CAC and gold

coinaesthetics

Seems to me that a strikingly low percentage of gold coins have CAC stickers. This includes high-end coins and PCGS as well as NGC. I heard one opinion that CAC graders are especially suspicious of many of the colors, especially the bright yellows and pumpkin-oranges in early gold. Do you agree with my impression that gold coins win CAC confirmation at much lower proportions than bronze or silver coins? If so, do you feel CAC graders are correct in their apparent concern about the originality of most slabbed gold? Or perhaps CACers are taking issue with TPG "forgiveness" of very old and scarce coins, which has for many years seemed a real phenomenon, to me, anyway. (I'm not making any valuation on CAC per se, so Kool Aid comments aren't necessary!)

DennisH

I've submitted a grand total of 3 gold coins for grading. Results: 2 green stickers and 1 gold sticker. (But they were all low-MS coins).

originalisbest

My take on CAC is I hear they're quite strict with stickering Saints at the gem level. As to their strictness or forgiveness on early pieces, I have no idea. That probably doesn't help you.

Boosibri

Gold coins, particularly early gold, branch mint and Territorials have been doctored, cleaned and processed at alarmingly high rates. CAC is quite strict in terms of what it will certify when it comes to gold. Certain issues, such as MS65+ Saints CAC has been very strict with.

With regard to coloration, I think you need to know the color that a specific issue should have. Each date may have a specific look that is "right" for the issue. Dahlonega for example has a greenish gold (due to the high silver content) look prior to around 1850 resuming again in the late 1850's once the inflow of California gold waned. The mid 50's have a distinctly different look than the early 50's and 1840's.

Philadelphia and San Francisco tends to have a more reddish look due to the copper used to refine the less pure gold than found in the south.

There are a few looks to unilaterally stay away from... Bright yellow and Cheeto orange.

In addition there are a few toning patterns to become familiar with. The 46 and 53-D below demonstrate a natural and deep tone with the fields deeper than the devices. This is characteristically original.



The second pattern is more rare and represents the opposite look. A deep tone from the outside in with the devices deeper than the fields. This is created from exposure to leather or wood. This 1848-C demonstrates this type on toning with deep reddish coloration, well inlaid into the crevices of the devices.


The most common pattern on original gold is simply a deep, rich color which appears layered, not uniform. The important thing to look for is the multiple layers of color which can be russet, orangish red, or even flashes of iridescent blue.



Lastly, sometimes coins come in contact with extreme conditions for long periods of time. This 48 $5 was supposedly found in a church cornerstone and displays wonderful deep coloration from over 100 years of contact and exposure to a medium which conveyed this color.



Edited for spelling.

PS all of these coins are CAC green or gold.

coinaesthetics

Great tutelage, Boosibrl. Many thanks.

lostincoins

Boosibri thank you for the info and pics to go with it I learned a lot from that.

coinaesthetics

Boosibrl ( I hope I've copied your CU name correctly) -- As I think about it, I want to make sure I correctly understand your posting. I believe you're showing several different looks for different pairs of original, un-doctored gold coins, that is: original gold coins can age differently. If that's right, I'd be interested in seeing any gold coins you have that you believe are doctored, and how their appearance gives them away. (Although, given your apparent expertise, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't own any non-originals!)

JJSingleton

The TPGs (esp ATS) have been rewarding processed gold with bright shiny surfaces for years now. Just another in their repertoire of increasing submissions. CAC does not reward this look.

Boosibri, nice post on gold originality.

roadrunner

<< <i>Seems to me that a strikingly low percentage of gold coins have CAC stickers. This includes high-end coins and PCGS as well as NGC. I heard one opinion that CAC graders are especially suspicious of many of the colors, especially the bright yellows and pumpkin-oranges in early gold. Do you agree with my impression that gold coins win CAC confirmation at much lower proportions than bronze or silver coins? If so, do you feel CAC graders are correct in their apparent concern about the originality of most slabbed gold? Or perhaps CACers are taking issue with TPG "forgiveness" of very old and scarce coins, which has for many years seemed a real phenomenon, to me, anyway. (I'm not making any valuation on CAC per se, so Kool Aid comments aren't necessary!) >>




I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here. I've probably posted dozens of times in great detail the past 5 years on the abysmally low stickering rates, especially for generic MS65 gold, and Saints/$20 Libs at MS64 or higher. Search for posts on the coin forum with "CAC" and "gold" in "title or body" plus my name as "author" and you'll find the information.

As an example, the sticker rate for MS65 and MS66 saints is probably on the order of 3-15%. I've seen large submissions sticker at 5-6%. The smaller denominations are somewhat higher. Yeah, it's tough to sticker gem gold.

Forum search for Cac + Gold

joebb21

it is very important to remember that just because a coin does not sticker does not mean the coin is not original or correctly graded.

many coins are both of the above but still wont cac.

cac looks for solid for the grade and not just a coin that passes on grade technicality.

Boosibri

<< <i>it is very important to remember that just because a coin does not sticker does not mean the coin is not original or correctly graded.

many coins are both of the above but still wont cac.

cac looks for solid for the grade and not just a coin that passes on grade technicality. >>



Word

coinaesthetics

Sorry, roadrunner, that I am only an occasional CU participant, and happened to miss your having repeatedly commented on this CAC / gold matter. I'll note that my own focus seems somewhat different from yours, as I'm now looking for a quarter eagle and eagle from the 1790s, which are not only quite scarce and expensive but also, it seems, even more sticker-free than are gold coins from the 19th and 20th centuries. You've probably checked out the miniscule numbers on these coins in the CAC population report, but others might be interested in this as well. (By the way, though I'm just an amateur Mahlerite, I've had over the years a number of proprietary insights into Mahler symphonies, only to finally see some critic make a less articulate point of what I'd earlier recognized. So I know how you feel!)

Catbert

Doug Winter's CAC Experience w/Half Eagles

Boosibri

<< <i>Boosibrl ( I hope I've copied your CU name correctly) -- As I think about it, I want to make sure I correctly understand your posting. I believe you're showing several different looks for different pairs of original, un-doctored gold coins, that is: original gold coins can age differently. If that's right, I'd be interested in seeing any gold coins you have that you believe are doctored, and how their appearance gives them away. (Although, given your apparent expertise, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't own any non-originals!) >>



Bright surfaces, hairlines, uniform color... You just know it when you see it. The coins have no soul.

Some forms of doctoring are fixable on gold. "Putty" a generic term for anything put on a coin to cover marks or hairlines, can be fixed generally with acetone. Search putty in the forum and some infamous threads will pop up.

You can go to Heritage or eBay and view most AU gold and 90% all looks the same. Light yellow and hideous.

coinaesthetics

To joebb21 -- Even though I introduced this subject as CAC and gold (not knowing I was way behind the curve of another CUer), your diversion to CAC itself strikes a chord in me. You know, when CAC first came around, I assumed their primary focus was strength of grade: Is this a strong 63, almost 64, or closer to 62? PCGS obviously thought the same, as they countered by introducing their plus grade. But I had the opportunity to learn that originality really was more important than grade weighting to CAC. Discount this if you want to, but I know that CAC puts overwhelming importance on originality as they see it, and that goes beyond whether a coin is obviously doctored. They even judge degrees of dipping with a critical attitude that the TPGs, when they came around, felt they could not enforce (without risking a revolt by the owners of dipped coins, which is to say, almost everyone with any substantial collection). Gimlet eye on storage, too.

CoinJunkie

<< <i>

<< <i>it is very important to remember that just because a coin does not sticker does not mean the coin is not original or correctly graded.

many coins are both of the above but still wont cac.

cac looks for solid for the grade and not just a coin that passes on grade technicality. >>



Word >>


Not to derail this thread, but it's actually "werd". From the Urban Dictionary:

1.
Werd
Werd werd interj (ca.1960) {a slang term whose origin is based on the remembrance of WERD;
the first black-owned radio station, based out of the Masonic building in Atlanta, Georgia, owned and
operated between 1949-1968 by Jesse B. Blayton and a means of media exposure for Dr. Martin Luther King}
1: a statement within itself of agreement and power

Ed62

While I claim no expertise in grading MS St. G double eagles I have been surprised how many have apparent rubs on Ms. Liberty's forward leg and still get grades of 65 and even 66.

A review of the Heritage auction offerings of these coins will show the CAC percentage on St. G. $20.00's is quite low compared to (say) walker halves or buffalo nickels. Not sure if the apparent leg rubbing is why CAC rejects them, but I certainly do not think a coin with a rub on the leg should be graded a 65 or 66.

originalisbest

<< <i>While I claim no expertise in grading MS St. G double eagles I have been surprised how many have apparent rubs on Ms. Liberty's forward leg and still get grades of 65 and even 66.

A review of the Heritage auction offerings of these coins will show the CAC percentage on St. G. $20.00's is quite low compared to (say) walker halves or buffalo nickels. Not sure if the apparent leg rubbing is why CAC rejects them, but I certainly do not think a coin with a rub on the leg should be graded a 65 or 66. >>



I don't know that leg rub is the issue with it being gem, or not, when it comes to Saints. All of them, generally, seem to have leg rub as it's practically unavoidable if the coin was ever stacked. Proof, or special handling pieces might have avoided this. Still, having exactly one Saint in 63 in my collection, I would defer to roadrunner and others on this grading topic.

AMRC

<< <i>it is very important to remember that just because a coin does not sticker does not mean the coin is not original or correctly graded.

many coins are both of the above but still wont cac.

cac looks for solid for the grade and not just a coin that passes on grade technicality. >>



All of the above AND original surfaces. And that is what kills the Gold.

roadrunner

<< <i>Doug Winter's CAC Experience w/Half Eagles >>



Good thoughts by Doug on the choice/gem generic gold market. A very close parallel to generic gold price movements have been the gold mining stocks. Essentially, both of them peaked back in the 2006-2009 era
based on denomination and grade. They peaked well before the price of gold did. When gold's long consolidation ends, the price of generic gold coins will probably get a nice jolt.....the mining stocks have already done
well since last December.

kaz

Nice concise tutorial on the "look" of original gold, boosibri.

Boosibri

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>it is very important to remember that just because a coin does not sticker does not mean the coin is not original or correctly graded.

many coins are both of the above but still wont cac.

cac looks for solid for the grade and not just a coin that passes on grade technicality. >>



Word >>


Not to derail this thread, but it's actually "werd". From the Urban Dictionary:

1.
Werd
Werd werd interj (ca.1960) {a slang term whose origin is based on the remembrance of WERD;
the first black-owned radio station, based out of the Masonic building in Atlanta, Georgia, owned and
operated between 1949-1968 by Jesse B. Blayton and a means of media exposure for Dr. Martin Luther King}
1: a statement within itself of agreement and power >>



Thanks?

CoinJunkie

<< <i>Thanks? >>


My pleasure?

AnkurJ

As the grade increases, the percentage that pass CAC decreases.
Once you discuss certain examples that pass CAC by talking with John, it gives you a feel for what is and is not original. Eventually after seeing enough examples, it is fairly easy to spot gold that has problem surfaces or putty. In some cases I can spot putty from a distance!

coinguy1989

CAC is stricter than the services, but not too bad. My sticker rate for gold has been about 70%.

coinaesthetics

So I wasn't the only one impressed by Boosibri's tutorial yesterday. After comparing his photos of a number of different original gold coins, I decided to research originality in the area I'm currently trying to buy: gold eagles from the 1790s. (As my 1790s collection happened to develop all-PCGS, I'm staying there -- no disrespect to NGC) What percentage of PCGS 1790s gold coins (at all grades) would you guess have been stickered? Though Heritage archives provide just one accounting, I reviewed their sales from 2009 forward, a period that corresponds to CAC stickers showing up there, two years after CAC's founding. Here are the numbers: 1797 -- 2 of 12, 1798 -- 1 of 8, 1799 -- 2 of 24. So of the 44 PCGS gold coins from the 1790s sold by Heritage during this period, a whopping eleven percent were stickered! If you look carefully at those five gold coins -- even understanding the limitations of photos online -- what they have in common is much less the "strong for the grade" quality that is commonly thought to be CAC's paradigm. Their common quality is an unmistakably original-gold look, variously seen as in Boosibri's coins, but each one un-doctored from the 1790s on.

mrearlygold

A representative early quarter eagle in circ





Some coins are really tough to sell sometimes.....

DennisH

<< <i>So I wasn't the only one impressed by Boosibri's tutorial yesterday. After comparing his photos of a number of different original gold coins, I decided to research originality in the area I'm currently trying to buy: gold eagles from the 1790s. (As my 1790s collection happened to develop all-PCGS, I'm staying there -- no disrespect to NGC) What percentage of PCGS 1790s gold coins (at all grades) would you guess have been stickered? Though Heritage archives provide just one accounting, I reviewed their sales from 2009 forward, a period that corresponds to CAC stickers showing up there, two years after CAC's founding. Here are the numbers: 1797 -- 2 of 12, 1798 -- 1 of 8, 1799 -- 2 of 24. So of the 44 PCGS gold coins from the 1790s sold by Heritage during this period, a whopping eleven percent were stickered! If you look carefully at those five gold coins -- even understanding the limitations of photos online -- what they have in common is much less the "strong for the grade" quality that is commonly thought to be CAC's paradigm. Their common quality is an unmistakably original-gold look, variously seen as in Boosibri's coins, but each one un-doctored from the 1790s on. >>

What percentage of them were submitted to CAC for evaluation? It might be that only 11% were ever tried.

edited: CAC no longer tells you if a coin was tried, but failed. Yikes!

Boosibri

>>

What percentage of them were submitted to CAC for evaluation? It might be that only 11% were ever tried. You can find out by entering the serial numbers of the non-stickered coins at the CAC website. >>



Really? I dont think that CAC notes which coins have been sent in but were not stickered so as to not create a negative stigma to those coins. All you will find out is that the coin is not currently stickered, not that they were tried and failed.

BillJones

I disagree with the contention that all original surface gold coins have to have coppery toning. There is no one look for original gold coins. This is influenced by the mixture of the gold, copper and yes, trace amounts of silver. Silver naturally occurs in gold ore and is not always completely removed with nitric acid especially at the Charlotte and Dahlonega Mints were nitric acid was sometimes in short supply. The toning on a gold coin can also be influenced by the atmosphere in which it was stored.

While I agree that gold coins that are the color of Cheeros is not good, original pieces can be in bright, yellow gold. I recently purchased and post pictures of an 1839-O quarter eagle that has bright yellow gold surfaces. That coin is graded PCGS AU-58, CAC.

I cannot post pictures because I am on an iPad, but you might look up the thread.

Boosibri

<< <i>I disagree with the contention that all original surface gold coins have to have coppery toning. There is no one look for original gold coins. This is influenced by the mixture of the gold, copper and yes, trace amounts of silver. Silver naturally occurs in gold ore and is not always completely removed with nitric acid especially at the Charlotte and Dahlonega Mints were nitric acid was sometimes in short supply. The toning on a gold coin can also be influenced by the atmosphere in which it was stored.

While I agree that gold coins that are the color of Cheeros is not good, original pieces can be in bright, yellow gold. I recently purchased and post pictures of an 1839-O quarter eagle that has bright yellow gold surfaces. That coin is graded PCGS AU-58, CAC.

I cannot post pictures because I am on an iPad, but you might look up the thread. >>



Agree that original coins can have bright yellow gold and certainly all gold doesn't have coppery toning. My response was more in the line of what does original toning look like and I would consider bright yellow to be untoned. I tend to avoid bright gold pieces that are 100+ years old as they are not generally my taste. It is not inconceivable that a bright gold piece is original.

Here are a few I consider to be yellow gold and original:

Boosibri

The 39-O referenced by BillJones...

stman

I'm seeing a few people saying gold needs to be "original" to get a CAC approval. So if I buy any gold coin with CAC approval....... I can be assured the coin has "original" surfaces?

Edit..... I see so much mis-information on what CAC means on all other coins including "Original" I just want to be clear on the gold part now.

ahopewell55

<< <i>I'm seeing a few people saying gold needs to be "original" to get a CAC approval. So if I buy any gold coin with CAC approval....... I can be assured the coin has "original" surfaces?

Edit..... I see so much mis-information on what CAC means on all other coins including "Original" I just want to be clear on the gold part now. >>



CAC will sticker dipped coins. A coin does not have to be "original" to be stickered by CAC or graded by the TPGs.

stman

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm seeing a few people saying gold needs to be "original" to get a CAC approval. So if I buy any gold coin with CAC approval....... I can be assured the coin has "original" surfaces?

Edit..... I see so much mis-information on what CAC means on all other coins including "Original" I just want to be clear on the gold part now. >>



CAC will sticker dipped coins. A coin does not have to be "original" to be stickered by CAC or graded by the TPGs. >>




I know what I see out there....... But I often hear different from different sources. Whether it be collectors and dealers as well. The interesting part is when there is a whole lot of mis-information out there the ones that always defend CAC don't seem to speak up and correct them. I always try and figure out why?

ahopewell55

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm seeing a few people saying gold needs to be "original" to get a CAC approval. So if I buy any gold coin with CAC approval....... I can be assured the coin has "original" surfaces?

Edit..... I see so much mis-information on what CAC means on all other coins including "Original" I just want to be clear on the gold part now. >>



CAC will sticker dipped coins. A coin does not have to be "original" to be stickered by CAC or graded by the TPGs. >>




I know what I see out there....... But I often hear different from different sources. Whether it be collectors and dealers as well. The interesting part is when there is a whole lot of mis-information out there the ones that always defend CAC don't seem to speak up and correct them. I always try and figure out why? >>



Go to the CAC website and find "Questions and Answers with John Albanese: Dipping." He states that CAC doesn't have a problem with coins of a higher grade being properly dipped, but when it comes to AU-50 and below, there may be an issue.

gypsylea

When it comes to gold, is there a distinction between "dipped" and "processed"? I ask out of ignorance, not intending to stir anything up.

coinaesthetics

That Albanese statement on dipping was a good reference, ahopewell55. Maybe some of you had the experience I had years ago -- kind of in "Numismatics 105" -- being surprised to learn that the TPGs permitted dipping, which I would have assumed to be just another altered surface. Even so, they have limits, and harshly over-dipped coins usually (not always) don't get PCGS or NGC slabs. Since I learned about dipping forgiveness, I haven't bought or even found eye-appealing any "blast white" coins, especially early ones, such as a BW 1795 half dollar Albanese used as an example. They remind me of replicas! It does seems that CAC's tolerance for dipping has a somewhat lower threshold than the primary TPGs.

Boosibri

We are likely hovering on the edge of the forum rules now with some much focus on CAC standards. We are after all on the PCGS forum.

coinaesthetics

You're right, Boosibri. Thanks for the heads-up.

steveben

cac does not equal original gold. pcgs does not equal original gold. both determine quality. cac, by virtue of the fact that their gold pops are lower, has a much higher quality bar.

only adept numismatists determine originality. even then, it's a matter of opinion.

if you're looking for original gold...i recommend gold in pcgs or ngc holders (i prefer pcgs) *with* cac stickers as a starting point. however, original gold can be found in other holders and raw (imagine that!!)

then, you need to do your homework. research these forums and books. talk to recognized experts. i recommend reading this thread, for instance:

crypto on original surfaces and toning

i think the hardest series is indian $5 and $2.5, as far as grading and determining originality. there are obvious indians that are not original...but many that are hard to determine, i think. good luck...and have fun!

BillJones

<< <i>A representative early quarter eagle in circ





Some coins are really tough to sell sometimes..... >>



I have long admired the 1797 quarter eagle, and believe it or not this example is outstanding compared to most of them. This coin is a lot rarer than the 1796 No Stars, especially in a gradable condition. Most survivors of this issue are in very beat up condition.