Haha troll. Post CAC beans gold/green that are better than mine. If only this made it worth much more than its MS-65 grade....
The coin I use as my avatar is in a PCGS MS66 OGH with a gold CAC sticker. I've received quite a few gold CAC stickers given my relatively small number of submitted coins. Here is a better image of my avatar coin-
It is my understanding that a green CAC sticker indicates a coin that CAC believes is within the top two-thirds or one-half of the assigned grade or is actually within the bottom third or bottom half of the next grade up. However, the gold CAC sticker indicates a coin that CAC believes is clearly undergraded and should grade at least within the top two-thirds or one-half of the next grade higher up. In the case of an MS66 Barber half dollar a green sticker would mean CAC views the coin as MS66 to low end MS67 while a gold sticker would mean CAC views the coin as solid MS67 or higher.
Thank you for the information. So, if CAC feels the coin is over-graded, it just doesn't get a sticker at all? Maybe it should get a red sticker. Not that you or anyone else cares, but I find the entire CAC thing ridiculous. Maybe the CAC "people" should just open up a grading company. Instead, they just sit back second guessing what we have already paid PCGS or NGC to do, while raking in cash and laughing at us.
If they believe it is overgraded according to the CAC standards then the coin does not receive a sticker. The more valuable aspect of CAC for many, in my opinion, is that they are willing to look at coins for evidence of applied putty, methods of AT, laser etching, oiled surfaces, etc...as well as examining the grade. If the coin has evidence, in the opinion of CAC, of alteration then it will fail the process. I've written similar statements to what I am about to write on multiple occasions within the forum, but will repeat again my thoughts on the issue. CAC is a tool that is available to all and, as such, it is quite similar to knowing how to use a loupe; having the knowledge to spot counterfeit pieces; understanding what manipulated and original coinage should look like or how they will likely appear; being able to interpret printed guide prices and auction results; understanding how to grade according to the ANA standards and how this grading differs from the various TPG grading standards; and learning all the options for buying and selling within the market. Sadly, the vast majority of collectors ignore their study of coinage and thus are not truly numismatists. However, some folks pursue this knowledge and will happily listen to other opinions, regardless of whether or not they agree with those opinions. CAC can help all, but will help those who are willing to accept their help the most. Unfortunately, I hav examined the collections of many long time collectors who believe CAC to be ridiculous, useless, redundant, a money-grab, etc...and they generally have collections that are at least sprinkled with altered coins to heavily infested with altered coins, yet they have no clue because they can't be told they might learn from listening to others with different or more experience in the hobby-industry.
If a coin is not up to CAC standards, it does not receive a sticker. The idea of somehow marking failed coins has often been discussed, but doing so would be counterproductive to such a business, plus would label certain coins as being subpar. Of course, a failed sticker could simply be removed unless CAC included the cert numbers into their database, and this is something I do not see them doing, although I would think that from a collectors standpoint, it could be beneficial since the only way around it would be TPG resubmission. I respectfully disagree and believe that CAC offers an excellent and valuable service to the average/general collecting public. Little in this hobby/business offers as much value for the dollar as CAC does.
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't this what the TPG's are paid to do in addition to the grade? Not trying to argue, I am just seriously baffled by CAC.
For the record, I am not trying to start a flame war or argument about CAC. In fact, I am a raw collector anyway. Not to mention I do not collect high-dollar items like the ones seen with the green beans. So, I will just let it go, and realize that folks collect the way they want to collect. I just have a hard time understanding the value added.
You are correct that the TPGs weed out an enormous number of altered coins. However, methods of alteration change over time in a cat-and-mouse type scenario with the "coin doctors" employing novel or increasingly advanced methods to fool the TPG graders. The initial waves of some types of alterations get coins into TPG holders or into higher TPG holders than the coins might otherwise deserve, but over time some or many of these methods are revealed to the TPGs or otherwise discovered by the TPGs. Those coins that were altered and certified by TPGs prior to their knowledge of the alteration are out in the market without a warning label, if you will, but if brought to the attention of the TPG they are at times purchased and taken off the market by the TPG. CAC can serve to find some of these coins and alert their owners as to what likely has been done to the coins. This can allow owners to have the coins removed by contacting PCGS or NGC. Additionally, other alterations are well known by the TPGs, but are not obvious after first performed and the alteration is only revealed some time later as it changes. Perhaps the best known of these is the application of putty onto the surfaces of gold coins. This can fill in shallow digs or pin scratches and make a low end AU appear very high end or can make a lower end, generic MS coin appear to be a true gem and much more valuable. However, the putty will dry a bit over time and create a haze on the coin. The TPGs have a hard time finding all these coins in real time when submitted, but again CAC has the advantage of a time delay and can reject these coins. Truly, the determination of CAC is not always final and I do not always agree with what CAC decides, but the folks who work at CAC are extremely experienced and talented and they take substantially more time to review each coin than the TPGs use. This, in combination with the time delay to see changes in alterations or to learn of new alteration techniques, makes the CAC process something to think about as adding some real value.
Well Tom, that is the best explanation I have ever received. I thank you for taking the time to explain it. BooksB4Coins sent me a couple links showing the puddy issue. Now it makes sense. Is the puddy still an issue with the advent of the coin sniffer for anything recently graded at PCGS? I assume it still could be if new techniques are being used by the doctors.
Just because a coin doesn't sticker doesn't mean it is overgraded or doctored, but rather is in the low end for the grade. Overtime , the undergraded and high end (for the grade) get cracked out and resubmitted - leaving many low end or overgraded coins in the marketplace. A sure fire way to loose your shirt in this hobby is to pay good money for low end or messed with coins. With so many coins being sold over the internet, through auctions, or catalogs a CAC sticker gives me assurance that the coin is solid. For a coin I can see in hand before buying, i can do without it. For everyday coins in everyday grades i don't see the use in CAC. But for coins such as bust dollars, expensive toners, codition rarities, most gold, old proofs, key dates, ect. it is useful indeed. That is my take on it anyway.
