Does PCGS SecurePlus equal or surpass CAC?

llafoe · June 18, 2011 8:38AM

I don't know why, but when I see a coin in a SecurePlus holder, it excites me more than a coin in an another PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker. When I look at coins, I wonder if they've been doctored... but when I see a coin in a SecurePlus holder, I feel confident it's original (well, at least market acceptable original). What are your thoughts?

renomedphys · June 18, 2011 8:46AM

Definitely a fan of this new holder. I know it's not necessarily the case, but the majority of coins I see in these holders are nice for the grade.

Bear · June 18, 2011 10:00AM

It is the gold shield on the slab. People who study human behavior

have found, that the color of gold denotes quality in the mind of the public.

In any event, I think that PCGS did a good job on the new slab.

questor54 · June 18, 2011 10:07AM

It's good to get a second (or third) opinion.

AnkurJ · June 18, 2011 10:08AM

Secure plus doesn't equal CAC. It's just an added service by PCGS. They are completely unrelated.

Zoins · June 18, 2011 10:09AM

Could it be that the gold shield slots in between the two beans?

(1) Gold Bean
(2) Gold Shield
(3) Green Bean

From a population perspective, the gold bean is probably the rarest (given that the coin should upgrade, not just plus).

Between the gold shield and the green bean, the gold shield has a few things going for it. First, it's gold, as Bear mentions. Second, it's from the TPG itself. Third, there's technology behind it.

LindeDad · June 18, 2011 10:49AM

Can the people that put beans on holders smell as good as the sniffer?
Not really a fan of having to get mulitple opinions on my coions so I would prefer it just get done right the first time even on my old green labels.

llafoe · June 18, 2011 11:10AM

<< Can the people that put beans on holders smell as good as the sniffer?
Not really a fan of having to get mulitple opinions on my coions so I would prefer it just get done right the first time even on my old green labels.

>>

That's kind of my point... PCGS gets to see the coin raw, smell it and then slab it. If a coin is in an older holder and the Coin Doctor was able to "fool' the TPG, are we naive in believing they couldn't fool CAC too when it's encased in plastic? I wonder how many graders can smell a doctored coin (a really good one)?

questor54 · June 18, 2011 11:14AM

<< 

<< Can the people that put beans on holders smell as good as the sniffer?
Not really a fan of having to get mulitple opinions on my coions so I would prefer it just get done right the first time even on my old green labels.

>>

That's kind of my point... PCGS gets to see the coin raw, smell it and then slab it. If a coin is in an older holder and the Coin Doctor was able to "fool' the TPG, are we naive in believing they couldn't fool CAC too when it's encased in plastic? I wonder how many graders can smell a doctored coin (a really good one)? >>

We are naive if we believe any system (or combination of systems) is perfect.

llafoe · June 18, 2011 11:31AM

<< We are naive if we believe any system (or combination of systems) is perfect. >>

...and it always comes back to my divorce rate!

It may not be perfect, but it's been proven to be market acceptable for the past 25 years.

Let's look at reality (okay, my reality)

... PCGS tends to sell for the most of all the TPGs (yes, there are exceptions) and NGC tends to sell for the next most, ANACS the third most, etc.; with raw coins far below PCGS and below NGC, ANACS, etc. A PCGS slab with a bean sells for the most, BUT an NGC slab with a bean sells closer to PCGS than one without a bean... so CAC "equalizes" the top two TPGs for the slabs with the bean.

PCGS are the market makers... they are the most trusted. NGC (this may get me into a little trouble) are the market buyers... they bought the ANA and PNG contracts; with ANA and PNG effectively "selling" NGC as their TPG. So as a member of either the ANA or PNG, I can take advantage of the purchased contract and the discount provided by MY organization. Why would I do this? We can all preach that ONLY the coin matters... Bravo Sierra! If you care about your collection (investment), you're going to want to maximize your profit (or minimize loss). If I own a coin in a PCGS slab and it's worth 1.5 times the EXACT same coin in an NGC slab... what should I do? If I own a coin in an older PCGS slab (one without a plastic premium) and I can submit it to SecurePlus to ensure it hasn't been doctored... what should I do? If I send my SecurePlus coin to JA for the bean and it's worth "+" money with the bean... what should I do? We can continue to argue that only the coin matters... but we all know the truth!

We may be collectors... but when it comes time to dispose of our collections, only the plastic and stickers matter!

CircOnly · June 18, 2011 11:37AM

Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

Zoins · June 18, 2011 11:41AM

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

Not very well as many collectors got taken to the cleaners when it came time to sell.

barrytrot · June 18, 2011 11:44AM

You can just take ANY PCGS coin and re-holder it to Secure, so how does that make Secure any better?

Secure is exactly the same except for the "sniffer". So there is a slightly reduced chance of "AT". Other than that exactly the same. Although a nicer box

llafoe · June 18, 2011 11:50AM

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

That's another thread!

I miss the simple G, F, VF, XF, AU, BU, ChU, GemU grades!

But, I would never give up the protection, authentication and grade opinion of PCGS.

I remember when PCGS sold the sight-unseen aspect of a TPG... great idea, hard to implement! You would literally have to have EVERY 1909-S VDB in house, grade them, stack them against all the other coins in that grade, etc., for it to work... it's not realistic. PCGS then added the "+"... that's great as long as ALL the coins come back in house to be stacked against each other... it's not realistic. Then we have CAC, which is effectively another TPG... but it's a plastic TPG and not a raw TPG. So NGC has their standards, CAC has their standards and PCGS has their standards... that's three standards... in theory, each should be consistent within their standards. So when you get a bean, ALL it's telling you is that it meets their standards (which is a mixture of PCGS and NGC standards). So a NGC CAC and a PCGS CAC are going to be relatively the same since the bean is using CACs standard... a PCGS coins is going to be relatively the same since they're using their standard, etc. If there was only one TPG or if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, there would be no CAC... it's that simple.

Since there really can't be a sight-unseen market, it's too bad the TPGs couldn't just become a mechanism to protect and to authenticate coins... then the market can decide the grade (value), but we're too far into the game for this reality. I can't remember the dealer, but I love their comment... I grade this coin $1,500... who cares what the Sheldon grade is, you don't pay in AUs or MSs, you pay in dollars.

MidLifeCrisis · June 18, 2011 11:54AM

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

Some of us did not enjoy our collections nearly as much before all this...and, in fact, left the hobby because of the all the problems that existed before TPGs. Any effort to bring some measure of objectivity, fairness, and a sense of security into this hobby for collectors should be applauded.

That said, to the OP's question, I have to echo the response of AnkurJ.

And the comments made about NGC with a CAC sticker equals PCGS, etc., are generalities at best. It really all depends on the specific coin as well as the time and manner in which it is sold. Still, stickers and pluses and shields all add some real or percieved value to a coin and can't hurt.

I commented to a guy in Baltimore today that I won't base my decision to buy a coin on whether or not it has a sticker, but a sticker can help when it comes time to sell. The same can be said for pluses and shields. They all provide a bit of "insurance", but no promises.

CircOnly · June 18, 2011 11:59AM

<< 

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

Some of us did not enjoy our collections nearly as much before all this...and, in fact, left the hobby because of the all the problems that existed before TPGs. Any effort to bring some measure of objectivity, fairness, and a sense of security into this hobby for collectors should be applauded. >>

My post was not meant to be sarcastic. I am still pretty green (not CAC'd) and still sometimes rely on the advice and opinions of others and the TPG's.

messydesk · June 18, 2011 12:04PM

They're two entirely different products. SecurePlus give assurance in the future that a coin resubmitted will be recognized as what it was when originally submitted, and as such offers a deterrent to doctoring. CAC provides assurance that there is a group of dealers that will not disparage the grade assigned to the coin, thus making it more liquid and also more valuable in the context of a sight-unseen trade.

llafoe · June 18, 2011 12:06PM

<< They're two entirely different products. SecurePlus give assurance in the future that a coin resubmitted will be recognized as what it was when originally submitted, and as such offers a deterrent to doctoring. CAC provides assurance that there is a group of dealers that will not disparage the grade assigned to the coin, thus making it more liquid and also more valuable in the context of a sight-unseen trade. >>

We all realize they're different... but which makes you feel more comfortable... more secure (pun not intended)?

frnklnlvr · June 18, 2011 11:04PM

<< If there was only one TPG or if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, there would be no CAC... it's that simple. >>

Why would this mean there would be no CAC? If for example, there was only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal in the marketplace then this wouldn't change CAC's purpose. They sticker PCGS/NGC graded coins that meet or exceed their standards, which means the coin must meet a certain quality within that grade. I don't see how this would be any different were there only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal.

Zoins · June 18, 2011 11:13PM

<< 

<< If there was only one TPG or if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, there would be no CAC... it's that simple. >>

Why would this mean there would be no CAC? If for example, there was only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal in the marketplace then this wouldn't change CAC's purpose. They sticker PCGS/NGC graded coins that meet or exceed their standards, which means the coin must meet a certain quality within that grade. I don't see how this would be any different were there only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal. >>

At the time CAC started, the TPGs own internal consistency seemed to be more at issue, which came to a head with the gradeflation era. Comparing grades between TPGs was an additional bonus, but perhaps not the original driver.

llafoe · June 18, 2011 11:21PM

<< 

<< If there was only one TPG or if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, there would be no CAC... it's that simple. >>

Why would this mean there would be no CAC? If for example, there was only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal in the marketplace then this wouldn't change CAC's purpose. They sticker PCGS/NGC graded coins that meet or exceed their standards, which means the coin must meet a certain quality within that grade. I don't see how this would be any different were there only one TPG or PCGS and NGC were equal. >>

I assume

CAC came to being because of the differences in the grading standards between PCGS and NGC? However, CAC is nothing more than a plastic TPG that has their own grading standards. Effectively, CAC is another TPG that uses a sticker in lieu of plastic. If everyone agreed (or if PCGS and NGC agreed) why would CAC exist? Would you really develop a business plan to sticker a slab if everyone shared the same standards? If CAC was the know-it-all, be-it-all in grading, then EVERY CAC stickered PCGS coin would automatically be that grade or higher at NGC and EVERY CAC stickered NGC coin would automatically be that grade or higher at PCGS... but we all know that's not reality.

Sooooo... if everyone shared the same standards, there would be no use for a service to agree with an already shared standard.

Even if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, their slabs are different enough to create their own markets... what does an additional sticker add to an already established encapsulated standard?

BAJJERFAN · June 18, 2011 11:28PM

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

Ignorance is/was bliss. What you don't know won't hurt you.

Sonorandesertrat · June 18, 2011 11:51PM

"...At the time CAC started, the TPGs own internal consistency seemed to be more at issue, which came to a head with the gradeflation era. Comparing grades between TPGs was an additional bonus, but perhaps not the original driver. "

ColonialCoinUnion · June 18, 2011 11:55PM

If you really want the answers to the questions you are asking then I'd suggest you check auction records - as many as possible - to see what real people are paying for the coins in the various holders and with or without the stickers you have described.

PerryHall · June 18, 2011 11:59PM

<< What you don't know won't hurt you. >>

Strongly disagree. Ever try to sell a coin only to find out it wasn't authentic?

Sonorandesertrat · June 19, 2011 12:09AM

"...Sooooo... if everyone shared the same standards, there would be no use for a service to agree with an already shared standard. Even if PCGS and NGC shared the same standards, their slabs are different enough to create their own markets... what does an additional sticker add to an already established encapsulated standard? "

Pick a generic coin (e.g., 1928 $20) in MS65 and a TPG, and look at three or four dozen slabbed examples graded during the last 20 years. The 'standard' that you allude to does not exist. That is the root of the problem.

keets · June 19, 2011 12:10AM

Does PCGS SecurePlus equal or surpass CAC?
I don't know why, but when I see a coin in a SecurePlus holder, it excites me more than a coin in an another PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker. When I look at coins, I wonder if they've been doctored... but when I see a coin in a SecurePlus holder, I feel confident it's original (well, at least market acceptable original). What are your thoughts?

the whole grading phenomenon has evolved from a great idea to little more than a money trap for those who insist on following it to its pre-designed conclusion, but that's a personal decision i can stand under, just not one i care to participate in. look at it this way-----the same collector who owns a certain coin today may have bought it back in the 1980's prior to the TPG revolution. he had it encapsulated by PCGS in an old rattler and it stayed there for a decade till the hype convinced him to get it re-graded. then around 2001-2002 when things were heating up he became convinced that it might get an upgrade at NGC so he crossed it there. dissatisfied with the flat pricing he decided it'd be better off in a PCGS holder so he re-crossed it around 2008 and then had CAC "verify" that grade. now we get more current with SecurePlus so our wise boy has it regraded again and follows that with another trip to CAC. now he has his coin in a PCGS SecurePlus holder with a nice CAC sticker, unwittingly waiting for the next go 'round designed to fleece him further.

i prefer to take the route endorsed by DHeath, a very wise man with some letters after his name to prove that fact!!!

it's simple, the time to get coins graded by a TPG is when you intend to sell. to me that means twice should be the limit and i'd better learn how to grade with a degree of proficienc.

llafoe · June 19, 2011 12:11AM

<< 

<< What you don't know won't hurt you. >>

Strongly disagree. Have you ever awakened with down feathers in your mouth and then saw your ex-wife with a pillow in her hand? >>

Fixed it for you...

joebb21 · June 19, 2011 12:16AM

I remember seeing a rare saint in an ms65+ secure holder that John would not sticker.

Cac coins in ngc holders sometimes dont cross to pcgs at the same grade.

llafoe · June 19, 2011 12:20AM

<< I remember seeing a rare saint in an ms65+ secure holder that John would not sticker.

Cac coins in ngc holders sometimes dont cross to pcgs at the same grade. >>

The value-add of SecurePlus is the sniffer... the knowledge that a scientific device checked a coin for tricks of a coin doctor. Not the widely accepted dipping of an unattractive coin, but the real doctoring of a coin by an expert; putty, added/removed metal, etc.

questor54 · June 19, 2011 12:28AM

As I understand it, CAC was developed because not every MS65 is equal to every other MS65, so to speak. The same sort of thing that the leading TPGs recognize by plus signs and stars.

Let's assume a best case scenario (admittedly fictional) that the grading standards between the two leading TPGs are absolutely identical, and internally consistent. No grading mistakes are ever made, and the grade on the slab is absolutely accurate. A high-end M66+ would still be worth more than a low-end MS66+.

CAC exists to recognize this fact by splitting the population of any grade into three additional tiers of 'choice-ness' - no sticker, green sticker, gold sticker. This becomes even more important if the assumption of TPG perfection is not valid. It's like getting a second opinion from an additional expert before a medical procedure. Skilled doctors can and do disagree. Of course, both doctors may be wrong. The market has recognized the value of the CAC stickers.

A coin in a Secure Plus holder with a gold CAC sticker is worth more in the marketplace than 'the same' coin in a Secure Plus holder with no CAC sticker.

This all seems pretty simple and straightforward.

llafoe · June 19, 2011 12:34AM

<< This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

Of course it does to you... it's your opinion!

questor54 · June 19, 2011 12:38AM

<< 

<< This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

Of course it does to you... it's your opinion!

>>

Yes, it is my opinion. But what of what I have written is factually inaccurate?

llafoe · June 19, 2011 12:42AM

<< 

<< 

<< This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

Of course it does to you... it's your opinion!

>>

Yes, it is my opinion. But what of what I have written is factually inaccurate? >>

I agree with it... but I do have some concerns with "what of what"!

questor54 · June 19, 2011 12:49AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

Of course it does to you... it's your opinion!

>>

Yes, it is my opinion. But what of what I have written is factually inaccurate? >>

I agree with it... but I do have some concerns with "what of what"!

>>

So do I.

curly · June 19, 2011 12:50AM

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

I can tell you from experience that the collector was a lamb among wolves back then. TPGs came along because the collectors and investors were being driven out of the hobby.

Let me give you an example why it is so much better today:

About a year or so ago, I purchased an NGC slabbed gold coin with a green sticker. This spring I sent it to PCGS and crossed it. I then sent it back to CAC to get it restickered. John sent me a note asking me to call him. He then explained to me that he thought the coin had been tooled and that he had missed it the first time. He pointed out the tooling to me but I still couldn't see it. He said that even though it was missed by both TPGs and that he himself had stickered it, his integrity wouldn't let him resticker it. He then asked me what I paid for it.

Here is a coin that passed both TPGs and CAC yet without any demand for a payment receipt, he refunded my cost of the coin ( four figures ) and also refunded my mailing cost.

And then he apologized to me for his mistake!!!!!!

Brothers, I have been collecting coins for 47 years that was the most remarkable thing to ever happen to me in numismatics.

Apologies to John for posting this without his permission.

astrorat · June 19, 2011 12:51AM

Apples and oranges. CAC is a opinion service secondary to PCGS and NGC. Regardless of what PCGS or NGC puts on THEIR label, CAC is a services that reviews THEIR opinion. Did you really want to ask about collector preference of "PCGS SecurePlus" versus "non-PCGS SecurePlus with a CAC sticker?"

llafoe · June 19, 2011 12:58AM

<< Apples and oranges. CAC is a opinion service secondary to PCGS and NGC. Regardless of what PCGS or NGC puts on THEIR label, CAC is a services that reviews THEIR opinion. Did you really want to ask about collector preference of "PCGS SecurePlus" versus "non-PCGS SecurePlus with a CAC sticker?" >>

I guess this is what I'm asking... What's more important to you; the belief that a coin in a SecurePlus holder hasn't been doctored or the belief that another grader agreed with three other graders?

MidLifeCrisis · June 19, 2011 1:30AM

All of my coins are slabbed by PCGS (that's just how it is currently - I buy NGC coins too from time to time).

None of my coins are in SecurePlus holders. I still like my coins and I have confidence in the holders they are in; i.e., I have confidence in the PCGS guarantee.

Some of my coins have CAC stickers. I like them. I also like the coins without the CAC stickers equally as much.

I don't think having a SecurePlus holder is important enough to get all my coins re-slabbed.

I don't think having a CAC sticker is important enough to send all my coins to CAC or to sell the ones that don't have CAC stickers.

littlebear · June 19, 2011 1:51AM

<< 

<< Makes me wonder how people enjoyed their collections before all this.

>>

I can tell you from experience that the collector was a lamb among wolves back then. TPGs came along because the collectors and investors were being driven out of the hobby.

Let me give you an example why it is so much better today:

About a year or so ago, I purchased an NGC slabbed gold coin with a green sticker. This spring I sent it to PCGS and crossed it. I then sent it back to CAC to get it restickered. John sent me a note asking me to call him. He then explained to me that he thought the coin had been tooled and that he had missed it the first time. He pointed out the tooling to me but I still couldn't see it. He said that even though it was missed by both TPGs and that he himself had stickered it, his integrity wouldn't let him resticker it. He then asked me what I paid for it.

Here is a coin that passed both TPGs and CAC yet without any demand for a payment receipt, he refunded my cost of the coin ( four figures ) and also refunded my mailing cost.

And then he apologized to me for his mistake!!!!!!

Brothers, I have been collecting coins for 47 years that was the most remarkable thing to ever happen to me in numismatics.

Apologies to John for posting this without his permission. >>

Now that is impressive and equally first-class!

Larry L.

frnklnlvr · June 19, 2011 1:55AM

<< As I understand it, CAC was developed because not every MS65 is equal to every other MS65, so to speak. The same sort of thing that the leading TPGs recognize by plus signs and stars.

Let's assume a best case scenario (admittedly fictional) that the grading standards between the two leading TPGs are absolutely identical, and internally consistent. No grading mistakes are ever made, and the grade on the slab is absolutely accurate. A high-end M66+ would still be worth more than a low-end MS66+.

CAC exists to recognize this fact by splitting the population of any grade into three additional tiers of 'choice-ness' - no sticker, green sticker, gold sticker. This becomes even more important if the assumption of TPG perfection is not valid. It's like getting a second opinion from an additional expert before a medical procedure. Skilled doctors can and do disagree. Of course, both doctors may be wrong. The market has recognized the value of the CAC stickers.

A coin in a Secure Plus holder with a gold CAC sticker is worth more in the marketplace than 'the same' coin in a Secure Plus holder with no CAC sticker.

This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

This is the point I was trying to make.

llafoe · June 19, 2011 1:58AM

<< 

<< As I understand it, CAC was developed because not every MS65 is equal to every other MS65, so to speak. The same sort of thing that the leading TPGs recognize by plus signs and stars.

Let's assume a best case scenario (admittedly fictional) that the grading standards between the two leading TPGs are absolutely identical, and internally consistent. No grading mistakes are ever made, and the grade on the slab is absolutely accurate. A high-end M66+ would still be worth more than a low-end MS66+.

CAC exists to recognize this fact by splitting the population of any grade into three additional tiers of 'choice-ness' - no sticker, green sticker, gold sticker. This becomes even more important if the assumption of TPG perfection is not valid. It's like getting a second opinion from an additional expert before a medical procedure. Skilled doctors can and do disagree. Of course, both doctors may be wrong. The market has recognized the value of the CAC stickers.

A coin in a Secure Plus holder with a gold CAC sticker is worth more in the marketplace than 'the same' coin in a Secure Plus holder with no CAC sticker.

This all seems pretty simple and straightforward. >>

This is the point I was trying to make. >>

How appropriate... a post by Frank that is loved by Frnklvr!

Does PCGS SecurePlus equal or surpass CAC?

Comments

Leave a Comment