Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Lehigh96, post: 1407384, member: 15309"]I strongly disagree with this logic.  Prior to the inception of the TPG's, unscrupulous dealers would blatantly overgrade coins they sold and blatantly undergrade coins they bought.  The TPG's leveled the playing field and paved the way for novice collectors to enter the market and spend their money without the fear of being ripped off.  I submit that the money brought into the hobby because of the leveling of the playing field far outweighs the money paid to the TPG's to level the playing field.  I can't prove it, so call it my theory.  I can grade Jefferson Nickels as good if not better than a professional grader.  But by your logic, I should never buy any other coin than a Jefferson Nickel.  I can't grade Saint Gauden's Double Eagles and I doubt that simply looking at a few hundred coins will be a substitute for the expert opinions provided by the both the TPG and the CAC.  Does that mean I should never buy an MS65 Saint for a type set? The plus designations used by the TPG's are for premium quality coins.  They would represent the top end of the "A" coins described by CAC.  The star designation employed by NGC relates solely to eye appeal and has nothing to do with the assigned numerical grade.  In fact, my experience has shown me that most star coins are low end for the assigned grade because they have already received a grade bump due to the toning. People seem to bash the CAC at every opportunity.  Yet these are the same people who condemn gradeflation and celebrate PQ coins.  If we recognize that not all coins with an assigned grade are created equal, then why would we criticize a company whose sole purpose is to separate the dreck from the solid for the grade.  I view the CAC as an insurance policy for high end coins.  Just as I don't think that grading is worthwhile until a coin reaches the $200+ range, I don't think that CAC certification is worthwhile until the value spread between grades reaches the $200+ range. But IMO, the most valuable aspect of the CAC verification is it's effect on the liquidity of a coin sight unseen.  I have had many experienced collectors tell me that the worst mistake a collector can make is to buy coins sight unseen including solely from online photos.  My response was always that I don't have the opportunity to personally attend major shows limiting my buying ability to online.  I was always greeted with the same advice:  find a reputable dealer to view the coins for you and give their opinion for a small fee.  Well you know what, that sounds a whole lot like what the CAC does to me.  And instead of getting the opinion of a dealer, you get JA's opinion.  I will take it. For those of you who appreciate anecdotes, here is mine relating to the CAC.  In April, 2008, Heritage offered a 1942-P Jefferson War Nickel NGC PF66 CAMEO in their signature sale.  <a href="http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1104&lotNo=504&lotIdNo=1566" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1104&lotNo=504&lotIdNo=1566" rel="nofollow">1942-P Jefferson Nickel NGC PF66 CAMEO</a> The problem was that you could not tell from the photo if the CAMEO designation was warranted or not.  I had been searching for a CAMEO war nickel for a while and was extremely interested in the coin.  Without CAC verification, there was no possible way I could bid on a coin with a $2,000 spread between a war nickel with CAMEO and one without.  As it was, the coin was verified by the CAC and I placed my bid and won the auction.  Here is my photo of the coin. <img src="http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o59/ACPitBoss/Jefferson%20Nickels/JN1942NGCPF66CAMEO.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> Since that day, I have been a supporter of the CAC![/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches