CAC Dealers...

[just-john]

10 or 20 yrs the only sticker I'LL have will be tied to my toe

[MarkFeld]

Why even submit the coins to NGC or PCGS? If you trust their grading abilities...why would you need another to authenticate the grade.

 

I guess it would be like buying an apple tree at Lowe's or Home Depot then driving over to your local nursery and having them say "yep" that's an apple tree and paying for them say that.

 

IMHO I believe it's just someone's idea to make money and/or to mark up the value of coins just because a label is on it. Just a scam and/or marketing ploy just like the "First Strike" and "Early Release" programs. People are paying money for things that mean absolutely nothing!

Your apple tree analogy doesn't begin to equate with getting a second expert opinion on a coin, the vaue of which is usually largely dependent upon the assigned grade.Your analogy might have made sense if, for example, we were merely talking about whether a Washington Quarter is in fact a Washington Quarter or not. But that's clearly not what we're talking about.

 

Why ever get a second opinion from a doctor? Because sometimes, if not often, two opinions are better than one. And while you might not care about a second opinion, some people do.

[EZ_E]

Well, Mark, what if you wanted to know if it were a Rambo apple tree?

 

You know that's where the author got the name for Sylvester Stallone's character? From the name brand of a Washington apple.

 

I admit that I have a little more confidence in a coin with the CAC sticker, I still don't like the waves it's causing, though, that are negatively affecting me personally.

 

And, no, I'm not going to submit flow charts and misc data to substantiate my claim.

[MarkFeld]

I still don't like the waves it's causing, though, that are negatively affecting me personally...

Victor, would you mind submitting flow charts and misc data to substantiate your claim?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WinstonWare]

I can understand and appreciate the second opinion argument. I’ll admit that I’d feel more comfortable buying an NGC or PCGS certified coin if I were buying from someone I did not know and the price was high for me. A second opinion could similarly be reassuring. I think time will tell if CAC approved coins receive the necessary respect to provide that reassurance to collectors like myself…

 

With that said, I would see it as a liquidity issue rather than a value add issue for the given coin i.e. someone with greater knowledge and experience may be willing to spend x dollars for the coin w/o the reassurances that I would require to spend the same amount of money.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

Sage Rad, look at B&M, Heritage or DLRC prices and history, tete a tete, CAC vs. not CAC. IMHO, what Victor states about CAC prices has some basis in fact and merit.

 

OT3, I have, and frankly I don't see it. I see what I've always seen -- good coins go for higher prices, and no-so-good coins go for lower prices; regardless if they are stickered or not....Mike

 

The thing that I don't really understand is, if the stickers are making so little difference in the market, and having no upward price impact on coins that are allegedly "PQ" .... then why do we need stickers at all?

 

For the approximately 20 coins that I received CAC acceptance of/stickers for AFTER already having bought and priced them, I did not raise my asking price on a single coin. And for the approximately 20 CAC coins that were already stcikered at the time I bought them, I don't feel that I necessarily had to pay a premium for them. I paid good money for good coins, as I would have done, had they not been stickered.

 

Mark, it's probably a dumb question ... but would you lower your prices on coins that failed to sticker?

[MarkFeld]

Sage Rad, look at B&M, Heritage or DLRC prices and history, tete a tete, CAC vs. not CAC. IMHO, what Victor states about CAC prices has some basis in fact and merit.

 

OT3, I have, and frankly I don't see it. I see what I've always seen -- good coins go for higher prices, and no-so-good coins go for lower prices; regardless if they are stickered or not....Mike

 

The thing that I don't really understand is, if the stickers are making so little difference in the market, and having no upward price impact on coins that are allegedly "PQ" .... then why do we need stickers at all?

 

For the approximately 20 coins that I received CAC acceptance of/stickers for AFTER already having bought and priced them, I did not raise my asking price on a single coin. And for the approximately 20 CAC coins that were already stcikered at the time I bought them, I don't feel that I necessarily had to pay a premium for them. I paid good money for good coins, as I would have done, had they not been stickered.

 

Mark, it's probably a dumb question ... but would you lower your prices on coins that failed to sticker?

No one "needs" stickers. For various reasons, however, some buyers and sellers prefer them. If after all of the discussions, you don't understand or appreciate why, I don't think it will do any good to re-hash those reasons, yet again. And the bottom line is that CAC is most assuredly not for you.

 

No, I would not lower prices on coins that failed to sticker.

[gmarguli]

No, I would not lower prices on coins that failed to sticker.

 

If a green sticker prices them at their current grade and a gold sticker prices them at the next higher grade, then the failure non-sticker should price them at the next grade below.

[EZ_E]

No, I would not lower prices on coins that failed to sticker.

 

If a green sticker prices them at their current grade and a gold sticker prices them at the next higher grade, then the failure non-sticker should price them at the next grade below.

 

Ah, zee chef has returned to stir the pot some more.

 

[MikeInFL]

I see what I've always seen -- good coins go for higher prices, and no-so-good coins go for lower prices

 

 

That has usually always been the case. My main point is that bids are increasing across the board with the C & D coins selling at discounts unless sold to a "sucker".

 

Now, the market is changing where nice coins for the grade cannot be cherry picked.

 

Conversely, the dregs will tail along with the price increases.

 

JA even backs up what I am saying in his interview.

 

What's wrong with that? It sounds like progress to me. Or does the need to cherrypick outweigh the greater good?

[WinstonWare]

No, I would not lower prices on coins that failed to sticker.

 

If a green sticker prices them at their current grade and a gold sticker prices them at the next higher grade, then the failure non-sticker should price them at the next grade below.

 

Ah, zee chef has returned to stir the pot some more.

 

Yorn desh born, der ritt de gitt der gue,

Orn desh, dee born desh, de umn bork! bork! bork!

[MikeInFL]

Sage Rad, look at B&M, Heritage or DLRC prices and history, tete a tete, CAC vs. not CAC. IMHO, what Victor states about CAC prices has some basis in fact and merit.

 

OT3, I have, and frankly I don't see it. I see what I've always seen -- good coins go for higher prices, and no-so-good coins go for lower prices; regardless if they are stickered or not....Mike

 

The thing that I don't really understand is, if the stickers are making so little difference in the market, and having no upward price impact on coins that are allegedly "PQ" .... then why do we need stickers at all?

 

No one "needs" stickers. For various reasons, however, some buyers and sellers prefer them. If after all of the discussions, you don't understand or appreciate why, I don't think it will do any good to re-hash those reasons, yet again. And the bottom line is that CAC is most assuredly not for you.

 

What Mark said.

[CarlWohlforth]

I like this thread! I've learned that TDN can't detect a doctored coin, but I know from previous threads that he has spent huge amounts of dough on coins. Perhaps if I were to spend millions I would pay peanuts for more opinions...

 

I had some "Mad Marty" toned proof Jeff nickels. I sent some to PCGS. Some were slabbed, later some were not. I went to a coin show and John A. was selling a slabbed MM nickel for $400!!!!!!! I offered to sell him a better one raw for $35. He said he would buy all I could offer if I got them into holders. He would pay nothing for a raw coin. Smart guy! He already knew PCGS closed the gate...

 

This is a diversion. It complicates the issue. Coins are expensive. If you agree don't buy the coin! If coins are cheap by coins, labels, sickers or whatever!

 

I have friends who spend tons on hobbies and the money disappears. If you are OK with that buy what you want. If you really think you are making an investment then learn how to grade coins and ignore stickers.

[just-john]

POST FLOW CHART

1ST POST 1:36 PM 1 POST PER HR first hr

2:01PM 9 post that hr

3:07 PM 5 post that hr

4:11PM 9 post that hr

5:05 PM 3 post that hr

6:01 PM 5 post that hr

7:05 PM 5 post that hr

8:22 PM 1 post that hr

9:22PM 5 post that hr

10:03PM 5 post that hr

11:08PM 4 post that hr

12:14 AM 4 post that hr

1:33 AM 1 post that hr

2AM OOOOOO

3AM 00000000

4:26 AM 1 that hr

5:51 AM 1 post that hr

6AM OOOO

7 AM 00000

8:03 am 3 post that hr

9:24AM 6 post that hr

10;02 am 5 post that hr

11:11am 6 post that hr

12:37 3 post that hr

LUNCH 12:48 THRU 1;43 no post==== 1 Hour lunch coin collectors have good jobs

1:43 PM 2 that hr

2:14PM 4 post that hr

3:07PM ====21 Post that hr

4;11 PM --------28 POST THAT HR

5:00PM 5 post that hr

6;02 pM 3 post that hr

DINNER No post between 6:51 pm and 7:51 PM

7:51PM 3 post that hr

8:05 PM 2 post that hr

9:01 PM 6 POST THAT HR

10:30 PM 3 POST that HR

 

numismatist are most active between 3PM AND 4 PM

LEAVE 15 MIN EARLY FOR LUNCH

TAKE ABOUT 1 HR FOR SUPPER

make me wish i could type

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

I went to a coin show and John A. was selling a slabbed MM nickel for $400!!!!!!!

Carl, that doesn't sound right and I strongly suspect you have John A. confused with someone else - really. He attends very few shows, doesn't set up at them, rarely has anything for sale and that doesn't sound like the type of material he handles or has handled in the past.

[Jeffrey Cardona]

How many opinions will it take for somebody to satified with the grade of a coin...2..3..4 or more?

 

My new company will review coins and we will put a sticker on a coin that means we reviewed the CAC sticker that review the TPG that graded the coin and it meets everybodies standard! For an extra charge we will add a second slab over the original slab instead of a sticker. When will it stop?

 

I trust NGC to do their job correctly but like everybody else, there will be mistakes. But to have coins with a sticker on them to make a person feel better about a grade is a bit over the top. If there are issues with a coin please get a second opinion but to have a second authentication process, just for the sake of it, is a bit redundent IMHO.

 

Remember..."buy the coin...not the slab"...or in this case...not the sticker.

[CarlWohlforth]

"Carl, that doesn't sound right and I strongly suspect you have John A. confused with someone else - really"

 

That could very well be the case. I'm sure there are several dealers named Albanese. I remember the event clearly but it is possible I remember the name wrong. My apologies to John A.

[CHABSENTIA]

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

Or could it be that it's not actually about the money but more about providing a needed service to the collecting community? Since moderns are less likely to be puttied, lasered, stripped and retoned, enhanced, etc - where is the value added?

 

Face facts - there are plenty of doctored coins in TPG holders. Go view a major auction sometime ... you'll see them by the dozens.

 

Is there an echo in here ? "Where is the value added " was my point. There is no value added and consequently there is no room for Profit.

 

People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

 

[EZ_E]

JA states in his interview that he played the grading games that the top two are known so well to perform. He states how reluctant grades are given if that incremental increase in grade sees a huge jump in price. Whereas, if it were a low dollar coin then the higher grade would be given.

 

Which boils down to cause and effect. CAC is the cause which is effecting the grading services to grade much tighter now, especially since January.

 

Once again, I offer no charts and graphs.

[Tradedollarnut]

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

Or could it be that it's not actually about the money but more about providing a needed service to the collecting community? Since moderns are less likely to be puttied, lasered, stripped and retoned, enhanced, etc - where is the value added?

 

Face facts - there are plenty of doctored coins in TPG holders. Go view a major auction sometime ... you'll see them by the dozens.

 

Is there an echo in here ? "Where is the value added " was my point. There is no value added and consequently there is no room for Profit.

 

People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

 

You are comparing apples to oranges. CAC refusing to sticker a coin does not necessarily mean the coin is overgraded. So yes, CAC standards are higher than those of the TPGs. So what? How in the world is that a poor reflection upon anything?

[ctrl-migration]

You are comparing apples to oranges. CAC refusing to sticker a coin does not necessarily mean the coin is overgraded. So yes, CAC standards are higher than those of the TPGs. So what? How in the world is that a poor reflection upon anything?

Not stickering a grade means that it is anything from C and below. It could very well mean "grossly overgraded" (D, F or worse), just as much as it could mean it's a "C" for the grade. They don't do the service of specifying that. A "C" MS-65 is still an MS-65 per CAC.

[MarkFeld]

....People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

Maybe no one answered your question because no one else was worried about it. But either way, you appear to be making a huge jump to a conclusion in your stated scenario - I don't expect that there will be "irate buyers". Nor will they "return these coins to PCGS and NGC...". Even with perfectly consistent and accurate grading (which people understand we don't have), a coin could have been accurately graded as a (low end) coin of grade X years ago and still merit that grade today, but be refused a sticker. You seem to be taking a very simple concept and trying to turn it into something much bigger and more complicated than it really is.

[MikeInFL]

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

Or could it be that it's not actually about the money but more about providing a needed service to the collecting community? Since moderns are less likely to be puttied, lasered, stripped and retoned, enhanced, etc - where is the value added?

 

Face facts - there are plenty of doctored coins in TPG holders. Go view a major auction sometime ... you'll see them by the dozens.

 

Is there an echo in here ? "Where is the value added " was my point. There is no value added and consequently there is no room for Profit.

 

People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

 

Here's your answer...

 

Said simply, one explanation is the TPG made a mistake in your example. It is worth noting that JA didn't grade all the coins back then, and nobody is perfect. Are you?

 

A second, and perhaps the more logical, explanation is the coin is simply low-end for the grade. Remember, CAC isn't saying a coin which doesn't get a sticker is necesarily overgraded. From the CAC website:

 

3. If a coin doesn’t receive a CAC sticker, does this mean CAC believes the coin is over-graded?

 

Absolutely not. There are many coins that are certified accurately for their grade. Unfortunately, it is an inescapable reality that many are at the lower end of the quality range for the assigned grade. CAC’s rejection of a coin does not necessarily mean that CAC believes the coin has been over-graded. It simply means that there are other coins with CAC stickers that are of higher quality for the grade. CAC will eventually reject tens of thousands of accurately graded coins. Many of these rejected coins will be acceptable to numerous dealers and collectors and will continue to be available in the marketplace. For quality-conscious collectors and dealers, a coin with a CAC sticker will have significant meaning.

 

Hope this helps...Mike

[IrishMike]

My first reaction when I read the title is who gives a flying truck. After reading it my opinion hasn't changed. Some of youse guys cwack me up as I see many collectors rushing up to certain dealers to get their opinion on a coin graded by one of the TPG's. I guess as long as their opinion is free its an ok thing to do. The minute they want to charge for their expertise porcupines find their way up your butts.

[MarkFeld]

The minute they want to charge for their expertise porcupines find their way up your butts.

Hi Mike. I like that line

[physics-fan3.14]

The minute they want to charge for their expertise porcupines find their way up your butts.

Hi Mike. I like that line

 

Sounds rather uncomfortable.

[BillJones]

If "the reasons CAC was formed were all about coin doctoring and overgrading", then why would they not also issue an "overgraded" judgement? Seems reasonable if that's what they're there for.

 

GET REAL!

 

If you owned such a coin would you leave that black mark on it when it came time to sell it? There is honesty then there is just plain foolish. People do not shoot themselves in the foot on purpose, at most of the time.

 

Like I said, you don't see many coins with body bag papers offered for sale at coin shows. Sure I've seen a few, but most of the time the dealer was showing them while he was complaining about the way the grading service had treated him.

[CHABSENTIA]

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

Or could it be that it's not actually about the money but more about providing a needed service to the collecting community? Since moderns are less likely to be puttied, lasered, stripped and retoned, enhanced, etc - where is the value added?

 

Face facts - there are plenty of doctored coins in TPG holders. Go view a major auction sometime ... you'll see them by the dozens.

 

Is there an echo in here ? "Where is the value added " was my point. There is no value added and consequently there is no room for Profit.

 

People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

 

Here's your answer...

 

Said simply, one explanation is the TPG made a mistake in your example. It is worth noting that JA didn't grade all the coins back then, and nobody is perfect. Are you?

 

A second, and perhaps the more logical, explanation is the coin is simply low-end for the grade. Remember, CAC isn't saying a coin which doesn't get a sticker is necesarily overgraded. From the CAC website:

 

3. If a coin doesnt receive a CAC sticker, does this mean CAC believes the coin is over-graded?

 

Absolutely not. There are many coins that are certified accurately for their grade. Unfortunately, it is an inescapable reality that many are at the lower end of the quality range for the assigned grade. CACs rejection of a coin does not necessarily mean that CAC believes the coin has been over-graded. It simply means that there are other coins with CAC stickers that are of higher quality for the grade. CAC will eventually reject tens of thousands of accurately graded coins. Many of these rejected coins will be acceptable to numerous dealers and collectors and will continue to be available in the marketplace. For quality-conscious collectors and dealers, a coin with a CAC sticker will have significant meaning.

 

Hope this helps...Mike

 

It does make a dfference. If mistakes were made when he was in charge of the two TPGs then what is ti say that mistakes will not be made while he is in charge of CAC? Is he going to be grading all the coins for a CAC sticker?In fact he states in the Rosen Interview that "Graders are only human and that mistakes will be made". Since this is the case then why is there a need for CAC.?

 

I mention only the possible Legal responses should tens of thousands of coins be submitted back to the TPGs since I have not seen where CAC is going to refund the Money if they refuse to sticker a coin.

 

The problem would be a little different if JA had not started CAC.

[MarkFeld]

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

Or could it be that it's not actually about the money but more about providing a needed service to the collecting community? Since moderns are less likely to be puttied, lasered, stripped and retoned, enhanced, etc - where is the value added?

 

Face facts - there are plenty of doctored coins in TPG holders. Go view a major auction sometime ... you'll see them by the dozens.

 

Is there an echo in here ? "Where is the value added " was my point. There is no value added and consequently there is no room for Profit.

 

People still don't want to answer my original question many moths ago when I brought it up so I will give an example.

 

There is a Morgan dollar in a holder by a top TPG who we weill call TPG #1. It presently does not have a CAC sticker and the Buyer decides to obtain one. CAC refuses to give one and says it is overgraded.

 

It turns out that Albanese was a Founder or one of the Co Founders at TPG #1 when this particular coin was certified.There are these possible conclusions.

 

1. CAC standards are more strict now then when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1

2. The Standards were too low at TPG #1 when Albanese was running the show at TPG #1.

 

Either way CAC is suspect in either #1 or #2 because Albanese is also the founder of TPG#1 and I find it hard to believe that each and every sticker granted or not granted by CAC is going to reflect 100% of the Tenure of Albanese at either PCGS or NGC.

 

I assume that PCGS and NGC has databases that give dates of when this coin were certified . What happens when irate Buyers return these coins to PCGS and NGC because a sticker was refused and because of the a large number of them that PCGS and NGC in their defense shows that these coins were certified during his Tenure?

 

Not only is CAC then suspect in the first place in #1 and #2 above but in the latter case there is going to be lot of irate CAC holders.

 

 

Here's your answer...

 

Said simply, one explanation is the TPG made a mistake in your example. It is worth noting that JA didn't grade all the coins back then, and nobody is perfect. Are you?

 

A second, and perhaps the more logical, explanation is the coin is simply low-end for the grade. Remember, CAC isn't saying a coin which doesn't get a sticker is necesarily overgraded. From the CAC website:

 

3. If a coin doesnt receive a CAC sticker, does this mean CAC believes the coin is over-graded?

 

Absolutely not. There are many coins that are certified accurately for their grade. Unfortunately, it is an inescapable reality that many are at the lower end of the quality range for the assigned grade. CACs rejection of a coin does not necessarily mean that CAC believes the coin has been over-graded. It simply means that there are other coins with CAC stickers that are of higher quality for the grade. CAC will eventually reject tens of thousands of accurately graded coins. Many of these rejected coins will be acceptable to numerous dealers and collectors and will continue to be available in the marketplace. For quality-conscious collectors and dealers, a coin with a CAC sticker will have significant meaning.

 

Hope this helps...Mike

 

It does make a dfference. If mistakes were made when he was in charge of the two TPGs then what is ti say that mistakes will not be made while he is in charge of CAC? Is he going to be grading all the coins for a CAC sticker?In fact he states in the Rosen Interview that "Graders are only human and that mistakes will be made". Since this is the case then why is there a need for CAC.?

 

I mention only the possible Legal responses should tens of thousands of coins be submitted back to the TPGs since I have not seen where CAC is going to refund the Money if they refuse to sticker a coin.

 

The problem would be a little different if JA had not started CAC.

Of course mistakes will be made - no one has said otherwise. That doesn't mean that a second expert opinion isn't better than just one. It really is that simple.

[ctrl-migration]

Perhaps the major TPGs simply need to adopt an extra level of precision for the grading scale. Formally introduce MS-##-{A,B,C} and be done with it. Or even better (more lucrative for the dealers and more off-putting for normal collectors), multiply the current numerical grade by 10, introducing 10 more points of precision. MS-###. That should solve the world's problems... (I'm quite aware this is not a new idea, don't worry.)