CAC, Heritage, and a mystery.

Back in July, I sent these 2 coins to Heritage to sell in the Chicago ANA. An 1839 PCGS AU55 gold $5, and an MS66 1862 3cent. I was told they would go to CAC first. 1 week later Heritage called me and said neither coin CAC'd and they did not get them back in time to put them in the ANA auction. I expressed my disappointment and asked them to mail the coins back to me. They billed me for the CAC submission.

At that point I sent them both back to PCGS for regrade (which cost me around $130 total), knowing that they would come back with new cert numbers, AND knowing that CAC keeps records of failed CAC coin cert numbers. I knew, therefore, that this would give the coins a second, unbiased look from CAC. Why spend so much just for the CAC sticker?-Because these coins historically sell for $1000+ more each if they are stickered, according to Heritage and Stacks Bowers.

So I sent them CAC myself a couple weeks ago, and just got the results yesterday. They both received a green sticker.

So this makes me wonder... is CAC really that inconsistent? Or did Heritage not send in my coins at all in the first place? What do you think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Let's just say I trust Heritage to do what they said, far more than I trust CAC to be consistent.

If you are implying Heritage lied, then you are also implying they cheated/stole the money they billed from you.

If you are implying CAC is inconsistent, you are about to be flame-smashed by the CAC lovers.

Take your pick.

 

Yeah, I'm just amazed. I personally thought the 3 cent was CAC worthy and the gold was questionable due to having too many field marks, especially on the reverse. I know coins are completely subjective, though. Maybe they accidentally didn't get sent in by Heritage. Maybe the CAC guys were in a bad mood the first time around. But whatever happened, I am left wondering... WHAT HAPPENED? Lol

 

I think Heritage did what it said it did and CAC made their call. The fact that they (CAC) take down the serial #'s of failed coins kind o' tells ya something, don't it? They are no more infallible than the TPG'ers.......

 

Yes. If that's the case, then spending the $130 getting new holders and cert numbers from PCGS was well worth it, considering the price difference in these coins CAC'D vs not CAC'D.

 

You gambled and won.

 

Truth.

 

that's crazy.

 

I believe you must have the original coin certification numbers which should allow you to determine from CAC whether these numbered coins were ever received by their organization.

I personally would appreciate a PM notification as to whether or not these coins were properly submitted, and returned as not appropriate for a CAC "bean".

It is my understanding that the green "bean" only indicates the coin met the average standard by the grading TPG for the grade assigned, and is not an above average graded coin.

I've posted CAC approved coins in this venue which were initially PCGS graded along with other same "tier" TPG graded specimens. I believe that any knowledgeable observer would have chosen one of the other coins before the PCGS CAC approved coin. In my opinion the ICG identical date/type/grade coin was a grade better than the CAC approved coin.

We have some specimens being currently graded by "Premier" TPG that's believed will again substantiate the hypothesis of inferior grading standards, relative to those TPG denigrated in public posts.

JMHO

 

I know many people on this forum have a low view of Facebook, however there is some coin dealer who spends considerable time complaining about how that he sent coins to Heritage and they did him dirty by saying they never received them or some such thing. Just looked, Lafitte Coin Company in New Orleans.

 

Actually, CAC does not publish or release the information of coins that failed to pass and receive a sticker. They keep that info for their records only. So there's no way I can ask and find out whether Heritage actually submitted them.

 

I believe if you check out the CAC website, it will tell you that green bean coins are solid for the grade, and that coins they don't bean are still accurately graded but not on the high end for the given grade.

 

Not really.... since they record the numbers from all coins submitted.

 

Right, but if you try to resubmit the same slab again they 'flag' you, right?

 

Clever Semantics!! I believe at minimum, a linguist would explain that anything less than average isn't "solid" for the grade. If the coins were found superior to average ("high end" for the grade) there wouldn't be a need for a higher level (e.g. Gold bean) "label".

I'm just reiterating what a believed reliable source explained about the "green bean", which I believe is as your quoted reference states, not superior to that average "solid" level.

JMHO

 

Maybe CAC had a better view with the "new" plastic.

 

Gold beans are for coins at least 1 full grade higher, in CAC'S opinion.

 

Admittedly, you have a more superior understanding of CAC. I only acquire CAC labeled coins which appear to have a lesser grade than other TPG, for a specific type/date/MM/grade relatively expensive (i.e. >$400 - TPG stated retail value).coins. My understandings were gleaned from posts in this venue, and your contribution is appreciated to present the CAC service understanding disparities.

I believe that objective evaluators would consider anything less than "average" to be inferior, and anything greater than average to be superior. Average for a TPG grade should be that publicly published/stated by the specific TPG. If publicly unpublished, an unchallenged FPG opinion would probably be legally accepted as the grade standard.

I find it sad that the definition of the CAC service/"green bean" isn't more specific (e.g. average to high end of grade), to disallow speculation/over-stating.

JMHO

 

Come on, we know that the TPG's aren't infallible (coins get resubmitted and come back with a different grade), why would you expect CAC to be infallible.

 

It's understood that the goal of CAC was to show which coins were meeting the "standard" of premier TPG.

I personally believe that the firm is accomplishing the goal which was intended, and believe their consistency is very even.

I collect those coins which I believe document the deteriorating grading process of the "top tier" TPG. I personally have collected relatively expensive GEM coins of the same type/date/MM/grade, certified by the same TPG that are believed to have appreciable grading disparities.

The PCI Coin Grading, Inc. lawsuit has already created a precedent for litigious action with a neutral fourth party supplying crucial grading evidence for allocating Judicial damages. I expect future action where a portion of the fourth party evidence may be CAC generated.

JMHO