I have some nice Colonial coins that I would have liked to submit but CAC no longer accepts them even though they had in the past. I was wondering if anyone knew why
I don't know the answer, but I have a related question. Does CAC verify variety attributions before stickering coins? Serious question. I really don't know the answer. Because if they don't actually attribute varieties, it might not make sense for them to get too involved in colonials. Or, for that matter, Large Cents by Sheldon number, etc. I'm sure somebody here has the answers for us.
One of the issues that critics brought years about third party grading was that the coins needed to be “like a can of peas.” In other words coins within the same grade and type should be quite similar. This was supposed to support the concept of sight, unseen bidding and purchasing.
We all know that is not really possible. Every coin, within its grade, has some characteristics that make it more or less desirable. That is even more evident with "colonial" or pre-constitutional coins (pre 1792 coins). The methods and tools used to make those pieces were often primitive and it shows in the quality and eye appeal of each piece.
Higher grade colonial coins are not the same. Quite often mint caused defects have big effect on the market price. Unlike modern coins, mint errors on older pieces often LOWERS the price; errors do not increase it.
I am just taking a shot here, but that might be one of the reasons why CAC left the colonial coin market.
Too much variability. For an example NE Shillings. Well produced for the time. Not so much whether the coin is AU or MS, but whether the coin is centered, planchet round and not wavy, etc. etc.
Comments
I don't know the answer, but I have a related question. Does CAC verify variety attributions before stickering coins? Serious question. I really don't know the answer. Because if they don't actually attribute varieties, it might not make sense for them to get too involved in colonials. Or, for that matter, Large Cents by Sheldon number, etc. I'm sure somebody here has the answers for us.
Hi Jeff Great question. Please call me at 908-781-9101 to discuss. John A
One of the issues that critics brought years about third party grading was that the coins needed to be “like a can of peas.” In other words coins within the same grade and type should be quite similar. This was supposed to support the concept of sight, unseen bidding and purchasing.
We all know that is not really possible. Every coin, within its grade, has some characteristics that make it more or less desirable. That is even more evident with "colonial" or pre-constitutional coins (pre 1792 coins). The methods and tools used to make those pieces were often primitive and it shows in the quality and eye appeal of each piece.
Higher grade colonial coins are not the same. Quite often mint caused defects have big effect on the market price. Unlike modern coins, mint errors on older pieces often LOWERS the price; errors do not increase it.
I am just taking a shot here, but that might be one of the reasons why CAC left the colonial coin market.
Agree Bill.
Too much variability. For an example NE Shillings. Well produced for the time. Not so much whether the coin is AU or MS, but whether the coin is centered, planchet round and not wavy, etc. etc.
I hope JA will comment.
Hi All,
I’m a newcomer to this group and I hope to learn a lot and maybe share some experience. I was wondering why CAC does not sticker ANACS coins?
Thanks,
Orlando
Very similar to Spanish colonial Cobs with respect to being centered, full legends, dates, etc. A lot of variability aside of preservation state.
I hope the OP, @fugio1787, can give us some quick notes on the rationale here, after his conversation with JA.
I agree. I have been curious for a while.
I am even more amazed that I did not even know this until I read your post!
I hope they get back into Colonials one day- I would love to submit this MS66 RB Fugio for a sticker!
I talked to John Agre years ago about this. If I recall it was about grader availability and consistency of standards but I could be mistaken.
This is an interesting question and one that I have long pondered.