I'm curious why folks think that coins over $1-5K have a high %age of having gone to CAC
SurfinxHI
Posts: 2,579 ✭✭✭✭✭
Discussions around here seem to suggest that coins in that price range should have gone to CAC. I think that is a long shot. For instance, in MS 65 and 66 for a saint $20 gold piece, the total pop is over 144k at PCGS alone. You all think those have been through CAC? Even considering re-subs, my guess the true pop total there is still over 115k. I think a very, very small %age of the slabbed, $1-5k coins have actually gone for stickering.
If you think about it, the irrational fear that if a coin doesn't have a sticker in this price level, (read -it must have failed CAC), which is creaping into discussions around here, is actually creating a wonderful buying opportunity....
Prove me wrong? You might, but I dont think you can with the data that CAC supplies.....
(I edited the post as I accidentally had 1924 next to the $20 gold piece and I was meaning the whole pop)
Comments
"I'm curious why folks think that coins over $1-5K have a high %age of having gone to CAC"
For the same reason folks think that coins in that range have a high %age of having gone to PCGS/NGC?
Because folks that rely on CAC for their buying decisions would prefer to believe that they are not missing any opportunities for nice coins w/o the bean ?
I have 200+ coins over that range and maybe 10% have been to CAC. I think there are a lot of great coins sitting in solid collections that haven’t ventured to NJ.
For gold coins trading close to melt simply pick out a nice slabbed coin you like whether US classic, mod, or world. I would not pay very much if any extra bc of sticker. Don’t be the end user.
I believe too it’s a long shot these been to CAC. Not everybody is going to spend that money sending out $10 k worth if coins in mail just for sticker anyway? Not my cup or tea.
To answer question add the total NGC and PCGS pops for an issue then compare to the CAC pop. I did this for a few Classic Commems I have - the CAC number around 10 pct or less.
To answer op question: Outside of their sticker enthusiasm - They want get top dollar for their stuff. They probably buried in it scared they will be the end user. Don’t let them bug you.
There is some truth to that: I don't send a lot of coins that I sell on Ebay to CAC, usually, it doesn't warrant the cost of shipping there and back. (the cac fee itself is minimal) Probably should in some cases, but most of the coins I spoke about, I don't think the price realized makes that much different with the extra time and money involved. Now, everything I keep for myself goes to cac, or if something came in that I felt was worthy I would send it.
I do know of two dealers (well known, and highly respected here, send everything to cac first before they offer it in inventory.
There are hundreds, maybe thousands of us who still enjoy the raw naked coins and many have no qualms about cracking the holders on any to slip into albums. Sorry to say.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Looking at Saints is a bad example to generalize that most that are graded Gem or better have been to CAC when most dealers who submit won't waste their time sending in gem saints unless they truly believe they are super PQ coins because generic gold is so heavily market graded.
Andrew Blinkiewicz-Heritage
I agree. I believe that there are some good buying opportunities left out there, because of this all-or-nothing CAC mindset of some buyers.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Yes. In fact I finally quit requiring beer to have a CAC sticker.
I’m going to make a wild guess that most of the “great” $1-5k coins “sitting in solid collections that haven’t ventured to NJ” will make a trip to NJ before they are sold.
Probably a lot of coins in collections that have not yet visited the oracle of New Jersey. At auction non Ebay though, it is a pretty good bet that most of the eligible coins in that price range have been reviewed.
I don't think a high percentage of cons in collections have been to CAC. I'm quite sure a high percentage of coins at major auction houses have been too CAC.
and you should not use bullion $20s as the test case doit $1000 could, which includes common dates $20s in 64 or less and even 65s to a degree
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
It really depends on what segment of the population your looking at. Sure there are many gem coins in strong collections that have not been to the bean factory; however most of the coins in the 1K and up range that we see in major auctions most likely has made the trip as the consigner and the auction firm don't want to leave any money on the table.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
It really has to do with where you are in the collection cycle.
During my acquisition phase, I very much accorded with those that say here they buy the coin for its essential personal appeal, the market be hanged.
I'm at the stage of my life, though, where I am aware that my heirs have no adequate interest in my collection to be judicious about selling. I've decided to take that on myself, and convert the proceeds into other assets they understand better.
Because I'm in the selling phase, I'm much more interested in marketability. And if marketability is important, then PCGS/CAC is where you want to be for most of the items I have.
I'm keeping my "Box of 20" for my own edification and joy, but even those will be PCGS/CAC in behalf of my heirs.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Like a beer the sticker sometimes makes people see things as a lot better than they really are.
It really depends, and I wouldn't necessarily assume that. Now if you're talking about Legend, yes I would assume every coin without a sticker has failed at least once and possibly more than once.
Everyone else is just whistling Dixie....
Many people will pay strong premiums for a scarce stickered coin in a specific grade where very few have been stickered. Case in point was a hammered 1817 Capped Bust Half I bought 3 1/2 years ago. It would have had to pay another $1,500 if it was stickered, and I don't know if I would have been willing to do that. That's serious money for most of us.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
MFeld can speak to it. But i'm fairly certain Stacks and heritage run everything off certain types by CAC. They did it with a consignment of mine. The price difference at auction makes it almost mandatory as a simple matter of due diligence.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
I usually think about it as twice spot.
There seems to be a lot of CAC interest above the $2800 mark for saints.
There are still a bunch of A grade coins out there to swoop on that aren't CAC'ed.
Also...If you're a bean buyer, you still have to judge the difference between under-graded, A & B coins.
Example...
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?ff3=2&toolid=10044&campid=5338308486&customid=&lgeo=1&vectorid=229466&item=303123724587
My Saint Set
The price difference between grades make it a bigger deal between grades AU to MS. They also realize those are the coins they will sell first when needing cash. Also the end buyers of that level will want to be sure of The quality.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
I agree with that but some want the collection without the work it takes to learn. I have been putting in the reading and practicing and listening others won’t > @washingtonrainbows said:
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
A CAC sticker commands a premium, generally speaking. It builds confidence for those with minimal experience and skills.... and is a positive when selling. I have no idea what percentage have stickers vs. non-sticker coins....If I were a dealer, all my better coins would have a bean....and even some of the coins of less value. Whether one approves or not, the market says it is a positive when selling. Cheers, RickO
To each his own, but my guess is that you’ve left a lot of money on the table. I agree there’s no way to prove it either way.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I simply don't care!
What type/price range?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
The percentage of coins that have been to CAC seems to be a pretty irrelevant metric to this discussion. The more interesting statistic is the percentage of coins currently for sale that have been to CAC.
The motivation to have higher end coins reviewed by CAC is obviously much higher if you are listing it for sale vs just sitting in your collection with no intention to sell.
Which I think in part leads to these wide differences in opinion in CAC. If you are collector who doesn't really sell, then CAC is more likely viewed as not important and potentially a negative if you blame it for raising prices of nicer coins. If you are dealer or collector who frequently turns over their collection, then CAC is much more likely to be very important to your business model/collecting.
I suspect that there are two reasons why coins are sent to CAC:
--- an increase in selling price with a Green sticker.
--- as a precursor to cracking a coin out or re-submitting in-holder for an upgrade.
considering the price increase at one point for many coins it can be cheaper to spend $10 at CAC before/instead of sending a coin to PCGS for the grade hope. in a word, it's about money.
Most of the higher value coins in PCGS or NGC holders on ebay have been sent to cac first, maybe several times. Good luck finding anything on ebay where much money has been left on the table.
I don't know that I'd agree with that sentiment since Saints are pretty much guaranteed to be worth at least $1000 based on metal content alone. Now a copper Lincoln cent or Morgan dollar is another story. Do the pop reports for Saints at CAC support that sentiment?
While many collectors do indeed feel that way, many of us know our heirs have no interest in keeping our collections once we pass. We also never know when that day will come. Do you think your heirs will send your coins to CAC (or even know which ones are worthwhile sending)? Chances are when the time comes that they do sell, they’ll be leaving some money on the table by not having sent the coins that merit a CAC to CAC. I feel I’ve done my heirs a favor by having my eligible coins CAC’d.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
So, from the conversation, I think some of you agree with my premise, but many of you don’t. Several big assumptions are going on into the discussion., that bear conversation and crystallization.
1) coins at action have mostly been to CAC (the argument being that the auction houses send them in).
I think this may be only partially correct, as this option is the SELLERS call, as noted by several in this thread that sold at auction but they did not send into CAC.
Others think EBAY has all mostly coins gone to CAC as well. Here, I’d argue that most EBay sellers 1) don’t have access to CAC, 2) most are mom and pop shops and 3) there are too many to believe the CAC saturation is present.
Therefore, it seems to me that there should still be many, many coins in auctions in this price range that have NOT been to CAC.
2) my example is bad because it relates mostly to bullion. Well, if you consider bullion to be 300-500 over spot, I guess.p you are right, but I don’t. Seems to me the principals for sending to CAC still stand regardless of thoughts on bullion — you want to make sure it is solid for the grade, not doctored, and still may get a price bump. Thus, while limited, the example seems fine to me.
3) no one is discussing the fact that while auctions move coins, there are hundreds of thousands of coins for sale in shops and at shows that fall into this category (anything from coin brick and mortar shops to pawn shops). What about these coins? Aren’t they a huge segment of the market as well?
4) I was trying to see if anyone would actually look at combined pop figures for both major TPGs to try and figure out what percentage of coins in that range may have gone to CAC, because that is where the discussion gets real teeth. I think that number is super low. But many of you seem to think it is not. Can this be proved, or is the kool-aid driving the conversation?
There was a study done in Jan 2019 of all Liberty Seated series ( see Summer 2019 Gobrecht Journal). Of a population of 244,000 coins slabbed by The TPGs, 20.15% have been to CAC. For only MS coins, the percentages rises to 25.99%.
To the CAC pops you have to add those that didnt sticker, so as a WAG if you think it was a 50% sticker rate it would be 20% of Classic Commems, a value pretty close to the number Ronyahaski quoted.
Regardless of the true answer, this point is completely off base, since the number of coins submitted is only known by JA at CAC. I look all the time at combined pops of PCGS and NGC, and then the number of coins with CAC stickers. That has absolutely no representation of the number of coins submitted. If anything, it very roughly shows how some coins in certain grades obtain CAC’s at a higher success rates than others. I believe I mentioned a perfect example with the most common date 1904 $20 Liberty graded MS65. Since the pricing differential between those without CAC’s and those with CAC’s is roughly $1,000 - $1,500, so I would think most in that grade would/should have been submitted to CAC. About 12,000 are graded MS65 by the two TPG’s (IGNORING resubmissions), but less than 4% have CAC’s. It’s a BIG mistake to interpret this data in thinking that only a small percentage of these MS65’s have been submitted to CAC.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Do you really think PCGS or NGC will grade any different if the slab has a sticker?
I believe it’s more logical to believe that a higher priced raw coin already has been submitted to a TPG and failed to pass muster (cleaning, etc.) than it is to believe a similar coin in a PCGS or NGC slab has been sent to CAC and failed to get a sticker.
Hope I said that right.
Wrong. The Liberty Seated study used total coins submitted.
Do you really think PCGS or NGC will grade any different if the slab has a sticker?
tell me you didn't understand my point, really??
here it is --- you can send a coin to CAC for $10-$15 for re-assurance that it might be an upgrade candidate. if it fails, not. it it gets a Green/Gold sticker, maybe.
I think that overall collectors don't really know how to grade that well and may not be willing to risk a submission in-holder, much less a crack-out. a sticker would embolden them.
Submission data is not publicly disclosed. However, only that Liberty Seated study had data given to them by JA. Otherwise, I stand by my point.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
True, but the study compared that to population counts published by PCGS and NGC. Since there are alot of coins submitted multiple times, i.e. cracked, submitted again (and again), etc., those pop counts are very likely to be too high, maybe by many 10's of %. So the true amount of Liberty Seated coins already submitted to CAC is much higher than the 20-25% listed in the study. Plus, since alot of the coins in the PCGS and NGC pop counts are lower grade and having values that are not worth a CAC submission, those with ≥$500 value, I would think well over 50% of the total amount of these have been submitted to CAC.
Best, SH
As I stated, 26% of Mint State coins have been submitted, so high value coin submissions is still low.
Yes, population numbers are inflated. Not as much, but so are CAC numbers.
You’d have to make grandiose assumptions about the lack of integrity of the numbers to conclude, as you did, that a majority of coins have been submitted to CAC.
One of the problems is that many think coins are only being submitted for resale.
They seem to think that they will always own their coins.
It may BE for resale value, but it could be for FUTURE resale value.
You are such an optimist. Unfortunately I question whether some of the deep pockets throwing around money can tell the difference.
@Ronyahski - I don’t have access to the Summer Gobrecht Journal to read the full article. PLEASE provide a hot link to the full article if you can.
Thanks.
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
How did that work out for the guy that only received a green bean for his 1938-S PCGS MS67+ FB CAC (green bean) dime at $3k that ended up going PCGS MS68+ FB CAC and selling for $364k? I have seen numerous examples sticker before and after the upgrade (both green beans), and my experience is that gold CAC stickers are only awarded when the grade on the holder looks absolutely absurd. In other words, in deciding which coins to submit for the upgrade, the value of the CAC sticker is limited.
An important fact that has not been mentioned is that many certified coins, particularly a series like Liberty Seated dollars, are not sent to CAC because they have no chance of being approved. This is why I believe that more than 50% of higher grade (EF & Higher) certified Liberty Seated dollars will not be CAC approved. In fact, CAC data proves that the approval rate for Seated dollars is less than 50% for the total number of coins submitted. Therefore, if you add the number of certified examples that are not sent in due to their quality the CAC approval rate for this series is well below 50%, perhaps only 25%. If you exclude the common dates the approval rate falls even lower.