We have additional responses to one reader’s inquiry in prior issues of the JR Newsletter about CAC grading.
First, from Brad Karoleff:
The last two weeks’ JR Newsletters (JRN) have had comments concerning the new CACG grading company. I would like to take a moment to answer the author’s questions/concerns, based on my experiences.
First, to be perfectly transparent, I have chosen CACG to grade my personal collection. I will explain the reasons later, as well as the PRELIMINARY results. I plan an article(s) later detailing my experiences that will be published in the John Reich Journal.
Jack initially wrote in JRN #648 about CACG placing a pre-embossed CAC emblem on each holder. That is, of course, their corporate logo identifying the company. The other grading services proudly display their corporate logos on their holders. Would you want PCGS or NGC to remove their corporate identity from their holders? Just because it looks like the “green bean” applied to PCGS and NGC holders for superior coins contained in their plastic should not cause any confusion as the new CACG holders do not resemble any other services holders.
In the latest newsletter, #649, James wrote he believes “CAC is a racket”. Why? Is it different from any other third party grading service in what they provide the collector? NO! They provide their OPINION of the grade of the coin submitted. Their opinion may differ from the other major services- usually to the stricter side- is that the problem? He states that he began collecting when Brown and Dunn was the accepted system. That would also mirror my introduction to the hobby. When Photograde was first published, I remember collectors criticizing the “new looser standards” they introduced.
The next step in professional grading happened with the ANA providing photo certificates authenticating coins submitted and offering their opinion of grades on the coin- separate obverse and reverse grades!
PCGS then entered the marketplace with their certified “slabs”, increasing security of the process. NGC soon followed becoming PCGS’s main competitor. We all know what has happened over the years with the modifications in each company’s holders and grading standards which is often referred to as grade inflation. Prized older holder coins are often worth more for a reason that is not always the rarity of the holder itself. Only time will tell if CACG can retain their grading standards through market fluctuations and changes in the grading room.
The CAC STICKERING service came into being to identify premium coins in both PCGS and NGC holders. We now had a grading company that was grading the other grading companies. Was their pushback to this? Certainly, but the marketplace soon spoke loudly, showing superior prices realized for those “green beaned” coins. Some collectors became so “married” to the concept that they do not purchase anything for their collections that does not don the bean. This excludes many coins from their consideration that are still considered nice, acceptable coins by many in the marketplace. Each collector determines the standards for his set. Employing the grading services PROFESSIONAL opinion is significant, but not the final answer. Personal knowledge is still, and always should be, king.
Now, let me discuss why I have PERSONALLY decided on CACG for grading my coins.
1. I agree with John’s philosophy that grading standards should not change over time. Sticking to a fixed standard, even if not everyone agrees, over time, will result in predictable pricing results. Ever wonder why sight unseen and sight seen bids are so much different for coins in other holders?
2. I have graded many coins through each of the services mentioned above. I continue to use each service for different coins based on a business decision for each individual coin. Return time is one of the major reasons for some of the decisions.
3. Since I have employed all the services for many years, I do have a few perspectives based on my individual experiences. Most importantly when something goes wrong, how is it handled? Most recently the other two grading services have changed ownership structure and customer relations, in my opinion, has significantly suffered. In the past I was able to talk with someone at either service who either had numismatic knowledge or knew when to forward me to someone who did. Calls now go to a call center and questions are answered by someone reading a FAQ sheet. I cannot adequately describe my frustration with a recent conversation with one of the services. I finally just gave up and submitted my coins to CACG. If there is a problem at CACG you will be speaking with someone physically present at CACG who has general numismatic knowledge or who will be willing to get someone to help you that does. This is A MAJOR advantage in my book.
4. Pricing and turnaround times are competitive or better than the other services.
5. The team at CACG has been carefully built with extremely respected members. The team leaders have extensive experience in the industry and are well respected members of the community.
6. John offered me a very fair deal in getting my collection pedigreed and identified with attributions. One of the other services refused to even consider pedigreeing my collection that was 98% complete by die marriage as it would not place high enough in their census because I collect primarily XF grades, not AU-UNC.
7. In addition, I was able to arrange for drop-off and pickup service at their facility to prevent the possibility of loss during shipping. I have spent a lifetime putting together the collection and am not willing to trust it to third party delivery.
Some may look at this as an advertisement for CACG. It is my PERSONAL experience and my PERSONAL decision. I understand many of the leaders will have ties to the registry sets at other services and that is their personal decision, which I support. I did what I thought would be the best for me and my heirs. I am happy to discuss experiences with anyone interested. So far, mine at CACG has been very positive- if not always in agreement with my previous assessment.
Brad Karoleff
--
Next, we have input from Alan Weinberg:
I started collecting in 1958 so I’m glad to read that James Higby has been collecting 70 years.
Numismatics was fun back then. Bright or dipped was good, naturally toned coins were frowned upon. Slabbing was non-existent and you had to “know your stuff”.
My mentors were Aaron Feldman (“buy the book before the coin”), Bill Anton Jr and John Ford (both of whom you had to watch your back but who were friendly with plenty of advice). I followed their collecting tastes. Today it’s all about grade/market value with silly $ differences for even “plus” signs. It seems the coin is quite secondary to the plastic slab grade or CAC sticker for too many collectors.
Alan V Weinberg
No comments:
Post a Comment