It might initially, but as time goes on I see the CAC sticker premium only going up. I think the stickers will be similar to the older TPG holders. NGC fatties and PCGS rattlers premiums have gone up significantly over the last few years, especially so if the coins in them are PQ.
I can definitely see your point of view. From the photos I’ve seen there’s nothing “wow” about them and they do somewhat remind me of some of the basement slabs I’ve seen over the years. However, I am guessing they will be much nicer in hand. I can’t imagine John Albanese and his partners would go through all the work of getting another TPG launched and have the holder itself be a piece of crap.
I don’t think that is an image of an actual physical slab. I believe that is a CGI with a real photo of a real coin superimposed.
Just that we see the chinese fake slabs and coins right now. And we have grown accustom to what their slabs look like. I would think that the chinese are already working on copying or plan to copy anything CAC puts out.
I am pretty sure that they will be offering imagining of the product without charge. (don't hit me...it is what I do). However, visit the website. Justin Lee is on board for a reason.
There is something I do not understand about most people. I'm probably guilty of it also; but I cannot think of an example. Let's say a person has a question about an ACME widget. Rather than contact the ACME Co for the answer, they ask all their frirnds. In practice, it seems to me that much of the time they are left with a speculative turd-ball of nonsense and misinformation. On very rare ocassions, they may arrive at the answer to their question. In this case, a simple call to CAC to ask if THE PICTURE OF YOUR NEW HOLDER ON YOUR WEBSITE IS ACCURATE?" I'm sorry I did not do that because it never would cross my mind that CAC would declare that an imsge of their slab on their site was a sham.
They will have a photo team, with Justin being the head man. From what he has said the imaging with be through the slab, not raw, for the safety of the coin.
I am not a buyer at those high prices. I would never pay a Premium on CAC mods. Those coins are high priced presale material. What kind of dunce would buy at those prices? Its an early sample slab. They still have not announced a release date of the real stuff. Could be 2 months?
Good point. I am sure somebody would like sell that idea. But I would never pay a premium on that nor accept that idea.
In order for CAC grading to really succeed, they will have to attract truly rare, high-end U.S. coins … four-figure and above based on numismatic value, not melt value. This will take time, if it happens at all, because most of these coins are already in NGC or PCGS holders. So, CAC grading has to convince owners to send these coins for crossover grading. This is much tougher that convincing the owners to send coins for stickering. With a sticker submission, the coin retains its original holder and grade no matter what the outcome of sticker grading. The real attraction of sticker grading is that it is a second opinion, so the coin has two independent organizations that agree on the grade if it stickers. If a coin is put in a CAC slab, there is only the one opinion … and that’s from a start-up company (slabbing operation is separate from the stickering operation). Ask yourself, would you rather have a coin in a PCGS or NGC slab with a CAC sticker or same coin in a CAC slab? And especially, if a coin already has a CAC sticker on the slab, why would you send it to CAC grading? Coin grade already has two opinions, so you’re going to pay to have that reduced to one opinion? I don’t think so. Cal
Individual buyers have created the illusion that a CACed coin is a better grade coin. A CAC "bean" merely indicates the submitted item meets or exceeds the average TPG graded standard (e.g. in todays' market a beautifully completely wide spectrum toned coin would qualify for many)! JMHO
I have hundreds of already CACed Gold coins ready (i.e. "beaned" over a long-period/since-CAC-startup) to be sent for an upgrade review. They are virtually relatively flawless TPG graded >MS62 coins that should "upgrade"! JMHO
Curious about your strategy. Are you going to send them for CAC slabbing or to PCGS or NGC? The gold sticker means they would probably upgrade at PCGS or NGC. Has CAC stated that a slab with a gold sticker will automatically go up one grade if submitted to CAC grading? And if the coins were submitted to PCGS or NGC and went up a grade, were then submitted to CAC for stickering and got a green sticker, would they be more or less valuable than the same coins in CAC slabs with the same grade? Cal
I personally have avoided for some time, submission to NGC and PCGS, especially after having coins that were graded/slabbed come back having a Details label, being resubmitted to receive a grade greater than the original. These firms haven't a consistent standard, as I've posted showing MS66 coins that don't meet the 1977 published A.N.A. standard for a MS coin, hardly general consistency with each other. CAC/J.A. Et Al have been criticized for their "Beaning" because they have approved relative to average of the deteriorative TPG standards. I've collected strictly based relatively to the 1977 A.N.A. published standard, and hope that CAC will do likewise, increasing the grades of many "sight-seen"/purchased coins. I don't believe CAC will grade relative to a "Bean" that was given upon varying/deteriorating TPG standards. I will start slow with coins that obviously approach the 1977 standard, relatively to currently higher grades. CACed coins currently receive greater pricing than either plain TPG graded coins, and I don't see why that would change, especially based on a holder design. If I were responsible for a new practical design that would outperform those currently in existence, it would be a labyrinthian holder "shrink-wrapped" inside a formed Stainless rectangular shape, encapsulated in an inert atmosphere. If the holder is adequate for retaining/protecting food products, why not coins? I'll store my coins with the MREs! LOL, being more concerned about the holder design than function, relative to the current impractical long term protection, is seemly ludicrous! JMHO
imrich, posted: "...I've collected strictly based relatively to the 1977 A.N.A. published standard, and hope that CAC will do likewise [NOT A FRIGGIN CHANCE] increasing the grades of many "sight-seen"/purchased coins." My PERSONAL GRADING STANDARDS are possibly as tough as yours. Unfortunately, I don't think any successful coin dealer uses 1977 ANA Grading Standards. I KNOW that none of the TPGS uses them either! Therefore, you could probably post millions of TPGS coins that are "over graded" by the standards you follow.
