CAC criteria
Gazes
Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭✭✭
What factor do you think CAC considers is most important when deciding whether to sticker (ie originality, surface, luster, etc). Thanks
0
Comments
So, it's a mixed bag. Best to submit and let them tell you.
NO GUNK on the coin. The body oil and/or PVC that plagues so many slabbed mint state coins is not gonna fly at CAC.
Secondly, they seem to really dislike the more noticeable hits.
Nicks and bumps on the rim seem to be the kiss of death.
- JA has a good eye
- JA is willing to make a market in coins he likes
- You send him a coin and if he likes it enough to buy it a current grade you get green, if he likes it enough to pay a premium, you get gold
- If you submit enough coins you'll figure out what he likes and what he doesn't and your sticker rate should go up
Sure, grading is art and science but don't get caught up trying to make a step by step guide, it's like roadrunner said... If he likes it enough to buy it, you get a sticker.
Don't get bummed out if it doesn't sticker. It just means that JA doesn't want to buy it. He is entitled to that as that is his business.
And don't think that you can take a 64, downgrade it to 62 and have it sticker. He might not like the coin at any grade.
What is superior for an 1847-D $5 is completely different for an 1863 $5. And an 1863 $5 has completely different characteristics from an 1862 $5.they are great, better than I will ever hope to be...but specialists still rule.
Latin American Collection
The challenge with CAC (coming from an ardent advocate) is that they cannot be specialtists in all series and of all dates in all series.
What is superior for an 1847-D $5 is completely different for an 1863 $5. And an 1863 $5 has completely different characteristics from an 1862 $5.they are great, better than I will ever hope to be...but specialists still rule.
I couldn't agree with you more. I like you collect something very specific and for example have been trying to get a 1869-S 10C stickered. The one JA like and stickered is a dark/dull 58 in a 62 holder, with gunk and PVC on the surface but it's for sure 100% original. I've sent him 5 more to look at, each at the 62 grade and head / shoulders above the one he stickered but none have stickered. Go figure.
In a blindfold test not one person would likely pick the one that got stickered as it is clearly not UNC but an ex NGC63 now in a PC62 holder with the look of a 64+ coin doesn't get a sticker.
Anyhow, as Brian said... They provide and awesome service and I'm a true supporter, but I also accept when JA doesn't agree with what I see. It is his buy list and he can adjudicate what he puts on it
How can we have possibly seen the same number of coins in our specialty area unless we've either run a TPG or attended every major coin show and auction of the past 35-40 years? I did attend most major shows and auctions for a 2 year period, but not 35 years....lol. Gene Gardner was no doubt an excellent seated specialist in his own right. But, he also had a dealer representative who was probably better. Specialists no doubt rule over non-specialists....where I'd categorize 90% of coin dealers as non-specialists. But, there are certainly top notch dealers in that upper 1-10% who exceed the level of collector "specialists" in the many areas that they cover. I can probably name 50-100 of them just by referencing the PCGS/NGC dealer lists.
Collector specialists typically can't keep up with the coin doctoring that is going on. While they can be excellent in identifying everything else about their favorite series, doctoring is often their weakness.
grading organization.... probably if one submitted a thousand coins, and kept meticulous
notes, a pattern may emerge....that still would not guarantee the next submission, since the
decision is subjective, not objective. Cheers, RickO
Don't get bummed out if it doesn't sticker. It just means that JA doesn't want to buy it. He is entitled to that as that is his business.
I think that if it's at the top of its grade and attractive then it doesn't matter if he doesn't want to buy it...it will still get stickered.
Yes.
You can see similar results with the 26-S Buffalo nickel.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
One thing to add along the lines of Boosibiri's point is that CAC seems less likely to relax strike standards for a date that is notoriously poorly struck. As an example, PCGS has 11 grading events for the 1919-D Walker in MS65 even though that issue has a notoriously soft central strike on the obverse, particularly lacking a split thumb. Not sure any of the eleven have a full split thumb. CAC has stickered only one of those eleven (and none of NGC's).
You can see similar results with the 26-S Buffalo nickel.
Agree, I never saw a coin with pancake strike got a bean regardless how nice its surface and luster is. I believe strike is a part of eye appealing and JA wants eye appealing on stickered coins.
In general, a coin with blooming luster has a good chance to reach next grade in a PCGS holder but when this coin strike is poor, it automatically goes into C class or lower for many collectors (so does JA
After showing records that the coins were all previously CAC, the other 8 were recertified.
I like CAC but that's a pretty bad record on consistency and this is not the first time more than 50% didn't sticker and I've had to prove they were in the past.
My Type Set & My Complete Proof Nickel Set!
The most important criteria is that JA likes the coin for the assigned grade and would be a willing buyer at typical market prices. After that, there is no exact standard as there are so many variations in strike, luster, marks, surfaces, and eye appeal....not to mention differences in the TPG's themselves on how they grade.
This. And after years of watching what gets stickered and what doesn't, then realizing that I have different tastes in what I like in a coin, and that what CAC likes might not be what I like, and what CAC won't sticker I might really like, I concluded that I don't care what CAC considers most important. Buy what you like.
CAC does not sticker the best coins within a grade. They sticker what they want to market.
Surface originality, even if it isn't attractive.
DennisH took the words right out of my mouth. I've seen a number of CAC coins that had less than great eye appeal due to very original surfaces so this factor (original surfaces) seems to play a significant roll.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
A sticker means that the coin is not monkeyed with as far as JA& Co. is concerned. That extra layer is important to me in the types of coins I collect. Otherwise I like what I like in the eye appeal, lustre and strike arena.
mark
I don't know about that... I've had coins I sent in for conservation that later I submitted to CAC and they got stickered. They have super pop/eye appeal for the assigned grade after they were conserved.
A sticker means that the coin is not monkeyed with as far as JA& Co. is concerned. That extra layer is important to me in the types of coins I collect. Otherwise I like what I like in the eye appeal, lustre and strike arena.
mark
I don't know about that... I've had coins I sent in for conservation that later I submitted to CAC and they got stickered. They have super pop/eye appeal for the assigned grade after they were conserved.
Conservation is not doctoring
Try again with the same "unbeaned" coin? Doubtful. Tastes change, but why bother? It's one person's (company) opinion afterall.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
The challenge with CAC (coming from an ardent advocate) is that they cannot be specialtists in all series and of all dates in all series.
What is superior for an 1847-D $5 is completely different for an 1863 $5. And an 1863 $5 has completely different characteristics from an 1862 $5.they are great, better than I will ever hope to be...but specialists still rule.
I couldn't agree with you more. I like you collect something very specific and for example have been trying to get a 1869-S 10C stickered. The one JA like and stickered is a dark/dull 58 in a 62 holder, with gunk and PVC on the surface but it's for sure 100% original. I've sent him 5 more to look at, each at the 62 grade and head / shoulders above the one he stickered but none have stickered. Go figure.
In a blindfold test not one person would likely pick the one that got stickered as it is clearly not UNC but an ex NGC63 now in a PC62 holder with the look of a 64+ coin doesn't get a sticker.
Anyhow, as Brian said... They provide and awesome service and I'm a true supporter, but I also accept when JA doesn't agree with what I see. It is his buy list and he can adjudicate what he puts on it
I disagree, the only way CAC will sticker a coin with PVC on it (no matter how nice it is) is if they miss seeing the PVC. AND they are usually nice enough to put a note on it as such.
Wish I knew. My last submission was 7 out of 15. All 15 were previously CAC as the coins were sent in for imagining.
After showing records that the coins were all previously CAC, the other 8 were recertified.
I like CAC but that's a pretty bad record on consistency and this is not the first time more than 50% didn't sticker and I've had to prove they were in the past.
Wow. That is an eye-opener Traz. I would not have expected that 50% of formerly stickered coins (out of 15) wouldn't resticker on a fresh look. That's a problem imo. That could be a result of getting fussier as certain market weaknesses/liquidity have continued to grind lower since fall of 2008. It could also be a result of JA wanting better coins, in the most liquid holders in order to more easily market them. Were those 15 coins all PCGS? In any case, you now have a 2nd CAC opinion that potentially puts those 8 coins at the lower end of "solid" for the grade. The past 6 months in the coin market have been a lot tougher than the 2013-early 2015....so some changes should be expected.
While I would expect some tightening of standards in a declining market, I wouldn't have expected a 50% variation. Then again, I wonder if it's just as simple that on average, for any submission coming through the door, the sticker rate needs to stay around 40-50%. That's not too far from the cross rates of the other TPG's where only about 30-50% of the coins through the door can cross. Everyone "wants" the top half of the coin market, not the bottom half. Thanks for that personal input.
Maybe down the road we'll see a CAC "premium" silver or platinum sticker (ie a +) that will identify coins that are higher end for the grade, but just not the next grade up. Those kinds of coins will be in demand even in declining markets. I would imagine that when really nice $1K and up coins come through CAC and earn a green sticker, that a few extra words of that quality get added to their internal description. Those are the coins they would really want to purchase down the road. It could be as simple as an ABC designator for each sticker on strike, luster, eye appeal (ie green sticker AAB or ABA or BBC).
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
The most important criteria is that JA likes the coin for the assigned grade and would be a willing buyer at typical market prices. After that, there is no exact standard as there are so many variations in strike, luster, marks, surfaces, and eye appeal....not to mention differences in the TPG's themselves on how they grade.
Not too many variations in my book when a coin must have it all in strike, luster, virtually no distracting marks, nice toning which all add up to a nice eye appealing coin. Which is what's lacking on many coins in holders.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Thanks to everyone who has posted on my thread. This has been incredibly helpful (even though there is no definitive answer)
The question;.........
What factor do you think CAC considers is most important when deciding whether to sticker (ie originality, surface, luster, etc). Thanks
How many more can you think of? And hopefully, they are
factoring in, each and every one of them.........
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
"Maybe down the road we'll see a CAC "premium" silver or platinum sticker (ie a +) that will identify coins that are higher end for the grade, but just not the next grade up. Those kinds of coins will be in demand even in declining markets."
Ditto for all of my professional training and experience to be in physical sciences and engineering. The bottom line is that there are a select group of the very best dealers out there who can consistently break down low end, average, and high end coins in the range of MS/PF 63-67. Just because the majority of collectors and dealers can't do it consistently doesn't make it improbable. I'm more than happy to review anyone's slab holdings where I get to pick which coins I can buy at current CDN bid/ask for the assigned grade. If they are all the "same" whats the problem?
Frankly, anyone here buying coins looks at every coin in a holder with the thought process of whether this coin just made it, is fine for the grade, or is closer to the next grade up. We all do this...except for those who only look for beans. I would submit that top collectors are pretty darn good at that process. The best dealers are even better. JA would be near the top of the list, as long as his eyes hold out. A very strong coin for the grade will never leave a sharp dealer's inventory without a premium attached. And in the same way, that dealer will likely not buy a low end coin without some sort of discount included. They can tell the difference consistently. Anything in between is solid/ok for the grade. It's not rocket science.
Where problems can arise is trying to assign a grade in 5-15 seconds. JA doesn't have to worry so much about that. The TPG's did the hard work in defining the slab grade. The final step is whether the coin is an A, B, C (or F) for that grade. If I gave you 10 MS65 seated quarters or 10 MS66 Morgans I would hope you could pick out the top third and bottom third of each group. That's what JA does. And just because he doesn't assign a "platinum" sticker for a high end coin, doesn't mean he doesn't make a permanent note of that coin being superior in CAC's data base. I know I would...so that when that coin shows up again I know I might have to pay a bit more to get it....and be happy to do so.
The music for the coin market may have already stopped in September 2008. And that's right around when CAC got started. It's been a roller coaster ever since. The market as a whole has never had a problem grading coins accurately. Trying to grade them in a few seconds with only a couple of opinions is where issues can arise. But get 10-20 experts together for a couple minutes (ie "the market") or stick them up for auction, and the market will tell you what it's worth (ie or what grade it is). The market is always right. TPG grading is only 30 years old. We don't know the lasting effects of that. We do know that a single grading event is not always reproduceable. That's been the case since 1986. Have a coin graded 3 to 5 times and you fill find out the market grade/value.
However, if the market continues to gravitate towards an increasingly strong preference for 'A' coins, it's s sign that (1) the majority of the available coins are not particularly liquid (even if properly graded), and (2) people are chasing 'A' coins in hopes of getting future upgrades. To whatever extent that they meet with success, the results will likely be 'C' or 'B' coins (for the next grade increment) and lower liquidity. What is going on is nuts. This should cause investors to be extremely cautious, even more than in the past.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
"Have a coin graded 3 to 5 times and you fill find out the market grade/value."
However, if the market continues to gravitate towards an increasingly strong preference for 'A' coins, it's s sign that (1) the majority of the available coins are not particularly liquid (even if properly graded), and (2) people are chasing 'A' coins in hopes of getting future upgrades. To whatever extent that they meet with success, the results will likely be 'C' or 'B' coins (for the next grade increment) and lower liquidity. What is going on is nuts. This should cause investors to be extremely cautious, even more than in the past.
I pretty much agree with all that, especially the part that "things are nuts." I hope we don't ever see B and C coins being resubmitted for upgrades....and getting them.
The most important criteria is that JA likes the coin for the assigned grade and would be a willing buyer at typical market prices. After that, there is no exact standard as there are so many variations in strike, luster, marks, surfaces, and eye appeal....not to mention differences in the TPG's themselves on how they grade.
This. And after years of watching what gets stickered and what doesn't, then realizing that I have different tastes in what I like in a coin, and that what CAC likes might not be what I like, and what CAC won't sticker I might really like, I concluded that I don't care what CAC considers most important. Buy what you like.
CAC does not sticker the best coins within a grade. They sticker what they want to market.
The above sums it up.
It's all in what JA wants to make a market. Sometimes I like what he likes, sometimes I don't. Suggest you look at enough coins in a particular area, learn how to grade them yourself, get a second opinion from someone you trust that you think knows more than you do, and then decide what you like and what you are willing to spend for it. You rarely, if ever, will buy a bad coin this way.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
I agree, but I worry that this is where we are headed. There are limited numbers of ways to extract money out of collectors/investors, and a key one in the recent decades has been selling 'value' by adding new inserts and/or stickers. The only way out of this is to bring many new buyers into the hobby (to keep prices moving up) and this isn't happening anytime soon. I think that this lack of constancy (i.e., upwards drift via the addition of new grade designations and inflation) is an inherent problem with market grading. This (and bullion trading) has kept many dealers in business.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Coincidentally, is that not about the same time certain submitters started playing golf with HRH, and losing?
Wish I knew. My last submission was 7 out of 15. All 15 were previously CAC as the coins were sent in for imagining.
After showing records that the coins were all previously CAC, the other 8 were recertified.
I like CAC but that's a pretty bad record on consistency and this is not the first time more than 50% didn't sticker and I've had to prove they were in the past.
I find this hard to believe especially since cert numbers don't change just for imaging a coin. CAC keeps track of which cert numbers have passed or not.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
My Type Set & My Complete Proof Nickel Set!
Wish I knew. My last submission was 7 out of 15. All 15 were previously CAC as the coins were sent in for imagining.
After showing records that the coins were all previously CAC, the other 8 were recertified.
I like CAC but that's a pretty bad record on consistency and this is not the first time more than 50% didn't sticker and I've had to prove they were in the past.
This is interesting.
I have a very limited sample, but I have a CAC seated liberty dollar where she's balder than I am because that date was horribly struck at the top of the obverse. I doubt that the same coin would CAC if the year were changed to a year where the strike was known to be good.
I figure I spend 2-3 hours on coin stuff a week, in a good week, 99% of which is either on this forum or looking at pictures of coins at various sites. JA (or the PCGS graders or other people who are true professionals) spend 40+ hours per week on coin stuff a ton of which is looking at actual coins in hand and talking with other similarly knowledgeable people. Those folks are just going to be so much more knowledgeable than I ever will be. If I with my meager expertise know that some years and mints have better strikes than others, wanna bet they can probably recite those years for all the different series? It's not like there have been that many coins we've minted. What is it, after 10,000 hours of practicing something you're going to be an expert? That's 5 years if it's your 40-hour per week job. I'm not saying it's all the hours you put in. I could have practiced my jump shot for just as long as Michael Jordan and I still wouldn't have played in the NBA.
Successful BST (me as buyer) with: Collectorcoins, PipestonePete, JasonRiffeRareCoins