CAC News: Published Grading Standards and New Insert Coming
ProofCollection
Posts: 6,874 ✭✭✭✭✭
Apologies if this has been posted, I didn't see anything, but CACG has finally posted their standards. I wish they would have broken each grade into Strike, Luster, Surface, and Eye Appeal but this is better than what we had before which was nothing. https://www.cacgrading.com/grading-standards
It was interesting to see their commentary in the email newsletter regarding this:
As many of you know, the ANA's Summer Seminar was recently held in Colorado Springs, bringing together many of the up-and-coming numismatists from across the country. We sent several members of our team who both taught and learned from the many classes.
Some feedback we received from the event was pretty surprising. We were told that it was difficult for the event's instructors to teach CAC's grading standards because we don't have them published.
Good news—they are, and they’ve been hiding in plain sight on our website all along. Shame on us, though, for not making that more obvious!
To strengthen consistency across classrooms and collecting communities, we’ve bundled the nuances of CAC's standards—originality, surface, strike, eye appeal—into one easy-to-navigate page.
You can find the Grading Standards on our website by selecting "Services" from the top menu bar on the home page and then choosing "Grading Standards" from the menu. Be sure to note that there are three tabs: Numeric Grades, Designations, and No Grades. Each tab helps clarify our standards for that subject in both words and images.
Then from the Greysheet podcast, JA said that a new insert design and/or color was coming because the green color was disliked (my translation). No big deal except now we will have another demarcation for generation of slab/insert.
Comments
I like the new label, works for me. Nice job (yeah I know, buy the coin, but...)...
.
I got this email today and it states in the third paragraph that it’s been on the website all along.
However, I never looked for it because I already know how they grade. If a coin is perfect and has absolutely no hits then it’s a 67. And if it has any hits at all then it’s a 65.
Next!
The grading standards have come full circle(for CACG), back to the beginning, I suppose. Refreshing, no?
Here’s “next “ - if, by chance, you actually think that’s how they grade, you’re under the wrong impression. I base my comments on the large number of CACG coins I’ve examined and on conversations with market participants,
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
What they didn't explain is why no one has ever seen it before or referenced it in the dozens of conversations on here about their standards. The internet archive first shows the page there on Feb 9, 2025.
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying but my impression is that the descriptions are the briefest grade descriptions I've ever seen. Again going back to my post their text lacks discussion of the nuance of how the different grading factors (strike, luster, condition, etc) can affect or compensate at each grade point. But I'm glad to have what they've provided and I'll take what I can get.
http://ProofCollection.Net
My humor must be too dry. That was supposed to be a joke or a take on how incredibly tight they are.
I suppose it is refreshing even though I wasn’t around in the first part of the circle. It will certainly take some getting used to. 😁
I haven’t looked at the published standards. I was saying that @Coinscratch gave an obviously inaccurate description of how they grade.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@mfeld if you ever wanted a job in programming AI then you would be a shoe in. PS don’t correct me, lol.
I know you’re not a shoe.
Not too dry. I was just covering my bases, which is why I prefaced my comment with “ if, by chance, you actually think that’s how they grade,”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Obviously, too dry or you would’ve known it was a joke. Not sure we can teach AI common sense.
Oh crap here it comes…
While it was a joke, it was still with respect to (as you phrased it) “how incredibly tight they are”. My point was that their grading isn’t as tight as some might infer from reading your post.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As we usually get to on debates about standards, "tight" is a relative term and few tend to specify what they are comparing it to. Tight compared to SEGS, ANACS, NGC, PCGS, ANA, or vague "market" standards?
For instance, MS65...
CAC: Well Struck with minimal imperfections in the focal areas and fields.
PCGS: (from 2nd Ed of PCGS Official Guide to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection)
Eye Appeal: Average or above.
Strike: Well Struck
Luster: At least above average. Copper coins have have mellowing of color for red and unevenness of color for RB or BN coins.
Marks: There may be some scattered marks, hairlines, or other defects. If flaws are in a main focal area, they must be minor and few. Hidden marks and hairlines can be smaller. On dime-type and smaller, they almost always must be in the devices or must be very minor if they are in the fields. On larger coins, there can be marks/hairlines in the fields and in the devices but no major ones.
The standards are similar but different. I'm not sure you can say one is "stricter" than another but also you can't really compare due to the difference in level of detail.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Mark - JA made an interesting comment in a recent interview.
He said "1939 dimes are like the nicest Proof Mercury, let's say, right? A perfect white coin comes in, we cap it at 67. That's it. Now if it had glorious color, it's a 68. If it's a modern coin, it's a 70."
It would appear in practice that's not how they do things, but that's what was said.
While, I completely understand and respect your stance and obvious experience with the TPGs @Mfeld I fill compelled to spew just a little more.
And just to confirm I am not knocking any of the major grading companies this is probably more a knock on my own grading abilities and of course I will try and embrace this new frustrating challenge.
Recently I submitted a few of my very best PCGS MS67s to CACG and simply because I wanted to see how they would fare grade wise but moreover with Imaging as you're I'm sure aware of. Fortunately I requested cross over only as none of them did.
After closer inspection, a hit here, a blemish there, I began to understand their thinking but 66 or 65 who knows they could've come back 64. Which led me to believe that eye appeal never even came into play. And rather than experience I was comparing my coins to Coin fact coins which may or may have not been graded in the same time period. So the frustration set in, at first.
I bought an XF45 CACG Barber half, cracked it and sent it to PCGS, and it graded AU53.
What’s your point? That CACG was tight? That PCGS was loose? Or that CACG was a bit tight and PCGS was a bit loose? Whatever your answer, your sample size was just a wee bit too small. 😉😉😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
These two were part of the submission which will pop at any point but I shutter at the newly expected grades.
At first I expected 64 & 68 CAM now I'm expecting 62 and 66.
The coins appear to be very nice. However, I’m not willing to conclude from images that their failure to cross as CACG 67’s illustrates how “incredibly tight they are”.
Regarding your comment “Which led me to believe that eye appeal never even came into play.” -
As impressive as the coins look, other than in the case of the 1972-D half dollar, I don’t see what about them (such as great color or blinding luster, etc.) would or should cause them to get a grade bump for eye-appeal.
Please know that I’m sorry for your frustration and I appreciate your taking the time to provide some background and an explanation for your point of view. The sharing of different experiences and opinions presents each of us with the opportunity to learn.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I was very taken aback by this comment. I hope he's not saying that no matter how nice a white 1939 dime is, the best you'll get from CACG is 67. Not only is that not stated in their grading standards, but to artificially cap grades just seems dishonest and is a big reason to NOT submit coins to CACG. What other exceptions do they have I wonder?
http://ProofCollection.Net
Now send it to CAC for a sticker.
Those are 67's all day long. I think CAC still does not have the modern coins down yet. I was thinking of crossing to CACG a gorgeous 1958 P Lincoln and then saw the POP at CACG was zero in 67RD.
@Clackamas1 Agreed and think about this, their price guide for the (hard to make) 82 Kennedy in 67 is like 250 versus Ps 700. So essentially you would turning a 700 coin into a 50 coin.
NEXT!
It's interesting how the page was only captured by the Internet Archive twice, and only in 2025. Typically, that means the page might have existed, but there were no links to it anywhere. Which is a little different than "hiding in plain sight on our website all along".
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
That I bought an XF45 CACG Barber half, cracked it and sent it to PCGS, and it graded AU53.
My question wasn’t in bold font when I posted it. I hope you don’t edit anyone else’s posts in a more severe manner, then display them as if they were the original quotes, as you did with mine.🫢
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I bolded the part of your quote I was answering. I don't think anyone was confused, except you.
You’re confused, as I wasn’t (confused).
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Have they started grading 5 step coins yet or are they still waiting for that 6 step 1961-D to come waltzing through their doors?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I am now.
Only 6 Steps from their website.
I really don't know, as I haven't sent a 68 quality blast white dime to CACG. What I will say is that neither GC nor Heritage has sold a PR68 CAC Mercury dime without color for as far back as we have online auction records. The same goes for Proof Walkers.
With that said, around half of all PR68 Walkers and Mercuries sold are in PCGS and NGC holders, and they're blast white. Feel free to draw your own conclusion.
As I've been saying forever, buy the coin you like in the holder that you think is appropriate, and forget about it. If you're selling it many years, later, send it in for review, so you can get an upgrade, versus sending it raw and risking a downgrade.
Grading services change standards over time, and as graders come and go. For many years, it was virtually impossible to make a business strike MS 67 in the Liberty Nickel series. Maybe JA is being candid about this.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
I would suggest to stop saying that here. This forum is focused on PCGS graded coins, and by extension, the PCGS registry which means most participants care greatly not just about the holder it's already in but what holder a coin could be in as well as maximizing value because like it or not, the holder does affect value. In addition to that, some coins are not common enough to just "buy in the holder you like" and instead we have to buy it in the holder it's already in or don't buy it at all.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Damn pretty coin but holy cow, that's a weak strike.
peacockcoins
Live and learn
but she was a talking to me couldn't refuse. I'm sure some other knucklehead will buy it later. 
It could make the ebay thread... The elusive Weak Strike Peace Dollar, rare find, 10,000 only one available.
PS Smiley face means I'm joking Mfeld.
^
Actually, it speaks to me too.
If you decide to part ways and/or you choose not to speak that Peace dollar's language, please PM me.
peacockcoins
Will do and I’m sure it’ll look good and under graded all dressed up in its new uniform.
I don't think any individual poster on this forum is qualified to say what is the most important thing to participants here.
I personally have never cared about registry sets of any sort. I have no idea how many others here feel like I do about this topic; it doesn't matter to me. I think most people here are interested in various aspects of collecting coins. Period. If you want to maximize the value of a particular coin, the best way to do that is to carefully analyze each potential purchase before you make it. Anything else is a matter of luck, and possibly timing.
I never said anything about a coin's holder affecting it's value. You did. Buying a coin in the holder that you think is appropriate is a big tent comment which includes your comment re buying a very rare coin where one cannot choose which holder he / she would prefer. That rare Flowing Hair Dollar I bought earlier this year falls into this category.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
It may not be important to all forum users but it certainly is important to a good percentage of users here. I think anyone is qualified enough to say that.
I understand that's how you feel, but as established, there are lot here who feel differently which is why I suggested that we stop making that comment because many users do care and do play the game so that tired line and reasoning is not helpful, and is almost a dig at those who do care by implying that they shouldn't. We should respect each other's positions on this and recognize that if someone else is trying to maximize their registry points or the value of their coins we should do what we can to assist or say nothing rather than trying to shame (perhaps too strong of a word but you know what I mean) them by insinuating that they should have just bought a different coin to begin with.
http://ProofCollection.Net
You learn something every day!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I am sorry that you are misinterpreting what I am writing about this. My whole point is everyone is free to do what he / she wishes with respect to coin collecting. If you, or anyone else are interested in registry sets, I have no issue with that. This is your decision. I am not putting anyone down. I am respecting the fact that people can make their own decisions about what they collect and why they do it. I have never said anything specific about what someone should buy.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
I would suggest you not tell other posters what they should post. Kind of pathetic and arrogant to the max
Wasn't telling anyone what to post. Was asking them to support (or not insult) people on this forum who want to play the registry game and maximize their coin's holders. @Elcontador said, "As I've been saying forever, buy the coin you like in the holder that you think is appropriate, and forget about it" which is a directive to stop playing the registry games and trying to maximize coin holders which I find to be unsupportive of fellow forum members at best and antithetical to this forum in general at worst. He is free to continue that stance if he chooses but I am certainly free to point out that the sentiment he expresses is negative toward posters who have a different approach to the hobby than he does.
Sorry that I'm misinterpreting a comment on the PCGS forum that suggests that crossing coins and maximizing holders is silly/a waste of time or money/etc because we all should have been smart and done what you "always" say which is as simple as just buying the perfect coin in a perfect holder to begin with? Clearly we're all too stupid to try that so we find ourselves on this forum doing what many of us enjoy which is discussing all facets of the TPG game only to "always" be told that we shouldn't play the game. Sorry, your comment is not as respectful as you think it is.
http://ProofCollection.Net
The comment by @Elcontador was nothing like you’ve made it out to be. After reading your misinterpretation, I read his comment three times to make sure I wasn’t missing something.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The strike looks fine to me, pretty good even. I think the photo lighting is making the letters sort of blend into the fields due to a lack of shadow. I assume this was axial lighting. 1924's aren't exactly known for high quality like 1925, either.
I like that coin a lot.
Collector, occasional seller
You’re talking about the reverse correct? Because the center obverse looks great to me. I dont know enough about these but I do know this is a fun coin to look at (fun meaning good cheap entertainment). The purplish luster really grabs the attention. And the flaws are hard to see with the naked eye. But anyway my point is you don’t have to spend 20,000.
You can prefer PCGS plastic (for US coins, I do) but have zero interest in registries (I do). So I do buy the coin i like, regardless of holder, and leave it where it is.
That doesn't mean people can't cross (when it's not in the "holder that you think is appropriate") so I think @Elcontador was being largely inclusive.
The PCGS owners thank you for your allegiance to the registry game.
Please visit the Set Registry Forum to read about how their thanks are meted out...
chopmarkedtradedollars.com