Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What I Like and Dislike the Most About CAC
After buying and selling CAC coins since their 2007 inception, here are my main verdicts:
PLUSES: salability, prestige, de facto grading guarantee, personal reputations of JA and his posse, excitement added to the hobby, and education about grading given to consumers (which I think was CAC's initial mission).
MINUSES: all non-CACable coins are thrown under the bus and the expected excessive premiums added for some beaned coins.
PLUSES: salability, prestige, de facto grading guarantee, personal reputations of JA and his posse, excitement added to the hobby, and education about grading given to consumers (which I think was CAC's initial mission).
MINUSES: all non-CACable coins are thrown under the bus and the expected excessive premiums added for some beaned coins.
Tagged:
Comments
MINUSES: all non-CACable coins are thrown under the bus and the expected excessive premiums added for some beaned coins.
----------
So my question is, how will CAC-Grading impact this effect? It seems like it may create a three tier market:
CAC-stickered and CAC-Grading Legacy coins on top
CAC-Grading non-Legacy coins in the middle
Non-stickered PCGS and NGC coins on the bottom
Or even more tiers if you put PCGS above NGC as many people do. It could make for a very complex, but very interesting market.
Will owners of coins in that bottom set refer to your categorization as tiers or “tears”, lol.
Steve
I trust CACG and will let them handle my collection. PCGS involvement unneeded and unwanted . I don’t believe having the 2 “opinions” on a coin offers any value . We already have that. The reason CAC became so successful is because collectors questioned the gradings accuracy and values the professional opinion of JA and his team . I know a lot of guys that won’t buy non cac gold , shows how little they trust others .
1) If neither coins are +, the market can value a PCGS/CAC coin more than a CACG coin of the same grade but not vice versa because PCGS/CAC is guaranteed to cross to CACG at the same grade or even get a +.
2) Multiple opinions matter. We know this because the market currently value PCGS/CAC coins more than NGC/CAC coins. If all that mattered is CAC's opinion, then those 2 coins will be the same value.
Opinions matter ? I agree . But think about this . IE: a 1920 Saint ms 64 , let’s say it goes for $6,000 . With a PQ sticker ( a 2nd opinion ) it goes for $5,500 🤣😂 😆🙄
Now take same coin with 64 CAC approval shoots up to $9 to $11,000
Why ? Both are 2nd opinions . It’s because collectors value the opinion so much they’ll pay 2 to 3 x a coins value for it. Think about that !!! CACG will be the trusted name and opinion in coins moving forward .
I dislike the fact they aren't within a 40 min drive from me now.....I have to rely on the mail system or fed x now....
The issue here is that PCGS and CAC have different grading standards. It's not just that CAC is slightly stricter. It's that the standards are actually different in ways that are not clear cut. Some coins are graded higher by CAC than PCGS. I know because I have some coins like this 1909 $10 proof coin that is graded PR 66+ by PCGS and given a gold CAC sticker. This means CAC thinks it's at least 1 grade higher if not more. But I have sent the coin to PCGS to regrade and they think 66+ is the correct grade. They don't see it as a 67. If I cross it to CACG, it will definitely cross at 67 and might even get a 68! If I did cross this coins to CACG 67, it will be a coin that CAC thinks is 67 but PCGS does not. Now compare this coin to a coin that is PCGS/CAC 67. Which coin do you think the market will value more sight unseen? A coin that both grading service says is 67 or a coin that only one grading service says is 67?
Legend , part of trusting JA is trusting his leadership skills , ability to build a strong team and oversee their training , standards set and ability of the team to maintain quality . Unless such a time comes that quality is slipping there is little reason to be overly concerned .
Anyways, I don't think I'm able to change your opinion. Let's see what happens after CACG launches. It's going to happen soon.
1. A more conservative grading standard by PCGS back then by some of the top shelf original graders.
2. Coin stability given how long the coin has been in the OGH holder.
3. Two party opinion versus only one.
4. The allure that the coin could possibly upgrade to a “plus” or the next grade higher.
5. Less worry about the coin being gradeflated or doctored up.
CACG will certainly have its place as one thing it will do is restore many over-graded coins back to the proper grade. Perhaps the CACG coins will carry a slight premium over their modern holdered PCGS CAC counterparts.
"Some coins are graded higher by CAC than PCGS. I know because I have some coins like this 1909 $10 proof coin that is graded PR 66+ by PCGS and given a gold CAC sticker. This means CAC thinks it's at least 1 grade higher if not more. But I have sent the coin to PCGS to regrade and they think 66+ is the correct grade. They don't see it as a 67".
I have encountered a similar experience. Dropped off my 67 (originally graded in 2001) at the show for PCGS reconsideration, just hoping for a plus (they don't do 68's in this series). It blows away the few 67+ coins I have seen, and is even superior to the lone 68. They said NO, so it remains in the old blue holder.
I agree some coins are graded higher by CAC than PCGS, but for every one that is, there are 10 times as many graded higher by PCGS than CAC. There isn't much debate that CAC has tougher grading standards and is more consistent than PCGS.
If NGC CAC coins sell for less on the market, well, a nice strategy presents itself for acquiring quality CAC coins for less money.
I have read many comments via Ms. Sperber (No, I am not signaling Ms. Sperber out...it is just that she is repetitive in her enthusiasm for one over the other) and her preference for PCGS/CAC over NGC/CAC, and the same type of commentary from others.
It is a conundrum, to me, and I can not think of a logic posit that supports the choice of inequality.
It is equal to a hypothetical without the hypo.