CAC Education

I'm educating myself about CAC.

For those that'll take the time to read this and constructively respond:

I'm new to the board but a very seasoned collector. I and my associates fully support TPG. Over the last three decades my associates and I have spent just over $300K on TPG. Although there have been times we're not happy about a grading result (just as every collector has experienced) none of us regret a cent we spent with them. Personally just the fabulous quality holders and serial number tracking they provide along with their fantastic databases are worthy of the fees they charge. Their grade opinion (sans gradeflation) is a bonus and, for the most part, pretty darn good (within any given grading standard period in time)!

Furthermore I expect most will cry "CAC bashing" here but sadly that's the cry of the insecure. Those afraid something they think they possess or profit from will be threatened. In fact, although I hope not, I expect to get banned for calling a spade a spade. Never the less I'm posing intelligent, fact-based, reasonable questions and hoping that someone more aware and educated than I apparently am can enlighten me as to what it is I'm missing. PM always welcome!

I see a lot of support for CAC and that most charge and many will pay more for a holder with a sticker on it. Of course dealers and TPG support CAC for plainly obviou$ reasons. I'm hoping to gain intelligent reasoning from fellow collectors, not biased dealers; from the passengers in the bus, not the driver. I'm a huge proponent of self-education and knowledge over purchasing my opinion or external validation for the sake of acceptance so I'm attempting to find the tangible value in CAC as, near as I can tell, it's absolutely nothing more than a purchased, subjective and (by nature of subjectivity) inconsistent opinion. I'm trying to determine if it's manufactured value is based in anything other than exploiting fragile ego's and/or financial greed. There are some things I read that, considering the support of the service by supposed "collectors", confuse me greatly and I'm "hoping" for some intelligent, reasonable explanation from fellow collectors about the following points:

The following are copied directly from CAC's site:




Here’s where I’m stumped. According to CAC a CAC sticker means the coin is (in one person's opinion, in one moment in time) at the A or B level (of A, B or C) of the spectrum of a given grade range (let's remember TPG grade is constantly changing). So, setting aside the RIDICULOUS thought that anyone (emphasis on “one”) could consistently and reliably slice the difference between 65+ and 66 into three sectors (this means being able to accurately and consistently discern a .166 or 1/6th of a grade point difference) on tens of thousands of coins over long periods of time:

1) What is the “standard for today’s selective buyer”? How is it determined? Is there an ANA “today’s selective buyer” standard? Is today's selective buyer different than yesterdays? What about tomorrows? Isn't this nothing more than a unilateral, self-determined and constantly variable, non-committal subjective standard?

2) “It simply means that there are other coins with CAC stickers that are of higher quality for the grade. CAC will eventually reject tens of thousands of accurately graded coins.” Then there is “Occasionally a coin that has previously been rejected for CAC verification is reconsidered by CAC and stickered”. These two statements equal “we reserve the right to function in a consistently inconsistent standard”.

3) What is their point? How can any consumer in their right mind consider this a positive thing? This is old school and there's a word to describe it! What better way in the world to promote your "service only, manufacture/create nothing" business than to purchase your own service? Furthermore in examples like this (where the proprietor is servicing a tangible asset they're paid to service) they're not "purchasing", they're "investing" while driving up demand for their service. They "invested" $600M in an asset they were paid to service....and they still have their $600M asset! Furthermore if they invest "X"% over retail in the items they invested in they've driven the market up "X"% or a good fraction thereof while making their service "appear" to be the reason for the price increase. Now, get dealer networks to play along and wholla...it's a well engineered, no risk, no capitol, no skin in the game massive money machine that the end user funds and ultimately gets bit by. Now, I'm not saying that's what CAC did or is doing. But then there's the 'ol saying "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...well, you know.

How about these:

So, they catalog all the coins that come across the counter. Yet they don't reveal the coins that didn't qualify (in a given moment, on a given day, in the subjective opinion of one person, to be in the top 2/3 of half a grade point) because they're protecting collectors? Really? Is there any thought by other collectors that maybe, just maybe, this is a way to get the same coin coming back over and over every time it changes hands? Another way to make a finite market infinite. Furthermore, beyond the simple arrogance of doing so, isn't publishing "CAC does not want to compromise the value of such a coin by disclosing a negative review by CAC" a blatantly passive aggressive method of telling collectors a coin holder without a sticker on it (let's remember....it could still get a sticker upon the second or third or tenth or hundredth payment since this is all based on the subjective opinion of a human that has no risk) is inferior? And yes, for those looking to justify this with "well _______ does this too" (which is childish crap anyway) I realize TPG does the same thing. However let's remember that TPG supplies an enormous amount of other tangible assets for the fees they charge! So, even if you don't get the grade you want you get something tangible and valuable for your expenditure.

Lastly, they publish What is that? Is that not the same as "we provide no guarantees", and the same as "we're backed by nothing other than our words"?

All this stated....I get that people can simply "want" and, really, there's no better thing to spend discretionary income on than "want". But as I educate myself about this facet of numismatics and genuine "collecting" I struggle with understanding, or, maybe, just facing ad accepting what the "want" is.

I see posts all the time about "do you think this (already certified and reaping the tangible benefits of TPG) coin will bean" and every single time I ask myself "why do you care". And....I mean that as a genuine question as a fellow passion based caring collector. I ponder; "if it does will you like the coin more"? "If it doesn't will you like the coin less"? And, if the answer to either one of these is yes then it's rooted in one or all of only three toxic things, a disinterest in or too lazy to educate one's self, a very fragile ego or selfish financial greed. None of which are good for the long term well-being of collectors or our hobby. If you answered no to both then you wouldn't care less about a sticker, especially not one that represents one person's opinion (in a single given moment on a single given day) about .166 or 1/6th of a grade point....let alone purchase it or try charge fellow collectors for it.

There's even a prominent dealer that has the nerve to publish (essentially) that any collector or dealer that says they don't submit coins to CAC should be avoided! From what tangible information I can gather any person that doesn't send coins to CAC is likely educated, confident, doesn't need external validation and values integrity far above the acquisition of paper dollars. Therefore they would only be avoided by people afraid of intelligent, confident, hard to BS (and therefore much harder to acquire paper dollars from through installation of fear) integrity-based individuals. Oddly (not really) this same dealer touts CAC as being great because they catch "doctored" coins. No, they don't. They only (just as TPG services do) sometimes catch poorly/unprofessionally doctored coins. This has been proven by submitting certified doctored , oops..."conserved" coins and receiving a sticker every time.

I gotta be missing something somewhere! Or am I?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That is quite the mouthful for a first post! Welcome to the forum..... I am a fifty year collector of coins. I watched the advent of the TPG's as well as CAC with something of a hesitant heart and have long felt that each of these services have served to drive up the value of our hobby to stratospheric levels in many cases...... However, in recent years I have been blessed to be able to expand my collecting to some of the higher valued pieces that I could only dream of for the last fifty years. As a result, I have recognized the value the security in both a TPG as well as a CAC determination on the current coin of my desires.

Several times in your post, you refer to "discretionary income". In fact, that is what we are spending when we lavish ourselves with our dream coins. It is our discretionary income to spend as we choose. If I choose to spend that income on a nice Dansco folder or a CAC sticker, it is my choice to make, if that makes any sense. Frankly, I have only chosen to have one of my coins stickered, however I have purchased several others that were already CAC stickered. And considering that I was pursuing my own tastes in coins long before anyone ever heard of a TPG, I always have and always will purchase coins based on the appeal that I have established for myself, regardless of what the label may say.

For arguments sake, lets say a new service comes along that can laser implant some security device in our coins. This is entirely a dream scenario only to illustrate a point..... The new service comes along and I choose to have all my high value coins "implanted" so I can track them if they are stolen. Because I have been the target of a coin theft in the past, this new service is a genuine value to me. Others will say, I am wasting my money. Maybe even potentially hurting the value of my collection, yadda, yadda..... But see, this is the great thing about my ability to choose what I do with my discretionary income. You don't have to be in favor of my choice. Yet it remains my choice. It's no different than changing the TV station when you don't like the program.

When we have coin shows in my area, we have one dealer that sets up with high value coins. All his coins are CAC stickered and he sets that table up with lamps that make those coins and stickers just pop. I'll spend an hour at his table just marveling at the beauty of it all..... Are CAC stickers worth the expense? I don't know. But they sure do attract attention.

 

Well well well.......

First off, I don't mind long winded posts, although I still have no idea what you are talking about in your post and I've read it twice now.

"I'm educating myself about CAC".
ramble ramble ramble....
"Here’s where I’m stumped."
Ramble Ramble Ramble
"I gotta be missing something somewhere! Or am I?"
ramble ramble ramble
"Are CAC stickers worth the expense? I don't know. But they sure do attract attention."

It in fact was a meandering rant about CAC and I have no idea what exactly your point was in all that typing except to sum up in 4 words "I don't like CAC".


Now, I'm going to put my cards on the table. I don't own a single graded coin by a TPG, nor do I own a CAC coin. I don't work for any of the companies either, nor am I a dealer of coins. I grade my own coins and I'm not in a market to sell any of what I have.

As far as the TPG, you would agree, it provides a service and a function right?
Some grader, you have no idea who they are, looks at your coin, gives you an opinion and closes it up in a fancy case with a bar code and it's the bees knees!

Same goes for CAC, it provides a service and a function. Not all MS66 is created equal. not all MS67 are either. if you have no need for the service, don't use it, literally no one is forcing it on you. if it's not for you, don't use it.

CAC's founder, John Albanese, is a co-founder of PCGS, started in 1986, and founder of NGC, in 1987. He is well known in the hobby as a superior rare coin dealer, and founder of the big two grading companies. That's his provenance. The service CAC provides is that, for every graded coin, within the grade there are high end examples, and there are low end examples. A green CAC sticker means it's not a low end example, a gold sticker means it's the highest end example.
Again, if it's not a service you are interested in, don't use it. it's just ANOTHER opinion, of an opinion from a TPG. Learn how to grade and you'll find paying for the TPG opinion is a waste of money also. I mean, it could be some 18 year old highschool dropout grading your coins, you have no idea who it is, or if they can even grade accurately, that's just reality, you also trust them to know what they are doing, because in the end, their reputation rides on it just like CAC.

CAC provides quality assurance of a graded coin for $14.50 valued up to $10,000 or $30 for coins valued over $10,000. if you don't want to pay that money or don't want or need the assurance, don't use the service.

IF there is a green or gold bean on a "doctored" coin, then the doctored coin got into a NGC or PCGS holder in the first place and got past them, so the example looks bad on TPGs also.

Are CAC stickers worth the expense?
Some people sure think they are, just like some people think grading fees for some randoms opinion of their coin is worth the expense.

 

I was and am very interested in the thoughts and questions you posted.

I am not sure, based on your post, if the CAC concept of making a market for the entity and its offerings/opinions is of import in your thoughts or is it understood and rejected.

Assuming that it is understood, it follows that on higher $ value pieces, the comfort zone for the hobbyist utilizing CAC is that a set of eyes has reviewed the coin with a greater focus of attention to abuses by a coin doctor, that would otherwise go undetected for a variety of reasons...lack of experience of the TPG grader in detecting same....time restraints imposed by the TPG that may cause an opinion grade that is either inflated or deflated concerning the particular coin..... unfamiliarity with the series/type/nuances of the particular coin.... and a propensity of TPGs to rely on the name recognition of the TPG as it relates to the customer base, as just a few examples.

The person that started CAC is and was the "father" (for lack of a better description) of the 2 presently preferred TPGs, and as such is a market condition needed entity that imposes a psychological effect on the 2 TPGs to up their game because CAC is waiting on the sidelines to make a market in the coins that CAC is interested in at any given time. This is a good thing, and capitalist competition that produces a higher level of quality in goods and services is the very definition of capitalism ad competition.

ABC (BTW you left out D coins) as used in definition in your post, is not quite correct. Name a grade, any grade. Use 63. How many hits are allowed? How much luster is required? What level of strike is needed to qualify for the grade technically, and what level of strike is needed to qualify technically? There are meh 63s, there are that is a nice coin 63s, and there are wow 63s. then there is the intangibles of the same 63....the eye appeal, how is it compared to other wow factor 63s...is it superlative to what a wow 63 is expected to be (read gold instead of green)?

Is CAC an opinion? of course. Does CAC make mistakes? Of course. Note though, you can call CAC and go over the coin for insight that may help be a better hobbyist. And, CAC will buy the coins they grade when on their 'want" list, and there is a dedicated network of dealers that support that buy concept.

A person visits their physician. The physician....and these days with the 12 minute clock and incredible stress levels faced by physicians.....might order blood work and then conclude an issue exists or not. The physician concludes no issue. 3 weeks later, the person is still experiencing the doubt. The person visits a specialist (that may or may not have been suggested by the physician) and the specialist finds an anomaly in the original blood work, and gives some options: the issue is acceptable and safe without further action, the issue is actually not an issue at all and your health is safeguarded for the the present, and finally, that the issue is an outstanding example of superior health and don't worry at all, it is just that the bloodwork was misinterpreted.

The overarching aspect though, of your post is, and reads as same, a question of collector/hobbyist vs. collector/investor.

All investors are interested in the same goal, some level of assuredness of profit at the least amount of cost, and an established buy-sell market for the goods being invested in. There is not, as a frontline consideration, whether the goods being invested in require absolute self knowledge of all things widget of the goods, only that the public thirst is satisfied to a level that offers the highest return for the investor.

The hobbyist/collector has a slightly different motivation and approach, in that he/she has expanded their personal knowledge in all things widget, has developed via years of study and application the ability to determine the best widget for the investment, and, while recognizing the value and contribution of the opinion of recognized widget market evaluators, is confident that their person opinion is satisfied to the end required level: the coin speaks for itself, and other experienced persons will always recognize the quality without the need for other widget market evaluators.

So, does CAC serve a good and needed purpose in the community? Yes.
Is the hobby better with it than without it? Yes.
Is it a good choice for everybody? That is an investment/cost analysis question, but in general my answer would be that if all collectors and investors could absorb the cost with no greater thought than the cost of buying a coke (weak comparison I know), then I would answer yes.

It is probable that none of this blarney is helpful, but know that I will always try my best and use all kinds of "that sounds good I believe it" language/phrasing stuff. Raindrop dancing. It is a thing.

 

Welcome to the forum, I like that you are giving us some info about your numismatic resume. Likewise, as a new member, you don't have a history of the people who are going to be commenting on this thread. All I can tell you is that Cointalk has a membership that spans a wide range of numismatic experience, including within the core member group.

Of the major coin forums, Cointalk is by far the most "anti" TPG and that hostility includes CAC. Don't expect to see many members running to support CAC, and don't expect to see many members support your approval of the TPGs.

I don't see it as RIDICULOUS at all. Have you never seen a coin where your initial impression was it is either high end MS65 or low end MS66? Imagine a coin with premium gem luster and attractive toning but too many surface marks to warrant a premium gem grade, for example:



If the coin shown above was blast white, it would probably get MS65 grades across the board even though it has premium gem luster, because most 1880-S Morgan Dollars have great luster. But when you add the rainbow toning to the mix, people who are inclined to reward luster and eye appeal would see this coin as an MS66 while those who believe that surface marks are grade limiting would still grade the coin MS65. And that is the source of the inherent subjectivity in grading.

Most people think that a coin has ONE specific and CORRECT grade. That simply isn't true. The overwhelming majority of coins will have a grade range and depending upon the proclivities of the graders assigned to evaluate the coin, the grade can change over time and still be correct both times. Back to the Morgan Dollar shown above, I would say the the grading range of this coin is 65.8-66.2. It could easily grade MS65+ or MS66 on any given day, and I would have no problem with either grade, would you?

Ok, you are nitpicking a little with this one. They are using that phrase simply to separate the discerning collector who doesn't simply accept the assigned grade from the legions of collectors who have no grading skills and are forced to accept the TPG grades, and they are doing this without insulting the latter group. As a connoisseur of Jefferson Nickels, I have my own standards, and if I think the grade assigned by the TPG is wrong, I won't add that coin to my collection.

No, it means that they reserve the right to change their grading standards, in the same way that the TPGs change theirs.

Did you really think that JA created CAC in order to charge $15/coin to make money? By separating the high end coins from the dreck, CAC restores the value of coins that have suffered due to gradeflation. Of course they are going to invest in their coins and realize the fruits of their labor.

I think this an important point that most people seem to gloss over. CAC isn't raising or inflating the price of the coins that they sticker, they are partially RESTORING the values of coins that lost significant value due to gradeflation. In essence, they are successfully fighting the effects of gradeflation. In my opinion, you can't be against both gradeflation and the CAC, it just isn't possible, you have to pick one.

I am almost certain that when CAC started, they only charged for coins that actually stickered, meaning there is no financial downside to resubmitting a previously submitted coin. I am not a member of CAC and don't know if this policy has changed over the years.

CAC is a tool, nothing more. There are times when submitting to CAC is appropriate and times when it is not. For example, submitting a common date Morgan Dollar is a complete and total waste of money, whereas the submission of a registry quality full bell Franklin Half Dollar could restore hundreds or thousands of dollars to the value of the coin.

So when a dealer flat out refuses to use a tool that is available to them, yes, that would make me very wary of that dealer.

You seem to be viewing CAC with only your collector hat on. We all act in our own self interest. Accordingly, collectors will always want coin prices to be as low as possible because it suits their own financial interests. Alas, there will come a day for every collector when they don their dealer (seller) hat. As a seller, you want to achieve the highest prices you can in the shortest amount of time. Just as TPG certification provides liquidity to your coins, CAC acceptance provides additional liquidity and often, additional value compared to the same coins without a green bean. IMO, it has zero to do with external validation and everything to do with financial prudence. Furthermore, I don't see an attempt to maximize sale prices as a lack of integrity, and I doubt you will either when it comes time for you to sell your coins.

Now typically, this is the time in this conversation that collectors tell me that they are "never" going to sell their coins so my entire argument is moot. My response is usually that you heirs deserve better than that, and that having coins graded by TPGs and evaluated by CAC is an important part of estate planning for a serious collector with a valuable collection.

PS: Bravo on a big & bold first post.

 

I can't even read any of these messages!!! this isn't a writing exam or is it?

 

So far the OP has copied and pasted this to at least 3 different message boards, NGC, PCGS and CT (and probably more).

Counting his opening entry he has made a total of 3 responses combined, one from each board. These are also equal to his total number of posts on all three boards combined.

All in all it was pretty long winded and probably made for no other reason than to stir the pot. I doubt he’s trying to learn at all, more likely he is trolling.

 

I'm guessing Wharton Masters Thesis in the works.

 

CAC is the reason why I no longer buy significant U.S. coins. If you have to depend on the opinion of one man to determine which coins get into your collection, the time has come to leave.

There are too many collectors who won't touch a coin if it does not have a sticker. There are too many collectors who believe blanket statements like, "CAC has reviewed every coin." and "Every coin that appears in the major auctions have been reviewed by CAC." Neither of those statements are true.

There are those who will shout me down that those statements have never been made, but let them yell. I've read the posts.

I will say that CAC gets it right somewhere around 90 to 95% of the time. That's down from what I said years ago, because it's been my observation that CAC has begun to track with grade-flation, not work against it.

I greatly enjoy the U.S. coins I have. I have no desire to sell my collection. I have no desire to spend thousands of dollars in shipping and grading fees, to say nothing of the shipping risks because of losses and theft, to get my collection CAC approved. It will sit as it is for me, the members of my local club and those to see my exhibits at the major conventions to enjoy until it's sold. Then the auction house and I, if I'm still alive, will determine which coins rate CAC reviews for marketing purposes.

 

Actually, I don’t think NGC and PCGS stickering each other’s slabs would be anticompetitive. It would only be anticompetitive if they colluded on price and would be fraud if they colluded (different from agreeing) on grade. They would still compete to have coins, either raw or in the competitor’s slab, sent in for grading. I think the reason they don’t do it is pride and perception that the company whose slab the coin was in would be considered more important that the company who just had a sticker on the slab.

When CAC started, if NGC and PCGS had gone to the option of having a sticker on the other guy’s slab for a crossover, CAC might not have succeeded. Wouldn’t you rather have a grade established by both leading TPGs rather than one of them and a start-up company? It still might bring in more bucks to NGC and PCGS now, but it’s too late for that tactic to put CAC out of business. And (shudder!) if they started it, a lot of collectors would feel they needed the grade approved by all three companies.

Instead NGC and PCGS went to the ridiculous and unneeded + grades (as if 11 uncirculated grades weren’t enough!). This didn’t crush CAC because it was still just one grading company’s opinion rather that a confirmation by a different company.

Cal

 

Whew, I'm dizzy!

 

CAC is great.
JA & I have completely opposite views on saints.
I think the ones he likes look like garbage and he feels the same about mine.
Almost too good to be true.

It looks like Brett & Laura are leading the CAC parade and the collectors are following.
Interesting times.

 

This guy has organized a coordinated attack against CAC. He hit all the major forums within an hour and is a brand new member on all of them. Probably sockpuppet accounts because he doesn't have the balls to post under his real account.

Whatsamadda buddy, were you denied a green bean?

 

I am sure I am right. This is a Wharton Masters Thesis exercise.

 

If it was on CU, it has vanished. The OP has been called out on NGC. I wouldn’t waste any time with this. The OP posted his novel, then vanished. As a group, we’ve already had plenty of debate on this subject.

 

You posted the same thing today on CAC over ATS.....are you interested in what you post, or just trolling ?

I posted a lengthy response over ATS so I will let that stand until you respond here (or there) as opposed to what so far is a hit-and-run, 1-super-long-post that you don't follow-up to existing responses from me and others, both here and ATS.

 

The post and user ID have been deleted on CCF as well.

 

It was just Insider trolling us! (alternative conspiracy theories welcome!)

 

I spotted it again this morning on CU.