To CAC or not to CAC - official game thread

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It definitely deserves gold bean. Really nice coin.

 

Summary

Rd. 1: 1921 MS 65 Green CAC Morgan--> Yes: 4 vs No: 3

Rd. 2: 1835 AU 50 Green CAC 50c--> Yes: 2 vs No: 8

Rd. 3: 1939-S Oregon MS 65 Gold CAC 50c--> Yes: 10 (8 Green and 2 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 4: 1838 AU 58 Green CAC (Gold $5)--> Yes: 1 vs No: 5

Rd. 5: 1908 MS 63 Green CAC (Gold $20)—> Yes: 5 vs No: 1

Rd. 6: 1885-CC MS 63 PL Green CAC Morgan--> Yes: 8 vs No: 1

Rd. 7: 1946-S MS 66 Green CAC Walker 50c--> Yes: 7 (6 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 1

Rd. 8: 1885-S MS 62 NOT CAC Morgan--> Yes: 5 (4 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 1

Rd. 9: 1830 EF 45 UNKNOWN CAC 50c--> Yes: 10 vs No: 1

Rd. 10*: 1899 MS 65 BN UNKNOWN CAC 1c--> Yes: 4 vs No: 5

Rd. 11: 1942 MS 65 Gold CAC 50c--> Yes: 4 (4 Green and 0 Gold) vs No: 2

Rd. 12: 1940-D MS 67 Star UNKNOWN CAC 10c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 4

Rd. 13*: 1884-O MS 61 Gold CAC $1--> Yes: 9 (4 Green and 5 Gold) vs No: 0

Green CAC on coin and deserves it: 4
Green CAC on coin and doesn't deserve it: 2
Gold CAC on coin and deserves it: 1
Gold CAC on coin but should only be Green: 2
Gold CAC on coin but should not sticker:
Failed to sticker but deserves a sticker: 1
Failed to sticker and should not sticker:
Unknown sticker status and deserves a sticker:1
Unknown sticker status and does not deserve a sticker:2


Note: if we don’t know the status of a coin before the reveal and more people say green CAC for a gold CAC coin, then it will go in the area of “Gold CAC on coin but should only be Green” ....see round 3 as the example case

*
Rd. 10 was 4-4...I interpreted that CircCam would consider it a no (based on a similar example), which swayed the overall vote to a lean towards no.
Rd. 13 was tied between green and gold at 4-4...I interpreted that geekpryde would consider it a gold

 

@Mainebill you are up...
@jom is up afterwards

 

@jom or @Mainebill whoever is ready first can post and then the other one can follow.

 

OK, then....this coin (obviously in NGC holder at the time of the photo) was sent to PCGS and came back AU55. I then sent it to CAC. What happened? Reject, Green, Gold?


jom

 

I would go with a green bean. The light rub on the obverse devices keep it from MS. The next question is would it grade AU 58. The nice toning and sharp details would tell me it is a superior AU 55 coin and deserving of a green bean.

 

Quite attractive, but I'm guessing an old cleaning plus the scratches over the eagles head got it rejected.

 

A very nice coin but I don't think it got the bean. The scratches are too distracting and I think move it down to a C coin for the grade.

 

The scratches mean NO bean from me.

 

My understanding was that the TPGs are more lenient with small scratches on early 19th century coins..

 

I’ll say no CAC
...looks potentially cleaned and retoned; the scratches can hurt too-although as was mentioned they are occasionally more lenient with some of these

 

@wxcoin: You are correct that the TPGs are often more lenient with early coins but CAC is not actually a third party grader. The grade is provided by PCGS in this case and CAC only decides if the coin is an A or B or C coin for the assigned grade plus whatever other magic juice they employ in their apothecary.

So, in our little contest here we are only tying to determine if CAC awarded a green or gold bean for the assigned grade. If The TPG had assigned a details grade for the coin, then I don't think CAC even considers it any way.

 

I understand that CAC isn't a TPG. But in effect they are grading coins since they make an evaluation as to bean (green or gold) or not to bean. As with the TPGs, I assumed that they too may be more lenient with surface blemishes on early 19th century coins. If the coin in question was a later series then I'd agree with most of the previous comments.

 

They make an evaluation as to where the coin falls in the grade range. Yes they are not a TPG. Coins they feel under graded vs the grade on the holder they put gold bean. C coins no bean. Some of their opinions I agree with some not. I dont pay above the grade on the holder. If seller wants higher grade money he needs get it in the higher grade holder.

I agree with your comment on surface blemishes. Coins with unattractive blemishes I usually consider C coins. Sometimes this is material that went bad in holder or tarnish got worse over time. These coins a tough sell on the bourse. I don’t like coins that look like run over by truck. Don’t get buried in that material.

 

I think people are getting confused between "C" coins and "coins with problems".

A coin can absolutely have the details of an A or B coin (in terms of wear or contact marks), but still have problems. Problems don't mean the coin is a "C" coin.

Now, don't get me wrong, the 1827 Dime in question has the wear of an AU-53 and should thus automatically be removed from CAC contention. However, let's assume it's wear was appropriate for an AU-55. The wear level is independent of the scratches. It might very well be an AU-55+, but the scratches are the problem.

CAC will not sticker a coin with problems, no matter how strong it might otherwise be for the grade.

 

Beautiful coin but I say no bean as old but not original surfaces and way too many marks and scratches in the fields

 

Anyone else want to opine?

 

scratches, luster somewhat muted, and secondary toning possibly from an old cleaning - NO bean