Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Why would you do this to an OGH now someone is playing catch

oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭
edited May 25, 2019 4:31PM in U.S. Coin Forum

This is surprising to me I had owned this coin many moons ago and is a solid 64 nothing more and the trusty CAC agreed once again but then change their mind as always. I would of left this coin in the old holder A 65+ in the new holder does nothing I feel to added more value to the coin I would think it would bring the value down. The coin is a very nice $550 coin I am not sure if these are real or just someone trying to get back out of the first mistake seems very strange to say the least.

https://greatcollections.com/Coin/666647/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-64-CAC-OGH-Toned

https://greatcollections.com/Coin/682995/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned

https://greatcollections.com/Coin/709042/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-Toned

Comments

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

  • This content has been removed.
  • JasonGamingJasonGaming Posts: 928 ✭✭✭✭

    In my opinion, that’s better than $550 toning. Kinda a shame that coin was cracked out; I’d say it had more value and was more interesting in the OGH at 64.

    Always buying nice toned coins! Searching for a low grade 1873 Arrows DDO Dime and 1842-O Small Date Quarter.

  • oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 4:58PM

    @MFeld said:

    @oldstandard said:
    This is surprising to me I had owned this coin many moons ago and is a solid 64 nothing more and the trusty CAC agreed once again but then change their mind as always. I would of left this coin in the old holder A 65+ in the new holder does nothing I feel to added more value to the coin I would think it would bring the value down. The coin is a very nice $550 coin I am not sure if these are real or just someone trying to get back out of the first mistake seems very strange to say the least.

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/666647/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-64-CAC-OGH-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/682995/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/709042/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-Toned

    To me, the color looks better than a “$550 coin”, whether it’s graded 64 or 65+. And no one “change their mind as always.”

    The price is just an opinion I paid $400 for it in 2012 has a good look a lot more hits you can see in hand then pictures. This coin was sent to CAC two times in the OGH and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker. When I bought the coin the sticker was in rough shape so instead of doing a resticker a cleaned it of and sent it for regrade and later place a phone call for reconsider and nothing they agreed solid 64. lots of luster but to many hits for a higher grade I agree but thought it was worth a try.

  • StuartStuart Posts: 9,793 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 4:53PM

    Although I’m not a Toned Coin Specialist, I appreciate attractive Toning, and have always thought that such a coin in a vintage slab demonstrates a certain amount of Color Stability over time (since when it was slabbed) and may also provide some provenance information.

    You can lose both of the above vintage slab reference points when placing that same coin in a newer generation holder.


    Stuart

    Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal

    "Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 14,835 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @oldstandard said:

    @MFeld said:

    @oldstandard said:
    This is surprising to me I had owned this coin many moons ago and is a solid 64 nothing more and the trusty CAC agreed once again but then change their mind as always. I would of left this coin in the old holder A 65+ in the new holder does nothing I feel to added more value to the coin I would think it would bring the value down. The coin is a very nice $550 coin I am not sure if these are real or just someone trying to get back out of the first mistake seems very strange to say the least.

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/666647/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-64-CAC-OGH-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/682995/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/709042/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-Toned

    To me, the color looks better than a “$550 coin”, whether it’s graded 64 or 65+. And no one “change their mind as always.”

    The price is just an opinion I paid $400 for it in 2012 has a good look a lot more hits you can see in hand then pictures. This coin was sent to CAC two times in the OGH and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    I never said CAC didn’t change their mind. I stated that (contrary to what you wrote) no one “changed their mind as always.” That’s quite different.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 5:08PM

    @MFeld said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @MFeld said:

    @oldstandard said:
    This is surprising to me I had owned this coin many moons ago and is a solid 64 nothing more and the trusty CAC agreed once again but then change their mind as always. I would of left this coin in the old holder A 65+ in the new holder does nothing I feel to added more value to the coin I would think it would bring the value down. The coin is a very nice $550 coin I am not sure if these are real or just someone trying to get back out of the first mistake seems very strange to say the least.

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/666647/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-64-CAC-OGH-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/682995/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned

    https://greatcollections.com/Coin/709042/1883-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-Toned

    To me, the color looks better than a “$550 coin”, whether it’s graded 64 or 65+. And no one “change their mind as always.”

    The price is just an opinion I paid $400 for it in 2012 has a good look a lot more hits you can see in hand then pictures. This coin was sent to CAC two times in the OGH and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    I never said CAC didn’t change their mind. I stated that (contrary to what you wrote) no one “changed their mind as always.” That’s quite different.

    Sorry my bad, When I bought the coin the sticker was in rough shape so instead of doing a resticker I cleaned it off and sent it for regrade and later place a phone call for reconsider and nothing they agreed solid 64. lots of luster but to many hits for a higher grade I agree but thought it was worth a try.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,262 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Why is it a shame it was cracked out? It's the same coin, isn't it?

  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's pretty cool toning. And $500-$600 seems cheap for that. In any case the auction has another day to go. Sometimes a coin being fresh is what drives the price. Once this was reholdered all that was LOST.

    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 5:59PM

    @cameonut2011 said:
    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65. I was hoping for the same to be honest when I summited it to CAC since the standards have change I was hoping for a gold sticker but was very happy that CAC was controlling an over grade and agreed it was a standard 64 which it is a true 64 super luster but way to many hits for a 65 kind of disappointing I know I could never crack that out and get a 65 maybe the right person could which they did and also got CAC to change their mind once and now it does not have a CAC sticker maybe the owner is just going to cut their loses I would be very surprised if someone thought that would go into a 66 holder look at the coin it does have new PcGS numbers each time a 66 really I would never even dream of a 65 and would feel 65+ was a lottery win.

  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 7:12PM

    CAC stickering that as a 65 is one way of saying they would buy it at their market for MS65's. Which for this date is normally around $120-$150.

    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cameonut2011 said:
    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

    I'd think that a $120 difference isn't a lot of change in value. Looks like a 5% natural variation. certainly not a profitable change tho.

    theknowitalltroll;
  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BAJJERFAN said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

    I'd think that a $120 difference isn't a lot of change in value. Looks like a 5% natural variation. certainly not a profitable change tho.

    Maybe from a price guide perspective. Many toned coin collectors do consider the grade. Put another way, my experience is that the buyers with the deepest pockets and those most likely to bid it up are mainly look for gems or better. There are some exceptions.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

  • ms70ms70 Posts: 13,956 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 25, 2019 8:05PM

    @MasonG said:
    Why is it a shame it was cracked out? It's the same coin, isn't it?

    There's different perspectives here and I'll bet more yet to come, but in the end......

    .....I like this one.

    Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.

  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @BAJJERFAN said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

    I'd think that a $120 difference isn't a lot of change in value. Looks like a 5% natural variation. certainly not a profitable change tho.

    Maybe from a price guide perspective. Many toned coin collectors do consider the grade. Put another way, my experience is that the buyers with the deepest pockets and those most likely to bid it up are mainly look for gems or better. There are some exceptions.

    I was comparing the hammer prices of the first 2 links.

    theknowitalltroll;
  • kbbpllkbbpll Posts: 542 ✭✭✭✭

    @BAJJERFAN said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    Typically with high end Morgan toners, there is a huge increase in premium starting around gem which was probably the logic in moving it from the OGH 64 CAC to a 65+ holder. I don't think this coin is the neon, tip top quality monster that is the beneficiary of that kind of increase though and obviously it lost value due to underestimating the OGH premium. It also looks like the coin was regraded again perhaps in hopes of a bump to 66 which would bring a few hundred to maybe a thousand or so more. When that failed, they submitted it to CAC hoping for a pay day.

    This thread is an excellent reminder that the crack out game is very risky in this market even when you are successful in the upgrade. Plastic and stickers matter too much, and it is difficult to figure out what the particular bidders in your case are going to be influenced most by.

    I'd think that a $120 difference isn't a lot of change in value. Looks like a 5% natural variation. certainly not a profitable change tho.

    In 6 weeks though. Plus the fees.

  • batumibatumi Posts: 852 ✭✭✭✭

    I likwly would have went an increment, two, or three had I seen the coin the third time around, but likely would have dropped out of the chase the first two times offered. Really attractive imo regardless of the grade.

  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think something like this shows the mentality of some collectors. the identical coin in three holder formats apparently is able to influence how a bidder views the Coin and what it is worth.
    MS64 OGH w/green CAC sticker --- nostalgic holder with upgrade potential.
    MS65+ fresh holder w/green CAC sticker --- nice TV's, one grade + higher and more potential(yet a lower price).
    MS65+ regraded --- an assumption that it was rejected by CAC, the coin is maxed out(probably sub $1,500).

    to me it displays how collectors can have a fondness for everything attached to the coin over-and-above the coin itself. the color is quite nice and surprisingly not on an '81-S or some other typical date, but it doesn't seem AS appealing when there's no "gambler incentive" attached to it.

    also, why regrade the thing and sell it at the same venue in such a short time frame?? that doesn't make sense.

  • This content has been removed.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭

    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    Then he isn't honoring his announced standards.

  • NicNic Posts: 3,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    Truth.

    And the value of this coin is based on the value of the toning the day it sells.

    Pretty coin btw.

  • oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 26, 2019 4:49PM

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    Then he isn't honoring his announced standards.

    His announced standards for receiving a gold sticker are very nebulous. The way I interpret them is the coin must exceed CAC standards for the next grade up....ie: be a no doubter A coin for the next grade. This jives with his public and private comments concerning the gold sticker.

  • ACopACop Posts: 1,479 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

    It what you posted stated anywhere on the CAC website?

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

    It what you posted stated anywhere on the CAC website?

    Oldstandard misinterpreted what I posted. He needs to re-read my verbiage exactly

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 26, 2019 4:53PM

    64 B or A coin in a 64 holder - green
    65 B coin in a 64 holder - green
    65 A coin in a 64 holder - gold

    This is why a green CAC coin can upgrade and receive the green sticker again. JA is super tight on gold stickers

  • ACopACop Posts: 1,479 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

    It what you posted stated anywhere on the CAC website?

    Oldstandard misinterpreted what I posted. He needs to re-read my verbiage exactly

    That's fine, im sure hes working on that. But does the CAC website state what you are saying?

  • ACopACop Posts: 1,479 ✭✭✭✭✭

    And where does the PCGS + sign fit into the CAC equation? Is that answer stated on the CAC website too?

  • REALGATORREALGATOR Posts: 2,641 ✭✭✭✭✭

    One thing I know for sure:
    Even JA has shifted a bit on what gets a sticker. CAC has been around for 10 years and you can see how it seems the standard has
    changed. I ve looked at enough auction records. Back in the day 2/3 of pcgs coins would seem to sticker as you would expect. Now, it seems like it takes B+ and A to get the sticker. As usual, it leaves us all trying to make sense of it all.

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,199 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

    It what you posted stated anywhere on the CAC website?

    Oldstandard misinterpreted what I posted. He needs to re-read my verbiage exactly

    That's fine, im sure hes working on that. But does the CAC website state what you are saying?

    Why don’t you peruse it and see?

  • ACopACop Posts: 1,479 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @ACop said:

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @oldstandard said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @oldstandard said:
    I understand but if you look at the coin and I have held it in hand and a conversation with CAC the coin is a solid 64. I have been very disappointed with what has gone on in the industry I feel all 3rd party services could do a lot better job in helping us protect the hobby who here would call this coin a 65 look at the cheek and fields they really thought it would 66 with another crack out??? I remember the day you where lucky to get a 65 with a mark on the cheek but everyone would comment about the small mark on the cheek and say it is not a true 65.

    Color bumpage is real. I don't care for it either. I will say that PCGS is less likely to bump by more than a point than it was 3-4 years ago.

    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    This is the part that I get confused on so help me out if john had it in hand and you say it is a B coin and he agrees so he gives it a green bean then how does it change it a better coin to CAC eyes after they agreed it was a solid 64 and would never qualify for a 65 coin?? The coin really is a nice 64 now the grading company calls it for what ever reason a 65+ why does that change Johns eyes on the coin it should be a 64 like they said nothing has change on the coin but the grade gift to someone from the grading company no doubt. I thought this was the reason everyone thinks CAC was needed the coin is still a 64 and it is and should not change in CAC eyes no matter what the grade on the holder. If you would comment back would be great just curious on this an how you view it.

    You need to re-read what I posted

    It what you posted stated anywhere on the CAC website?

    Oldstandard misinterpreted what I posted. He needs to re-read my verbiage exactly

    That's fine, im sure hes working on that. But does the CAC website state what you are saying?

    Why don’t you peruse it and see?

    Well I'm clearly looking in the wrong place. Because all I can see is what im pasting below. But you are saying A LOT more. So I am wondering, where does one go to see what you are saying is to be the case?

    1. I noticed that CAC uses the term “premium quality” to describe coins that receive a CAC sticker. How does CAC define premium quality?
      For many years, coin dealers and advanced collectors have used the letters A, B, and C among themselves to further describe coins. C indicates low-end for the grade, B indicates solid for the grade, and A indicates high-end. CAC will only award stickers to coins in the A or B category. C coins, although accurately graded, will be returned without a CAC sticker
  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @oldstandard said:
    I see, so you saying they bumped it a grade due to the over all look of the coin with the color

    Yes.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 26, 2019 5:38PM

    @tradedollarnut said:

    @cameonut2011 said:

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    Then he isn't honoring his announced standards.

    His announced standards for receiving a gold sticker are very nebulous. The way I interpret them is the coin must exceed CAC standards for the next grade up....ie: be a no doubter A coin for the next grade. This jives with his public and private comments concerning the gold sticker.

    I think John went on record somewhere (or maybe it was a phone conversation in the past) that a gold CAC supposedly was solid for the next grade up. That said I agree with your observations. Usually a coin receives a gold sticker when it looks absolutely stupid in its current holder.

  • This content has been removed.
  • JasonGamingJasonGaming Posts: 928 ✭✭✭✭


    The coin has sold for $2,025 w/ BP at 6:10 PST today.

    Always buying nice toned coins! Searching for a low grade 1873 Arrows DDO Dime and 1842-O Small Date Quarter.

  • robkoolrobkool Posts: 5,934 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Same coin resubmitted & reholdered 2x in the last 4 months ??? WOW !!!

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What a total dolt! It previously stickered at 65+ and then he regrades it. It fails to upgrade but he doesn't send it to CAC before selling it again? He deserves to take a bath on that one.

  • CuKevinCuKevin Posts: 1,738 ✭✭✭✭

    I have a feeling this won’t be the last we see of this coin.

    Zircon Cases - Protect Your Vintage Slabs www.ZirconCases.com
    Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com

    CN eBay

    All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 36,419 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @cameonut2011 said:
    What a total dolt! It previously stickered at 65+ and then he regrades it. It fails to upgrade but he doesn't send it to CAC before selling it again? He deserves to take a bath on that one.

    How do you know he didn't send it? Maybe it just didn't CAC the second time.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    What a total dolt! It previously stickered at 65+ and then he regrades it. It fails to upgrade but he doesn't send it to CAC before selling it again? He deserves to take a bath on that one.

    How do you know he didn't send it? Maybe it just didn't CAC the second time.

    Fair point, but I think it is unlikely. It recently stickered and is consistent with other CAC toners. Also, if he sent the original images from GC in with it, I'm sure John would have stickered it again.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 14,835 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    What a total dolt! It previously stickered at 65+ and then he regrades it. It fails to upgrade but he doesn't send it to CAC before selling it again? He deserves to take a bath on that one.

    How do you know he didn't send it? Maybe it just didn't CAC the second time.

    And how do you know that someone else didn’t own the coin the second and/or third time it was auctioned?

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,181 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 27, 2019 3:04AM

    @MFeld said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @cameonut2011 said:
    What a total dolt! It previously stickered at 65+ and then he regrades it. It fails to upgrade but he doesn't send it to CAC before selling it again? He deserves to take a bath on that one.

    How do you know he didn't send it? Maybe it just didn't CAC the second time.

    And how do you know that someone else didn’t own the coin the second and/or third time it was auctioned?

    Probability. It sold March 17th and was relisted in a new holder on May 13, 2019. During that time, it had to:
    1. Travel to the initial buyer.
    2. Travel to PCGS.
    3. Go through PCGS grading.
    4. Travel back to the buyer.
    5. Travel to GC.
    6. Be re-cataloged/imaged by GC (takes 1-2 weeks on average).

  • oldstandardoldstandard Posts: 387 ✭✭✭

    @tradedollarnut said:
    and yes they did change their mind or it would have been a gold sticker.

    No, that’s not how it works. John’s not gonna give a gold sticker for a B coin the next grade up. That’s reality. Once it goes up, it green stickers again.

    Sorry I see what you were saying yes after it has went up it would only get a green my bad

  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    since we're trying to figure out if our Aunt might really be our Uncle it is entirely possible that GC sent the coin everywhere for a single owner. I think they'll submit coins for a consignor, right??

  • jerseycat101jerseycat101 Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Awfully baggy for a 65+ holder. Color bumpage should not be a thing.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file