Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;imrich, post: 8604248, member: 22331&quot;]I believe the addition of CAC grading will not affect those TPG, as the industry generally is not concerned about grading, but other facets of those TPG.</p><p><br /></p><p>Wise individuals will do as I when finding a 2nd tier under-graded coin, submit it as raw to CAC for a believed proper grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>An example of current criticism of CAC is my linking/posting of requested 1908 NM MS66+ $20 coins with pricing, where I posted a CACed PCGS and an NGC MS66 specimen.</p><p><br /></p><p>The NGC specimen clearly met the 1977 copyright ANA standard for a MS65, thus: NO TRACE OF WEAR. HAS FULL MINT LUSTER. SURFACE IS USUALLY LIGHTLY MARRED BY MINOR BAG MARKS AND ABRASIONS.</p><p><br /></p><p>The NGC coin clearly exceeded the MS65 standard with even &quot;cartwheel&quot; luster, unblemished fields/devices.</p><p><br /></p><p>The PCGS coin is believed to not have met the MS60 standard, thus: Has full mint luster, but may lack brilliance. Surface is LIGHTLY marred by MINOR bag marks and abrasions.</p><p><br /></p><p>I believe that collectors forget that the current standard for CAC approval is believed to be that the coin meets or exceeds the PCGS average at the time of grading for that particular TYPE of coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>I believe a future CAC grading would meet a published standard, rather than a current &quot;market&quot; practice for a particular firm.</p><p><br /></p><p>JMHO[/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