At this time CAC does not differentiate within a grade, the designation of a + or *. This could be extremely financially beneficial. Will this ever occur, and if this has been discussed, please point me to the conversation.
CAC has always ignored a + or * from the other TPGs, so moving forward I would expect nothing to change in that regard. With their own slabs, I'm sure there will be pop stats and separate pricing for their own + grade coins but P or N + designations are irrelevant in the eyes of CAC.
You miss my point. If there is only one or two "+" coins that are buried with 100 non "+" coins, there is a significant financial value for WHO? The CAC POP is more realistic that NGC or PCGS. But, no "+" categories mis-represent the true value of the CAC "+" coin. CAC must retain the grade , i.e. "+" because you have to enter the grade on their form. So, CAC has the data.
It may assist you if your read this forum and the comments from CAC and members concerning your inquiry.
A question for you, to clarify your understanding of the issue you are asking:
If a piece submitted to CAC is a 64+ and receives a Green designation, what is your understanding of the CAC position?
If the same piece receives a Gold designation, what is your understanding of the CAC position?
If the same piece is re-submitted to the emerging CAC Grading entity, what is your understanding of the grading designation the piece will receive, for the previous Green Designation, or the Gold Designation?
The "point" is, that it is possible you are misunderstanding how and why CAC evaluates the piece and how it will do so when the CAC grading entity becomes active.
John, it is not what the CAC position is, There is a value of a CAC coin that is graded with a "+", however, that is an unknown POP. It is obvious that CAC coins are of much greater value than non CAC. But, like the PCGS and NGC POP there is a price value difference from the non "+" and the "+". The very same should be with the CAC POP but that is unknown. Without a doubt, knowing the POP of a "+" CAC coin would be of great value to me as a dealer. Does that better explain?
Just jumping in - I agree with your point. However, once CACG starts, since they'll be recognizing plus grades, I believe we'll start seeing in CACG pops coins with pluses. With their process of deeming CAC stickered coins that are "A" coins, we'll start seeing a bunch of those cross to + grades (but not as many as I had originally thought since @JohnButler made valuable points). With those CACG plus pops, I'm HOPING that @johnFeigenbaum 's Greysheet will then start to provide pricing for CACG + coins (the current CAC market values are provided by the Greysheet).
Separately, from around 2016 - 2020, Mark Ferguson, who is the person currently at the head of the PCGS Price Guide, had a phenomenal publication called "CAC Market Values", and he did EXACTLY as you (and I) would like. He researched auctions and other data, and provided a nice price RANGE for CAC stickered coins, both for those with whole grade numbers, AND separately, also for those with + grades!!! But he was ahead of his time. Not enough subscribers to keep it going. That's unfortunate. It was tremendously useful!
John, it is not what the CAC position is, There is a value of a CAC coin that is graded with a "+", however, that is an unknown POP. It is obvious that CAC coins are of much greater value than non CAC. But, like the PCGS and NGC POP there is a price value difference from the non "+" and the "+". The very same should be with the CAC POP but that is unknown. Without a doubt, knowing the POP of a "+" CAC coin would be of great value to me as a dealer. Does that better explain?
Yes, Thank you, the explanation of what you were asking is now clear. I certainly understand the added value to a Dealer for the information. I am not convinced that actual auction results would not provide the same information over time, although I can appreciate the value of a concise report on a regular basis for business decisions for a Dealer.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were asking, but it looks like it has been sorted out now. I also agree with you, that a true CAC + should be valued higher, and soon it will be when they start grading. In the mean time, I've been trying to buy coins that I perceive to be choice for the grade, in the "A" category, regardless of whether or not PCGS awarded the coin a + or not. If it ends up being financially sensible, I will try to cross my PCGS coins, + or no +, to a CAC slab specifying for them only to cross with a + only, otherwise id rather keep just them in the PCGS holders.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were asking, but it looks like it has been sorted out now. I also agree with you, that a true CAC + should be valued higher, and soon it will be when they start grading. In the mean time, I've been trying to buy coins that I perceive to be choice for the grade, in the "A" category, regardless of whether or not PCGS awarded the coin a + or not. If it ends up being financially sensible, I will try to cross my PCGS coins, + or no +, to a CAC slab specifying for them only to cross with a + only, otherwise id rather keep just them in the PCGS holders.
This makes sense. Additionally, as @JohnButler has correctly said, it appears that the PCGS population of + coins is probably a lot lower than the number that truly warrant + grades at PCGS. So when you use your keen eye to pick out coins superior for the grade, you're probably right on target. Not that you'll get 100% crossing to CACG at a +, but knowing some of the coins you've purchased, you'll probably do quite well.
I am not certain the last sentence is the best choice, because public perception is evolving in favor of a CAC encapsulation over PCGS/NGC in the marketplace. The question to me is how confident is a submitter that the grade meets the standard (technical, etc.) CAC uses.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were asking, but it looks like it has been sorted out now. I also agree with you, that a true CAC + should be valued higher, and soon it will be when they start grading. In the mean time, I've been trying to buy coins that I perceive to be choice for the grade, in the "A" category, regardless of whether or not PCGS awarded the coin a + or not. If it ends up being financially sensible, I will try to cross my PCGS coins, + or no +, to a CAC slab specifying for them only to cross with a + only, otherwise id rather keep just them in the PCGS holders.
I am not certain the last sentence is the best choice, because public perception is evolving in favor of a CAC encapsulation over PCGS/NGC in the marketplace. The question to me is how confident is a submitter that the grade meets the standard (technical, etc.) CAC uses.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were asking, but it looks like it has been sorted out now. I also agree with you, that a true CAC + should be valued higher, and soon it will be when they start grading. In the mean time, I've been trying to buy coins that I perceive to be choice for the grade, in the "A" category, regardless of whether or not PCGS awarded the coin a + or not. If it ends up being financially sensible, I will try to cross my PCGS coins, + or no +, to a CAC slab specifying for them only to cross with a + only, otherwise id rather keep just them in the PCGS holders.
It will all be dependent on the market reception to CAC encapsulation. The last sentence in my comment is based on there amount of comments I have read that claim that they prefer "two opinions instead of one", and the fact that a PCGS+CAC will still be eligible for the PCGS registry, which might appeal to a wider audience when it comes time to sell. Personally, I place a much higher value on CAC's opinion than PCGS, but I believe that the fact that a PCGS+CAC can be crossed to CACG at any time, will prevent the average resale value of a CAC 64 from exceeding the average resale value of a PCAC 64.
I am not certain the last sentence is the best choice, because public perception is evolving in favor of a CAC encapsulation over PCGS/NGC in the marketplace. The question to me is how confident is a submitter that the grade meets the standard (technical, etc.) CAC uses.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were asking, but it looks like it has been sorted out now. I also agree with you, that a true CAC + should be valued higher, and soon it will be when they start grading. In the mean time, I've been trying to buy coins that I perceive to be choice for the grade, in the "A" category, regardless of whether or not PCGS awarded the coin a + or not. If it ends up being financially sensible, I will try to cross my PCGS coins, + or no +, to a CAC slab specifying for them only to cross with a + only, otherwise id rather keep just them in the PCGS holders.
It will all be dependent on the market reception to CAC encapsulation. The last sentence in my comment is based on there amount of comments I have read that claim that they prefer "two opinions instead of one", and the fact that a PCGS+CAC will still be eligible for the PCGS registry, which might appeal to a wider audience when it comes time to sell. Personally, I place a much higher value on CAC's opinion than PCGS, but I believe that the fact that a PCGS+CAC can be crossed to CACG at any time, will prevent the average resale value of a CAC 64 from exceeding the average resale value of a PCAC 64.
That is a thoughtful opinion, and I concur. My failure, as it applies to the reasons for a collector's preference of which TPG/4PG, is that I do not consider investment and/or profit as a priority in my choice of acquiring a piece. I am aware I should, and I do, to the extent of overall availability of unencumbered funds to spend, but I am somewhat disheartened by the trend for the last several years to emphasize investment. I do not consider it wrong to emphasize profit/investment, but I do not personally experience any increased enthusiasm for the hobby when I am contemplating buying a piece, and the seller emphasizes same, over the enjoyment of the hobby.
Seems to me CACG + is worth more than PCGS/CAC + as CAC is only stickering the whole PCGS number not necessarily the plus as I understand it
My prediction is that a CACG 64+ will ,on average, trade at a higher amount than than a PCAC 64+, so I agree.
I think that is a safe opinion, with the caveat that you meant to type PCGS and not PCAC, but that may be because PCAC may be something I do not know about.
Comments
members concerning your inquiry.
A question for you, to clarify your understanding of the issue you are asking:
If a piece submitted to CAC is a 64+ and receives a Green designation, what is your understanding of the CAC position?
If the same piece receives a Gold designation, what is your understanding of the CAC position?
If the same piece is re-submitted to the emerging CAC Grading entity, what is your understanding of the grading designation the piece will receive, for the previous Green Designation, or the Gold Designation?
The "point" is, that it is possible you are misunderstanding how and why CAC evaluates the piece and how it will do so when the CAC grading entity becomes active.
Separately, from around 2016 - 2020, Mark Ferguson, who is the person currently at the head of the PCGS Price Guide, had a phenomenal publication called "CAC Market Values", and he did EXACTLY as you (and I) would like. He researched auctions and other data, and provided a nice price RANGE for CAC stickered coins, both for those with whole grade numbers, AND separately, also for those with + grades!!! But he was ahead of his time. Not enough subscribers to keep it going. That's unfortunate. It was tremendously useful!
Steve
I certainly understand the added value to a Dealer for the information. I am not convinced that actual auction results would not provide the same information over time, although I can appreciate the value of a concise report on a regular basis for business decisions for a Dealer.
Steve
I am not certain the last sentence is the best choice, because public perception is evolving in favor of a CAC encapsulation over PCGS/NGC in the marketplace. The question to me is how confident is a submitter that the grade meets the standard (technical, etc.) CAC uses.
If
My prediction is that a CACG 64+ will ,on average, trade at a higher amount than than a PCAC 64+, so I agree.
I am old, and old ways die, I know.
Start the tomato and rotten cabbage attack.....
Steve
I try to keep current, but, then SHE shows up.....
By the way, I love your sense of humor!
Steve