@Moxie15 said:
Outside of this forum I have seen indifference at best on CAC. I admit that I do not collect ultra high end coins or deal with large high end dealers.
Much of the coin market does not seem to care all that much about stickers as it is below a price-point that the sticker adds a large amount of value. At the level of the largest part of the market resides the sticker companies do hold much sway at all. Most collectors do not participate in registry sets, or hold coins of great value.
Here and across the street are many people who seem to think that the level of which I speak is unimportant to the market, but it is by far the largest part, and what keeps many dealers in business, of the market. The dealer mentioned may not be wrong that CAC is harmful as it adds an unnecessary layer that many collectors do not understand and raises expectations to the under informed.
I agree that certain coins do not benefit as much from a cac approval (i believe JA has said this as well). You mention the market does not care about cac below a certain price point. Where is that price point in your opinion? Thanks
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@TurtleCat said:
You know, I’ve never actually seen the rationale for why CAC doesn’t indicate whether a particular coin was submitted and not beaned. Perhaps they have stated it but I haven’t run across it. Can anyone explain or link to an explanation for why they won’t?
It would discourage submissions, most likely.
Because it would create potential litigation with PCGS or NGC. It would be a public thumbs down on a grade. They might as well hang a scarlet "C" on the coin.
Yeah, good luck with that lawsuit. "Your honor, this man (JA) publicly stated that in his opinion certain coins slabbed by my client were not above average quality for their assigned grades."
That's not the way it need work. Cameonut laid out some complex cases. Could even be simpler. Collector could go after PCGS or NGC for having inflated the grade.
Just because you think the lawsuit us specious doesn't mean it won't get filed.
Admittedly I'm not a lawyer (or even close), but I'm not claiming a specious lawsuit wouldn't get filed, just that it presumably wouldn't be protracted and costly to the defendant.
You've also got potential impairment of coins in auction. Do you think heritage or stacks want coins in their auctions painted with scarlet letters?
Come now. Do you think any coin worth upwards of (say) $5-10k that appears in a major auction nowadays without a sticker isn't presumed by pretty much everyone to have failed CAC? While a tiny percentage actually may never have been sent, none will be given the benefit of the doubt.
That's irrelevant. You can't sue based on the presumption that JA turned up his nose on a coin. You could sue based on the FACT that JA put a scarlet letter on a coin.
@topstuf said:
Another true statement is that there would not be a ton of posts if every CAC thread wasn't regarded as a mine field.
The service is a valid element in the coin arena.
I also have learned nothing new but I think if there were less controversy and the topic wasn't a sure "poof" some of the discussion ...could...be educational.
Who knew collectors were such a sensitive lot.
Agree on your statements. Most people seemed to have dug their heels in on the subject and it’s become almost fruitless to discuss it at this point.
m
I agree. And I'll never fully understand why it is so controversial. It's a respected second opinion that you are free to embrace or ignore. It just seems that the people that want to ignore it will not be happy until everyone ignores it.
Is there a price implication? Yes. But there is also a price implication in going from 65 to 65+ to 66. Yet there is nowhere near the vitriol leveled at TPGS's and crack-out specialists. Even when gradeflation comes up, there is not nearly the passionate kvetching involved.
@Moxie15 said:
Outside of this forum I have seen indifference at best on CAC. I admit that I do not collect ultra high end coins or deal with large high end dealers.
Much of the coin market does not seem to care all that much about stickers as it is below a price-point that the sticker adds a large amount of value. At the level of the largest part of the market resides the sticker companies do hold much sway at all. Most collectors do not participate in registry sets, or hold coins of great value.
Here and across the street are many people who seem to think that the level of which I speak is unimportant to the market, but it is by far the largest part, and what keeps many dealers in business, of the market. The dealer mentioned may not be wrong that CAC is harmful as it adds an unnecessary layer that many collectors do not understand and raises expectations to the under informed.
I think you should look around more. It is NOT just this forum. If it were just the couple hundred people on this forum you would not see the auction results that you see in ALL market segments from widgets to rarities.
Maybe people are less passionate about a $10 difference on a widget, but that is just because people can't do math. $10 on a $50 coin is no different than $1000 on a $5000 coin. That said, the CAC widget will get $10 more so CAC still matters to the bidders in that segment of the market.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
I would add one thing to this, people seem to get a psychological boost out of feeling that they "made the slab". We've seen it mentioned by several forum members when their decision to submit was questioned.
That psychological boost appears to be extremely strong in the afflicted. I've seen people spent $75 to submit a coin that doesn't have a chance to be worth $75 once slabbed.
@Moxie15 said:
Outside of this forum I have seen indifference at best on CAC. I admit that I do not collect ultra high end coins or deal with large high end dealers.
Much of the coin market does not seem to care all that much about stickers as it is below a price-point that the sticker adds a large amount of value. At the level of the largest part of the market resides the sticker companies do hold much sway at all. Most collectors do not participate in registry sets, or hold coins of great value.
Here and across the street are many people who seem to think that the level of which I speak is unimportant to the market, but it is by far the largest part, and what keeps many dealers in business, of the market. The dealer mentioned may not be wrong that CAC is harmful as it adds an unnecessary layer that many collectors do not understand and raises expectations to the under informed.
I agree that certain coins do not benefit as much from a cac approval (i believe JA has said this as well). You mention the market does not care about cac below a certain price point. Where is that price point in your opinion? Thanks
$6
LOL.
I have yet to see any market segment where the CAC coin doesn't sell for more than the non-CAC equivalent.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
I would add one thing to this, people seem to get a psychological boost out of feeling that they "made the slab". We've seen it mentioned by several forum members when their decision to submit was questioned.
That psychological boost appears to be extremely strong in the afflicted. I've seen people spent $75 to submit a coin that doesn't have a chance to be worth $75 once slabbed.
I'm not sure how that's different from "And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded."
Are you sating that they know they wont recoup their cost, but don't care?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Moxie15 said:
Outside of this forum I have seen indifference at best on CAC. I admit that I do not collect ultra high end coins or deal with large high end dealers.
Much of the coin market does not seem to care all that much about stickers as it is below a price-point that the sticker adds a large amount of value. At the level of the largest part of the market resides the sticker companies do hold much sway at all. Most collectors do not participate in registry sets, or hold coins of great value.
Here and across the street are many people who seem to think that the level of which I speak is unimportant to the market, but it is by far the largest part, and what keeps many dealers in business, of the market. The dealer mentioned may not be wrong that CAC is harmful as it adds an unnecessary layer that many collectors do not understand and raises expectations to the under informed.
I think you should look around more. It is NOT just this forum. If it were just the couple hundred people on this forum you would not see the auction results that you see in ALL market segments from widgets to rarities.
Maybe people are less passionate about a $10 difference on a widget, but that is just because people can't do math. $10 on a $50 coin is no different than $1000 on a $5000 coin. That said, the CAC widget will get $10 more so CAC still matters to the bidders in that segment of the market.
Actually, the people who can't do math are those who spend $15 plus postage to gain $10.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
I'm not sure how that's different from "And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded."
Are you sating that they know they wont recoup their cost, but don't care?
'
'
In today's market with coin PRICES in general in a downdraft, I'd say that dealers HAVE TO CARE but
collectors (speaking for me only maybe) just have to consider the ownership value more than anything else.
"Is the coin worth the price of admission to look at it?"
It has made me MUCH more selective in purchases and a NO MERCY standard on returns.
"Returns" are uncommon for return if CAC approved, I find.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
I would add one thing to this, people seem to get a psychological boost out of feeling that they "made the slab". We've seen it mentioned by several forum members when their decision to submit was questioned.
That psychological boost appears to be extremely strong in the afflicted. I've seen people spent $75 to submit a coin that doesn't have a chance to be worth $75 once slabbed.
I'm not sure how that's different from "And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded."
Are you sating that they know they wont recoup their cost, but don't care?
Yes, they know and don't care. (2 people on this forum come to mind.) They get a thrill out of "making the slab".
@Moxie15 said:
Outside of this forum I have seen indifference at best on CAC. I admit that I do not collect ultra high end coins or deal with large high end dealers.
Much of the coin market does not seem to care all that much about stickers as it is below a price-point that the sticker adds a large amount of value. At the level of the largest part of the market resides the sticker companies do hold much sway at all. Most collectors do not participate in registry sets, or hold coins of great value.
Here and across the street are many people who seem to think that the level of which I speak is unimportant to the market, but it is by far the largest part, and what keeps many dealers in business, of the market. The dealer mentioned may not be wrong that CAC is harmful as it adds an unnecessary layer that many collectors do not understand and raises expectations to the under informed.
I think you should look around more. It is NOT just this forum. If it were just the couple hundred people on this forum you would not see the auction results that you see in ALL market segments from widgets to rarities.
Maybe people are less passionate about a $10 difference on a widget, but that is just because people can't do math. $10 on a $50 coin is no different than $1000 on a $5000 coin. That said, the CAC widget will get $10 more so CAC still matters to the bidders in that segment of the market.
Actually, the people who can't do math are those who spend $15 plus postage to gain $10.
Well, some of the $10 difference coins used to be more than $10 different. LOL. But, yes. Those people also exist. Encouraged, of course, by the new CAC registry sets.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
I would add one thing to this, people seem to get a psychological boost out of feeling that they "made the slab". We've seen it mentioned by several forum members when their decision to submit was questioned.
That psychological boost appears to be extremely strong in the afflicted. I've seen people spent $75 to submit a coin that doesn't have a chance to be worth $75 once slabbed.
I'm not sure how that's different from "And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded."
Are you sating that they know they wont recoup their cost, but don't care?
Of course, as of last year, we can also add "need to put it in my CAC registry set" as a rationale for doing so. That is a similarly ego-driven reason.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
Actually a gold sticker would have hurt the value of that coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@TurtleCat said:
You know, I’ve never actually seen the rationale for why CAC doesn’t indicate whether a particular coin was submitted and not beaned. Perhaps they have stated it but I haven’t run across it. Can anyone explain or link to an explanation for why they won’t?
It would discourage submissions, most likely.
Because it would create potential litigation with PCGS or NGC. It would be a public thumbs down on a grade. They might as well hang a scarlet "C" on the coin.
Yeah, good luck with that lawsuit. "Your honor, this man (JA) publicly stated that in his opinion certain coins slabbed by my client were not above average quality for their assigned grades."
That's not the way it need work. Cameonut laid out some complex cases. Could even be simpler. Collector could go after PCGS or NGC for having inflated the grade.
Just because you think the lawsuit us specious doesn't mean it won't get filed.
Admittedly I'm not a lawyer (or even close), but I'm not claiming a specious lawsuit wouldn't get filed, just that it presumably wouldn't be protracted and costly to the defendant.
You've also got potential impairment of coins in auction. Do you think heritage or stacks want coins in their auctions painted with scarlet letters?
Come now. Do you think any coin worth upwards of (say) $5-10k that appears in a major auction nowadays without a sticker isn't presumed by pretty much everyone to have failed CAC? While a tiny percentage actually may> @MFeld said: @jmlanzaf said:
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
The buyer was getting a leg up on the inevitable PCGS CAC Lowball Registry.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
@TurtleCat said:
You know, I’ve never actually seen the rationale for why CAC doesn’t indicate whether a particular coin was submitted and not beaned. Perhaps they have stated it but I haven’t run across it. Can anyone explain or link to an explanation for why they won’t?
It would discourage submissions, most likely.
Because it would create potential litigation with PCGS or NGC. It would be a public thumbs down on a grade. They might as well hang a scarlet "C" on the coin.
Yeah, good luck with that lawsuit. "Your honor, this man (JA) publicly stated that in his opinion certain coins slabbed by my client were not above average quality for their assigned grades."
That's not the way it need work. Cameonut laid out some complex cases. Could even be simpler. Collector could go after PCGS or NGC for having inflated the grade.
Just because you think the lawsuit us specious doesn't mean it won't get filed.
Admittedly I'm not a lawyer (or even close), but I'm not claiming a specious lawsuit wouldn't get filed, just that it presumably wouldn't be protracted and costly to the defendant.
You've also got potential impairment of coins in auction. Do you think heritage or stacks want coins in their auctions painted with scarlet letters?
Come now. Do you think any coin worth upwards of (say) $5-10k that appears in a major auction nowadays without a sticker isn't presumed by pretty much everyone to have failed CAC? While a tiny percentage actually may> @MFeld said: @jmlanzaf said:
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
The buyer was getting a leg up on the inevitable PCGS CAC Lowball Registry.
Exactly! If it wasn’t CAC, you’d need to upgrade in the future. This one doesn’t need to be upgraded.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I wish we all spent as much time discussing plans to grow the hobby as we do about CAC. I mean real actions that will result in a broad and healthy collector demographic.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
Shouldn't a non-CAC lowball be worth more registry points than a CAC lowball? After all, a "C" coin would be worth more than an A/B.
[This is when you know that ego is more powerful than money.]
@coinlieutenant said:
I wish we all spent as much time discussing plans to grow the hobby as we do about CAC. I mean real actions that will result in a broad and healthy collector demographic.
How do you know they aren't one and the same?
Are slabs good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
Is CAC good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
@coinlieutenant said:
I wish we all spent as much time discussing plans to grow the hobby as we do about CAC. I mean real actions that will result in a broad and healthy collector demographic.
How do you know they aren't one and the same?
Are slabs good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
Is CAC good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
Shouldn't a non-CAC lowball be worth more registry points than a CAC lowball? After all, a "C" coin would be worth more than an A/B.
[This is when you know that ego is more powerful than money.]
I’ve always wondered whether a CAC sticker had negative value for lowball/cull coins.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
My opinion on why the coin failed to CAC is that it has net graded / market acceptable damage. Before I got into collecting CAC low balls, I used to think the same as some here: that a C coin would be better than a A/B coin for a low ball set, but in collecting these coins, I find that I prefer coins without net graded / market acceptable damage as they are more eye appealing. I was also interested in low ball coins for eye appeal before there was ever a low ball registry set.
On the New Rochelle, the fingerprint doesn't help the eye appeal for me but that hasn't prevented other coins from being CACed.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
Shouldn't a non-CAC lowball be worth more registry points than a CAC lowball? After all, a "C" coin would be worth more than an A/B.
For the Registry set, it doesn't matter. Either CAC is irrelevant, or in the future, it's mandatory.
As for general desirability, this depends on the reasoning why a coin is a C.
At grades FR02 and above, you can get a non-CAC because the coin is a problem-free PO01, which is more desirable.
However, at PO01, there is no lower problem-free grade, so it seems the main reason to not get a bean is a net graded / market acceptable problem, e.g. damage/cleaning/alteration/etc., which is undesirable to me.
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
what exactly does a CAC green sticker on a PO1 coin mean?? understanding the concept of the "Lowball Registry" I accept it to mean that the coin is close to the next lower grade.
@keets said:
what exactly does a CAC green sticker on a PO1 coin mean?? understanding the concept of the "Lowball Registry" I accept it to mean that the coin is close to the next lower grade.
See my posts above where I take it to mean less net graded / market acceptable problems. As low grade these coins are, problems are still undesirable as they can impact eye appeal. There is a certain beauty in a well-worn problem free coin.
@keets said:
what exactly does a CAC green sticker on a PO1 coin mean?? understanding the concept of the "Lowball Registry" I accept it to mean that the coin is close to the next lower grade.
I spoke with JA about this a few years ago. Short answer is that it is a wholesome PO1, free of excessive rattiness.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
@ElmerFusterpuck said:
I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
My opinion on why the coin failed to CAC is that it has net graded / market acceptable damage. Before I got into collecting CAC low balls, I used to think the same as some here: that a C coin would be better than a A/B coin for a low ball set, but in collecting these coins, I find that I prefer coins without net graded / market acceptable damage as they are more eye appealing. I was also interested in low ball coins for eye appeal before there was ever a low ball registry set.
On the New Rochelle, the fingerprint doesn't help the eye appeal for me but that hasn't prevented other coins from being CACed.
Thanks.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
There have been a number of discussions about this before.
Some made the point that CAC on a PO01 adds to the value, because it theoretically is another endorsement that the coin wasn’t artificially worn to achieve its lowball status—and that it doesn’t have other undetected problems. A ‘wholesome PO01’ was the idea. That seems to be the case with this coin since it seems like it could still pick up quite a bit more detail and still remain just a PO01.
And others said that the ‘worst’ possible PO01 shouldn’t be technically strong enough to merit a CAC bean. Another fair point.
In this case no doubt the huge price mostly reflected its Pop 1 status .... hardcore lowball collectors only really pay up for Pop 1 examples.
@keets said: I don’t understand the biased standards part.
it is probably directed to the fact that one opinion decides the sticker
More likely, Larry is thinking that CAC is biased against blue copper. Probably true, but maybe a justifiable bias.
I've had conversations with Larry about this, who thinks that CAC is biased against toned copper, not just blue copper. I think there is some justification for that view, as grading toned copper is not CAC's strong suit.
I agree. I dont have any personal expereince with blue copper, and i dont know if I would call it "bias", but I have submitted a lot of expensive copper to CAC and they definitely have a particular look that they like. This CAC view does not completely align with what is considered market acceptable/original by others in my experience.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
When they look like this:
And they are not in a registry set.
Quality pictures are extremely important to the younger generation of collectors that primarily deal thru the internet, ex. Instagram. To them, high-quality pictures add value, a way to demonstratively display their collection online.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
When they look like this:
And they are not in a registry set.
Quality pictures are extremely important to the younger generation of collectors that primarily deal thru the internet, ex. Instagram. To them, high-quality pictures add value, a way to demonstratively display their collection online.
Comments
I agree that certain coins do not benefit as much from a cac approval (i believe JA has said this as well). You mention the market does not care about cac below a certain price point. Where is that price point in your opinion? Thanks
This thread is pretty much what I expected, long and wordy, but pretty much civil.
As primarily a collector, I've never submitted or had someone submit coins for me to CAC (still need to finish my application), but if/when it comes time to sell some of my better stuff, I'd consider it pretty foolish if I didn't submit to CAC - there is a chance I would leave money on the table.
That being said, I've never figured out why people submit low value coins for the sticker, much less slabbing them. I've actually seen slabbed F-15 common date walkers with a green bean. Go figure, but to each their own.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Regarding submission of low value coins for grading (and sometimes stickers) - I think that often, it's done because the submitter wants to see if he's "right" about the grade of the coin and the satisfaction he gets, if he is.
To a lesser extent, some submitters want to display and preserve the coin, though obviously, there are more economical ways to do so.
And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That's irrelevant. You can't sue based on the presumption that JA turned up his nose on a coin. You could sue based on the FACT that JA put a scarlet letter on a coin.
I agree. And I'll never fully understand why it is so controversial. It's a respected second opinion that you are free to embrace or ignore. It just seems that the people that want to ignore it will not be happy until everyone ignores it.
Is there a price implication? Yes. But there is also a price implication in going from 65 to 65+ to 66. Yet there is nowhere near the vitriol leveled at TPGS's and crack-out specialists. Even when gradeflation comes up, there is not nearly the passionate kvetching involved.
I think you should look around more. It is NOT just this forum. If it were just the couple hundred people on this forum you would not see the auction results that you see in ALL market segments from widgets to rarities.
Maybe people are less passionate about a $10 difference on a widget, but that is just because people can't do math. $10 on a $50 coin is no different than $1000 on a $5000 coin. That said, the CAC widget will get $10 more so CAC still matters to the bidders in that segment of the market.
Where's monsterman?
I would add one thing to this, people seem to get a psychological boost out of feeling that they "made the slab". We've seen it mentioned by several forum members when their decision to submit was questioned.
That psychological boost appears to be extremely strong in the afflicted. I've seen people spent $75 to submit a coin that doesn't have a chance to be worth $75 once slabbed.
$6
LOL.
I have yet to see any market segment where the CAC coin doesn't sell for more than the non-CAC equivalent.
I'm not sure how that's different from "And finally, some submitters don't realize how little the coins are worth and/or don't take into account that the grading and postage fees wont be recouped by having the coin graded."
Are you sating that they know they wont recoup their cost, but don't care?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Actually, the people who can't do math are those who spend $15 plus postage to gain $10.
1938 New Rochelle Half Dollar - PCGS PO01 POP 1/4,795 CAC - Ex-Pogue
This fingerprinted coin zoomed out of my reach to $4,080 on an estimate of $200-$300
Do I think CAC helped here? Definitely!
https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-LY84C/1938-new-rochelle-new-york-250th-anniversary-poor-1-pcgs-cac
...
'
'
In today's market with coin PRICES in general in a downdraft, I'd say that dealers HAVE TO CARE but
collectors (speaking for me only maybe) just have to consider the ownership value more than anything else.
"Is the coin worth the price of admission to look at it?"
It has made me MUCH more selective in purchases and a NO MERCY standard on returns.
"Returns" are uncommon for return if CAC approved, I find.
Yes, they know and don't care. (2 people on this forum come to mind.) They get a thrill out of "making the slab".
Well, some of the $10 difference coins used to be more than $10 different. LOL. But, yes. Those people also exist. Encouraged, of course, by the new CAC registry sets.
Of course, as of last year, we can also add "need to put it in my CAC registry set" as a rationale for doing so. That is a similarly ego-driven reason.
I'm not sure CAC ever helps the lowball coins. Hard to say. In this case, I"m not sure how you can be so sure given the provenance and the lowball Pop 1.
So what?
I was thinking and hoping he was joking. I don't think CAC mattered a bit for that coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I won 2 Pogue low ball coins, one CAC and one non-CAC. For me, as a bidder, CAC approval matters a lot. When I look at my PO01 non-CAC Pogue, I can easily see why it didn’t CAC which makes me keep looking for another.
Have you ever owned any low ball CAC?
Actually a gold sticker would have hurt the value of that coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The buyer was getting a leg up on the inevitable PCGS CAC Lowball Registry.
LOL I like how the True View is upside down!
Exactly! If it wasn’t CAC, you’d need to upgrade in the future. This one doesn’t need to be upgraded.
Why do you think the non-CAC piece failed to sticker? And other than a CAC registry set, why would it matter whether the coin was an A or B quality low ball example, as opposed to a C quality one?
In answer to your question - no.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I wish we all spent as much time discussing plans to grow the hobby as we do about CAC. I mean real actions that will result in a broad and healthy collector demographic.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Shouldn't a non-CAC lowball be worth more registry points than a CAC lowball? After all, a "C" coin would be worth more than an A/B.
[This is when you know that ego is more powerful than money.]
How do you know they aren't one and the same?
Are slabs good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
Is CAC good, bad or neutral for the hobby?
Yes.
siliconvalleycoins.com
I’ve always wondered whether a CAC sticker had negative value for lowball/cull coins.
My opinion on why the coin failed to CAC is that it has net graded / market acceptable damage. Before I got into collecting CAC low balls, I used to think the same as some here: that a C coin would be better than a A/B coin for a low ball set, but in collecting these coins, I find that I prefer coins without net graded / market acceptable damage as they are more eye appealing. I was also interested in low ball coins for eye appeal before there was ever a low ball registry set.
On the New Rochelle, the fingerprint doesn't help the eye appeal for me but that hasn't prevented other coins from being CACed.
For the Registry set, it doesn't matter. Either CAC is irrelevant, or in the future, it's mandatory.
As for general desirability, this depends on the reasoning why a coin is a C.
At grades FR02 and above, you can get a non-CAC because the coin is a problem-free PO01, which is more desirable.
However, at PO01, there is no lower problem-free grade, so it seems the main reason to not get a bean is a net graded / market acceptable problem, e.g. damage/cleaning/alteration/etc., which is undesirable to me.
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
what exactly does a CAC green sticker on a PO1 coin mean?? understanding the concept of the "Lowball Registry" I accept it to mean that the coin is close to the next lower grade.
See my posts above where I take it to mean less net graded / market acceptable problems. As low grade these coins are, problems are still undesirable as they can impact eye appeal. There is a certain beauty in a well-worn problem free coin.
I spoke with JA about this a few years ago. Short answer is that it is a wholesome PO1, free of excessive rattiness.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Thanks.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
There have been a number of discussions about this before.
Some made the point that CAC on a PO01 adds to the value, because it theoretically is another endorsement that the coin wasn’t artificially worn to achieve its lowball status—and that it doesn’t have other undetected problems. A ‘wholesome PO01’ was the idea. That seems to be the case with this coin since it seems like it could still pick up quite a bit more detail and still remain just a PO01.
And others said that the ‘worst’ possible PO01 shouldn’t be technically strong enough to merit a CAC bean. Another fair point.
In this case no doubt the huge price mostly reflected its Pop 1 status .... hardcore lowball collectors only really pay up for Pop 1 examples.
I agree. I dont have any personal expereince with blue copper, and i dont know if I would call it "bias", but I have submitted a lot of expensive copper to CAC and they definitely have a particular look that they like. This CAC view does not completely align with what is considered market acceptable/original by others in my experience.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Cocky Amateur Collector
But I have grown to like them
In before the lock
My Saint Set
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
When they look like this:
And they are not in a registry set.
Quality pictures are extremely important to the younger generation of collectors that primarily deal thru the internet, ex. Instagram. To them, high-quality pictures add value, a way to demonstratively display their collection online.
Those are not $20 coins in $30 slabs.