@Crypto said:
I for one hope they discontinue stickering. While a fan of the premise, one of the major unintended consequences was any coin without a sticker was guilty until proven innocent of being a C coin. Many quality coins had their values suppressed due to this effect for collectors without the access or desire to play that game.
In a world without stickers, I can see that fading away.
To pile on, it's not just "C" coins. Many collectors (yes, including me), assume a "high value" coin being sold without a sticker has indeed failed CAC - MAYBE it's deemed by CAC to be a "C" coin, but MAYBE worse - maybe it has defects that don't pass muster with CAC, but are OK with the other TPG's? Regardless, there's less demand at auction (or in a dealers inventory) for high valued coins without stickers.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Someone, someday may post that they found an OLD ...stickered... slab and it achieves the status of the coins now found in original B. Max Mehl envelopes and generates wonder and excitement.
Even on a ms65 $20 1924 common date Saint the sticker premium per CPG $570 so a bunch of those….”Elevator operator take me to top Penthouse Please.” Now at PH -I prefer the Pcgs69 1oz AGE vs paying all that. Yes I bet somebody banked on the $4k Libs - new buyer - now go sell em for more.
@Cougar1978 said:
Even on a ms65 $20 1924 common date Saint the sticker premium per CPG $570 so a bunch of those….”Elevator operator take me to top Penthouse Please.” Now at PH -I prefer the Pcgs69 1oz AGE vs paying all that. Yes I bet somebody banked on the $4k Libs - new buyer - now go sell em for more.
While many will not pay that $570 premium, there’s a legitimate reason that many do, when it comes to gold coins. We see from pop reports of gold coins that as a generalization, only a low percentage of gold coins in a particular date and grade merit CAC stickers. The reason for most of that low percentage is not an overabundance of “C” graded coins, but apparently many gold coins have had their surfaces “messed with” in one manner or another. It seems these “treatments” are of concern to the people at CAC stickering! Some collectors don’t mind buying coins like these, other collectors do mind.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@TheMayor said:
It seems silly to phase out the stickering service when there is great demand for it. When JA and his NJ crew get tired of doing it, they could move the stickering operations to Virginia and charge the same price for stickering or grading/slabbing and let consumers choose what service they want. There are a lot of PCGS/CAC collectors that when stickering stops will be faced with a choice between PCGS no sticker and CACG are going to choose PCGS (I know I am one of them). Why give up all of that business?
Except they don't make any money on stickering.
Explain please.
If they can't make any money putting a sticker on a slab, how are they going to make money putting coins in slabs? Massively higher prices? Stickering doesn't have the overhead of inventory, machines, encapsulation, guarantees, and maintaining registries and can be done with much less staff.
They started the stickering service to allow them to make market in CAC coins. They make their money on the retail side. Google it. JA has said many times that they are just trying to break even on the stickers.
It's been discussed numerous times by JA and CAC as well a several threads in this forum if you want to do the research.
Consider that they offer free review of coins. How profitable do you think that is? CACG has no freebies and they can switch to making market in CACG coins rather than stickered coins.
What retail outlet / dealership are they? Do they have a website, show retail circuit or is this a group of insiders / various venues? So the sticker biz sets up the retail side. Sort of like the run (non stickered pickups) setting up the pass (stickered retail inventory) in the West Coast offense (my college FB coach game). Then retail based on CDN CPG for CAC (like player archetypes for the FB West Cost Offense) - Cool. If u play College FB Coach it’s a great offense. Won a lot of Natl Championships with it. Now I see why a lot of them want the sticker submissions continuing.
Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.
Laura posted a couple of years back that CAC started to profit from stickering for the first time. Public records reveal that she had an ownership interest in CAC at one time (her pleadings in her lawsuit against Ewell).
@telephoto1 said:
Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.
Much, if not most of the cream of the crop isn’t available for sale to anyone, at least at the time it’s stickered.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ten years from now the haters will still hate and wonder why their "nice" coin sold for 5 grand less than that other coin with that stupid sticker. Life is short people. Get over it.
Much, if not most of the cream of the crop isn’t available for sale to anyone, at least at the time it’s stickered.
Could you explain that further? Are you implying CAC coins are being hoarded?
I interpreted Mark's statement to simply mean that collectors who submit the coins they love to CAC aren't necessarily looking to cash-out now or any time in the future.
Much, if not most of the cream of the crop isn’t available for sale to anyone, at least at the time it’s stickered.
Could you explain that further? Are you implying CAC coins are being hoarded?
In re-reading my post, I can see how you thought I might have been implying that CAC coins were being hoarded and I apologize for that. For proper context, I had posted in reply to the one copied below.
@telephoto1 said:
“Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.”
I was attempting to make the point that just because CAC stickers a coin doesn’t necessarily mean that they get first shot at it. What I should have written was that many newly stickered CAC coins are privately placed with collectors, consigned to auction, offered to dealers or set aside for any number of reasons. And CAC doesn't get “first shot at the cream of the crop” in any of those scenarios.
Again, I apologize for the confusion.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@logger7 said:
Will the gold stickered coins automatically be put in the next grade up holders? What happens on the few coins they don't want to put in the new holders automatically? Will submitters be getting calls, "sorry fellah, no dice on that coin guy, we changed our minds on endorsing the grade so can't put it in our holder"? Or how many high end coins are going back to them under their warranties? Is Coinplex still up an running with active bids on their stickered coins?
That would not be right; retracting their own conviction!?
@logger7 said:
Will the gold stickered coins automatically be put in the next grade up holders? What happens on the few coins they don't want to put in the new holders automatically? Will submitters be getting calls, "sorry fellah, no dice on that coin guy, we changed our minds on endorsing the grade so can't put it in our holder"? Or how many high end coins are going back to them under their warranties? Is Coinplex still up an running with active bids on their stickered coins?
That would not be right; retracting their own conviction!?
Good point. If CACG doesn't automatically upgrade a coin with a gold CAC sticker by at least one grade, they lose credibility.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
No need to speculate, JA has always said that he would pay the next grade up for gold stickered coins. Could a gold stickered coin grade more than one point higher? Yes it can. Is it possible that the CACG graders decide not upgrade a gold sticker coin? Anything is possible, however, I believe they would have good reason to do so and this would be rare.
@logger7 said:
Will the gold stickered coins automatically be put in the next grade up holders? What happens on the few coins they don't want to put in the new holders automatically? Will submitters be getting calls, "sorry fellah, no dice on that coin guy, we changed our minds on endorsing the grade so can't put it in our holder"? Or how many high end coins are going back to them under their warranties? Is Coinplex still up an running with active bids on their stickered coins?
That would not be right; retracting their own conviction!?
Good point. If CACG doesn't automatically upgrade a coin with a gold CAC sticker by at least one grade, they lose credibility.
The most likely scenario could be a coin that turns in the holder.
Another possible scenario for a gold sticker coin not upgrading is that something wasn't visible while the coin was in the original holder, such as a whack on the rim that was hidden by a prong. I imagine this will be spelled out in their crossover policy.
@messydesk said:
Another possible scenario for a gold sticker coin not upgrading is that something wasn't visible while the coin was in the original holder, such as a whack on the rim that was hidden by a prong. I imagine this will be spelled out in their crossover policy.
True, but that would likely have been seen by the TPG. The more likely scenario IF a gold stickered coin is not upgraded is the copper coin changed from RD to RB, or from RB to BN while in the holder.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@telephoto1 said:
“Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.”
I was attempting to make the point that just because CAC stickers a coin doesn’t necessarily mean that they get first shot at it. What I should have written was that many newly stickered CAC coins are privately placed with collectors, consigned to auction, offered to dealers or set aside for any number of reasons. And CAC doesn't get “first shot at the cream of the crop” in any of those scenarios.
Again, I apologize for the confusion.
"First shot" means having the first opportunity to at least make a purchase offer. If someone is stickering coins and then making purchase offers based on that outcome (JA himself says they make money on the retail end), that seems a bit of a conflict IMO, as they know the results before anyone else and have a potential vested interest in said outcome. Our hosts for example don't buy and sell what they slab... as that would be looked upon as a conflict, correct? Someone needs to give me a cogent explanation as to how making a market in one's own supposed third-party (or would that more appropriately be termed "fourth-party"?) stickered items is any different.
Another question...who's going to sticker the CACG slabs?
@winesteven said:
My understanding is that a gold stickered coin will indeed cross at least at the next higher whole grade number, EXCEPT if it was a color designation, such as RD on a copper coin, or other similar situation where the coin may have changed in the holder since originally graded.
Steve
However, for EF coins, a green stickered EF45 does not automatically equate to a gold stickered EF40.
@winesteven said:
My understanding is that a gold stickered coin will indeed cross at least at the next higher whole grade number, EXCEPT if it was a color designation, such as RD on a copper coin, or other similar situation where the coin may have changed in the holder since originally graded.
Steve
However, for EF coins, a green stickered EF45 does not automatically equate to a gold stickered EF40.
Same deal with AU coins, NGC 58 w/ green bean crossed to PCGS 55 also w/ green bean.
@telephoto1 said:
“Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.”
I was attempting to make the point that just because CAC stickers a coin doesn’t necessarily mean that they get first shot at it. What I should have written was that many newly stickered CAC coins are privately placed with collectors, consigned to auction, offered to dealers or set aside for any number of reasons. And CAC doesn't get “first shot at the cream of the crop” in any of those scenarios.
Again, I apologize for the confusion.
"First shot" means having the first opportunity to at least make a purchase offer. If someone is stickering coins and then making purchase offers based on that outcome (JA himself says they make money on the retail end), that seems a bit of a conflict IMO, as they know the results before anyone else and have a potential vested interest in said outcome. Our hosts for example don't buy and sell what they slab... as that would be looked upon as a conflict, correct? Someone needs to give me a cogent explanation as to how making a market in one's own supposed third-party (or would that more appropriately be termed "fourth-party"?) stickered items is any different.
Another question...who's going to sticker the CACG slabs?
They do not make offers on sticker submissions. They buy from their posted bid on the Exchange.
I consider it a bit of a conflict except that they aren't making offers on submissions, and they only buy coins already stickered. They aren't slapping stickers on coins they bought without stickers.
But I also think that a lot of it is trust in JA. We've discussed before whether the company could survive without him and his personal reputation.
@messydesk said:
Another possible scenario for a gold sticker coin not upgrading is that something wasn't visible while the coin was in the original holder, such as a whack on the rim that was hidden by a prong. I imagine this will be spelled out in their crossover policy.
True, but that would likely have been seen by the TPG. The more likely scenario IF a gold stickered coin is not upgraded is the copper coin changed from RD to RB, or from RB to BN while in the holder.
Steve
Yes, color change is a more likely scenario, but if a coin was netted down a grade because of a feature the TPG then concealed in their holder, an understandable reaction to seeing the coin in the holder is that it was undergraded. There was a late date large cent cracked out of an NGC holder posted here on at least two occasions over the past several years that fits that description. This doesn't even have to be a gold stickered coin. The general question is whether CAC can overestimate a coin in a holder because the holder obscures part of the coin. It is possible, however rare.
I am late to this party. It's too hot for this old retired fogie guy (72) to work in the yard today so I spent some enjoyable time reading up some great posts from other members. Always entertaining and educational. What a great bunch you all are!
So anyway, CAGC? I'm not sure what this is all about as I can't quite put the story together based on the posts I read. Can anyone kindly explain if this is reality, something that will be occurring in the future, or just speculation? Does it spell the demise of PCGS and NGC? I am SO confused.
Funny, I just sent a note to Heritage yesterday asking about consigning and mentioned that I think that a few of my better pieces may be "CAC-able" and along comes CAGC. What's this all about??? I'm confused (my usual state my wife tells me). 😂
Slight topic change here.
With my U.S. Type collection, I entered the "slabbing generation" before we had OGH from PCGS and "Fatties " from NGC. I have several of each. I don't own any "Rattlers" though. All of my type set is still in those coins in the "relic" slabs. I VERY begrudgingly accepted CAC though I never used the service...not feeling totally trusting with leaving my coins or shipping them to "someone" for CAC consideration. Also, gee, a group of professional experts in grading already did their thing. Do I need another opinion? It's probably very naive of me, but I have never understood why grading standards have changed over the years and I need 2 or more opinions. I know that zillions of coins could have potentially zillions of different grades depending on many factors including the mood of the grading team on a particular day. I put lots of time and many a show building my collection. I was VERY fussy. I never resubmitted anything either. I figure the grading crews are far more experienced than I am.
I guess I am still a slab supporter but when I see some of the stuff that is going to the services nowadays, medals, slabs with signatures of sports heroes, Proof 70 Ultra Heavy Cameo common current coins, First Day of Issue (so what!!!???) and on and on...I think that the slabbing industry has perhaps run out of stuff worthy of slabbing. To each his own and I certainly don't mean to offend anyone, but I thought slabbing was for grading of good-quality collector coins and assure authenticity (for the most part). Where has the industry gone?? Anyone want a complete set of early 2000's Eastward Bound NGC Proof 70 Ultra Cameo nickels or a 2005 Bison Nickel ANACS Proof 70 Cameo with the dislocated hip joint or crooked horn or whatever its disability was? I don't but I "fell for them" just the same but paid cheap money. Dumped the disabled Bison coin but still scratching my head over the Eastward Bound nickels now residing in obscurity in a dark box where I don't encounter them often. I expect that the dealer paid for slabbing cost more than the coins were (or ever will be) worth.
Many years ago, I read in maybe Numismatic News (when it was an actual newspaper I received in the mail...(does THAT date me?) that in the 1900's, people used to throw proof U.S. coins on the sidewalk or streets to give them that "used-circulated" look. Wear added to the collectability of the coins. Is slabbing headed down a similar path where it will become obsolete and cracking out will be the newest trend? I certainly won't start that one...and I sure as hell hope I'm not around to see it. I would have hated to see all of my spent submission money go down the loo....or recycled! (Gee...do new slabs have that little recycling numbered triangle on them? 🙄
No, not grumpy or having a bad day...sometimes I "just don't get it"!
"First shot" means having the first opportunity to at least make a purchase offer. If someone is stickering coins and then making purchase offers based on that outcome (JA himself says they make money on the retail end), that seems a bit of a conflict IMO, as they know the results before anyone else and have a potential vested interest in said outcome. Our hosts for example don't buy and sell what they slab... as that would be looked upon as a conflict, correct? Someone needs to give me a cogent explanation as to how making a market in one's own supposed third-party (or would that more appropriately be termed "fourth-party"?) stickered items is any different.
Another question...who's going to sticker the CACG slabs?
They do not make offers on sticker submissions. They buy from their posted bid on the Exchange.
I consider it a bit of a conflict except that they aren't making offers on submissions, and they only buy coins already stickered. They aren't slapping stickers on coins they bought without stickers.
But I also think that a lot of it is trust in JA. We've discussed before whether the company could survive without him and his personal reputation.
They may not be making offers on submissions as they come in but offers could be made before the items go back out or made by dealer associates with knowledge of the item. We personally had this happen with a TPG in the somewhat distant past (not our hosts). We had a rather rare foreign piece that we submitted to said TPG. Before we even knew the grade, our phone was ringing from a dealer who was a specialist in that country who also happened to be one of their consultants on said country.... and who had examined the piece. He TOLD US WHAT IT WAS GOING TO GRADE, crowed about how no one is a stronger buyer, he has clients at the high end for this piece, yada yada (his offer was $2000 under Krause in that grade for a RAW example- of a piece from what at that time was a white-hot country). Frankly even if the offer had been higher, we wouldn't have sold based on ethical concerns alone. I found myself asking the question "How do I know this isn't an undergrade now?"...and by the same token I suppose someone with a green bean could just as easily ask "How do I know this isn't really a gold bean candidate?" I think these are all legit questions, especially when one considers that they've bought $600 million worth of their own product.
As a generalization my coins are "high end", with 63% having a plus grade, along with the CAC sticker confirming it being solid for the whole grade number (NOT confirming solid for the plus).
I'm one of the very first Collector submitters, and in the roughly 14 years I've submitted (100% of my coins eligible for a CAC sticker have one), NEVER have they made me an offer, or did ANYTHING other than to just ship my coins back to me!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@winesteven said:
As a generalization my coins are "high end", with 63% having a plus grade, along with the CAC sticker confirming it being solid for the whole grade number (NOT confirming solid for the plus).
I'm one of the very first Collector submitters, and in the roughly 14 years I've submitted (100% of my coins eligible for a CAC sticker have one), NEVER have they made me an offer, or did ANYTHING other than to just ship my coins back to me!
Steve
Let me be clear; I'm not saying that they necessarily do this as I have zero evidence of it... I'm saying that something like this could happen in the context of a service that essentially deals in their own product. I was also relating my own experience with a different service and stating that if it could occur in that instance, it conceivably could elsewhere.
Let me be clear; I'm not saying that they necessarily do this as I have zero evidence of it... I'm saying that something like this could happen in the context of a service that essentially deals in their own product. I was also relating my own experience with a different service and stating that if it could occur in that instance, it conceivably could elsewhere.
It could, but while it hasn't happened with me, I have not read anywhere on these forums over the years where it happens to others.
My Miami Marlins could win the World Series this year, playing against the Oakland A's. It is possible, but just because it's possible, let's not imply it has happened.
Thanks.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@ProofCollection said:
Surely someone on this forum could say whether or not they received offers after submitting coins to CAC. I have not received any.
I've had an account at, and submitted coins to, CAC since they opened their doors about 15-years ago and have well over 100 submission forms submitted in that time. Over the few thousand coins I have submitted there have been zero inquiries from CAC or anyone associated with CAC as to the availability of a coin for purchase that was submitted to CAC.
Zero. None. Zilch. Nada. Oogatz.
This includes coins that I owned as well as coins for clients that were submitted. Of the coins I owned I have a gold CAC rate of perhaps 12% and a combined gold/green rate of perhaps 97% with relatively few of those pieces being generic twentieth century coins (such as late date Mercs, Buffalos or Franklins). The coins I typically submit are better date and/or type and oftentimes are beautifully toned and/or high grade.
The two calls I have received from CAC in that time regarding submissions were both when I forgot to update my insurance coverage on their site and they called to confirm coverage.
"First shot" means having the first opportunity to at least make a purchase offer. If someone is stickering coins and then making purchase offers based on that outcome (JA himself says they make money on the retail end), that seems a bit of a conflict IMO, as they know the results before anyone else and have a potential vested interest in said outcome. Our hosts for example don't buy and sell what they slab... as that would be looked upon as a conflict, correct? Someone needs to give me a cogent explanation as to how making a market in one's own supposed third-party (or would that more appropriately be termed "fourth-party"?) stickered items is any different.
Another question...who's going to sticker the CACG slabs?
They do not make offers on sticker submissions. They buy from their posted bid on the Exchange.
I consider it a bit of a conflict except that they aren't making offers on submissions, and they only buy coins already stickered. They aren't slapping stickers on coins they bought without stickers.
But I also think that a lot of it is trust in JA. We've discussed before whether the company could survive without him and his personal reputation.
They may not be making offers on submissions as they come in but offers could be made before the items go back out or made by dealer associates with knowledge of the item. We personally had this happen with a TPG in the somewhat distant past (not our hosts). We had a rather rare foreign piece that we submitted to said TPG. Before we even knew the grade, our phone was ringing from a dealer who was a specialist in that country who also happened to be one of their consultants on said country.... and who had examined the piece. He TOLD US WHAT IT WAS GOING TO GRADE, crowed about how no one is a stronger buyer, he has clients at the high end for this piece, yada yada (his offer was $2000 under Krause in that grade for a RAW example- of a piece from what at that time was a white-hot country). Frankly even if the offer had been higher, we wouldn't have sold based on ethical concerns alone. I found myself asking the question "How do I know this isn't an undergrade now?"...and by the same token I suppose someone with a green bean could just as easily ask "How do I know this isn't really a gold bean candidate?" I think these are all legit questions, especially when one considers that they've bought $600 million worth of their own product.
Edited for typo
There have been rumors of such "coincidences" with PCGS and ATS coins. I've yet to hear such a rumor about CAC, but who knows...
At this juncture, keeping it simple (consistent procurement strategy) and moving forward would just want the CACG slabs vs stickered slabs. At this time have no CAC. Sold out. Preference PCGS. Last CAC piece offered off bourse price about there would have bought but tick on holder next to coin, so pass.
Moving to their new formation (slabs) I would think for cost control they would shut down the sticker operation. Also I would want get as many of my slabs out there as I could so shutting down sticker thing a valid strategic objective. Like the personnel on roster needed if going to a west coast offense (QB, WR, OL, TE).
Comments
To pile on, it's not just "C" coins. Many collectors (yes, including me), assume a "high value" coin being sold without a sticker has indeed failed CAC - MAYBE it's deemed by CAC to be a "C" coin, but MAYBE worse - maybe it has defects that don't pass muster with CAC, but are OK with the other TPG's? Regardless, there's less demand at auction (or in a dealers inventory) for high valued coins without stickers.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
ITEM FROM THE FUTURE
Someone, someday may post that they found an OLD ...stickered... slab and it achieves the status of the coins now found in original B. Max Mehl envelopes and generates wonder and excitement.
but I doubt it. ......
Even on a ms65 $20 1924 common date Saint the sticker premium per CPG $570 so a bunch of those….”Elevator operator take me to top Penthouse Please.” Now at PH -I prefer the Pcgs69 1oz AGE vs paying all that. Yes I bet somebody banked on the $4k Libs - new buyer - now go sell em for more.
While many will not pay that $570 premium, there’s a legitimate reason that many do, when it comes to gold coins. We see from pop reports of gold coins that as a generalization, only a low percentage of gold coins in a particular date and grade merit CAC stickers. The reason for most of that low percentage is not an overabundance of “C” graded coins, but apparently many gold coins have had their surfaces “messed with” in one manner or another. It seems these “treatments” are of concern to the people at CAC stickering! Some collectors don’t mind buying coins like these, other collectors do mind.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
They only wholesale to other dealers.
Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Laura posted a couple of years back that CAC started to profit from stickering for the first time. Public records reveal that she had an ownership interest in CAC at one time (her pleadings in her lawsuit against Ewell).
Much, if not most of the cream of the crop isn’t available for sale to anyone, at least at the time it’s stickered.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
How I see CAC stickers....
https://youtu.be/vxxQS5LJi9w
Throw a coin enough times, and suppose one day it lands on its edge.
Ten years from now the haters will still hate and wonder why their "nice" coin sold for 5 grand less than that other coin with that stupid sticker. Life is short people. Get over it.
I don’t do big ticket 5k coins. I just do nice stuff I enjoy / most can afford. Frankly this year made more on currency vs coins.
The thread has been educational for me.
Thank you everyone for the discussion. It is nice to be able to have a serious discussion about CAC and CACG without the thread being derailed.
Could you explain that further? Are you implying CAC coins are being hoarded?
I interpreted Mark's statement to simply mean that collectors who submit the coins they love to CAC aren't necessarily looking to cash-out now or any time in the future.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
In re-reading my post, I can see how you thought I might have been implying that CAC coins were being hoarded and I apologize for that. For proper context, I had posted in reply to the one copied below.
@telephoto1 said:
“Let's be real. CAC isn't a philanthropic organization. The stickers might be a breakeven (if I believe that's even true) but it affords them first shot at the cream of the crop.”
I was attempting to make the point that just because CAC stickers a coin doesn’t necessarily mean that they get first shot at it. What I should have written was that many newly stickered CAC coins are privately placed with collectors, consigned to auction, offered to dealers or set aside for any number of reasons. And CAC doesn't get “first shot at the cream of the crop” in any of those scenarios.
Again, I apologize for the confusion.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
.
That would not be right; retracting their own conviction!?
Good point. If CACG doesn't automatically upgrade a coin with a gold CAC sticker by at least one grade, they lose credibility.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
No need to speculate, JA has always said that he would pay the next grade up for gold stickered coins. Could a gold stickered coin grade more than one point higher? Yes it can. Is it possible that the CACG graders decide not upgrade a gold sticker coin? Anything is possible, however, I believe they would have good reason to do so and this would be rare.
The most likely scenario could be a coin that turns in the holder.
Another possible scenario for a gold sticker coin not upgrading is that something wasn't visible while the coin was in the original holder, such as a whack on the rim that was hidden by a prong. I imagine this will be spelled out in their crossover policy.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
True, but that would likely have been seen by the TPG. The more likely scenario IF a gold stickered coin is not upgraded is the copper coin changed from RD to RB, or from RB to BN while in the holder.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
"First shot" means having the first opportunity to at least make a purchase offer. If someone is stickering coins and then making purchase offers based on that outcome (JA himself says they make money on the retail end), that seems a bit of a conflict IMO, as they know the results before anyone else and have a potential vested interest in said outcome. Our hosts for example don't buy and sell what they slab... as that would be looked upon as a conflict, correct? Someone needs to give me a cogent explanation as to how making a market in one's own supposed third-party (or would that more appropriately be termed "fourth-party"?) stickered items is any different.
Another question...who's going to sticker the CACG slabs?
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
However, for EF coins, a green stickered EF45 does not automatically equate to a gold stickered EF40.
Same unaltered coin.
Same deal with AU coins, NGC 58 w/ green bean crossed to PCGS 55 also w/ green bean.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
They do not make offers on sticker submissions. They buy from their posted bid on the Exchange.
I consider it a bit of a conflict except that they aren't making offers on submissions, and they only buy coins already stickered. They aren't slapping stickers on coins they bought without stickers.
But I also think that a lot of it is trust in JA. We've discussed before whether the company could survive without him and his personal reputation.
Yes, color change is a more likely scenario, but if a coin was netted down a grade because of a feature the TPG then concealed in their holder, an understandable reaction to seeing the coin in the holder is that it was undergraded. There was a late date large cent cracked out of an NGC holder posted here on at least two occasions over the past several years that fits that description. This doesn't even have to be a gold stickered coin. The general question is whether CAC can overestimate a coin in a holder because the holder obscures part of the coin. It is possible, however rare.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I simple say: Market Move.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT.
FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL.
THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
MARK TWAIN
Hi, guys.
I am late to this party. It's too hot for this old retired fogie guy (72) to work in the yard today so I spent some enjoyable time reading up some great posts from other members. Always entertaining and educational. What a great bunch you all are!
So anyway, CAGC? I'm not sure what this is all about as I can't quite put the story together based on the posts I read. Can anyone kindly explain if this is reality, something that will be occurring in the future, or just speculation? Does it spell the demise of PCGS and NGC? I am SO confused.
Funny, I just sent a note to Heritage yesterday asking about consigning and mentioned that I think that a few of my better pieces may be "CAC-able" and along comes CAGC. What's this all about??? I'm confused (my usual state my wife tells me). 😂
Slight topic change here.
With my U.S. Type collection, I entered the "slabbing generation" before we had OGH from PCGS and "Fatties " from NGC. I have several of each. I don't own any "Rattlers" though. All of my type set is still in those coins in the "relic" slabs. I VERY begrudgingly accepted CAC though I never used the service...not feeling totally trusting with leaving my coins or shipping them to "someone" for CAC consideration. Also, gee, a group of professional experts in grading already did their thing. Do I need another opinion? It's probably very naive of me, but I have never understood why grading standards have changed over the years and I need 2 or more opinions. I know that zillions of coins could have potentially zillions of different grades depending on many factors including the mood of the grading team on a particular day. I put lots of time and many a show building my collection. I was VERY fussy. I never resubmitted anything either. I figure the grading crews are far more experienced than I am.
I guess I am still a slab supporter but when I see some of the stuff that is going to the services nowadays, medals, slabs with signatures of sports heroes, Proof 70 Ultra Heavy Cameo common current coins, First Day of Issue (so what!!!???) and on and on...I think that the slabbing industry has perhaps run out of stuff worthy of slabbing. To each his own and I certainly don't mean to offend anyone, but I thought slabbing was for grading of good-quality collector coins and assure authenticity (for the most part). Where has the industry gone?? Anyone want a complete set of early 2000's Eastward Bound NGC Proof 70 Ultra Cameo nickels or a 2005 Bison Nickel ANACS Proof 70 Cameo with the dislocated hip joint or crooked horn or whatever its disability was? I don't but I "fell for them" just the same but paid cheap money. Dumped the disabled Bison coin but still scratching my head over the Eastward Bound nickels now residing in obscurity in a dark box where I don't encounter them often. I expect that the dealer paid for slabbing cost more than the coins were (or ever will be) worth.
Many years ago, I read in maybe Numismatic News (when it was an actual newspaper I received in the mail...(does THAT date me?) that in the 1900's, people used to throw proof U.S. coins on the sidewalk or streets to give them that "used-circulated" look. Wear added to the collectability of the coins. Is slabbing headed down a similar path where it will become obsolete and cracking out will be the newest trend? I certainly won't start that one...and I sure as hell hope I'm not around to see it. I would have hated to see all of my spent submission money go down the loo....or recycled! (Gee...do new slabs have that little recycling numbered triangle on them? 🙄
No, not grumpy or having a bad day...sometimes I "just don't get it"!
Be well and have a good day, everyone. Piano1
@Piano1 It's CACG rather than CAGC. CACG is CAC's new slabbing service.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Thanks, PerryHall. I guess it's dyslexia day here in NH! 🤣
Piano1
They may not be making offers on submissions as they come in but offers could be made before the items go back out or made by dealer associates with knowledge of the item. We personally had this happen with a TPG in the somewhat distant past (not our hosts). We had a rather rare foreign piece that we submitted to said TPG. Before we even knew the grade, our phone was ringing from a dealer who was a specialist in that country who also happened to be one of their consultants on said country.... and who had examined the piece. He TOLD US WHAT IT WAS GOING TO GRADE, crowed about how no one is a stronger buyer, he has clients at the high end for this piece, yada yada (his offer was $2000 under Krause in that grade for a RAW example- of a piece from what at that time was a white-hot country). Frankly even if the offer had been higher, we wouldn't have sold based on ethical concerns alone. I found myself asking the question "How do I know this isn't an undergrade now?"...and by the same token I suppose someone with a green bean could just as easily ask "How do I know this isn't really a gold bean candidate?" I think these are all legit questions, especially when one considers that they've bought $600 million worth of their own product.
Edited for typo
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Surely someone on this forum could say whether or not they received offers after submitting coins to CAC. I have not received any.
As a generalization my coins are "high end", with 63% having a plus grade, along with the CAC sticker confirming it being solid for the whole grade number (NOT confirming solid for the plus).
I'm one of the very first Collector submitters, and in the roughly 14 years I've submitted (100% of my coins eligible for a CAC sticker have one), NEVER have they made me an offer, or did ANYTHING other than to just ship my coins back to me!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Let me be clear; I'm not saying that they necessarily do this as I have zero evidence of it... I'm saying that something like this could happen in the context of a service that essentially deals in their own product. I was also relating my own experience with a different service and stating that if it could occur in that instance, it conceivably could elsewhere.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
It could, but while it hasn't happened with me, I have not read anywhere on these forums over the years where it happens to others.
My Miami Marlins could win the World Series this year, playing against the Oakland A's. It is possible, but just because it's possible, let's not imply it has happened.
Thanks.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I've had an account at, and submitted coins to, CAC since they opened their doors about 15-years ago and have well over 100 submission forms submitted in that time. Over the few thousand coins I have submitted there have been zero inquiries from CAC or anyone associated with CAC as to the availability of a coin for purchase that was submitted to CAC.
Zero. None. Zilch. Nada. Oogatz.
This includes coins that I owned as well as coins for clients that were submitted. Of the coins I owned I have a gold CAC rate of perhaps 12% and a combined gold/green rate of perhaps 97% with relatively few of those pieces being generic twentieth century coins (such as late date Mercs, Buffalos or Franklins). The coins I typically submit are better date and/or type and oftentimes are beautifully toned and/or high grade.
The two calls I have received from CAC in that time regarding submissions were both when I forgot to update my insurance coverage on their site and they called to confirm coverage.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
There have been rumors of such "coincidences" with PCGS and ATS coins. I've yet to hear such a rumor about CAC, but who knows...
At this juncture, keeping it simple (consistent procurement strategy) and moving forward would just want the CACG slabs vs stickered slabs. At this time have no CAC. Sold out. Preference PCGS. Last CAC piece offered off bourse price about there would have bought but tick on holder next to coin, so pass.
Moving to their new formation (slabs) I would think for cost control they would shut down the sticker operation. Also I would want get as many of my slabs out there as I could so shutting down sticker thing a valid strategic objective. Like the personnel on roster needed if going to a west coast offense (QB, WR, OL, TE).