It's about time for CAC to fill the vacuum!

For many years now it has pretty much been a two horse race between NGC and PCGS, with the other TPG services picking-up the scraps left behind by them. I sense that this long-held status quo may well be in for a shock in the months ahead.

There has been such profound change at NGC ---and especially PCGS-- over the last year. For the first time since these two companies came to dominate the grading and authentication field, there exists an opening for a qualified new entry to completely shatter the existing paradigm.

The ownership changes at PCGS and NGC, and their nascent move away from coins towards other much more esoteric and speculative collectibles suggests to me that both firms have taken their eye off the numismatic ball. The announced departures of both Brett Charville and Joe Orlando at PCGS suggests that PCGS in particular must be navigating significant internal turmoil. How could they not be?

Add in institutionalized grade inflation at NGC and PCGS whereby a continuous stream of older holdered coins get the boost to a higher grade that generates both revenue for the grading services and facilitates arbitrage among submitters, and the environment is right for a profound change in the existing order. Or as Martin Luther would have coined it, a list of "indulgences" desperately needing to be rectified.

That natural evolution would be for an existing arbiter to step-in and take over. The only organization that has that prerequisite qualification is Certified Acceptance Corporation, otherwise known as CAC. The original establishment of CAC by John Albanese was to address this very same grade inflation, something that has actually gotten worse among the established TPG since CAC was first introduced.

All that would be required at this juncture for CAC to near completely take over the market, would be a holder of their own, a registry set application on their website, and the adoption of a published policy on resubmissions. Existing holders with a CAC sticker would be crossed at their current grade. No grade reassessments will be performed on coins in a new CAC holder; they must be cracked-out and resubmitted with a chance at a lower grade and not just a higher grade.

I think the hobby is very much ready for a development like this, and while it would disrupt many existing relationships within the industry, in the final analysis it would be a very positive development. Instead of vast sums of money being wasted on resubmissions, collectors and investors could instead direct their resources towards acquiring coins, something that will without doubt benefit collectors, dealers, and auction houses alike after many years of abuse at the hands of the current grading service cartel.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

What paradign is that? Personally, I don't like either of them or CAC.

 

Here's one for you . I only like it when other people get robbed and end up selling it to me for Cheap .

 

Yea......no.

 

I believe there is a rustling of the leaves at the major TPG’s. However I also believe that some compromise has been afoot for years now. Thankfully, I have the fortune of having been a collector long before the inception of TPG grade standards and with that comes my ability to see beyond the holder and enjoy the beauty of the coin inside…. Which I believe was the original intent of TPG grading. I will always regard the plastic as protection for the piece displayed inside and little more than that. My eye sets the standard for what appeals to me.

 

princeofwaldo ... have you written this letter to CAC? I would strongly suggest you do so. It seems they are currently not accepting new memberships as this is posted on their website: "
In order to maintain the quality of our service and continue to properly and timely serve our members, effective immediately, we are closing CAC collector/dealer membership applications. We will post a notice once membership is reopened."
but you can write to them:
P.O. Box 1776, Far Hills, NJ 07931 Phone: 908-781-9101

 

CAC needs to be put to sleep also. ANACS is still around and needs to take the lead along with others. If I purchase a slabbed coin great, but I am the grader of what I see, desire, buy, and slab. My way or the highway, in my opinion. Enjoyed your post, thank you.

 

Yea....No.

 

There isn't enough prestige associated with ANACS for a registry-set app to work, --in other words, I don't think you could get Dell Loy Hansen to buy-in to the arrangement or others like him. That's not to say I don't like ANACS, though aside from a dozen or so little white holders I do not have any ANACS slabs in my collection. Much like ICG and their "innovative" holder with dips on the side of slabs (so it can be grabbed like a steering wheel??) --the ANACS holder with curved arching lines and sloped top for viewing the label has been a failure in my opinion. I don't think anyone wants innovation in slab design as a central criteria for selecting a grading service. The number one consideration has always been acceptance in the market-place, and though there have been literally hundreds of gradings services that have tried, none have come close to becoming as widely accepted as NGC and PCGS. While there is a certain amount of inertia that has helped continue this arrangement, like all organized systems, entropy eventually erodes the very foundations that made them great to begin with.

It began with the proliferation of different slab labels, was greatly accelerated by additional grades with a +, and even the adoption of the 70 grade can be seen as an abdication of their founding principles made in search of revenue. Once organizational decay has begun, it is very difficult to reverse. For example, take a look at IBM these days. Once the greatest corporation the world had ever seen, now days they can't even get their own internal email servers to work:

https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/30/ibm_email_outage/

 

That's actually very good news for CAC. It likely means there is huge demand for their services, --so much so that they can't keep up-- and that they do not need to compromise their grading standards in order to attract additional revenue.

 

Forget CAC...! Just more of horse and cart philosophy, IMO. Where is the TECHNOLOGY in our industry, our hobby...and where are our LEADERS of such, in getting with the program...??? We have long ago come over from slide rules and T-squares and given way to various and wonderfully innovative technologies in so many facets of engineering and design, manufacturing, medicine, sports and all sorts of analysis, detection and on and on. Until Numismatics gets with the program relative to current, cave-man, TPG...essentially by candlelight...and allows for computer-aided grading by sophisticated development, programming and analysis...written and developed for industry-wide use to replace the archaic, subjective, selective and all-too-fallible human factors of grading...TPG as we know it is doomed. And well it should be. C'mon ANA and all the Numis-leader VIPs plus those of TPG services...at least those not in bed with each other and stuffing their pockets...let's move FORWARD in this world. The horse and cart have long ago left the building. Yes, indeed...questions to be asked/answered and bugs to be worked out...but the technology is there and it can be done and we MUST do it.

 

Mac nailed it. Whichever company can bring a reliable AI grading service onto the market will dominate, at least for modern coins. I don't see it happening in the very near future, but it will happen. Beyond grading, if it can also consistently catch fakes, that would also drive customers to their door.

The problem will be folks reluctant to send in their grade-inflated coins for evaluation by a computer. The loss of value would be too much for many to bear.

 

I’ll admit I am old school. I been doing commercial construction estimating since the 1980’s. I still to this day do it with pocket scales and printed blueprints while the young bucks in my office do it on laptops and IPads.

Evaluating a coin is a process of judgment based upon strict long held standards. Those standards have somewhat been compromised over the years and that has created chaos. How often do we see MS70 “first day of issue” ASE’s posted here that are far from perfect? Judgment has been compromised by the large corporate submitters and it has trickled down…. Yet, price points in the market are based upon the judgment of the TPG label and I have long been a vocal opponent of the damage it has done to our “hobby”.

No, a computer does not have the ability to judge the strike quality of a late 18th century press. Only a human can discern that difference. The problem here is humans are compromised by the power of the dollar as has been our hobby. AI grading would be a further travesty to our hobby. One that just might send me off to find a new passion.

 

In other words, once Elon Musk has perfected self-driving cars let him have a crack at the coin grading business? Sorry, but I'm with Randy on this one. Not a chance that is technologically possible.

Grading coins is hardly the only task that will never be automated.

Cool video of the 15 most daunting runways in the world to land on. Note that they consider landing on an aircraft carrier to be the "easiest" of the bunch. Watch it and then ask yourself if you would want a pilot or software sticking the plane onto the runway if you were in it. I especially like the runway at Gisborne Airport in New Zealand with railroad tracks that cross the middle of it.

 

Many years ago, I was flying on Republic Airlines from Atlanta to New Orleans in March. We ended up making 3 approaches, each time, the pilot had to fly over the Gulf of Mexico. I took my son with me on the flight and he enjoyed it all. I had flown a thousand times, so I knew what was going on. Upon leaving the airplane, the pilot was at the door. I asked him if he had much trouble landing. His response was, "I wasn't sure we were going to make it." I had a similar experience flying to Dayton, Ohio with snow. After a couple of other scary flights, I changed jobs that didn't require flying.

 

I was on a Southwest flight in July of 1987 from Memphis to Chicago when they aborted the takeoff while the plane was hurling down the runway 100+ MPH. A steward on the way to his jump seat in the rear of the plane was assaulted by a passenger, grabbed by the tie and clocked in the aisle. They had already gone full throttle for 5 or 6 seconds before word got to the cockpit what had happened. Amazing how quickly they can stop a 737 when they really set their minds to it(!)

 

that is not true.

 

My point is that a computer doesn't have the ability to be subjective.

 

Of course it can judge. Anything that the computer can be correctly programmed to perform can be performed.
The question is, is it accurate? or, like any other evaluation, an opinion given using a different tool?
Please don't opine it would be 100% accurate and there would not be disagreement.