Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by potty dollar 1878, Feb 16, 2021.
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
This is one example from above. The CAC example has a better strike and better luster. Comparing the two it’s not surprising at all that the CAC example brought a stronger price at auction compared to the non. Buying the coin not the holder applies to CAC material as well.
Why a proof that isn’t fully struck should grade 68 in the first place is another discussion.
It is just another way to get collectors to pay the piper. Go on Grey Sheet and look at the difference, usually just a couple of dollars (with exceptions) when I bid and if it has the green bean on it The MOST I will pay is Blue/grey sheet prices. I lose some but I have won more than I have lost. Refer to an earlier thread posted about the individual going from table to table at a Large Show in Chicago, offering the Beans for a couple of bucks and telling the dealers it would increae the coin price. JMO
You are missing the whole point of CAC. The entire CAC market is predicated on the fact that the coins with the stickers are not the same as the coins that don't sticker.
For years, everyone complained when gradeflation inflated populations and drove down prices of rarities. Then CAC comes along and lifts those same rarities out of the sea of dreck, thereby restoring some of their value, and everyone complains that CAC is artificially inflating prices.
I am gonna say this is as plain as I can, you guys can't have it both ways.
It was and is making a market. It benefits the hobby, and on more than one level. As an example, it will buy back what it blesses.
The TPGs do not. The 4pg also created a needed response to coin doctors. The 4pg also limited the needles irrationally attacking balloons that were solid metal.
It was not only rarities. It was collectible pieces that hobbyists wanted, and collectors also wanted an assurance greater than what was offered by TPGs at the time.
Some here may recall the discussions that were a sort of round table prior to and during the formation of CAC.
It was an open forum and served the hobby well.
I believe it is still in the PCGS archives.
That was not my experience. I have written in the past the CAC gets it right over 95% of the time, but the mistakes can be big ones. The coin that really was the beginning of the end for me was a better date gold coin that a dealer offered me after I left him a want list. The coin was graded MS-62, CAC, but the it would have had a hard time making it to AU-58. The difference in price because of the over grade was more than $6,000 or almost 50% of the asking price. The dealer wanted not only the retail price, but a $2,000 CAC premium as well. I passed
The coin did not sell for over three months. This dealer usually turns stuff over in less than a month. The dealer even asked for offers. None of them were enough to hit his minimum. Finally he sold or consigned the coin to a dealer at the Winter FUN show.
CAC is both a matter of grading accuracy and marketing. If you blindly accept their opinion, you can get hurt badly.
He got stuck, and instead of doing the right thing, he tried to kick the can down the road.
I would have called this dealer out. That is the kind of lack of integrity that damages the hobby.
Mistakes occur. John and CAC have never denied this and have never sidestepped legitimate complaints and not corrected legitimate mistakes.
No. The dealer is an expert in gold coinage.
I will stick with he got stuck. He did not do the right thing.
With the 1881-O Morgan...I have to believe that an MS-67 MSD is a quantum jump in price from the MS-66 (MSD experts, feel free to chime in). That's why the CAC sticker led to a 250% jump in price. Normally, for coins that cost in the $500 - $5,000 range....you see a 20-25% bump in price for a CAC.
I'm also surprised Legend sold a non-CAC coin.
Legend "made" a heck of a lot of them that are on the market. One does wonder, though.
DOWNGRADE so they can then get a CAC on the label !!
Separate names with a comma.