker.
I wouldn’t have any qualms about buying a coin I really liked—say something that got a bump for great eye appeal—that failed to sticker only because CAC felt it was a point overgraded.
Isn’t the idea of having a perfect 70 coin being able to see the full intended beauty as good as it gets? How is that boring?
The coin you posted has green corrosion on both sides and (to me) looking at coins that are or should be in detailed holders is boring.
I’d still buy it, if I liked the coin and grade, and if it was scarce and something that I really needed, and the price was right.
@winesteven I believe I answered your question on a different thread, but here goes again:
Besides the reasons that I already mentioned, I’m not in a rush to submit. This is because-who knows what the latest market trend will be in the future? And CAC may not even be relevant anymore. The whole market dynamic may have (Probably will have) changed by then. We’ll have to wait and see. There might even be (likely) a newcomer (Company or process) that will be the latest craze.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
And if not? If when you get closer to the time to sell, and if the CAC situation is similar to now, would you submit slabbed coins valued in the high three figures or higher to get stickered to have a higher chance of netting higher sale proceeds? This question is meant not just for you, but mainly to those who were quick to reply that they buy mostly (or only) non stickered coins.
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
@1madman said “Isn’t the idea of having a perfect 70 coin being able to see the full intended beauty as good as it gets? How is that boring?”
I like your post, especially if it means I can get better deal on coins like the one you quoted/posted. Perfect 70 coins and Proof coins that were carefully made and set aside and pampered just don’t do that much for me compared to a coin that was used for its intended purpose and then somehow escaped the ravages of time good enough to have good eye appeal. It’s ok that others prefer the pampered ones, I like them too but find them boring. Especially when the mint can produce them so easy these days that dealers can safely guarantee pre-sales of MS or PF 70s before they are even released. Those aren’t real coins to me anymore and it’s hard for me to get excited about them.
Mr_Spud
Why not? I know how to grade for one thing plus pick out nice coins. I buy coins I like CAC or not.
Yes I have some CAC and considering what I paid for them plus my markup gladly retail them. Just fun and games. Do you pay the money?
The whole question of CAC/no CAC is moot without consideration of price. I would buy a details coin if the price was right. But I wouldn't pay the same price for a raw details, raw wholesome, PCGS/no CAC, and PCGS/CAC.
@winesteven:
My situation is a bit different. While I’m active, I mostly trade/swap, or sell very selectively. The latter group is targeted & will require a bean only if the buyer wants me to obtain one. So far, virtually no one has, but I don’t do a lot of selling these days (the missus says I do too much buying - ha, she might be right).
When I’m gone, my grandkids are inheriting what I have. It’s up to them to maximize what I’ve left them. I’ve discussed why I’m doing it this way with their parents, who wholeheartedly approve. Of course, they’re willing to assist.
While it may look to an outsider that I’m throwing this into their respective laps for them to figure out, it’s way more than that. One, appreciating the gift (much more than a bank account would). Two, maximizing a return through their best efforts. A bank account is easy & available; overall the best or desired outcome here depends on what they put into it.
Finally, as our tour guide in Athens liked to say: and that is that!
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Nickelodeon
Yes
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
CAC doesnt grade raw coins. I buy a lot of Raw coins.
My current registry sets:
20th Century Type Set
Virtual DANSCO 7070
Slabbed IHC set - Missing the Anacs Slabbed coins
CAC does not grade the vast majority of what I collect. I suspect my icon gives it away.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
And how does one know that?
I guess I would flip the question and ask, why would you buy only CAC stickered coins? I get that for the unconfident or beginner collector having a second opinion on the grade is reassuring and valuable. But otherwise, why arbitrarily dismiss/ignore/eschew coins that fall into the "C" spectrum? There are likely coins out there where the top pop is something like MS68 pop 1, but that coin is barely an MS68. Why would you not want to own it just because it won't qualify for a sticker? If you want the top best specimen, you'll have to accept the one without a sticker.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Because I just explained I made a mistake in not clarifying. I’ll make sure to add this thought at the correct post count number for reference.
Ultra rare, no issues to own without. Dealers typically buy back of bid so a coin that failed CAC likely sells for the same price to a dealer as one that has not been to CAC. Now do you see it?
Furthermore, I’ve used CAC grading in my Morgan’s to learn, and now I can clearly see in person on blast white coins which will and will not pass with a high degree of confidence. I do not want to pay 65 money for a 65 C coin that should really be in a 64 holder. It’s just math.
Dang. Hot thread. I only post because I won a CAC'd coin tonight. It was by far the best Morgan out of its bunch of peers and a rare VAM to boot. Still got it under PCGS retail so I feel good. Two sets of eyes can't be a bad thing.
USAF veteran 1984-2005
I appreciate that this was a timely and well-intentioned clarification. My question was, if you see a coin that is slabbed but not stickered, how do you know if it was submitted to a stickering firm or not?
Maybe I missed some of the conversation on this thread, but the question was binary, would you buy a non-CAC coin (yes or no)? Not, 'would you buy a non-CAC coin for CAC money?' Clearly the price guides are just guides. but for the most part I assume that the posted price for coins that trade regularly is the price for a B coin which is also CAC worthy although CAC stickered coins do tend to get an additional premium. An A coin probably should be priced above guide and a C coin or a coin with issues would be pried below guide. No rocket science here.
The philosophy I disagree with is those collectors will not buy the 65 "C" coin with no sticker and no other surface or quality issues simply for the lack of a sticker even if priced accordingly and even if it is nicer than the 64 CAC in the case right next to it .
http://ProofCollection.Net
You do not BUT I make a point every time to ask and the believe it or not, the dealers are transparent and a majority of the time will respond
1) I’ve never sent it
2) I was planning to send it since I was told it was not sent
3) it did not pass CAC
I’ve yet to run into a single dealer who I felt was being dishonest on this topic.
When I ask collectors I feel I get the same honest answers and for my rattlers there’s even been a few times where older collectors have asked me, “What is CAC” in response to my question.
Coin: dealer acquired price $200
Coin: dealer sales price $225
Coin: did not pass CAC = not solid for the grade = downgrade one point = bad purchase
Coin: passes CAC worth $250
Spread keeps getting worse for non-cac coin owners, not better.
Agree not rocket science.
You left a few details out like guide price, but "Not solid for the grade" does not mean improperly graded. JA has made that very clear. Why does that equal to "downgrade one point" if PCGS got it right?
And if you're saying a non-CAC coin is a bad purchase, why'd you start the thread if you already had the answer?
http://ProofCollection.Net