CAC Question

That's spot on and open honesty which CAC is known for. They've been one of the bigger advocates that coins shouldn't be condemned for not having a sticker.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm a big fan of CAC but I don't feel that the word quality is always correct. Maybe quality for the grade but I would rather hear, solid for the grade.

 

I’ve seen that ad often. Seems some CAC detractors want to put other words in their mouth.

 

Knowing what you're talking about is helpful. You should try it some time. The 1 in 100 statement was based on your statement that 99% of stickered coins deserve a sticker. That is an error rate of 1/100 among stickered coins.

So:

1.1 million x 1% = 11,000 erroneously stickered coins = thousands

 

There aren't over a million stickered coins but again why let facts matter and I said over 99% accuracy rate.

 

The use of "PQ" on the results form is also misleading. A sticker means solid for the grade or high end. Solid for the grade isn't PQ IMHO. Solid is a B coin. The solid A to A+ is PQ.

 

Read 'em and weep:



P.S. 99.5% accuracy would yield .005 x 1,100,000 = 5,500 error coins = thousands.

 

No weeping necessary...yet. They just say how many they've evaluated. Interested to see how many of those they stickered. I've got no horse in this game, just enjoying the banter and learning a coupla things I really didn't know

Up until five minutes ago I thought the CAC sticker indicated a + value for the coin or indicated a premium example for the grade or something, but then I was puzzled having seen a few unimpressive stickered coins... that I now know are just solid for the grade and have been gandered at close-like by a top shelf numismatist, cool.

 

Reading comprehension 101. Evaluated does not mean stickered. You can look at their population report and it doesn't take long at all for a logical human being to realize they have not stickered over 1 million coins when they haven't even stickered 100k Morgans. Or you can just keep saying incorrect information.

It gets very old how many people just make things up about CAC because they either don't know what they are talking about or out of their dislike of them.

For the record their accuracy is more like 99.99 or 99.999 percent, their actual mistakes are incredibly rare. Anyone who thinks they've made several thousand of mistakes really should be ignored when it comes to CAC as generally speaking the TPG had to make a mistake as well.

 

it just depend(s) at what you like .... you can always find others

 

Lets just say that some folks believe everything that PCGS, NGC and CAC does is correct. They think of them like they are some kind of GOD. When in fact they are just human like everyone else, they make mistakes. And plenty of them.
Lets just look back to this:
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/19...r-110k-at-auction.324310/page-11#post-3253426
Baseball would have you believe that this coin is graded correctly, and well deserved of a bean. It is not, in fact it is why there are plenty of folks on this thread and many other that say buy the coin and not the label. And a CAC sticker means nothing. I am with @Paddy54
Those that push buying coins for the grade and sticker on them really do not know how to grade they just let someone else do the thinking for them. A CAC sticker is only a blown up fictional opinion of what another collector likes. It is stickered so that the uneducated can feel like they got a good deal.

 

Plenty of people think their skills are much better than they are. Thinking that they're superior graders to JA when it comes to US coins is naive at best and more likely far more to do with egos thinking they're actual experts.

As I said a lot of internet forum experts spread a lot of misinformation about CAC

That coin absolutely is deserving of a bean.

 

I don't need to actually post names but you are the only one who lives and dies by the TPG's opinion. We get into plenty of arguments because you spew this misinformation anytime you get the chance.
It's fine if you have a blind trust in the TPG's. But just remember it is only you and the NEWBIES.

Maybe at a 65.

 

Nope, I actually can grade which is why I understand me not finding something attractive doesn't mean it was graded wrong. I also understand who knows more than I do and that JA has seen more than the people who think they're experts trying to demean CAC.

There's a big difference between actual world renowned experts and being a big fish in a small forum puddle

 

I’ll admit I ocassionally enjoy a drink of the koolaid when warranted, but it seems that some people have allowed themselves to drink it exclusively.

 

This one was interesting




Sold in Feb 2016 as a 65+ CAC and then in June 2016 as a 67+ CAC.


https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/339820/1881-S-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned

https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dol...6-4968.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

From an old thread. And this is why drinking the Kool Aid is bad.
Sorry, that CAC wasn't around yet. A blast from the past.
https://forums.collectors.com/discu...ver-seen-submitting-the-same-coin-raw-to-pcgs

 

Crazy. 2 points is a pretty big swing.

 

I agree. I wonder why it wasn't gold at 65+?
Looking at the picture from GC, the 65+ looks nicer than other 65/65+ (and even some 66s) that I have seen/bought lately (including those that also received a sticker).

 

Maybe the last auction was during the super bowl or something? I think the coin, regardless of the holder+bean, is pretty much a steal at 660$. Especially if someone were aware of its prior grade, and I'm sure some bidders were.
Slightly off topic, can anyone recommend an excellent, perhaps the best, Morgan Dollar book on history and grading? Thanks in advance!