I believe the idea behind the "L" is to be an insurance policy of a sort for a previously stickered coin in the unlikely event that CACG is eventually perceived to be of lower quality/value. I do not think this is a likely outcome, but as a collector of primarily stickered coins I find the built in 'insurance' of the "L" to be comforting as I am considering crossing some stickered coins to CACG when they are up and running. I believe that adding +'s or further designators to the "L" would result in needless confusion.
I'm not sure what kind of insurance policy it would be given there's no guarantee of grade once a coin is cracked out and the TPG, PCGS or NGC, won't be specified.
While I understand the arguments against a Legacy designation, I think it's the practical reality if CACG wants to avoid getting mostly just non-stickered submissions, with most stickered coins remaining in their current holders. Do you really want only non-stickered coins to end up in CACG holders? Even with the L designation, there will still be many who choose to leave their PCGS-CAC coins in their current holders due to the fact that all the crossing from NGC to PCGS has left most of the A coins in PCGS holders. They would likely only submit under the provision that they can get a + from CACG. As for whether upgrades should still get an L or whether +'s from other services should get an L+, that just makes an already messy situation even messier. There is no ideal solution here, so at some point they have to just choose a path and go, and it appears that's what they're doing with the simple L designation.
I believe the idea behind the "L" is to be an insurance policy of a sort for a previously stickered coin in the unlikely event that CACG is eventually perceived to be of lower quality/value. I do not think this is a likely outcome, but as a collector of primarily stickered coins I find the built in 'insurance' of the "L" to be comforting as I am considering crossing some stickered coins to CACG when they are up and running. I believe that adding +'s or further designators to the "L" would result in needless confusion.
I'm not sure what kind of insurance policy it would be given there's no guarantee of grade once a coin is cracked out and the TPG, PCGS or NGC, won't be specified.
The implied insurance is simply that the coin was previously stickered. I agree the former TPG would be unknowable. I realize I may be in the minority on this but the TPG is meaningless to me so long as I like the coin and it has been stickered.
I believe the idea behind the "L" is to be an insurance policy of a sort for a previously stickered coin in the unlikely event that CACG is eventually perceived to be of lower quality/value. I do not think this is a likely outcome, but as a collector of primarily stickered coins I find the built in 'insurance' of the "L" to be comforting as I am considering crossing some stickered coins to CACG when they are up and running. I believe that adding +'s or further designators to the "L" would result in needless confusion.
I'm not sure what kind of insurance policy it would be given there's no guarantee of grade once a coin is cracked out and the TPG, PCGS or NGC, won't be specified.
The implied insurance is simply that the coin was previously stickered. I agree the former TPG would be unknowable. I realize I may be in the minority on this but the TPG is meaningless to me so long as I like the coin and it has been stickered.
Is the implied insurance more that it was slabbed by PCGS or NGC, since the CACG grade should cover the sticker?
Or is it that you think CACG may not have as much acceptance as the sticker?
I believe the idea behind the "L" is to be an insurance policy of a sort for a previously stickered coin in the unlikely event that CACG is eventually perceived to be of lower quality/value. I do not think this is a likely outcome, but as a collector of primarily stickered coins I find the built in 'insurance' of the "L" to be comforting as I am considering crossing some stickered coins to CACG when they are up and running. I believe that adding +'s or further designators to the "L" would result in needless confusion.
I'm not sure what kind of insurance policy it would be given there's no guarantee of grade once a coin is cracked out and the TPG, PCGS or NGC, won't be specified.
The implied insurance is simply that the coin was previously stickered. I agree the former TPG would be unknowable. I realize I may be in the minority on this but the TPG is meaningless to me so long as I like the coin and it has been stickered.
Is the implied insurance more that it was slabbed by PCGS or NGC, since the CACG grade should cover the sticker?
Or is it that you think CACG may not have as much acceptance as the sticker?
As I stated, to me the implied insurance is the fact an "L" coin was previously stickered. No more, no less.
I also previously stated that I think it unlikely that CACG will be perceived to be of lower quality/value than a stickered coin in a TPG holder. The market will decide that issue, however. If the market does decide CACG is in fact of a lower quality/value then those coins in CACG with an "L" will likely sell for a premium as compared to those without the "L". Hence, insurance.
Comments
Or is it that you think CACG may not have as much acceptance as the sticker?
I also previously stated that I think it unlikely that CACG will be perceived to be of lower quality/value than a stickered coin in a TPG holder. The market will decide that issue, however. If the market does decide CACG is in fact of a lower quality/value then those coins in CACG with an "L" will likely sell for a premium as compared to those without the "L". Hence, insurance.