Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 1454418, member: 15309&quot;]I really think that some people on this forum don&#039;t understand the reason for the emergence of the CAC.&nbsp; It really makes no difference whether you subscribe to the theory that grading standards have changed or you believe simply in the inherent subjectivity of grading, the fact is that gradeflation is very real.&nbsp; If you look at grading using decimals, it is easy to see how the same coin can achieve a different grade on different submissions and BOTH GRADES BE CORRECT.&nbsp; Most collectors have a tough time differentiating an MS64.5 from and MS65.5.&nbsp; Imagine the difficulty in trying to differentiate an MS64.9 from and MS65.1.&nbsp; They are essentially the same coin and sometimes they will grade MS64, other times MS65.</p><p><br /></p><p>Since higher graded coins carry higher prices, the crackout artists have been diligently applied their craft and sent all of these MS6X.8&#039;s &amp; MS6X.9&#039;s to the TPG for regrading.&nbsp; The eventual result was the decrease in PQ coins and an increase in the number of low end coins for the assigned grade:&nbsp; GRADEFLATION!&nbsp; Now for all of the people who blame the CAC for higher prices, what happens to the value of a coin with a certain grade when the population in that grade increases?&nbsp; If the increase is negligible probably nothing.&nbsp; But when the population increases by 10%, 25%, or 50% the price will drop causing an erosion of the value of all of the coins in that grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>This is where the CAC comes into play.&nbsp; JA recognized this and created the CAC to essentially separate the wheat from the chaff.&nbsp; Does the CAC increase the value of a coin or does it restore it&#039;s original value before the effects of gradeflation?&nbsp; The idea of incremental grading is not new and experienced collectors know that coins of a particular grade are not all created equal.&nbsp; In order to criticize the CAC, one would necessarily have to refute the validity of incremental grading.</p><p><br /></p><p>So here is how I look at it.&nbsp; There are two groups of collectors.&nbsp; First are those who have the requisite grading skills to differentiate coins that are low end and high end for the assigned grade.&nbsp; These collectors would naturally seek to obtain coins that are high end for the assigned grade and their collections are probably full of PQ coins that have suffered in value over the years due to the effects of gradeflation.&nbsp; I submit that these collectors would welcome the CAC with open arms to restore the value of their solid for the grade and PQ coins.&nbsp; The second group are those who don&#039;t know how to grade.&nbsp; Before the inception of the CAC, these collectors armed with nothing but money were destined to end up with low end coins for the assigned grade.&nbsp; Logic would dictate that these collectors would also welcome the CAC since it provides and avenue to obtain great coins with little or no knowledge.</p><p><br /></p><p>Calling the CAC a scam, trivializing it by calling the stickers &quot;green beans&quot;, and blaming the CAC for increasing coin prices are all the product of ignorance about the rare coin market.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in