I'm late to this party, but wanted to share some opinions. I do realize that when buying a coin off the internet or from pics it is nice to have a profesional opinion on grade and authenticity. But if the original graders from respectable tpg,s can be off a a grade or two, what makes people think that another firm can split grade a coin any better. It is almost like CAC is saying, we are the best graders in the world and you should trust only us. If the graders at CAC are so good, why don't they slab coins themselves and split grade them at that time. By looking at the coins in the example in this thread it is obvious they may not get it right any better than the original slabbers. The pics look to close in quality to say they make one coin look that much better or worse than the others. To buy a coin already stickered is one thing, but why pay to have it done. Unless enough people fall into the trap, it sure seams like a waste to me. collectors do it in the raw Investors encapsulate.
I just picked 5 of the last 1883-CC coins that were sold on Heritage. I have no way of knowing if all of the coins were submitted to the CAC or not. This was not a scientific poll at all and nobody should form an opinion based on this poll. This exercise was really just for fun.
I find it a very rare occurrence for PCGS or NGC to be off by more than one grade. In fact, I believe that a very high percentage of PCGS & NGC graded coins are graded properly. The value of the second opinion is that the chance that the coin is overgraded with two opinions becomes very small. Let's assume that NGC, PCGS, and CAC are correct in their grade 90% of the time. If an NGC or PCGS coin has a CAC, the chance that one of these coins is incorrectly graded becomes very small.
That being the case, we could assume that at least one other coin would get the CAC seal of approval. and as far as having one more grader look at a coin, if I'm not mistaken NGC and PCGS already have three graders look at each coin.
That is true, but they don't look at them for very long. I imagine that the routine of looking at hundreds of coins each day will lead a human being (even 3) to make mistakes.
It was fun - but I think at least two others and maybe all three would get CAC stickers. This certainly was an entertaining thread.:thumb:
Ruben no offence but you kept repeating what you were saying over and over , to me it didn't make much sence , then Lehigh comes and in 1 thread I understood what you were saying , to explain something you can't use terms the layperson doesn't know , explain it in common English . rzage:thumb::bow:
I think it was fun. I think it proves that CAC stickers on slabs are useful...but the lack of a sticker doesn't mean the coin is not a premium coin. To simply use the CAC sticker as another for of "grade insurance" before buying a coin is fine but not to use it as the only determining factor. If I was going to buy those coins, I would have bought #2 first...even before I knew it had a sticker. I like the PL eye appeal the best. However, #4 would be my second choice...which doesn't have a sticker. Was it ever send to CAC? I have no idea. One thing about CAC I would like to see is a database that includes "rejected" coins. I don't care about putting a "bad" sticker on them. But, if CAC registered the reject coins, it would prevent resubmissions and IMHO go a long way to establishing they are a company that is not solely about profit but also wants to be a contributing force to the industry. I know they probably won't do that because the lack of a way to track if a coin has been submitted will allow for more income for the company...but I think it would be a good gesture.
And I liked coin 3 and 4 better than the others - just my choice. And I agree with the second paragraph completely. How will you know which coins were rejected by CAC?
I still like coins 1 & 4 but this definately was a fun thread , but the only way to make it fair would be to pick 5 coins of the same grade that you know were submitted to CAC , and then hold the poll , also extra pics of each coin would help . rzage
Hey - anybody got 5 coins of the same grade and date to send to CAC? That would make it fun. Post pictures before sending to CAC. Let us pick which ones are accurately graded. Send the coins in - get them back from cac, do another poll and let us pick which ones got CAC stickers. Now that would be fun. Of course if 4 others would donate 4 1877 VF30 UHC to me I would have 5 in that grade.
Sorry Marc , The only 4 '77 IHCs I can spare are MS-68s , but you said you wanted VF-30s , I wish:whistle::hail: rzage:thumb:
LOL - and I wish I just had one MS 1877 coin. Maybe we can get arizona jack to donate a few ms64 1909-S VDB's to us? What about that? Works for me.
you're forgetting the CC bump, lol. Across the board au/unc CC coins are graded on a different basis than any other mints (with the possible exception of Charlotte and Dahlonaga). You will routinely see a solid 1 point bump for CC coins. As an aside, is it gradeflation if it has always been that way? (Please note that "always" in this case is more limited for me than for some of our more senior members).
How about this A TPG is like Bloomburg News and the CAC is like a shyster stock broker selling you stock tips in the bathroon stall of the greesy spoon behind the market on New Street or in the smoking lounge at Harry at Hanovers...
Ya had to go and make it complicated didn't ya I've told ya before - 1 step at a time. Ya give a little bit of info, let 'em absorb that, THEN give the next step. Oh, wait - that's what ya did isn't it :thumb:
Is this because Carson City tended to produce a nicer coin or because the CC coins are more popular. I'd imagine it's the latter. If that's the case, this phenomenon is something you would see with the market grading on slabs...but in actuality the techinical grade would be unaffected. Is that a correct assumption? It almost sounds like the TPGs treat CC minted coins like they treat key coins, they tend to let a little bit more slide.
