Ah, so they'll be just like the other TPGs, but with stricter grading? Hmm. Wonder if this will be "we will always grade coins 2/3 of a point more strictly than those other guys do in mid-2023", or "we will always grade coins 2/3 of a point more strictly than those guys would on any given day"? In other words, are they aiming for "gradeflation stops here", or just "we'll always be a little stricter than our competitors"?
That gets going and PCGS and NGC will start stickering CAC’s coins and their endorsements will be just as discriminating.
I am sincere in stating that I don't think you understand the nature, purpose, goal and commitment of CAC (and what is popularly becoming known as CACG). You would benefit by navigating to the website, and start reading... beginning with Dec. 2021 and forward until now. It is not like you to be presumptively dismissive and not informed. Unless you were stealing a page from my satire replies Playbook Then I would understand, and welcome the competition for the top spot, in that classification.
I think they’ll be more strict overall. More strict in their technical grading and also more strict on problem coins. The top two TPGs let a good number of problem coins through, whether it be cleaned or artificially toned… at least that’s my opinion. It’s concerning the number of blatantly AT coins that pass. I’m hoping that the inception of CACG will mitigate a lot of the problem coins that pass at the top two, although I fear it may get worse as a way for them to compensate for the probable loss of business.
This is one of the problems I see with CACG. Downgrading a properly graded MS-64 from ANY OTHER TPGS.
I think we'll have to continue in disagreement. If a coin is in a CAC slab, then there is evidence that it has been graded by only one organization ... CAC. If a coin is in a PCGS or NGC holder and has a CAC sticker, then there is evidence that it has been graded by two organizations. Now if you believe CAC accuracy is always equal to or better than PCGS or NGC, then OK for you. Personally, I think it's better to have two independent TPGs grade a coin and agree on the grade. Cal
How is that factual? Are you referring to a previously CAC stickered piece? How is that factual, if the piece is submitted raw to what is being identified as the new CACG? The previous stickering entity (CAC) DID NOT HAVE A SLAB. How is that factual, if the piece was first submitted to PCGS, then cracked out and submitted to NGC, or, if you prefer, submitted to NGC first, and then sent to PCGS? How is it factual, if the piece was sent to either PCGS or NGC, having been graded by PCGS or NGC and submitted as "cross at any grade" or "cross at same grade" and is/was in a PCGS Slab or NGC slab? How is it factual, if the piece...be it in a PCGS slab or NGC slab.... was sent to CAC for sticker consideration, and was sent back to the submitter without a Sticker-green or gold? How is that factual, if the CAC sticker entity either judged the piece to be an A or B or C piece. Only A and B pieces received a sticker. A piece might not receive a sticker if the piece is judged to be a 'C' piece. IT DOES NOT MEAN CAC "graded" the piece as not the Grade on the PCGS or NGC Holder. As to the preference and/or confidence in the entity that a person chooses, that is their purview and choice, and is neither good or bad. It just is. My reply is simply as a voice against non-factual statements. Other than that, I got nuttin".
That is not necessarily fact...because a review can be requested. It is not "downgrading" simply because it did not have a Green or Gold sticker. Using your example, it could simply be an MS64 'C' coin, and would still be graded a 64. Neither will the piece be downgraded to 63 or Details. Yes, it could be, it depends on the piece. There is also the "L" designation for previously stickered CAC pieces being submitted to CACG. But you know all this, because you have been intimately involved in the discussions on the CAC Boards.
First a definition for current discussion: “CAC slab” means a coin in a slab of CACG; it does not mean a PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker. If presented with a coin in a CAC slab, initially all you know is CAC’s grade for it. Now it might be possible if someone tells you about the coin’s history to know whether it was graded previously or if the coin is uniquely identifiable in photographs, it might be possible to track its history. If a coin is in a PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker, initially you know it has been graded by PCGS or NGC plus CAC … i.e. graded by two independent grading services. Now it might be possible if someone tells you about the coin’s history to know whether it was graded previously or if the coin is uniquely identifiable in photographs, it might be possible to track its history. Cal
CACG Slabs are just now being graded, and the first will be numbered 1-20, based on a contest held by the entity. You may substitute any TPG/4PG designation you prefer, but it does not change the non-factual premise(s) you presented. You continue to be incorrect. As an example (again) there have NOT been CAC slabs produced until recently and are just now...this past week...being listed. The rest of your comments are semantics to attempt to correct your first non-factual statements. I am not and will not attempt to convince you of who/what is the bestest of the bestest. It is clear to me that you are misinformed and/or have not navigated to the CAC website /forums and read same, or you would not have made the statements you did. Or, you have read the forum and have woefully misinterpreted the various information presented. Again, it is not all anyone knows if a piece is presented with a CACG slab that CACG graded it. You obviously do not know about "L" identified pieces. "If" is not a grade or a condition or a factual position. Truth in editing" changed a "d" to a "y", for clarity, where required.
The legacy designation, if implemented, would indicate that the coin was in a PCGS or NGC holder previously and received a sticker. However, it’s only CAC’s word for it, and the PCGS/NGC grade may not have been exactly the same grade as the one on the CAC slab. And coins submitted raw or in a non-stickered holder won’t be “legacy” coins, so the grade on those CAC slabs will be only CAC’s opinion. Whereas, a PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker will have obviously been graded by two independent TPGs. Cal
What I saw and discussed several months ago on the CAC forum was that "C" coins will be downgraded to the lower grade by CACG! Has something changed for the better?
Not factual. Several months ago is not correct, as to the subject being discussed. You know this also, since as recently as this past week you have been posting. Maybe you misunderstood. It is a bit of a wonder why you didn't mention the non-fact facts being presented here, since you were involved in the factual aspects of the CAC emerging grading arm, via discussions with many members on the CAC Board, and you certainly know the statements were not correct What you are correct about, is that if a previous submitted piece was reviewed by CAC (the records exist)....and note there is a sharing of info with PCGS.....and is resubmitted FOR A GREEN BEAN OR GOLD BEAN to CAC, it won't happen and a review can be asked for. A piece submitted to CACG for the first time will be treated to the same standards of scrutiny, and subject to the opinion of CACG, without regard to a previous submittal for a Bean, since there was not a previous bean request submittal. You know this also, because 2 weeks ago you discussed that perspective. Maybe it slipped your mind. After all, we are both old, and it could have slipped my mind. It think we are talking past each other. It is neither better or worse. It is a different entity as you know. Truth in editing: eliminated a space between an e and another letter and added a clarifying my 3rd. paragraph, beginning with "....since..." and ending with "....submittal."
I'm one of the CACed pre-1933 Gold predominately Double Eagle high grade "sight-seen" collectors who has hundreds of B-A coins that were significantly "under-graded" coins, waiting to be submitted for cross-over. Have your statements verification information from J.A.? Where did you, as possibly not a double eagle CACed coin collector, get your statement information which appears to be inexperienced opinions. JMHO
