Options
CAC Low Ball Sticker
oldabeintx
Posts: 1,636 ✭✭✭✭✭
CAC should add a brown sticker to their repertoire, to be used for coins with the very lowest grades, for those coins that JA thinks are actually markedly worse than the assigned grade. Would add a premium to the low ball coins. Additionally, our host should consider a minus sign for similar reasons. Do the low ball guys crack coins out and resubmit them hoping for a lower grade? Just curious.
11
Comments
Oh ghu, starting the race to the bottom... again
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
I like it...I mean, why not?
Dave
Yup. Lowball guys work very hard to get their dreck in the right holder!
Maybe make an "SQ" sticker to help people avoid P01's that are too PQ
While we are at it, why not just have five stickers. Gold for upgrade. Green for PQ. White for Average. Brown for Below Average. Black for downgrade. Every coin gets a sticker, no more guessing if it has been previously submitted. Those looking for the best of the lowball sets will be paying Obscenely Big Bucks for the PO01 with a black sticker!!
The lowball market is pretty niche, so I don't really see much of a market for special CAC lowball stickers.
Black for downgrade. Those looking for the best of the lowball sets will be paying Obscenely Big Bucks for the PO01 with a black sticker!!
I find the lowball concept confusing, is the idea to have the best set, the worst set or the best worst set?
Can't they just say "Look...it didn't sticker!"?
Lance.
NO I think PCGS is good enough. This game has gone too far, What does JA know that PCGS does not? It seems everyone has their hand out. Even the walk thru sandwich shows have a tip jar and they don't even bring you your food,
Good question. Being that I don't have lowballs... I will let those that do answer...
I do not think that adding any more stickers is a good idea.... It seems the grading game just keeps getting more opinions.... and what we need are standards - hard, defined standards. Someday... hope I live long enough to see that happen. Cheers, RickO
no leave it alone for once. just saying
Who was that masked man?
Pete
P01+
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
Standards are great for stuff like newly minted ASEs, but IMO it's unrealistic to expect that 2 1883-O Morgan silver dollars struck over 135 years ago could both be held to the same ms64 standard. Thing is that there is no exact ms64 or vf35 standard since 2 coins can grade ms64 or vf35 and look nothing like each other. Informed/educated opinions are probably one's best bet and it's best to align yourself with those persons whose opinions you've come to value the most.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
Umm, guys, I wasn't being serious about adding a new sticker. Just poking a little fun at the lowball concept. BTW I might collect well-worn common coins myself one day, lots of history there and would be fun, give me something more to do at shows. So no disrespect intended.
@BAJJERFAN...While informed opinions are all we have, presently, and, they are reasonably consistent when given by trained individuals... there is still a distinct gap and even within TPG's - as evidenced by grade creep. Standards are possible through computers and AI.... and it will happen. Cheers, RickO
If a PCGS grader/s can't consistently grade to PCGS' standards then how can they be expected to grade to some Government or other organization's standards? The big issue is that the coins are more inconsistent than the graders both at PCGS and elsewhere. What would be nice is that when one looks up the cert number, for some coins there should be written comment as to why it has the grade that it does.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
@BAJJERFAN... I agree with your suggestion for commentary on grade...that would help. The standards I am talking about will be computer grading with Artificial Intelligence... it will be fully standardized and repeatable. The first TPG to launch this, will own the industry and it will be the final authority. The software development is a huge project, but when coupled with AI it will be amazing. Coins, once in the data base, will always be identifiable - unless mutilated of course. Cheers, RickO
Maybe they could use this sticker for the lowest of grades:
My YouTube Channel
So if someone wants to have the "best" low ball collection should they buy the coin before the book?
"Lowballs" don't register with me. I had a TERRIBLE 7070 I built for fun but to pay premiums for the crap I had wouldn't be any fun at all.
Next trend should be (and quietly is) sets of fakes.
Idiocy in my opinion.
Gorgeous P01 1922, Chris! Downright slick.
Dave
Oh the stories that coin could tell if it could talk.
Just ran across this one. The price difference between a raw lowball and a slabbed one is pretty striking.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1853-Arrows-and-Rays-Seated-Liberty-Quarter-PCGS-PO01-Lowball-Poor-SLQ-Type-Coin/281990285747
As is the difference in price difference between a PO01 and a FR02:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1853-PCGS-FR02-Seated-Liberty-Quarter-Arrows-and-Rays-Lowball-25C/192493928199
Now let's keep this about stickers, slabs, special edition labels and more stickers. Who said people that buy coins were supposed to be coin collectors? This hobby is descending into a bunch of sticker lickers and it will not end well. One day coin collecting will again be about the coins and all this sticker slab crap will be worthless, just like those beanie babies and 1980s baseball cards
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
The low ball concept, paying a premium for it, 5 levels of sticker, etc.
And coin collectors wonder why they got beat up in school all the time.
I hate to admit it, but I kind of like the reverse on the FR02 example.
Something like this will really just cause more problems and confusion than what there is already. Let's put a minus sign on slabs so those coins sell for the next grade down.
No guns are placed against anybody's heads to use CAC, PCGS, or the tip jar and the sandwich shop. In the 1980's people whined about how TPGs weren't needed and now PCGS and NGC have transformed numismatic transactions. PCGS and NGC are just opinions that many agree with when it meets their purposes. CAC is just another opinion.
Don't like it? Then no worries ... you are not forced to accept CAC or anyone else's opinion ... including PCGS and NGC. It's supposed to be about what makes you happy as a collector.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Best Worst. It is just Low Ball Poker, but with coins.
I disagree. When it comes time to sell, you are effectively forced to use CAC and the TPGs unless you enjoy writing off capital losses on your taxes.
Low Ball Poker (Razz) was such a good money maker for me while internet poker was still legal. I cannot believe ONE person (Big Money Sheldon Adelson) can force lawmakers to do his bidding ......
It is amazing how one super rich donor won't allow millions to play a game of skill on the internet.
Folks would just remove the bronze sicker. Back to square 1.
I do too. I have a raw lowball arrows and rays quarter that I'm thinking of sending in, just to get a TrueView which neither of these two have.
It could still be listed in an online cert verification, but the issue is whether people would send in coins to such a service.
In the Olympics, the vast majority of athletes don't medal at all, but then again they are known not to have medaled.
Good point, but then JA wouldn't disclose the bronze class just as he doesn't disclose the "not CAC" coins.
Yes, as mentioned, I think JA doesn't do it because people would be more reluctant to submit their coins if that was the casel.
Not sure I understand the concept of a CAC sticker at all when it comes to PO coins, Is JA attesting to the fact that it's really about as bad as it could be, the inverse of the CAC concept? If the coin doesn't sticker, then what does that tell the owner that it's actually worse than the lowest grade possible? I guess gold stickers are removed by the owners to sustain the market value. The mind boggles.
He also doesn't want a slew of law suits.
CAC on a lowball makes no sense. If you are trying to get the lowest possible grade, why on earth would you want an sticker saying it is quality for the grade? Doesn't that essentially "raise" the grade? I have never understood the lowball thing anyway. Wasting money on both slabbing and stickering seems like the most ridiculous fad of all time. Who can possibly proud to own a collection of that garbage? To each their own, I guess.
I usually don't pay the price to collect the best, but I have never spent money to buy the worse.
So then, do you say to a potential buyer, "And by the way, that coin was rejected by CAC, so you know it is bad!"
I used to drink highballs, but now truly appreciate a fine bourbon on the rocks - no mixers. You could say I've grown up.
You lowball guys are on drugs, especially getting them CAC stickered.
I doubt he would get lawsuits if it was clearly spelled out in the contract. Kind of like how I don't see CU/PCGS getting lawsuits for details or non-plus grades.
Here is the reasoning for my answer. If a coin is straight graded at a certain level by a legitimate grading service, that states that in the professional opinion of that service that the piece grades a given number. Privately certain people can disagree with that, but if you post the serial numbers of slabs didn't qualify for the CAC standard on the Internet and make that information easily accessible, which is something someone here advocated, that will effect the market value of those pieces in a significate number of venues.
If your actions lower the value of other people’s property on a regular basis, you are on the road to some legal actions. Don’t tell me I’m wrong because we are living in a very litigious society. That’s why CAC was careful to create a public record about the coins that they don’t sticker. They leave them alone and don’t publicize the fact that those pieces didn’t make it.
Such a lawsuit could be a nightmare for CAC. The plaintiffs would hire experts who would testify that CAC is not always correct in their opinion. Sure, the defense lawyers would try to tear them down, but it would still open a can of worms for CAC.
CAC does not want to go there. It is much better for all concerned for people to pay a premium for CAC approved coins, and leave the other coins alone.
The actions would only affect the submitter of the coin who agrees to the services provided, like a TPG. If you purchase a CACed coin after the fact, you are purchasing with knowledge of the opinion. It is not affecting the value of anyone's property that did not agree to have it affected (either by submission or by purchase).
Isn't this the same for any TPG?
I believe this is a business decision and I think it's a good business decision to not list not strong for the grade (but potentially still accurately graded) coins to increase submissions. I'm not yet convinced of the lawsuits issue.