@Coinstartled said:
Just a thought. If third party grading standards fell significantly CAC is out of business as there would be no freshly slabbed coins to certify. They would be forced to become an actual full service grading operation and not hide behind a colorful little facsimile or fade off into obscurity.
CAC loses money on its stickering operations so I think you're out to lunch
Then why are they in this business? What is their real business model? They can always raise their fees to give them a positive bottom line. Valued companies have this advantage in the marketplace.
@Coinstartled said:
Just a thought. If third party grading standards fell significantly CAC is out of business as there would be no freshly slabbed coins to certify. They would be forced to become an actual full service grading operation and not hide behind a colorful little facsimile or fade off into obscurity.
CAC loses money on its stickering operations so I think you're out to lunch
So it would financially benefit them to stop evaluating coins? Bull elmo.
@Coinstartled said:
Just a thought. If third party grading standards fell significantly CAC is out of business as there would be no freshly slabbed coins to certify. They would be forced to become an actual full service grading operation and not hide behind a colorful little facsimile or fade off into obscurity.
CAC loses money on its stickering operations so I think you're out to lunch
So it would financially benefit them to stop evaluating coins? Bull elmo.
No because increasing the pool of stickered coins increases their money making opportunities
CAC loses money on its stickering operations so I think you're out to lunch
They charge dealers for those that sticker AND those that do not. there is no slabbing costs, including the materials, equipment, and labor. They do not have to buy back coins that should not be graded or graded incorrectly. The website is a joke and no online submissions, so not much cost there. How long does it take to attach a little sticker and only on a percentage of the coins? If they are not turning a profit from that operation, time to send in a consultant and show them how to do it.
CAC loses money on its stickering operations so I think you're out to lunch
They charge dealers for those that sticker AND those that do not. there is no slabbing costs, including the materials, equipment, and labor. They do not have to buy back coins that should not be graded or graded incorrectly. The website is a joke and no online submissions, so not much cost there. How long does it take to attach a little sticker and only on a percentage of the coins? If they are not turning a profit from that operation, time to send in a consultant and show them how to do it.
I was ready to hit like but I do believe that CAC has an obligation to make a fair offer on coins that they have certified ie buyback.
I was ready to hit like but I do believe that CAC has an obligation to make a fair offer on coins that they have certified ie buyback.
Last I checked CAC had certified over 500,000 coins. Figuring $500 per coin, that's $250 MILL. Even at $200/coin that's $100 MILL. I don't think they should be expected to have that kind of money available to buy everything if offered. At some point you just can't. And what exactly is a "fair" offer since it shifts with market liquidity, market cycles, changes in collector preferences, etc. Who was making "fair" offers for coins in March-June 2009 when the market last tanked big time...and liquidity was at a stand still. Maybe a "fair" offer....but there's a limit on what anyone can buy. Market-makers place bids on particular coins in specific grades....they don't necessarily bid on the entire coin market. And even if they did, they are allowed to pull all their bids at any time depending on market conditions.
CAC created a pool of coins for them to trade in. That's it. It's the coin dealers and collectors that ceded the "power" to control the coin market. That's not CAC's problem....that's our problem for "expecting" them to be the sole arbiter of TPG coin values. CAC has a ready pool of coins to buy/sell sight/unseen on short notice regardless of market conditions. Anyone else and you have to ship them the coin or take it to them.
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
I was ready to hit like but I do believe that CAC has an obligation to make a fair offer on coins that they have certified ie buyback.
Last I checked CAC had certified over 500,000 coins. Figuring $500 per coin, that's $250 MILL. Even at $200/coin that's $100 MILL. I don't think they should be expected to have that kind of money available to buy everything if offered. At some point you just can't. And what exactly is a "fair" offer since it shifts with market liquidity, market cycles, changes in collector preferences, etc. Who was making "fair" offers for coins in March-June 2009 when the market last tanked big time...and liquidity was at a stand still. Maybe a "fair" offer....but there's a limit on what anyone can buy. Market-makers place bids on particular coins in specific grades....they don't necessarily bid on the entire coin market. And even if they did, they are allowed to pull all their bids at any time depending on market conditions.
As with many things CAC, I don't know the specifics regarding buybacks and offers. I am not sure if PL or DMPL designations are considered and I have no idea if a gold stickered AU58 is a 59 or a 60 in JA's eyes. Perhaps if they offered a coin forum.....
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Again, this is the market's fault for handing over such power to CAC....they didn't ask for it. They probably never saw this dependence coming back in 2007. And if they honestly believed they would sticker 80% or more of all slabbed coins, then they should have NEVER expected any dependence. But, when you only sticker as low as 5-25% of "some" coins, that leads to dependence. Don't blame CAC for what the collectors and dealers did. If you don't like it, don't buy CAC coins as there are plenty of other fish in the ocean.
You said you did not have any knowledge of Legend having had prior or current interest in CAC, so I imagine you don't know for sure if any other officers and or owners of Legend had a private stake. I appreciate your honesty.
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Don't blame CAC for what the collectors and dealers did. If you don't like it, don't buy CAC coins as there are plenty of other fish in the ocean.
But what about those that have invested (yes, I said invested) substantial amounts of money in coins which are now discounted for not having a coveted sticker, even if they have been locked in a vault for 20 plus years?
@SoCalBigMark said:
You said you did not have any knowledge of Legend having had prior or current interest in CAC, so I imagine you don't know for sure if any other officers and or owners of Legend had a private stake. I appreciate your honesty.
Legend is an S corp. I do not believe that an S corp can own part of an llc - therefore legend itself would be legally precluded from being an owner. There is only one other owner of legend and to my knowledge she is not a CAC shareholder- which doesn't preclude that she is.
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Don't blame CAC for what the collectors and dealers did. If you don't like it, don't buy CAC coins as there are plenty of other fish in the ocean.
But what about those that have invested (yes, I said invested) substantial amounts of money in coins which are now discounted for not having a coveted sticker, even if they have been locked in a vault for 20 plus years?
If they bought nice coins there will be a feeding frenzy over them. See the 1994 collection in the next Regency sale
CAC certainly provides a grading opinion that is always well respected in the market. But CAC does not seem to provide uniform coverage of the entire market. The example is cited that high grade gold has a very low CAC sticker criteria. I find the smae is much with copper. In my IHC registry set which is #3 with mostly all BN and RB coins, the only CAC coin in the set is an RD coin. I rarely see CAC on BN and RB IHC proofs. Much more commonly seen on RD coins. This would seem to indicate to me that their certification is more about whether they would like to make market in that coin than it is about the relatively quality of the TPG assigned grade. I credit TDN when he says they are not into this for the sticketr........they are really a market maker in coins they prefer.
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Don't blame CAC for what the collectors and dealers did. If you don't like it, don't buy CAC coins as there are plenty of other fish in the ocean.
But what about those that have invested (yes, I said invested) substantial amounts of money in coins which are now discounted for not having a coveted sticker, even if they have been locked in a vault for 20 plus years?
I was one of those people who had a number of important coins fail to CAC when I first sent them in....some were coins I owned for 10-20 yrs. And even the NGC CAC coins got hammered at auction because they weren't PCGS. I don't know what other people will do when they take out their coins from 20 yrs ago. If they're lucky they will have some coins worthy of upgrades and gold beans that collectors and dealers of "fresh" material will go Lady GA-GA over them.
There's no guarantee that what anyone put away 20 yrs ago will do good today. Tastes change. The market has risks. That's not CAC's problems. It's yours and mine problem. The coins are the coins in the end....and all the holders and stickers don't alter what the coins really are. In the end, if everything is stripped away, you're relying on what the coins are. Hopefully, you picked the right coins for the right reasons 20+ yrs ago. If you loaded up on Gem Commems and better date Morgan dollars in 1989-1993 then no permutation of holders or stickers will bail you out.
@Coinstartled said:
......If third party grading standards fell significantly CAC is out of business as there would be no freshly slabbed coins to certify.......
Interesting question would be what percentage of newly slabbed PCGS & NGC coins passed at CAC. Then compare the numbers through the years of CAC's existence. I realize we'll never have that type of data but imagine we did? 2008 = 55% passed.........2017 = 25% passed?
@coinkat said:
Perhaps an interesting question for TDN would be What analysis did he follow in making the decision to exclude that so-called finest coin? Was that coin not attractive based on a comparison to other surviving top pop examples within the series or were there just more pleasing examples of that date that may just be more satisfying to own? I see a significant distinction that is worth making here. There are some dates with a series that are just plain challenging and often may not meet expectations. So should the expectations change based on circumstances associated with the production, handling and surviving population which in most instances, are unique to the individual dates within the series?
Readers' Digest condensed version... What do you do when the surviving population of a date is just not up to par?
I handled the 78-S T$1 that wouldn't cross to PCGS MS68 after it crossed. Gone (not hyperbolic) in less than 5 minutes to a pop-top buyer. I completely validate TDN's decision to pass on it
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Totally reasonable to avoid giving out this information. Like Heritage and NGC (did Spectrum just go this way too?), it's closely held and accordingly not required to make the same disclosures as those publically traded.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@Coinstartled said:
......If third party grading standards fell significantly CAC is out of business as there would be no freshly slabbed coins to certify.......
Interesting question would be what percentage of newly slabbed PCGS & NGC coins passed at CAC. Then compare the numbers through the years of CAC's existence. I realize we'll never have that type of data but imagine we did? 2008 = 55% passed.........2017 = 25% passed?
@Coinstartled said:
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Totally reasonable to avoid giving out this information. Like Heritage and NGC (did Spectrum just go this way too?), it's closely held and accordingly not required to make the same disclosures as those publically traded.
My point was not one of legality but of clarity. We can suspend belief if we wish that a dealer- owner might get better results that the average submitter. At least let us know who the investors are so we can make a better evaluation.
My point was not one of legality but of clarity. We can suspend belief if we wish that a dealer- owner might get better results that the average submitter. At least let us know who the investors are so we can make a better evaluation.
Sigh. A big ole patent pending TDN eye roll
I've never met a more collector friendly patriarch then JA
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album 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......
My point was not one of legality but of clarity. We can suspend belief if we wish that a dealer- owner might get better results that the average submitter. At least let us know who the investors are so we can make a better evaluation.
Sigh. A big ole patent pending TDN eye roll
I've never met a more collector friendly patriarch then JA
mark
I have been in the hobby/business for a decade and a half. Have seen good deals and horrible deals. Good people and shylocks. Have seen good people that became shylocks. A lot of trust goes into the plastic holders and verification beans. To try to decipher possible conflicts of interest is what prudent folks do.
My point was not one of legality but of clarity. We can suspend belief if we wish that a dealer- owner might get better results that the average submitter. At least let us know who the investors are so we can make a better evaluation.
Sigh. A big ole patent pending TDN eye roll
I've never met a more collector friendly patriarch then JA
mark
I have been in the hobby/business for a decade and a half. Have seen good deals and horrible deals. Good people and shylocks. Have seen good people that became shylocks. A lot of trust goes into the plastic holders and verification beans. To try to decipher possible conflicts of interest is what prudent folks do.
Nah. You just like stirring the pot for the sake of stirring the pot.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album 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......
My two cents. It is a very rare person in this industry who has not crossed a line in some way. Money is a strong temptation.
Thankfully, there are millions of eyes looking over virtually everything done by the auction companies, dealers, TPGS's and CAC. He who has not strayed....
Hmm, thieves' honor, we're all guilty? There are obvious conflicts that are just passed over so many times, kind of like the Emperor's New Clothes. Almost humorous at times, bigger thieves more honors. Oh well....
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
There are multiple secondary graders at CAC. If one of their packages comes in they are excluded from the process. No gifts. JA is strenuously scrupulous. I've personally seen him pay $20,000 to take a sticker off an 18th century coin.
And PCGS paying out over $800,000 in one year buying back some mistakes. And before they incorporated (IIRC), another $150,000 on one coin.
If you don't feel safe, get out.
I know of at least two cases where hanky-panky was discovered and the situations resolved to the financial detriment of the TPG(s). Anecdotally proving nothing, but a self-policing hobby/industry is the best we can realistically expect.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Quite the long conversation about coins that has nothing to do about coins.
I sometimes get the feeling that some people's unease/distrust of CAC stems from what is most likely a gut feeling of theirs that may stem from the growing imbalance between dealers vs investors vs collectors in our hobby. One has to make money, one hopes to make money and one hopes not to lose money on duds and some how CAC tires to strike a balance and serve all three even though they are very different and often cannibalize each other.
I sometimes wonder what it would be like for us collectors if we didn't have so many mouths to feed off of X number of transactions. Yes the liquidity is nice but if my money went exponentially further I suspect I wouldn't care about resale as much.
In my opinion CAC helps dealers add value more than it helps collectors. What it helps in assurances hurts 2x as many with rejection. Also not sure how empowering dealers to charge me extra helps me either. The people who are clueless without help will be taken one way or another at one point or another. People act like you can't over pay for quality.
Coins are like diamonds. The real value is paying for what you are really getting and not basing your valuation off of an inaccurate evaluation of quality. Only difference is there is an industry standard for quality on stones where I am not sure there is a true one for coins. CAC is purported by some to be an industry standard and deep down it isn't. It is a specific dealer's standard. Granted a good one but still
@ColonelJessup said:
There are multiple secondary graders at CAC. If one of their packages comes in they are excluded from the process. No gifts. JA is strenuously scrupulous. I've personally seen him pay $20,000 to take a sticker off an 18th century coin.
And PCGS paying out over $800,000 in one year buying back some mistakes. And before they incorporated (IIRC), another $150,000 on one coin.
If you don't feel safe, get out.
I know of at least two cases where hanky-panky was discovered and the situations resolved to the financial detriment of the TPG(s). Anecdotally proving nothing, but a self-policing hobby/industry is the best we can realistically expect.
Very good post Jessup. To answer my next question we would be stretching the tolerance of our gracious hosts. Enjoy the 4th!
Comments
Do you now or in the past have any financial interest in CAC?
In the past I was a shareholder. No longer
Did they buy back the shares?
Why does that matter?
Always wondered if Legend is invested in cac.
Not to my knowledge
Then why are they in this business? What is their real business model? They can always raise their fees to give them a positive bottom line. Valued companies have this advantage in the marketplace.
Asked and answered
So it would financially benefit them to stop evaluating coins? Bull elmo.
No because increasing the pool of stickered coins increases their money making opportunities
They charge dealers for those that sticker AND those that do not. there is no slabbing costs, including the materials, equipment, and labor. They do not have to buy back coins that should not be graded or graded incorrectly. The website is a joke and no online submissions, so not much cost there. How long does it take to attach a little sticker and only on a percentage of the coins? If they are not turning a profit from that operation, time to send in a consultant and show them how to do it.
Think what you like. I'm certain that JA looks forward to the day when he can stop the stickering process. What sane man wouldn't?
I was ready to hit like but I do believe that CAC has an obligation to make a fair offer on coins that they have certified ie buyback.
You're being a weasel. Most likely you did very well selling your shares i.e. seed money for CAC to get started.
Seriously? Stop being an ass. What other person is gonna sit here patiently when being grilled
I sold them back for zero change in blue sky market value. Which is NONE of your business
I'm just succurieding around being a chatroom chimp, that's what I do.
Last I checked CAC had certified over 500,000 coins. Figuring $500 per coin, that's $250 MILL. Even at $200/coin that's $100 MILL. I don't think they should be expected to have that kind of money available to buy everything if offered. At some point you just can't. And what exactly is a "fair" offer since it shifts with market liquidity, market cycles, changes in collector preferences, etc. Who was making "fair" offers for coins in March-June 2009 when the market last tanked big time...and liquidity was at a stand still. Maybe a "fair" offer....but there's a limit on what anyone can buy. Market-makers place bids on particular coins in specific grades....they don't necessarily bid on the entire coin market. And even if they did, they are allowed to pull all their bids at any time depending on market conditions.
CAC created a pool of coins for them to trade in. That's it. It's the coin dealers and collectors that ceded the "power" to control the coin market. That's not CAC's problem....that's our problem for "expecting" them to be the sole arbiter of TPG coin values. CAC has a ready pool of coins to buy/sell sight/unseen on short notice regardless of market conditions. Anyone else and you have to ship them the coin or take it to them.
Ass and Weasel aside, the mid to upper end of the hobby intentionally or not has a huge dependence on CAC. Transparency regarding ownership is not unreasonable.
Which is why I answered whether or not I or legend are shareholders
As with many things CAC, I don't know the specifics regarding buybacks and offers. I am not sure if PL or DMPL designations are considered and I have no idea if a gold stickered AU58 is a 59 or a 60 in JA's eyes. Perhaps if they offered a coin forum.....
Again, this is the market's fault for handing over such power to CAC....they didn't ask for it. They probably never saw this dependence coming back in 2007. And if they honestly believed they would sticker 80% or more of all slabbed coins, then they should have NEVER expected any dependence. But, when you only sticker as low as 5-25% of "some" coins, that leads to dependence. Don't blame CAC for what the collectors and dealers did. If you don't like it, don't buy CAC coins as there are plenty of other fish in the ocean.
Cac has seen the stickered coins so it is not sight unseen. They have their mark on it.
You said you did not have any knowledge of Legend having had prior or current interest in CAC, so I imagine you don't know for sure if any other officers and or owners of Legend had a private stake. I appreciate your honesty.
But what about those that have invested (yes, I said invested) substantial amounts of money in coins which are now discounted for not having a coveted sticker, even if they have been locked in a vault for 20 plus years?
Appreciated.
Legend is an S corp. I do not believe that an S corp can own part of an llc - therefore legend itself would be legally precluded from being an owner. There is only one other owner of legend and to my knowledge she is not a CAC shareholder- which doesn't preclude that she is.
If they bought nice coins there will be a feeding frenzy over them. See the 1994 collection in the next Regency sale
The stored coins are superb. They are from the Rollo Dreckenheimer Collection!
CAC certainly provides a grading opinion that is always well respected in the market. But CAC does not seem to provide uniform coverage of the entire market. The example is cited that high grade gold has a very low CAC sticker criteria. I find the smae is much with copper. In my IHC registry set which is #3 with mostly all BN and RB coins, the only CAC coin in the set is an RD coin. I rarely see CAC on BN and RB IHC proofs. Much more commonly seen on RD coins. This would seem to indicate to me that their certification is more about whether they would like to make market in that coin than it is about the relatively quality of the TPG assigned grade. I credit TDN when he says they are not into this for the sticketr........they are really a market maker in coins they prefer.
OINK
CAC went from technical grading the graders to market grading in about a year from conception.
I was one of those people who had a number of important coins fail to CAC when I first sent them in....some were coins I owned for 10-20 yrs. And even the NGC CAC coins got hammered at auction because they weren't PCGS. I don't know what other people will do when they take out their coins from 20 yrs ago. If they're lucky they will have some coins worthy of upgrades and gold beans that collectors and dealers of "fresh" material will go Lady GA-GA over them.
There's no guarantee that what anyone put away 20 yrs ago will do good today. Tastes change. The market has risks. That's not CAC's problems. It's yours and mine problem. The coins are the coins in the end....and all the holders and stickers don't alter what the coins really are. In the end, if everything is stripped away, you're relying on what the coins are. Hopefully, you picked the right coins for the right reasons 20+ yrs ago. If you loaded up on Gem Commems and better date Morgan dollars in 1989-1993 then no permutation of holders or stickers will bail you out.
For the last time, CAC does not have to buy every coin they stickered! Not sure who started that foolishness?
Here, go read some info about them and stop all the guessing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certified_Acceptance_Corporation
That wiki page leaves more questions that answers. Sort of like a Huckabee-Sanders presser.
Interesting question would be what percentage of newly slabbed PCGS & NGC coins passed at CAC. Then compare the numbers through the years of CAC's existence. I realize we'll never have that type of data but imagine we did? 2008 = 55% passed.........2017 = 25% passed?
I handled the 78-S T$1 that wouldn't cross to PCGS MS68 after it crossed. Gone (not hyperbolic) in less than 5 minutes to a pop-top buyer. I completely validate TDN's decision to pass on it
A niche market remains a niche market. Market makers make a market in that. Simple as it gets.
Totally reasonable to avoid giving out this information. Like Heritage and NGC (did Spectrum just go this way too?), it's closely held and accordingly not required to make the same disclosures as those publically traded.
One might be able to glean that
My point was not one of legality but of clarity. We can suspend belief if we wish that a dealer- owner might get better results that the average submitter. At least let us know who the investors are so we can make a better evaluation.
Sigh. A big ole patent pending TDN eye roll
I've never met a more collector friendly patriarch then JA
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......
I have been in the hobby/business for a decade and a half. Have seen good deals and horrible deals. Good people and shylocks. Have seen good people that became shylocks. A lot of trust goes into the plastic holders and verification beans. To try to decipher possible conflicts of interest is what prudent folks do.
Just curious..... does cac have dealer submitting graders?
Nah. You just like stirring the pot for the sake of stirring the pot.
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......
Mark...in your business do you vet the counter parties or just hand over a check?
My two cents. It is a very rare person in this industry who has not crossed a line in some way. Money is a strong temptation.
Thankfully, there are millions of eyes looking over virtually everything done by the auction companies, dealers, TPGS's and CAC. He who has not strayed....
Hmm, thieves' honor, we're all guilty? There are obvious conflicts that are just passed over so many times, kind of like the Emperor's New Clothes. Almost humorous at times, bigger thieves more honors. Oh well....
Well, just Love coins, period.
There are multiple secondary graders at CAC. If one of their packages comes in they are excluded from the process. No gifts. JA is strenuously scrupulous. I've personally seen him pay $20,000 to take a sticker off an 18th century coin.
And PCGS paying out over $800,000 in one year buying back some mistakes. And before they incorporated (IIRC), another $150,000 on one coin.
If you don't feel safe, get out.
I know of at least two cases where hanky-panky was discovered and the situations resolved to the financial detriment of the TPG(s). Anecdotally proving nothing, but a self-policing hobby/industry is the best we can realistically expect.
Quite the long conversation about coins that has nothing to do about coins.
I sometimes get the feeling that some people's unease/distrust of CAC stems from what is most likely a gut feeling of theirs that may stem from the growing imbalance between dealers vs investors vs collectors in our hobby. One has to make money, one hopes to make money and one hopes not to lose money on duds and some how CAC tires to strike a balance and serve all three even though they are very different and often cannibalize each other.
I sometimes wonder what it would be like for us collectors if we didn't have so many mouths to feed off of X number of transactions. Yes the liquidity is nice but if my money went exponentially further I suspect I wouldn't care about resale as much.
In my opinion CAC helps dealers add value more than it helps collectors. What it helps in assurances hurts 2x as many with rejection. Also not sure how empowering dealers to charge me extra helps me either. The people who are clueless without help will be taken one way or another at one point or another. People act like you can't over pay for quality.
Coins are like diamonds. The real value is paying for what you are really getting and not basing your valuation off of an inaccurate evaluation of quality. Only difference is there is an industry standard for quality on stones where I am not sure there is a true one for coins. CAC is purported by some to be an industry standard and deep down it isn't. It is a specific dealer's standard. Granted a good one but still
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I asked a question, why the grumpy old codger response?
yeah I know a certain group on here don't want those kinda questions.
I knew there used to be submitting dealer grader, but did not want to assume so now. Is this when you guys try and beat me down to shut m up?
Or when feld whispers in someone's ear. That is right feld I am on to that too.
Have a great weekend.
Very good post Jessup. To answer my next question we would be stretching the tolerance of our gracious hosts. Enjoy the 4th!
Boy am I glad I'm not trying to build a world class collection. It just seems that the effort takes a whole lot of the fun out of collecting.
To seek out the best PCGS_CAC coin, I'd need to pass on a lot of coins that I did like.