So, has it been announced when grading will begin? — Welcome to the CAC Educational Forum

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

So, has it been announced when grading will begin?

edited January 21 in General
Sorry for the previous point of discussion here. I was in no way trying to be negative. I just found the situation interesting and I must have been bored. So, I haven’t seen when grading might start. Any thoughts on this?

Comments

  • So you are saying it's wrong because pcgs won't grade it the way NGC did? Maybe CAC didn't make a mistake? Were talking about different opinions here. 
  • edited January 21
    .
  • You raise a valid concern, and it seems to be that this is an anecdotal example rather than hypothetical. I haven't formed an opinion yet but ill be watching to see what others say. I might be incorrect but I'm pretty sure I've heard JA state that AU 50/53 are basically interchangeable and its difficult to discern with many coins, but in your scenario I would imagine that an AU50 would merit a gold sticker even more than it would as an AU53
  • edited January 20
    Grading and stickers are all about opinions and opinions can change over time. I do not think asking a company on an open chat room if they made a mistake the first time around is likely to be answered, nor do I think it should be. Anytime you choose to crack a coin you must also be willing to assume the risks of doing so. Also, I could be wrong, but I do not recall seeing anywhere that CAC promises or guaranties to apply a gold sticker on a coin that is downgraded due to a crossover.

    As to how would CACG grade this coin, well at this point we have no data on just how CACG's standards will equate to those of NGC or PCGS. So I do not see how anyone can offer any sort of informed opinion on how CACG will grade the coin if you submit it to them.
  • Interesting how there's confusion about this...

    CACG should grade it AU55. They should have gold stickered the coin too.

    CACG's "claim to fame" is it's supposed consistency. If they won't honor a huge mistake like this (saying a coin is solid for an AU55 and then changing their mind and saying that it's not even a solid AU53), then something is really wrong.

    Dan, you and I usually agree with a lot of stuff so your reply surprised me a bit. If AU50 and 53 are interchangeable, then why should we trust CAC's ability to tell us what coins in those grades are solid?
  • edited January 21
    FlyingAl said:
    Interesting how there's confusion about this... CACG should grade it AU55. They should have gold stickered the coin too. CACG's "claim to fame" is its supposed consistency. If they won't honor a huge mistake like this (saying a coin is solid for an AU55 and then changing their mind and saying that it's not even a solid AU53), then something is really wrong. Dan, you and I usually agree with a lot of stuff so your reply surprised me a bit. If AU50 and 53 are interchangeable, then why should we trust CAC's ability to tell us what coins in those grades are solid?
    Please note that comment about them being interchangeable is not necessarily an opinion of mine, but it was something I believe I had heard from JA in a recent interview, it made me wonder a bit too. I also stated that I may be incorrect, but allow me some time to find the interview for clarity. It is hard for me personally to identify one, Whenever I take a shot at a "GTG" my answer has never been AU53, its either 50 or 55. We may not actually disagree with each other at all 🙃
  • @FlyingAl

    The part I’m referring to is around the 48:30 mark

    https://youtu.be/q0jvJXB4njY
  • This seems pretty unfair to keyman if you ask me (unless green only means solid for "AU" and not the numeric number, like with plusses). I've seen several Washington quarters that were ms67 green cac and then upgraded to ms68 and got a green cac. They were trivially easy to find as ms67 green cac in the archives. I wish they had been gold the first time or did not get the cac the second time. It would have annoyed me less that I was the underbidder on all of them as ms67s.

  • This seems pretty unfair to keyman if you ask me (unless green only means solid for "AU" and not the numeric number, like with plusses). I've seen several Washington quarters that were ms67 green cac and then upgraded to ms68 and got a green cac. They were trivially easy to find as ms67 green cac in the archives. I wish they had been gold the first time or did not get the cac the second time. It would have annoyed me less that I was the underbidder on all of them as ms67s.
    It’s very common for coins to have green CAC and then get upgraded and get green CAC again. When JA gives out gold CAC, the coin is usually under-graded by more than one grade (typically 1.5 higher). As good as John is, grading is still subjective and his eyes are as human as the TPGS so no surprise that todays 67 is tomorrow’s 68 and vise versa. I had an 1891seated 25c in AU-58 NGC fatty with green CAC and I was convinced it was MS so I cracked out and it came back PCGS MS-63 and CAC’d again! 

  • FlyingAl said:

    Interesting how there's confusion about this...

    CACG should grade it AU55. They should have gold stickered the coin too.

    CACG's "claim to fame" is its supposed consistency. If they won't honor a huge mistake like this (saying a coin is solid for an AU55 and then changing their mind and saying that it's not even a solid AU53), then something is really wrong.

    Dan, you and I usually agree with a lot of stuff so your reply surprised me a bit. If AU50 and 53 are interchangeable, then why should we trust CAC's ability to tell us what coins in those grades are solid?

    Please note that comment about them being interchangeable is not necessarily an opinion of mine, but it was something I believe I had heard from JA in a recent interview, it made me wonder a bit too. I also stated that I may be incorrect, but allow me some time to find the interview for clarity. As you know, AU53 is a relatively new grade and it is hard for me personally to identify one. Whenever I take a shot at a "GTG" my answer has never been AU53, its either 50 or 55. We may not actually disagree with each other at all 🙃

    Sounds good to me! Either way - there's a solid difference between what constitutes a solid 55 and a solid 50. Such a jump in grade should have a change in sticker. :smile:

    I'll take a look at that interview. BTW - did CAC attempt to buyback the aforementioned coin Keyman?
  • edited January 21
    .
  • For the following reasons, I’m not really bothered by the scenario:

    The coin was removed from its original holder one or more times.

    Awarding gold CAC stickers has always been far less frequent and the requirements, not nearly as clearly defined as for green ones.

    I believe that JA has said that there are too many AU grades and that some of them are treated interchangeably.

    Submitters and re-submitters of coins know that grading is subjective and often seek to benefit from the upside of the inconsistencies, but want to be immune to the downside. And while that attitude is very prevalent, I don’t think it’s reasonable.

    Now please excuse me while I go purchase and quickly put on my flame-retardant suit.😉
Sign In or Register to comment.