Again, JA recently said (in this forum) that CAC has graded 1.5 million coins yet approved only 600,000 (40%). And those 1.5 million submissions were already perceived (by the submitters) to be above average for their respective grades. And I suspect that most submitters were dealers who were relatively sophisticated about grading. Do the math. A green CAC bean means above average for the grade. Period.
I disagree that the 1.5M submissions were perceived to be above average. I believe a significant percentage are bulk submissions that are not carefully pre screened on the chance they’ll get lucky.
Again, JA recently said (in this forum) that CAC has graded 1.5 million coins yet approved only 600,000 (40%). And those 1.5 million submissions were already perceived (by the submitters) to be above average for their respective grades. And I suspect that most submitters were dealers who were relatively sophisticated about grading. Do the math. A green CAC bean means above average for the grade. Period.
I disagree that the 1.5M submissions were perceived to be above average. I believe a significant percentage are bulk submissions that are not carefully pre screened on the chance they’ll get lucky.
Also, in many cases, the low cost of submission weighed against the much larger upside, probably causes a lot of submitters to be other than highly discriminating.
Even if your theory were true, the 600,000 green beaned out of the 1.5 million are still above average for their respective grades, with coin 750,000 being average (I will not consider the mere 3,000 or so gold stickers). So again, a green CAC bean means above average for the grade (an A or B coin, the former in rare cases being undergraded by a grade but not warranting a green bean in the higher grade).
But there could be other factors, variables, and influences to consider, such as a high percentage of the submissions being common Morgan dollars and other generic coins, which may have been more conservatively graded than scarcer coins by NGC and PCGS because they are extremely common, so they are already above average for the grade.
@CACfan, I’ll agree with you if @JACAC says “B” coins with green stickers are above average for the grade (and therefore agrees with the implication that “C” coins are average for the grade).
JA has stated to me many times that the B stickered coin is at least 0.4 or higher of the assigned grade. That equates to the coin grade being at least solid for the grade but it can include coins that are less than mid- range of the assigned grade but at least it it solidly within the assigned grade but NOT necessarily premium quality.
By implication, a C quality coin is definitely below average NOT average for the assigned grade.
How can a coin that is viewed as 0.3 or below of the assigned grade be considered as average?
It can only be viewed as average if 90% of similar coins graded are considered to be overgraded so it depends on the “competition.”
@CACfan, I’ll agree with you if @JACAC says “B” coins with green stickers are above average for the grade (and therefore agrees with the implication that “C” coins are average for the grade).
JA has stated to me many times that the B stickered coin is at least 0.4 or higher of the assigned grade. That equates to the coin grade being at least solid for the grade but it can include coins that are less than mid- range of the assigned grade but at least it it solidly within the assigned grade but NOT necessarily premium quality.
By implication, a C quality coin is definitely below average NOT average for the assigned grade.
How can a coin that is viewed as 0.3 or below of the assigned grade be considered as average?
It can only be viewed as average if 90% of similar coins graded are considered to be overgraded so it depends on the “competition.”
MY REPLY: But science has proven otherwise. You cannot argue with statistics. A staggering 1.5 million coins were submitted but just 600,000 were beaned. Coin 750,000 was the mean/average. Thus, all 600,000 were above average, as were the 150,000 nicer than coin 750,000 that did not quite qualify.
@CACfan, I’ll agree with you if @JACAC says “B” coins with green stickers are above average for the grade (and therefore agrees with the implication that “C” coins are average for the grade).
JA has stated to me many times that the B stickered coin is at least 0.4 or higher of the assigned grade. That equates to the coin grade being at least solid for the grade but it can include coins that are less than mid- range of the assigned grade but at least it it solidly within the assigned grade but NOT necessarily premium quality.
By implication, a C quality coin is definitely below average NOT average for the assigned grade.
How can a coin that is viewed as 0.3 or below of the assigned grade be considered as average?
It can only be viewed as average if 90% of similar coins graded are considered to be overgraded so it depends on the “competition.”
Also, you are assuming that "0.4" is not above average. It could still be in the top 30% in terms of numbers of coins that meet that standard. In other words, 70% of coins within a grade could grade lower than "0.4". It is not necessarily a percentile ranking.
@CACfan, I’ll agree with you if @JACAC says “B” coins with green stickers are above average for the grade (and therefore agrees with the implication that “C” coins are average for the grade).
JA has stated to me many times that the B stickered coin is at least 0.4 or higher of the assigned grade. That equates to the coin grade being at least solid for the grade but it can include coins that are less than mid- range of the assigned grade but at least it it solidly within the assigned grade but NOT necessarily premium quality.
By implication, a C quality coin is definitely below average NOT average for the assigned grade.
How can a coin that is viewed as 0.3 or below of the assigned grade be considered as average?
It can only be viewed as average if 90% of similar coins graded are considered to be overgraded so it depends on the “competition.”
my understanding is that B coins start at 0.5 not 0.4. Regardless if a coin is considered solid by CAC standards that would imply above average not average. C coins can range anywhere between below average to average from 0.1 to 0.4. Nobody wants a B CAC coin that is only average, defeats the illusion of CAC quality
If an “attractive” non CAC coin has been to CAC and been rejected, we all have to agree it’s either because it’s a “C” coin, has a negative “surface” issue, or some other problem that CAC has determined.
While there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a collector owning attractive non-CAC coins, those that think those coins that knowingly have been rejected by CAC have absolutely no issues are living in fantasy land!
In my opinion, I believe @FloridaFacelifter recognizes that absolutely gorgeous Proof $20 gold Lib without a CAC does indeed not merit a CAC for a reason, but feels the many positive attributes of that lovely coin outweighs the disadvantage of the reason for the coin not having a CAC.
If an “attractive” non CAC coin has been to CAC and been rejected, we all have to agree it’s either because it’s a “C” coin, has a negative “surface” issue, or some other problem that CAC has determined.
While there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a collector owning attractive non-CAC coins, those that think those coins that knowingly have been rejected by CAC have absolutely no issues are living in fantasy land!
In my opinion, I believe @FloridaFacelifter recognizes that absolutely gorgeous Proof $20 gold Lib without a CAC does indeed not merit a CAC for a reason, but feels the many positive attributes of that lovely coin outweighs the disadvantage of the reason for the coin not having a CAC.
Steve
Your points are valid but I think below average is too negative a connotation, and is overly severe. Honest difference of opinion as I like average for a C coin
Unlike all kids getting trophies in Little League, in the real world when one discusses some items that are “average”, by definition some items therefore have to be below average, like it or not.
Unlike all kids getting trophies in Little League, in the real world when one discusses some items that are “average”, by definition some items therefore have to be below average, like it or not.
Steve
But CAC uses the term PREMIUM for its stickers in its advertisements and promotions. That doesn’t jive with just average. CAC claims superior quality for their stickers not average
If an “attractive” non CAC coin has been to CAC and been rejected, we all have to agree it’s either because it’s a “C” coin, has a negative “surface” issue, or some other problem that CAC has determined.
While there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a collector owning attractive non-CAC coins, those that think those coins that knowingly have been rejected by CAC have absolutely no issues are living in fantasy land!
Steve
Just because a coin is rejected by CAC doesn’t automatically mean it’s not a B (or even A) quality example. It just means that it’s wasn’t so in the opinion of CAC. Grading is subjective and as good as CAC is, it’s still far from perfect.
Don’t forget, they sometimes sticker coins that they previously rejected. Did the initially-rejected coins have issues that subsequently disappeared before they were resubmitted and stickered? Or maybe those who thought the initially-rejected coins had no issues weren’t really living in fantasy land, after all.
Comments
But there could be other factors, variables, and influences to consider, such as a high percentage of the submissions being common Morgan dollars and other generic coins, which may have been more conservatively graded than scarcer coins by NGC and PCGS because they are extremely common, so they are already above average for the grade.
By implication, a C quality coin is definitely below average NOT average for the assigned grade.
How can a coin that is viewed as 0.3 or below of the assigned grade be considered as average?
It can only be viewed as average if 90% of similar coins graded are considered to be overgraded so it depends on the “competition.”
I think we're still giving too many people headaches, lol.
Steve
29 if they're skinny.
Steve
While there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a collector owning attractive non-CAC coins, those that think those coins that knowingly have been rejected by CAC have absolutely no issues are living in fantasy land!
In my opinion, I believe @FloridaFacelifter recognizes that absolutely gorgeous Proof $20 gold Lib without a CAC does indeed not merit a CAC for a reason, but feels the many positive attributes of that lovely coin outweighs the disadvantage of the reason for the coin not having a CAC.
Steve
Steve
Don’t forget, they sometimes sticker coins that they previously rejected. Did the initially-rejected coins have issues that subsequently disappeared before they were resubmitted and stickered? Or maybe those who thought the initially-rejected coins had no issues weren’t really living in fantasy land, after all.