What I really Don't Like About CAC...

...or any other sticker grading service...

You don't have much basis for comparison!!!

What I mean by this is that you don't know how other coins stack up against the one with a "bean" (sticker) in most cases since most coins haven't been CAC assessed. You also don't know if a coin was assessed by CAC and denied a sticker. Sure the one with the sticker was assessed a passing grade, but how are you supposed to know a similar non-stickered slab (at a most likely lower price since CAC carries a premium) wouldn't get a sticker also? To a lesser degree, it's almost like comparing an ungraded coin with a graded coin.

On the other hand, if you are comparing two CAC stickered coins then you can gauge which one is the better deal for the money.

I know some of you are going to respond that on high-end coins it's a security blanket. I understand that (and agree). In this case the issue is rather insignificant since rare coins are more unique and therefore comparisons to other coins is more subjective.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Depends on the market level you are talking about. There are a bunch of levels and venues where you can likely infer coins have been seen. And yes sometimes big collections pull the stickers off or have none on because their sticker rate was to low but checking cert numbers shows that.

That really is no different than grading a raw coin. The more experience the less of a guessing game it is

 

Okay but now you are playing a guessing game. I get what you are saying in the instance where you are confident a particular dealer most likely submitted the coin, but that's analyzing things differently. Also you can never be 100% sure if the coin doesn't show with CAC. At the market level I hang around in there isn't much to infer.

That is correct, but I'm more interested in comparing value. CAC may remove doubt on the coin that has been stickered, but it opens up a lot of uncertainty when comparing it to a non-stickered coin (value-wise). As you can tell I am looking at this as a buyer.

 

I think that trying to figure out CAC, helps you to look at a coin differently. It certainly starts to get you to look at the coin and not the holder, which really is the most important thing.

Looking at coins that have passed CAC helps give you an idea of what a strong unmolested coin should look like. Do they get them all correct? No, does PCGS or NGC? Certainly not. But a high percentage of the time they do. The down side to CAC is you don't know which coins have been submitted and failed. You also don't know how close they may have come to passing either. I can see where they come from on not listing coins that did not pass, as it would add a stigma to it that might not be warranted. It's all just part of the game. A game that I like to play.

 

Which is really how they need to be approached. There are a few instances where you can be certain it has been seen but yes sometimes its a guessing game.

True, but they would almost certainly be open to lawsuits if they listed the coins they did not sticker. It really just is what it is. CAC adds value clearly, in my opinion it doesn't mean that every coin without one shouldn't have extra value and sometimes I just flat out disagree with them.

It's a tool and should be one. 5 figure coins it's much more important but push comes to shove I would put more weight into the grading services for the most part especially on lower value coins.

CAC is a good learning tool which will help with getting coins graded, failing shouldn't mean a coin is automatically junk though. If you dig around enough you can get a good idea what has and has not been submitted, or you can always ask and hope for a real answer

 

CAC is just another means of making money for that dumbish looking little green bean on your slab.

 

By sending it in to them. Again and again and again. That's clearly the best strategy -- from CAC's point of view.

Of course, if they did start issuing "brown beans", people would simply peel them off.

Now, publishing a list of cert numbers for coins that didn't make the grade -- that's a different matter. If your coin ended up on that list, you'd be compelled to crack it out and resubmit it to get a new number. Come to think of it, why haven't the TPGs prevailed upon CAC to do exactly that, then?

 

I do most of my buying on Heritage (and I'm not a frequent bidder). I know Heritage encourages its sellers to send their better coins to CAC—at least, that was my experience with them.

Therefore I assume that the coins I view/follow on Heritage which are not stickered have (very likely) already been sent in and rejected, which influences my reading of the coin.

Don't know if Stacks Bowers encourages the same thing.

 

Doing so would be admitting that the TPG itself is worthless and a means to get to CAC approval. Would also mean that half of the slabs are worthless which they aren't. PCGS seems to have embraced the CAC relationship realizing it can be a value enhancer, but if there was ever a didn't pass list that relationship would turn hostile quickly and surely would end up in lawsuits from someone.

 

That's why I "buy the coin and not the holder."

In fact, I don't see much use for CAC stickers except for ultra high grade (in year or variety), rare, etc. coins, just as you say.

Doubly in fact, a green CAC sticker on say, a PCGS Rattler, will be a negative since you know that it probably won't upgrade based on modern grading standards! Gold CAC stickers are good, but then you'd wonder by how much of a grade increase it is, and why CAC won't just say it (e.g. "CAC +1", "CAC +2", etc. in gold).

 

I wouldn't worry about wondering if coins without a sticker failed CAC. I only have 1 coin with a CAC sticker because I think the premiums they call for are a little absurd generally. I've done just fine getting non-CAC coins that I feel good about for the grade. I think worrying about whether those coins didn't pass or not is a little unfounded...the vast majority of slabbed coins have never been CAC attempted.

That said, if I was a seller you bet I'd play the CAC game. See above about the premiums. It's a no brainer to get as many stickered as possible if you are a seller.

 

My answer is to learn how to grade coins yourself.

 

Your logic here is a stretch to say the least. With all due respect, to state, as unquestionable fact, a CAC approved rattler is a "negative" compared to one un-stickered is wholly ridiculous, and is especially so coming from someone who just claimed they buy only the coin and not the holder.

Far too many still simply assume remaining rattlers to be automatic candidates for upgrades, and is foolish all-around. I'm sorry, but statements like the one quoted above only help propagate the notion among to those with the potential to be most harmed by it.

 

Amen to that!

 

His logic was spot on in all honesty. Non gold makes people think it cannot upgrade but no sticker and enough people will think it could that the sticker in that case may be leaving money on the table.

I know that most rattlers wouldn't and didn't upgrade, you know that, many others do as well, but there are enough people who make upgrades sound like they are automatic that the old slabs have a premium for that reason among others

 

Nothing wrong with CAC. It's just another opinion about a coin, albeit one a lot of collectors make careful note of.

 

Does CAC track submissions vs beans?

 

They track everything internally. Only external information you will get is the population report for what beaned

 

So I figured but wanted to be sure. Thanks for the answer. That information would sure be interesting. And also potentially damaging to the CAC process.

 

No, it isn't, and is simply because what "people think" is meaningless when it has no basis in reality.