I don't want to be bidding against John Albanese at a coin auction....
Coinstartled
Posts: 10,135 ✭✭✭✭✭
The 1804 is moot as I am not in the market for 7 figure coins. The concern though is the gentleman has access to a complete list of those holdered coins that have failed to earn a coveted sticker. More importantly, he also knows which coins have not yet been submitted and are eligible for the coveted and highly valued elevation to CACdom.
Might be a good time to publish the results of all submissions, Mr. A.
3
Comments
Just go to lot viewing. If your grading skills are good, you don't need to know if something stickered or not in the past,
as you will see it in hand.
If you can grade like the guys at CAC, you don't need a list.
The list would be helpful to guys like me.
All you need do to level that field again is become a world renowned expert in numismatics, develop an extremely successful business model to compete with CAC and spend the next decade developing your own super secret list! See? It's so easy anyone can do it!
From the little I know, JA only buys coins already CAC to support his market. His ethics are unquestioned. He started CAC not for personal gain-just to help the market with gradeflation and coin doctoring issues.
I had no idea he was your competition for circulated Statehood Quarters.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
So you're saying that he can look at a coin, decide if he likes it and wants to bid on it, check the list to make sure that he didn't not like it before and then place a bid.
Isn't it simpler to just place the bid after step one and skip checking the list? lol
He is certainly rewarding the submitters with a near no lose proposition. Collector base at large though is left guessing. I have yet to see a dealer note in a listing that a coin up for sale or auction was submitted to CAC and did not meet their criteria. They certainly boast about the beans though.
Careful what you wish for. Do you really want large numbers of coins with a scarlet letter on them? Do you think that one man should have that much power? Do you think that man is infallible? Is everyone who disagrees with him is wrong all the time? You seem to believe that.
If this were to happen, CAC would be in line for a slews of law suits. It would seriously damage this hobby.
Like I said, be careful what you wish for.
If you think CAC is perfect, why take the chance? Buy only CAC approved coins. It's a simple answer, and you will not be discrediting other people's collections.
On a single coin, maybe two, your logic prevails. Many dealers though bid en masse. A master list of fails would provide a significant advantage.
It seems highly unlikely that he has never seen that 1804. If he didn't, I am sure he is about to!
He's the man on gold, then silver but copper...
How so? If he's good enough to spot the problem the first time you think he can't spot it the second time?
Does a non CAC'd coin have to have a problem?
"""Careful what you wish for. Do you really want large numbers of coins with a scarlet letter on them? Do you think that one man should have that much power? Do you think that man is infallible? Is everyone who disagrees with him is wrong all the time? You seem to believe that."""
Apparently he already has that power. Only coins that have been submitted would be included in the database of disapproval.
Definitely not. Remember it's just someone's opinion and that's all.
Before he joined Heritage, Mark Feld would usually state that CAC did not sticker a coin in his inventory listing. Legend sometimes puts this in their website and auction descriptions. Many dealers will tell you (if you ask) if they've sent a particular coin in for review.
Thank you for the post Bryce. I will look a little closer.
In the context of my post, not being nice enough for a sticker would be a problem
Not true, I've seen this done many times. And I'd be surprised if you asked a dealer about if a coin had been sent in or not and they wouldn't tell you.
Andrew Blinkiewicz-Heritage
Dealer though may have not been aware that the coin was previously submitted. Outing the fail list would provide greater transparency.
When I look at a major auction, I don't usually look for coins to send to CAC. I figure some other bidders know the CAC history of the coin, and I would be at a significant competitive disadvantage playing the sticker game. So I focus on other opportunities.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Two sequential opinions are always better than one. And for higher valued coins, it's more like getting a second opinion before you have brain surgery. And if you think that you are a world class grader........you live alone at the top of a mountain, perhaps?
Mark Feld does this and I have done it, as well.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
So, all raw coins should have a note if they have been submitted and didn't slab? Or they slabbed with a problem stated?
Sounds good on the surface, but in reality, there are some that were re-submitted that, rightfully so, slabbed. Some slabbed that I am sure didn't deserve it.
For the CAC part, I really doubt that JA sits at a keyboard, for bidding, and pulls out the list and going through all the coins that may interest him, and compares them to the list. 1st, I honestly think he is past that part. 2nd, he is most likely to go see the coins in person if they interest him.
If you search hard enough, you can always try to find a way to use a system in a negative way. Good job.
Now, actually applying the nefarious way you have stated, with the person stated, is very very unlikely.
As TDN mentioned, if he is seeing the coin in hand, in particular, he would evaluate it the same way and, if he saw something the first time (or didn't), it is likely that he would have the same take the 2nd time.
All this whining that people do about CAC, as if it were a boogeyman, is just old and stupid.
Just to bring it all back in 1 place:
No, CAC/JA isn't perfect.
Yes, some people do value the CAC sticker highly and will only get coins with the sticker (good or bad, doesn't matter...just like some people will only buy already slabbed or only buy based on the slab grade)
No, CAC doesn't share the list of coins that didn't sticker.
Yes, coins can be resubmitted and 'may' change, but likely not.
Yes, some collectors/dealers don't value the CAC sticker at all (well, that they will tell you...)
on and on and on.....
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I would rather be bidding WITH JA rather than bidding AGAINST JA!
I would be more comfortable if he were the underbidder. My hammer = JA price + 5%........ I can sleep at night.
OINK
"""All this whining that people do about CAC, as if it were a boogeyman, is just old and stupid."""
I am perhaps denser than the next collector, but was not aware that JA was an active buyer outside of being a market maker for previously stickered coins.
Too many hats for my liking.
Probably true
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......
"""So, all raw coins should have a note if they have been submitted and didn't slab? Or they slabbed with a problem stated?"""
Perhaps a small "D" for declined can be stamped on the reverse.
Out of curiosity, let's take an MS65 as an example. Suppose the coin is just a good 65. It's not extraordinary, it's no 66, but if it were a 64, it would be a really nice 64. There are no issues (there's no toning streak or light scrape that makes it an ugly 65), it just is what it is. As a 65 the coin doesn't warrant a sticker, but as a 64 it surely would get one. Is it still a problem that the coin doesn't have a sticker? Certainly with the coins you buy (where there's no wide selection to choose from like there would be with generic Morgans) the coin means more than the grade. It seems to me in this case the sticker really depends on what the grading company said. If they were tight, CAC can approve. If they were a bit loose, CAC appears a bit tighter. But the coin never changed.
Data that is only available to a select few can always be used for an advantage if one is inclined....
Don't quote me on that.
No I don't believe data for coins sent to Cac but not stickered should be released.
In my view it's an opinion plus would be invasion of the owners privacy. If I have a coin that did not Cac that information is for me only and not something for some third party to give a scarlet letter to that certificate number. Numismatic investment has numerous risks which increase the more expensive the coin is. Buyers of this material better know how to look at coins and how to grade. Not taking responsibility on this means tuition.
CoinStartled:
This remark is unfair, misleading and erroneously presumes knowledge of JA's behavior. Only on very rare occasions does he bid on a coin that does not have a CAC sticker. Other than the CAC stickers being removed (over JA's objections) before the Pogue sales, I can think of only three instances; one of the three was for an 1838-O half. I reported his purchase of a non-stickered 1838-O in one of my articles, or at least he gave me permission to do so. I do not now remember exactly what I then said publicly. In almost all circumstances, when JA bids in auctions, he bids only on coins that have CAC stickers. I have discussed his bids with him on innumerable occasions.
CoinStartled:
This is an unfair remark, too. If a non-generic, Classic U.S. coin in a Heritage, Stack's-Bowers or Goldbergs auction is worth more than a thousand dollars, there is at least a 95% chance that it is has been to CAC, maybe even 98%! There are exceptions, last minute consignments as CNN said in a different thread, and there are cases where consignors do not wish for their consignments to be sent to CAC. Even in those cases, the respective coins may have been to CAC years ago. The exceptions makeup a very small percentage of relevant coins in auctions.
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future?
With all of the CAC axes to grind I hope that eventually you all wear the blades down to the point that the complaining stops.
Latin American Collection
Hear here.
When we can no longer challenge the third party graders.....the hobby is done.
An FYI for everyone here. Over on the sportcard side a similar view exists. Many feel that if an expensive sportscard is not slabbed it is viewed as "there must be something wrong with it", or it has been previously submitted for grading, and failed. Then subsequently "cracked" out and sold raw. Without ever telling potential buyers it made a trip to the "grading shed" and failed. From the buyers viewpoint: After all, if it was gradable resulting in a higher selling price, (more profit) then why would a seller leave $ on the table by selling it raw.
What you are doing isn't constructive challenging it is dropping lazy unsupported opinions as if fact. Criticize through creation. If you can do better, do it.
Latin American Collection
Are you denying that the third party grader has also actively bid on (and won) a premier $3,000,000 coin that frankly with the graffiti D and fingerprint should not be housed in any respectable gem graded slab?
Somewhere between the foil hat and pitcher of kool aid lies reason and logic.....
Seriously dude you're losing it.....................yet again.
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......
CAC isn't a third party grader.
It is an 1804 Class I dollar, not an 1881-S Morgan in 64 that some guy named Dexter took a screwdriver to. Different grading rules apply. Sorry if that comes as a surprise.
Who cares if he bid on it? Seriously why do you think that your opinion of what a major market leader does is even of borderline relevance when you have absolutely no knowledge of the individuals actions or intent. If CAC made an active market buying non-CAC coins and applying different standards to those coins I would agree that this is a conflict of interest at the highest level but that clearly isn't the case. If they did that they would have failed long ago.
Latin American Collection
"""It is an 1804 Class I dollar, not an 1881-S Morgan in 64 that some guy named Dexter took a screwdriver to. Different grading rules apply. Sorry if that comes as a surprise."""
C'mon....even Eureka, Henway and TDN don't buy that it is a 65.
Read the original1804 thread. I bumped it for you....
Enjoy your thread, I'm signing off to catch a plane.
Latin American Collection
Does anybody really care that it's not a true 65? Makes no difference as there is no debate that this is the third ranked 1804 Class 1 dollar. Doesn't really need a grade to be honest
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......
This is point. The 1804 dollar does not need a grade and it does not need a sticker. If I recall, there is a sticker on the 1794 Specimen dollar. At the seven figure level, the sticker serves only as free advertising.
And so it continues.... Whether one likes CAC or not, it is a fact that the organization is an established and accepted market force. Just as PCGS and competitors are also established. Members of these organizations are free to participate in the market and many likely do so. There is no reason that they would not use their knowledge and skills to determine participation in the market. Happens in all walks of life. If it intimidates anyone, I suggest becoming more skilled in order to better compete. Cheers, RickO
Lots of dealer not telling you that a coin failed to cac is just not true:
I have on many occasions been told by several. Laura has flat out told me about a coin or two from the legend sales in the pass that it didn't sticker.Also I have actually seen them state a coin was tried but didn't cac in the auction description. Honest and straight. Reeded edge , harry laibstain and several others I deal with are all up front about coins they know about. I myself will state the fact fi I know myself!
There has been a lot of politics involved in the grading of 1804 silver dollars. Does anyone honestly believe that when all of the coins in the King of Siam Proof Set were upgraded by one point when they were crossed from one service to the other that politics was not involved?
Famous rarities like that have a cachet that goes beyond the grade to a point. If a grading service called the Class I Cohen - DuPont specimen, which grades VF, "Proof-65" that would be a problem, but short of that the stated grade is sort of secondary.
Yes the Dexter coin has a "D" punched into the reverse and a spot lifted. The fact the number is off by a point or two really doesn't matter. It's the point where the coin market stands at a particular time, and the current attitudes toward that classic coin. Currently 1804 Dollars seem to be out favor about as much as they could be out style it seems. Therefore the price realized was "disappointing." The grade really didn't have that much to do with it.
As long as there are CAC sycophants who are looking to down grade the value other people's holdings because they have not received the approval of one individual, we have a perfect right to defend our position.
I have purchased CAC approved coins when I liked them and the price was fair. I have purchased a few coins that I knew had not received the CAC sticker after they had been submitted because I liked them for what they were and the price was fair.
There are many experts in the field of numismatic grading. There is not ONE EXPERT who knows EVERYTHING, and who NEVER MAKES A MISTAKE. Anyone who says that statement is false has a financial interest in CAC, is a toady or a fool.
Oh really?
If this is true, than why have all of the coins without CAC stickers, upon which I have placed bids, sold for such high prices? By high prices I mean higher, sometimes much higher, than the numbers shown on the "Coin Facts" site, and previous auction results for coins in the same grade.
If I have really been bidding on "rejects," then I'd like that information to be shouted from the rooftops so that perhaps I could buy those coins for a bit less money.
Recently I bought an 1836 $5 gold in PCGS MS-61. The coin is close to P-L with monster strike for the type. If that coin flunked at CAC I would really like to the know the reason why. Compared to some other CAC approved gold coins I've seen, that piece is a "WOW!"
Somehow I doubt that almost 100% of the coins that are sold in the major auctions have had a CAC review.