Just wondering, why aren't the major TPGs competing with CAC?

That is funny, I did that to CRO earlier this year with my MS65 Lafayette Dollar. The boys at CRO happily submitted the coin to the CAC and the coin did not sticker. However, JA wrote on the rejection sticker "MS65 but too dark". Since that was not the problem that I had with the coin, I felt paying MS65 money for the coin with a rare die variety was warranted. I don't know what I would have done if it was just rejected by the CAC with no remarks whatsoever.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Because you were on the "inside," Mark, I think I'd like to hear that explanation.

Aside from that, an explanation that just occurred to me is, a respect for the others turf. I don't fool with your slab, you don't fool with mine. CAC, OTOH, doesn't have a slab to fool with.

 

It's not because I'm on the inside - in fact, some of what I'm about to state was presented on a coin forum.

PCGS and NGC can't afford to objectively review their own coins the way CAC does, because if they did, they would be bombarded with coins under their grade guarantees. Can you imagine owners of PCGS and NGC coins being told by the very companies that graded them, that many of their coins are over-graded and/or have problems such as doctoring?

If CAC makes a mistake by stickering and over-graded coin, they can take it off the market, remove the sticker and sell it as a non CAC coin. They will presumably lose some money on it, based on the difference between a CAC price and a non-CAC price. But in the case of PCGS or NGC admitting the same mistake, they are on the hook for the difference in value between the assigned grade and the lower grade that they admit to. That is often a much larger difference in value/loss to them than what CAC would incur. In addition to that, the universe of PCGS and NGC coins that would present potential liabilities to those two companies is huge compared to the universe of CAC coins that could present potential liabilities to CAC.

 

Now you're talking. That's a reason. Let me ask you this, do you get paperwork with the stickers? If so, do you expect to get that along with the coin when you buy the coin at auction?

 

Coming Soon: Fifth Party Re-Regrading

I had to google CAC, so I do not know what "a viable share of the market" would be. (I also had to google CRO: Coin Rarities Online. Never heard of it before)

In truth, I do not know what "the" market is. I am sure that there must be -a- market for this.

A few posts above this is a reference to a rare die variety Lafayatte Dollar in Mint State 65. Off hand, I estimate that as a $9000 coin, but only another Non-Circulating Legal Tender commemorative, like a Liberian Elvis coin or Marshall Islands celebrating World War II. So, perhaps that is "the" market for some people.

John Albanese is probably a nice guy and a knowledgeable dealer. Go to any ANA convention and you can find 300 more just like that. Certainly, many professional dealers of good status could do this. As far as I can tell, anyone here could offer the same service. In fact, we all do.

Someone offers you a coin in a 2x2 or a flip or a Third Party slab and you judge for yourself what grade to give the coin and what price to offer. You could go to an office supply store, buy a sheet of stickers and write your own opinion on every coin you own. Take the game to your coin club and you can all sit around second-guessing the second guesses, slapping labels over stickers. (I like the little green caterpillars so popular with kindergarten teachers.)

Maybe we should do this for the next MSNS Convention, have a CoinTalk Opinion Room where people bring us their coins and we put our stickers on them.

 

You're going to have to slow down. I'm already warming up to CAC, some. How is a PCGS sticker on a NGC slab, whether it says undergraded, good for the grade or overgraded exposing NGC to liability? For that matter, how is it fussing with PCGS? These are opinions, not representations of fact.

Again, isn't that statement a little conclusory? "Potential liabilities," from whence...in what form?

 

Good point.:thumb:

 

You are both very wrong about that. Mr. Albanese has been acknowledged by his peers for many years as among the most gifted coin graders there is. Additionally, he was involved with both PCGS and NGC and has been one of the largest buyers and sellers of rare coins for a very long time. He has very few, if any equals.

And there are nowhere near 300, or for that matter, a fraction of that number of individuals at ANA conventions or elsewhere, who have the expertise to be professional graders.

You might also be unaware of the fact that CAC is backed by $25,000,000, to make markets in CAC coins and to have funds in reserve to honor their guarantee. CAC has the expertise and credibility that very few others could possibly offer.

All of the preceding is very different from, in your words "anyone here could offer the same service".

 

I was speaking of PCGS reviewing their own coins and NGC reviewing their own coins, with respect to potential liabilities.

I already explained the "in what form" of potential liabilities (bombardment of grade guarantee submissions and the huge resulting losses from the down-grade of coins and having to pay submitters the difference in value between the original grade and the new grade). If that wasn't clear to you, I don't know how to make it so - sorry.

 

Forgive me for saying so but you're off on a frolic of your own with that. The question involved stickering each others coins, not their own coins. Any third-grader can understand the "potential liability" in the latter...in fact, that would be rather self-defeating, don't you think?

I think you're talking about the same thing, here, stickering their own coins. But, again, that's a straw position, because I don't hear anybody, here, even remotely suggesting that.

 

Ditto.

 

Your "ditto" with respect to "'good point" and the comment below completely ignores reality. Show me 300 people at any ANA convention with the expertsie of John Albanese AND $25,000,000 to stand behind thier service. Are you actually claiming that YOU and everyone else here could offer that? After all, the quote below did say "anyone here could offer the same service".

"John Albanese is probably a nice guy and a knowledgeable dealer. Go to any ANA convention and you can find 300 more just like that. Certainly, many professional dealers of good status could do this. As far as I can tell, anyone here could offer the same service. In fact, we all do."

Your original question in the thread title was: "Just wondering, why aren't the major TPG's competing with CAC"?

CAC reviews NGC and PCGS coins. Based on your question, it would seem that any competitor would be doing the same. And as I already noted, NGC and PCGS already review each other's coins to a large extent via their crossover services. So, perhaps my being "off on a frolic" was the result of the way you phrased your thread title. I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to reply to you, while being insulted.

 

A little touchy, aren't we? Then I'll get the last word in. Here's what I asked in the question, that evidently blew right by you: So, why aren't there yet PCGS stickers on NGC slabs, e.g., and vice versa? Help me out on that one. Thanks for the "help."

 

I didn't read all the replies so if I repeat something already said, I'm sorry.

The fact is ALL TPG's have a CAC service, it's known as a Crossover. :goof: You send in a NGC slabbed coin to PCGS, tell them that if they will grade it the same or better, crack it out and move it into a PCGS slab and PCGS will gladly perfrom that service, as will all the other TPG's. :hammer:

The TPG's cannot perform the CAC service because of conflict of interest. Can you imagine PCGS saying a NGC graded coin is undergraded? :goof: Or imagine them saying one of their own slabbed coins is overgraded? :goof: It doesn't work! It's like letting students grade their own homework assignments or tests? :whistle:

That's the answer to the OP and I'm surprised no one caught it! :goof:

Ribbit

 

Please see some of my previous posts to this thread, in which I mentioned the PCGS and NGC crossover services, as well as the problem with each of those companies evaluating their own coins. I can't believe that you didn't catch it.

 

CAC is a 4th party it just confirms the grade a TPG has grade the item.
In the 50+ years I have been collecting I do not need CAC.
Google John Albanese he has been no angel he been in court too many time in 80-90'sfor me

 

I ask that you provide a single link for an instance in which the John Albanese being discussed in this thread was in court and found responsible for any wrong doing? I believe that you are mistaken and that your comment is libelous.

 

Since you didn't reply to my previous post, I did a Google search also. And the only reference I could find to the John Albanese being discussed in this thread having been in court was when he served as a government witness in a fraud case against a coin dealer. Unless you can show otherwise, your post was extremely careless, reckless and libelous. And you should retract it, as well as apologize. You should be a man about it and not hide or disappear.

 

There are, except they are called "crossover service" and include a new slab instead of a sticker.