Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;messydesk, post: 26810680, member: 1765&quot;]Well, it <i>is</i> their logo.&nbsp; When it&#039;s on their own slab, it&#039;s nothing more than a logo.&nbsp; When it appears on a slab that&#039;s not theirs, it&#039;s their approval of the grade.&nbsp; Not really hard to figure out.</p><p><br /></p><p>The big issue I have with the details-graded coins is that when there is a market-acceptable problem with a coin that PCGS or NGC would straight-grade.&nbsp; The easiest example for this is a cleaned coin.&nbsp; CACG will use the terms &quot;cleaned&quot;, &quot;harshly cleaned&quot;, &quot;wiped&quot;, &quot;brushed&quot;, and &quot;polished&quot;.&nbsp; There are a few that mean &quot;totally trashed&quot;, which they will return unholdered.&nbsp; Maybe harshly cleaned is one of them, now that I think about it.&nbsp; If you break down &quot;cleaned&quot;, this can cover everything from a hard-to-detect old cleaning that&#039;s toned over to an obvious cleaning.&nbsp; These are different in the marketplace, but the same coming out of the grading room.&nbsp; There&#039;s currently no scale in place for the severity of a problem.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The pecking order as of last big show I was at (FUN) was still PCGS+CAC, followed by CACG, then NGC+CAC, PCGS, NGC.&nbsp; Having the coin &quot;double graded&quot; is still a big deal, but people are starting to submit crossovers or crack-outs to CACG and taking a downgrade.&nbsp; When CACG started, NGC+CAC was considered more desirable, simply because there was no track record yet.&nbsp; I imagine in a few years, a larger percentage of NGC+CAC coins will be old holders that plastic collectors don&#039;t want to lose.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in