I would like to become a CAC member.

I know they are not accepting members right now but I have heard of collectors getting in line to become one and get in that way. I'm not in a big hurry but seems that I will never be able to join by just waiting until they open membership. My question is, how do I get in this so called line to gain membership. Thanks for any help.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Call 908-781-9101, and tell them you would like to sign up for the Collector Submission waiting list. They will fax/mail you an application.

You have to be a member of ANA.
You will need 3 Numismatic references.
It also helps if you are a member of LSCC- Liberty Seated Collectors Club.
It also helps if you are member of the CAC Forum. Go to www.caccoin.com. Navigate to the Educational Forum, that started up in Dec. You will learn a lot.

That is all I got. I don't know nothing after that.

 

I joined last year. A few months before they closed membership. Glad I got in then. Now it seems they want to make it a little more elite. But I'm ok with that. Yes you can call them or email them. They are very responsive and real nice people.

 

Oh Wow, I didn't know I had to be a member of ANA and all of that. Might just have to have a dealer send them in for me. Thanks for the info.

 

ANA membership is cheap.

 

I would call them and tell them you want to become a member and ask for their outlook. The office staff, in my experience, is exceptionally competent, friendly and helpful. Just the nicest people you would ever want to know.

My application last year was sort of fun. I filled out the form, w/o the three references. They wrote back and told me that I needed numismatic references. I replied that I am so old and stopped actively collecting coins so long ago that all of my numismatic references are either retired or dead, lol (all true, incidentally). On the basis of their reply I would say that they enjoyed my explanation (probably still chuckling) and I was accepted without further comment.

 

I believe you'll find there have been exceptions to your qualifications list.

I qualify for none of the requirement items you've stated, but have been allowed to join when CAC was stated to not being accepting new collectors.

I talked with John, informing how long I'd collected (now 70+ years), what I collected (generally ~MS coins), size of collection (6 figure) size of my CACed collection (hundreds at the time) and education (appreciable).

I informed him that the majority of my submissions would be through CAC submitters. Some needed to be directly submitted because of appreciable past losses through several prominent dealers, now having been majorly jailed.

I was accepted as a "Collector".

 

Why would you not join ANA, the membership is nominal, and they do have very interesting/informative articles. The information provided by ANA has assisted me in several purchases of coins after I had read an article therein. JMHO
Semper Fi
Phil

 

Wanting to be a CAC member but not an ANA member is certainly putting things bass-ackwards.

 

The exceptions to the list are not mine, and neither is the CAC List. Mr. Albanese has ben very clear that there are individual exceptions, and the parameters are someone such as yourself that more than likely will submit A and B pieces that have been off the Market for decades and that you are submitting "exclusively" to CAC for evaluation. Of course you would...there is nobody else to evaluate for a Bean that is accepted by the Market. He is not a fool, and wants first shot at your pieces, because, remember, he buys back and creates the Market for what he beans. You are the type of exception huckleberry he wants as a collector/submitter exception. You know the ins and outs, you know the game and have CAC coins and CAC is all about education.

Of course you know this...you have been around long enough to have seen the Market re-invent itself over and over, and what is and is not desirable, and have been aware of the many market re-births of Mr. Albanese.

 

You're correct, I submit through others. coins that I believe are appreciably under-graded, meeting the original 1977 published A.N.A. standards.

I want to determine if the bean is being applied relative to current non-technical grading standards, or "market-grading".

I believe CAC is doing as they've promised, applying the beans relative to the current grading averages of NGC and PCGS.

The CAC bean is often also applied to under-graded coins, for which I search and purchase.

I'm sad to say that I've tired of sending the "premium" TPG coins that haven't problems, being returned as "detailed".

I hate resubmitting coins that already had received a grade by the top four TPG, only to again resubmit for a grade. Another option has been to sell at a slight premium above melt to established Sellers.

I believe the grading system has severely deteriorated.

I now try to just buy "Fair-Market" priced CACed coins that meet the original illustrated A.N.A. standards.

JMHO

P.S.: I liked your "Huckleberry" reference!

 

We are in COMPLETE agreement. Your methodology of evaluation and concern and past disappointments are exactly the points that Mr. Albanese stressed on the PCGS Board were and are his basis of, and reason for, undertaking the task of making a CAC Market.

You know and I know you are the definition of Hobbyist/Collector that CAC cared about and wanted to re-establish trust in the Hobby and the fiduciary responsibility. Without those qualities, there is no trustworthy Market for the collector.

Technical standards are technical standards. Market standards are market standards. There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking profits off the table. It is better for the Hobby, though, if the profits are based on quality and not a false sense of security.

 

Why?

 

I used one person, my wife. I said if you call and ask her she'll tell you it's all I talk about and frankly she's sick of hearing about coins. They didn't even say anything at all. I was approved.

 

I am not sure if you are referring to my opinion(s), but if that is the intent, I am not sure I understand what part of my opinion you are referring to.

 

I find no value in the ANA membership and I am not alone in that. That said you just have to join for a year to get accepted by CAC then you can let it lapse so its really not a big deal.

 

Sorry @charley I should have made my question clear. Why do you want to become a CAC member? Through our post I believe I got my answer, thank you and good luck.

 

I Stated:
"I want to determine if the bean is being applied relative to current non-technical grading standards, or "market-grading".
You responded: "Market standards are market standards. There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking profits off the table."
I've found both "CACings", including Gem grade coins with "bag marks", "bag rub", "scratches/gouges" in "fields/devices", as an allowed current grading standard.

I also found/purchased the hopefully posted coin which I believe you might recognize. I'm considering direct submission for CAC consideration.

Any Thoughts?

 

Now I understand. Thankyou.

 

You raise a very interesting subject. Before the other comments I make, a quick market check for the 08D in 64:
CPG= 2860 (up this month).
GREYSHEET (wholesale)= 2369 (up this month).
CAC - RCMR= 3690 (up this month).

I chose 64 as a flag, not as commentary on your piece. I never grade from photos. I do note some feint coppering (a good thing-I am a SaintGuru guy...a mentor of mentors).

With a 5-7X, the contact marks are nowhere near as obtrusive as the posted photo size suggests. I do not see any 1mm hits and I do not see any flow line disruption, and the luster is all there. I always try to remember what ANA used as a standard: a Mint State coin can not be lackluster, and an uncirculated coin without full luster can not grade higher than a 63. I do not detect any circulation wear or friction. The strike is average, but there are no ill defined details and the luster is unimpaired.

Comparing your coin, I have seen a hell of a lot worse 65s, and none of them would CAC (and if they would have CAC'd they would already have).

The bag marks/contact marks etc., that you mention, have always been an accepted anomaly with Gold, due to the "softness". It is not that CAC is declaring such hits as current market acceptable. CAC is very critical when it comes to Gold, and over the last several years has forced the TPGs to up their game in gold grading, and consumers are much more cognizant now, because $$$$$$!. It matters. CAC is DEFINITELY not grading in less than technical standards. If they were, the Market he makes- INCLUDING BUYING BACK WHAT BEANS- would not be reflected in the obvious $$ CACA preference.

That is all I got. Remember, you invited my thoughts (which I rarely share because I don't want people hitting me).

I am also old, so don't hit/kick/push me and cause me to topple and break a hip. Calling me names and making fun of me is OK, though.

But, you know all this, so yes my opinion is submit it can't hurt.

Truth in editing: removed an extra nonsensical 'with".