Data request - cac submissions

Aercus · October 13, 2019 9:28AM

I'm curious as to the overall cac pass rate for the two big services. I think it would be interesting to get some data on this. If you have data available, please respond below with it. I only really need the service (pcgs or ngc) and whether it passed, didn't, or got a gold, but any other info, such as series or grade, would also be cool to have. If you do respond, please don't omit any data so we can get a relatively unbiased sample set. I know that there is already a selection bias but I still think the effort will be worth it. Any input on how to crunch the data is also appreciated!

Cameonut · October 13, 2019 4:42PM

I agree that it would be interesting to understand the overall pass rate. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that people will not share their results unless they are "above average". This will skew the data such that people will think they have a better chance at a bean than they actually do.

The better way to assess this is to ask CAC directly. They know the "pass rates" overall and by TPGS.

amwldcoin · October 13, 2019 7:26PM

Do you really believe they would reveal that information?

@Cameonut said:
I agree that it would be interesting to understand the overall pass rate. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that people will not share their results unless they are "above average". This will skew the data such that people will think they have a better chance at a bean than they actually do.

The better way to assess this is to ask CAC directly. They know the "pass rates" overall and by TPGS.

Eagleguy · October 13, 2019 7:29PM

When I sold off my commemorative collection, Heritage sent 40 of my coins to CAC and 39 passed (but with no gold beans). I'm sure if I had picked 40 coins that I felt would pass the result would not have been the same.

cameonut2011 · October 13, 2019 9:13PM

@amwldcoin said:
Do you really believe they would reveal that information?

@Cameonut said:
I agree that it would be interesting to understand the overall pass rate. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that people will not share their results unless they are "above average". This will skew the data such that people will think they have a better chance at a bean than they actually do.

The better way to assess this is to ask CAC directly. They know the "pass rates" overall and by TPGS.

CAC has done it in the past. After a few years of inception, JA mentioned in an interview that the sticker rate was roughly 40% and split roughly evenly between the services. As more and more coins are stickered and the demand for the service has remained constant, I am sure the percentage for current submissions is lower.

BryceM · October 13, 2019 9:25PM

As others have said, there are way too many problems with this to give you any meaningful data.

Most CAC submissions (90%?) are done by dealers, wholesalers, auction houses, and crackout-guys. What you get from collectors will be a different (possibly VERY different) subset of coins.
Many submissions are for re-stickering coins that have successfully or unsuccessfully gone through a TPG "regrade" process. How are you going to account for that? In my own submissions this probably accounts for 1/3 to 1/2 of my CAC submissions.
It's almost a certainty that I have unknowingly submitted many coins to CAC that they've already seen and rejected. How do you account for that?
Those who frequent these boards are probably not a good representation of the average collector.
Those who often do poorly on their submissions are less likely to respond than those who don't.
Gold and "everything else" sticker at very different rates.
Why not just call JA and ask?

winesteven · October 13, 2019 9:45PM

Admittedly the following is a bit of “comparing apples and oranges” as other factors are involved, as it does not directly address the OP question. However, in another thread, it was somewhat determined that in typical auctions held by Heritage, GC and DLRC, if you look at the coins that have CAC’s, about 85% or so of those are in PCGS holders, and about 15% or so are in NGC holders. As noted, other factors are involved, possibly more coins in PCGS holders getting submitted to CAC than coins in NGC holders? I don’t know. You can’t look at Legend auctions, since they emphasize PCGS with CAC’s in the coins they accept for consignment.

Bochiman · October 13, 2019 10:15PM

Data given by people here wouldn't be worth anything in regards to actual knowledge of the numbers.
The only data that would matter would be that from CAC itself.

Case in point: My submissions, which I screen twice on my own coins, did fairly well and JA said that as well. However, some folks with just toss anything and everything in. Dealers should be relatively high as well, but, if someone pushes them to submit, then that will lower it.

Most CAC submitters are likely a bit more knowledgeable about the grades and look, but, again, not all.

Then, add to that that someone may submit coins that have certain "looks" that JA/CAC doesn't fully appreciate (toned copper can be one of those) and those may not sticker in as high a percentage......what does that actually tell you, unless you know what was submitted and how it looked? Imagine someone sending in 20 proof IHCs that were toned....and only 5 stickered. 25%. However, maybe those same 20 coins were sent to Rick Snow and 18 received his Eagle Eye sticker......your data wouldn't show any of that and therefore would be misleading data in most of the ways that data would be likely to be used.

CoinPhysicist · October 13, 2019 10:42PM

If I told you that I flipped a coin H,H,T,H,T would you be comfortable telling me what the odds of that potentially unfair coin flipping heads or tails is? And then if my friend told you he flipped the coin T,T,H,H,H, would that help you tell me the odds of the coin?

No, you would either (1) have to have all the data about all the flips of the coin from everyone (and it would have to be a big sample) or (2) you would have to ask the person who made the coin hint hint.

Aercus · October 14, 2019 5:00AM

Thanks all for the critiques. I think I left out one very important point: what am I actually going to do with this data? Hopefully this will answer some of the critiques.

The plan is to compare NGC and PCGS pass rates on a relative basis. As many have pointed out here, absolute percentages will undoubtedly be influenced by any number of factors, and won't be valid. However, due to consensus effects, a significant net difference should still be observed even with these selection biases. For example, if you have a 70% cac rate, and PCGS has a 20% pass rate, and NGC has a 15% cac rate, we would still be able to observe that there is a difference between the services, given a large enough sample size. Interesting right? Consensus also explains why PCGS/cac is typically worth more than NGC/cac.

There are definitely some caveats here. We have to get a large enough sample size to compare the services, and this could be challenging (especially since I've gotten critiques but no data yet 😅). There also may be holder perception effects which makes collectors preferentially submit one over the other. I will be looking for this by comparing our sample sizes to overall pcgs versus NGC pops.

We will have to be careful to not over interpret the data. The actual difference, even if it exists and is significant, probably will not be the actual number. This is more of a qualitative look. The market tells us there should be a difference, since ngc coins are typically valued less than pcgs for the same grade. At any rate, sometimes you just have to do the experiment.

Edit: I forgot to mention, if you do not want to share results publicly, you can PM instead. I will not share who submitted the results.

Aercus · October 14, 2019 5:04AM

@cameonut2011 said:

@amwldcoin said:
Do you really believe they would reveal that information?

@Cameonut said:
I agree that it would be interesting to understand the overall pass rate. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that people will not share their results unless they are "above average". This will skew the data such that people will think they have a better chance at a bean than they actually do.

The better way to assess this is to ask CAC directly. They know the "pass rates" overall and by TPGS.

CAC has done it in the past. After a few years of inception, JA mentioned in an interview that the sticker rate was roughly 40% and split roughly evenly between the services. As more and more coins are stickered and the demand for the service has remained constant, I am sure the percentage for current submissions is lower.

This is good info, thanks! Do you happen to remember the publication?

jonruns · October 14, 2019 5:05AM

I would think it would be important to compare Pass Rates by series...for example IMHO it is much more difficult to get a sticker with Old Gold than Morgans

DisneyFan · October 14, 2019 8:04AM

The January 14, 2019 issue of Coin World had a Guest Commentary discussing the sticker rate of CAC coins. Also, one can evaluate the success rates by comparing the total populations of PCGS and NGC coins to the number stickered at CAC. For example, the percentage of Liberty Walking Half Dollars receiving a CAC is very low.

winesteven · October 14, 2019 8:09AM

@DisneyFan said:
The January 14, 2019 issue of Coin World had a Guest Commentary discussing the sticker rate of CAC coins. Also, one can evaluate the success rates by comparing the total populations of PCGS and NGC coins to the number stickered at CAC. For example, the percentage of Liberty Walking Half Dollars receiving a CAC is very low.

While there's no perfect solution, the above assumes all coins have been submitted to CAC, and separately, the TPG pop figures often reflect many submissions of the same coin in crackouts, whereas the CAC pop probably has many fewer CAC's applied to the same coin with different cert numbers.

DisneyFan · October 14, 2019 8:27AM

@winesteven said:

@DisneyFan said:
The January 14, 2019 issue of Coin World had a Guest Commentary discussing the sticker rate of CAC coins. Also, one can evaluate the success rates by comparing the total populations of PCGS and NGC coins to the number stickered at CAC. For example, the percentage of Liberty Walking Half Dollars receiving a CAC is very low.

While there's no perfect solution, the above assumes all coins have been submitted to CAC, and separately, the TPG pop figures often reflect many submissions of the same coin in crackouts, whereas the CAC pop probably has many fewer CAC's applied to the same coin with different cert numbers.

What I find interesting is comparing the CAC success rates for specific coins within a series.

ricko · October 14, 2019 8:53AM

The only meaningful data for such a study would have to come from CAC themselves. Simply polling collectors will never produce data that will be statistically significant. Cheers, RickO

cameonut2011 · October 14, 2019 11:22AM

@Aercus said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC has done it in the past. After a few years of inception, JA mentioned in an interview that the sticker rate was roughly 40% and split roughly evenly between the services. As more and more coins are stickered and the demand for the service has remained constant, I am sure the percentage for current submissions is lower.

This is good info, thanks! Do you happen to remember the publication?

I don't unfortunately.

TomB · October 14, 2019 12:07PM

In 2010 CAC published on their website that there was a success rate of approximately 47% for the coins submitted. This counted all coins from all series and grade ranges and mixed both PCGS and NGC together. Since that time, I have read numbers that have drifted slightly lower for the overall success rate, such as 44% and 42%.

AMRC · October 14, 2019 12:16PM

Guys, CAC freely shares this information. All I ever have to do is ask them.

Aercus · October 14, 2019 12:36PM

@AMRC said:
Guys, CAC freely shares this information. All I ever have to do is ask them.

I wasn't aware they would divulge this info. Thanks!

MFeld · October 14, 2019 1:46PM

@AMRC said:
Guys, CAC freely shares this information. All I ever have to do is ask them.

I don’t know what information CAC has shared freely with you. But If you ask them what % of PCGS submissions have stickered and what % of NGC submissions have stickered, I bet you will not get specific answers.

TomB · October 14, 2019 2:14PM

@MFeld said:

@AMRC said:
Guys, CAC freely shares this information. All I ever have to do is ask them.

I don’t know what information CAC has shared freely with you. But If you ask them what % of PCGS submissions have stickered and what % of NGC submissions have stickered, I bet you will not get specific answers.

I agree with this. CAC may give out an overall success percentage, but it has not been my experience that they will break it down by service.

astrorat · October 14, 2019 2:57PM

CAC submissions are a biased population. Submitters screen coins to send to CAC and thus what is submitted represents a subset of coins graded by the two TPGs.

Only if CAC were to receive a random sample of PCGS and NGC coins could an estimate about overall 'pass' rates be inferred.

MFeld · October 14, 2019 3:11PM

@astrorat said:
CAC submissions are a biased population. Submitters screen coins to send to CAC and thus what is submitted represents a subset of coins graded by the two TPGs.

Only if CAC were to receive a random sample of PCGS and NGC coins could an estimate about overall 'pass' rates be inferred.

I agree with what you said. But, the discussions I’ve seen haven’t been about what the overall pass rate might be if a random sample were submitted. Instead, they have been about the actual sample of coins that have been submitted.

astrorat · October 14, 2019 3:27PM

@MFeld said:

@astrorat said:
CAC submissions are a biased population. Submitters screen coins to send to CAC and thus what is submitted represents a subset of coins graded by the two TPGs.

Only if CAC were to receive a random sample of PCGS and NGC coins could an estimate about overall 'pass' rates be inferred.

I agree with what you said. But, the discussions I’ve seen haven’t been about what the overall pass rate might be if a random sample were submitted. Instead, they have been about the actual sample of coins that have been submitted.

Sure and that makes sense, of course, and I was responding to what I read in the OP about overall pass rate of the two TPGs. The sample of coins submitted are biased and any reflection on the grading of the two TPGs is mitigated based on only coins believed to be 'high end' for the grade (ie, will likely 'pass' or 'exceed') are generally submitted.

To add another layer, there is a different intensity of bias between dealer submitters and collector submitters. Dealers pay for the submission irrespective of the outcome. Collectors only pay if the outcome is positive. Thus, collectors will have a lower threshold for submission and I would estimated that the collector 'pass' rate is lower than of the dealer submitters.

I have no data ... only speculation on my part.

Unknown · October 14, 2019 4:00PM

This content has been removed.

Cougar1978 · October 15, 2019 6:58AM

I don’t see any stampede on the part of players to sticker coins where the CAC premium in the sheet is not substantially higher than the non CAC. The sticker indicates JA opinion coin is an A or B.

There are players on the bourse looking for coins they can sticker which fit the above criteria. These are better date, scarce, more expensive issues not material like generic walkers and dollars. Their concern lol what is the population of players who will pay the extra money bc JA blessed the coin.

One can ponder the NGC / PCGS mix but if a buyer does not want NGC anyway what does it matter?

On the other hand there are players who won’t pay a dime for CAC. Like a car lot with hundreds of cars economy thru premium they don’t want the extra expense of sending a car to the mod shop. Let the buyer do that if he wants engine upgrade, chrome wheels, exhaust and transmission upgrades is their view.

Data request - cac submissions

Comments

Leave a Comment