Options
My latest CAC Submission - with images
oih82w8
Posts: 11,902 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here are the results from my last CAC submission, 6 out 10 passed, some surprises, by not passing, but...oh well, you can't please JA with everything.
My apologies for the different sizes and if the different background colors are hard on the eyes.
1849/6 H10C PCGS AU58 CAC – Passed
1867 5C W/Rays (SNV-S1-04001) PCGS AU58 CAC – Passed
1871 2C PCGS AU58 CAC – Passed
1881 3CN (RPD-001) PCGS MS63 CAC – Passed
1885-O Morgan Dollar PCGS AU58 CAC – Passed
1887-S Seated Dime F-119 PCGS AU53 – Not CAC
1904 Liberty Nickel PCGS MS63 - Not CAC
1908 IHC PCGS MPD FS-301 S-4 MS65BN CAC - Passed
1909 V.D.B. Lincoln Cent PCGS MS65BN – Not CAC
1917 Standing Liberty Quarter PCGS MS63FH – Not CAC
oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's
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...
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...
0
Comments
Beautiful Coins John.....some look like varieties.
They all look like nice coins to me. At least cac could tell submitters why or give them an option to pay a couple bucks for a sticky on why.
you did well! i like the 1881 trime, especially
Very nice coins. Why they passed on them I don't know. Do they charge if they pass on them?
Hoard the keys.
No, only if they receive the "bean". They usually send back a check on the ones that do not pass.
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...
Thanks Jon, I added the variety descriptions in the OP...to the ones that I know of.
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...
Thanks for sharing those beautiful coins!
Why in the world did that 1887 S Seated Dime not CAC at AU53?
I looked on PCGS at the 1887 S AU53's that have sold and they are mud compared to that one. (No offense to anyone that maybe on this board and bought one)
I really like the 1871 two-cent piece and 1908 IHC, they look like superb examples.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Maybe just the pic, but the 1871 2c looks like a RPD (7) top.
CAC looks at not only grade, but also if the coin has been, in their estimation, altered in the past to a point beyond their level of acceptance. We can see the details of the coin in the images, but can't see what the surfaces truly look like.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Lovely! They have been tough over there lately and 60% is good! The 1909 VDB has the MS-70 look to it, and those never pass!
Quick question: Let's say you submit an MS65 1909 Lincoln cent that looks like an MS66 or better yet the coin is really a proof. The slab says mint state, but it is really a proof. If CAC picks up on that will they then not give it a bean? CAC agrees the coin is way better than an MS65 yet disagree it is mint state. Even though a proof is worth ten times more.
Why would you not send it back to get the Proof designation before sending it to CAC? Especially in view of the value?
Yes, very good point. Looks like a super picture of a super coin to me, but when I can see Liberty's facial features on those I go all gaga.
Yes, I noticed that, I will have to get a closer look when I get them back.
The TrueView does show something above the 7;
http://images.pcgs.com/trueview/32840609
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...
Nice. Especially like the subtle rim toning on that Morgan . Does CAC not give gold stickers on AU coins? It certainly deserved one.
Yep, they give them on AU. I really like the reverse toning of that 1849.
Sure they give gold CAC stickers to AU coins, but the coin has to be undergraded and not simply pretty.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Here are my guesses on the ones that did not CAC. These are just my humble guesses. Not asking for agreement or accolades. The following is not meant to degrade the coins in any way. Nor is it meant to question the grades placed on the coins by PCGS. It is just me, IMHO, expressing why CAC did not sticker those coins. Just because CAC does not sticker a coin does not make it wrong to be in a TPG holder. All CAC is doing is taking it to the next level by adhering to standards of originality above and beyond what is market acceptable within the grading house (and with most of the collecting public). It is just another level of scrutiny.
1887-S Seated Dime F-119 PCGS AU53 – Not CAC: The Black/Grey/Blue on this coin is a result of contact with some cleaning/restoration process. Not enough to keep it from grading, but not a surface one would expect in general. An AU coin should have some luster.
1904 Liberty Nickel PCGS MS63 - Not CAC: Blotchiness of the toning. These are hard items to get to tone. What you are seeing here is a chemical reaction to something. Not a question natural or not because either way it is "off" in how you would expect a Nickel Coin to patines.
1909 V.D.B. Lincoln Cent PCGS MS65BN – Not CAC: Those rainbow splotches are not something one would expect to see "naturally" on a lincoln. It is evenly dispersed around all of the devices and not apparent in the fields. The fields are the easiest place to wipe away, or otherwise remove, cleaners/preservatives while minute amounts may stay in the devices. This coin is classic in that regard.
1917 Standing Liberty Quarter PCGS MS63FH – Not CAC: This coin, being about 100 years old and being comprised of a significantly reactive metal (Silver) should have some "original skin" This coin looks like it has had it's skin dipped away.
Fire away!
I like your analysis, but mine is just slightly different-
1887-S; Same analysis.
1904; Agree with you, but think the cheek is too busy for MS63.
1909 VDB; Has the look of MS70 treatment (AT).
1917; Perhaps a bit of rub on the top of the knee, as well.
Obviously, these are simply guesses on my part given the images, but the ideas being thrown out might help.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Well if you agree with me then they are great guesses!
But seriously, I did not even get into the grades, as that is usually the MINORITY reason a coin does not sticker. Let me rant if you will. On the grading side, a coin only has to be in the top 2/3's of the grade. In a normal bell shaped curve (and yes, I know there is no such thing) that lead to an expectation of a 66.6% chance of a coin stickering. But the real number of their acceptance is about 27 (ish)%? Where does that magic nearly 40% disappear to? The "no original skin universe" black hole.
PCGS and NGC just have to pass muster in the "marketplace", ie "market acceptable" and with the original customer. CAC exists for itself and its own concept of quality, no-problem, original, high end coins, and its followers. Too bad their FAQs are so limited; they could greatly expand that to what they consider acceptable and not.
No, I am saying YOU didn't know it was a Proof, CAC did.
logger7 quote> CAC exists for itself and its own concept of quality, no-problem, original, high end coins, and its followers.
I'm curious where this comes from. Are you saying they don't sticker coins not original. And are you saying they only sticker high end for the grade? It sounds like it to me when you say that's why CAC exists.
So what is up with the 3C that makes it not green or gold bean?......sure looks to be at least a very PQ 63....
SS, The 1881 3CN did receive the Green Bean. "Passed" means that it met CAC standards, Green Bean. "Exceeded" means that it exceeded CAC standards and received the Gold Bean. "Not CAC"...kinda obvious. These are the three descriptions that CAC uses on their return form.
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...
This is a good assessment that I agree with at least from the perspective of only images. 6 of 10 is good. I am sending in 8 on Monday, we will see.......
Best, SH
Successful transactions with-Boosibri,lkeigwin,TomB,Broadstruck,coinsarefun,Type2,jom,ProfLiz, UltraHighRelief,Barndog,EXOJUNKIE,ldhair,fivecents,paesan,Crusty...
Six of ten seems to be a fair result.... and the analysis by TomB and AMRC should help.... Cheers, RickO
I've taken cac non-sticker coins to sharp collectors/dealers, and it as if they are channeling the cac brainwaves when they tell me why they think they did not sticker. Weird.