I am surprised at the extent of the debate here. Cases such as the OP questioned have been mentioned several times here. The subjectivity of grading is incontestable fact. So many seem to believe that a grade, and especially if beaned, is rock solid fact. It is not. A grade - even if four people agree, is still a subjective opinion, and reviewed again, may well change. I am beginning to think that general categories, such as poor, good, better, best would serve us well. Actually, I know better, the numismatic community - and the apparently inherent OCD nature - demands ever finer discrimination in the quality levels of coins. Until computer grading - with solid, repeatable, establishe standards - is developed, such controversies will continue, and be a never ending source of discussion. Cheers, RickO
I find it amazing, both in the microcosm of the maturing (positive attitude) or regressing (negative attitude) coin market and in our society as a whole how much people want guarantees and absolutes. We see it all over the place and I believe it is born of a natural human nature to want complete control over our lives and the perception that we are informed, even approaching omniscient, as a species. People expect zero risk. Therefore, someone who is an expert in their field should obviously not have any inconsistency. This trend is getting us in trouble as a society. In finance it is pervasive. We see it with our expectations of public servants. I could go on and on. You are paying JA for an opinion and the ability to put a coin to him at his bid at a point in time. Nothing more. You are paying PCGS for an opinion and the ability to put the coin to them within a set of guarantees they make. Nothing more.
CAC inconsistency wouldn't be such a big deal if it hadn't been monetized and combined with the above expectation (marketing?) of infallibility. But it has been, as dealers and collectors have eaten their own dogfood. Now we have a pronounced bifurcation in the market, but it has always been there and dealers have known it. Hard core collectors have known it too. CAC was marketed the hardest by a subset of dealers for whom the creation of CAC suited their business model under the altruistic tent of ending coin doctoring. JA wanted the same and saw a fantastic business opportunity that would offer a service to the hobby he loves. Your inconsistency is drastically lowered with a CAC sticker, but it is not eliminated. If you expect something different, you are in the wrong hobby. Try joining Actuaries of America Club or something exciting like that.
Finally, Roadrunner said: > Analyst should consider himself lucky if his grading skills are sharper at say age 60 than they were at age 50. If he's not 50 yet, then it's no comparable. Ask Colonel Jessup if he grades better today than 10 yrs ago with is 30-40 years of market experience to assist him.>
@ColonelJessup WISHES he was still 60 with 30-40 years of market experience. Luckily, I just cashed the check he sent me yesterday. No stop payment please Colonel!!
Comments
Old thread was bumped alert!!!
How about a downgrade from PR64 to PR62 and loss of CAC:
Nicely done! I would leave that out of your advertising!!
"Previously CACed in a NGC holder..."
That can't be! Isn't JA the almighty coin God?
I am surprised at the extent of the debate here. Cases such as the OP questioned have been mentioned several times here. The subjectivity of grading is incontestable fact. So many seem to believe that a grade, and especially if beaned, is rock solid fact. It is not. A grade - even if four people agree, is still a subjective opinion, and reviewed again, may well change. I am beginning to think that general categories, such as poor, good, better, best would serve us well. Actually, I know better, the numismatic community - and the apparently inherent OCD nature - demands ever finer discrimination in the quality levels of coins. Until computer grading - with solid, repeatable, establishe standards - is developed, such controversies will continue, and be a never ending source of discussion. Cheers, RickO
Three comments:
I find it amazing, both in the microcosm of the maturing (positive attitude) or regressing (negative attitude) coin market and in our society as a whole how much people want guarantees and absolutes. We see it all over the place and I believe it is born of a natural human nature to want complete control over our lives and the perception that we are informed, even approaching omniscient, as a species. People expect zero risk. Therefore, someone who is an expert in their field should obviously not have any inconsistency. This trend is getting us in trouble as a society. In finance it is pervasive. We see it with our expectations of public servants. I could go on and on. You are paying JA for an opinion and the ability to put a coin to him at his bid at a point in time. Nothing more. You are paying PCGS for an opinion and the ability to put the coin to them within a set of guarantees they make. Nothing more.
CAC inconsistency wouldn't be such a big deal if it hadn't been monetized and combined with the above expectation (marketing?) of infallibility. But it has been, as dealers and collectors have eaten their own dogfood. Now we have a pronounced bifurcation in the market, but it has always been there and dealers have known it. Hard core collectors have known it too. CAC was marketed the hardest by a subset of dealers for whom the creation of CAC suited their business model under the altruistic tent of ending coin doctoring. JA wanted the same and saw a fantastic business opportunity that would offer a service to the hobby he loves. Your inconsistency is drastically lowered with a CAC sticker, but it is not eliminated. If you expect something different, you are in the wrong hobby. Try joining Actuaries of America Club or something exciting like that.
Finally, Roadrunner said: > Analyst should consider himself lucky if his grading skills are sharper at say age 60 than they were at age 50. If he's not 50 yet, then it's no comparable. Ask Colonel Jessup if he grades better today than 10 yrs ago with is 30-40 years of market experience to assist him.>
@ColonelJessup WISHES he was still 60 with 30-40 years of market experience.
Luckily, I just cashed the check he sent me yesterday. No stop payment please Colonel!!
I do love this hobby.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Excellent post CoinLT....especially your #2. Great summary of the market grading/CAC paradigm we have moved into over the past 8 years.
My God, this has turned to a can of worms. And STILL..... no one is certain EXACTLY what CAC "does."