About two years ago, I became a collector member of the Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) and submitted some of the classic coins from my collection for evaluation. I anticipated that nearly all of these coins would receive stickers, as I believed I had always carefully selected my coins for eye appeal and quality within the grade. I was disappointed, when only around half of my coins received stickers.
For those unfamiliar with CAC, the company evaluates coins previously graded by either PCGS or NGC. Coins which meet CAC’s quality standards receive a green sticker on the holder, and coins which do not meet their standards do not receive a sticker. The green stickers serve to differentiate coins which are solid or premium for the grade with good eye appeal from those which are lower end for the grade. Recent statistics indicate that overall about 45% of all coins submitted to CAC are awarded green stickers.
Once I received my first submission back from CAC, I took a second look at my coins and grudgingly found myself more or less in agreement with their judgements. The prices that I paid for the coins also provided somewhat of a corroboration. Coins which I acquired relatively cheaply tended to be the ones that did not receive stickers. (This is not to say that there are not some bargains out there, but when coins are priced too low, more often than not, there is a reason.)
After a few more submissions and continued scrutiny of the results, I became more familiar with the makings of a coin that is solid or premium for the grade and worthy of a CAC sticker. I used this knowledge to refine my own standards when selecting new coins to add to my collection.
My past two submissions of about 20 coins each have fared much better, with more than 90% of the coins receiving stickers. My last submission also included three gold stickers, signifying that the coins exceeded CAC’s standards, or presumably are worthy of a higher grade than indicated on the holder.
Collector opinions sometimes vary on the usefulness of CAC evaluation and the premiums that can be associated with the little green stickers, but from my perspective CAC has provided a valuable method of feedback which has helped me to become a better collector. For a nominal fee, my coins were evaluated by a professional outside party and a decision was rendered. This feedback has helped me to refine my own standards for future acquisitions.
From time to time, there have been unfortunate tales of collectors who diligently added coins to their collection over a period of many years. When it came time to sell, these collectors discovered that the coins they had purchased were not all that they believe them to be. Raw coins may have been cleaned or not authentic. Even certified coins may have been low end for the grade or had other problems. The end result was that the lifetime collection was worth considerably less than anticipated.
While it doesn’t necessarily have to be CAC, every collector needs some method of feedback to refine their standards and strategies for acquisitions. This could also take the form of a trusted dealer or fellow collector who can provide a second opinion on recent or potential purchases. Another possibility is periodically selling coins from a collection. If the prices realized are much less than expected, more scrutiny may be prudent for future purchases. Whatever your avenue, a refined focus on quality will yield benefits down the road.
Michael: With all due respect, how many people have to look at a coin in order for it to be the allegedly perfect coin for your collection? Does it really matter what is on the plastic holder? What does the coin look like? How do you feel about the coin?
The vast majority of my collection are raw coins. My collection of Peace Dollars will range from XF to BU but with nice luster. I admit my 1921-D would get the lowest grade of the set, but as a key date, it was a great coin for what I paid. Does that mean I made a bade choice? No… because I trust my eyes and I trust my judgement. I know what I like.
I buy the coin for how it looks, how it fits into my collection, and how I feel after I take these and other factors into consideration. I do not need a grading service or the CAC to tell me a coin is worth being in my collection.
Further, I believe the CAC is a sham. If the grading services are third-party graders, than the CAC is a fourth party. A fourth party puts them down the food chain to the point that I question their effectiveness. How can you trust an evaluation of a coin that has to be done looking through the plastic casing? How can you trust an evaluation in that old NGC holder in your article that does not use the same technology of today and you cannot even see the coin’s edge? Is that a proper evaluation of the evaluators?
The CAC is not exactly neutral. Aside from their owners having commercial concerns, the CAC are also “market makers.” This means that they buy the coins they sticker to resell them, of course as a profit. This means that they are pumping up the value of the coin then saying that since they are confident about this value, they are churning them in the market, inflating its value without justification. In the securities industry, that would be equivalent to the pump-and-dump. This is similar to what Morgan Stanley has been accused of with the recent Facebook IPO. Morgan Stanley put their little green sticker on Facebook and churned it out to the market. Fortunately for the market, traders are smart enough to see past the ruse and the Facebook stock as suffered. In the numismatics industry, the maturity of coin buyers has not caught up to the reality and they are trusting a company whose only purpose appears to be inflating the price of collectible coins.
People have told me that CAC founder, John Albanese, does this for the integrity of the industry. After all, we should trust the original co-founder of PCGS and NGC. Sorry… aside from not knowing Mr. Albanese, which allows for me to look at the situation in the cold light of day, I see a very serious conflict of interest if Albanese, the CAC, and the CAC “investors” are doing with CAC stickered coins as what Morgan Stanley did with Facebook. If Albanese was really in this for the integrity of the industry, the CAC would not be involved in “market making” and be an independent evaluator.
Everyone can choose to collect in a manner that suits them. Of course, I have raw coins and circulated coins in my collection as well. The minutiae in grading is not as important in these instances. If you are purchasing higher grade certified coins, a difference in quality within the grade is important and will drive a premium or discount- regardless of whether there is a sticker or not.
Coins can be evaluated through the plastic of the holder- that’s what anyone has to do any time they purchase a certified coin.
I am not advocating only buying CAC stickered coins or paying huge premiums for them, or evaluating their actions in the marketplace, whatever they may be. I used them to evaluate higher grade certified coins, which I purchased without stickers. In this vein, CAC serves a useful purpose for me.
I’m thinking that CAC service would be a whole lot more useful if they provided information on coins that were reviewed and not stickered.As it is, it is hard to trat them seriously since they obviously want the same coins submitted to them again, and again, and again, and again.
I don’t see why you think they want the same coins submitted to them again and again? Once a coin either receives or doesn’t receive a sticker, there’s really no reason to submit it again. And CAC doesn’t even charge their fee if the coin does not receive a sticker.
Once a coin either receives or doesn’t receive a sticker, there’s really no reason to submit it again.
If I submit the coin and it comes back stickerless and then sell it. The next guy wanting it reviewed will send it in, and so on. Also, CAC says: “Occasionally a coin that has previously been rejected for CAC verification is reconsidered by CAC and stickered.”. Be that as it may, If I own a coin, I would be interested in knowing if it has been reviewed or not.
I wasn’t aware that CAC does not charge a fee for reviewing a coin that doesn’t meet their criteria. At any rate, my understanding is that CAC currently is not accepting new members.
Scott,
It’s probably just a typo, but there is no 1921-D Peace dollar. It was minted in Philly.
Also, CAC is not owned only by Mr. Albanese. It is actually owned by a group of PNG dealers like Laura Sperber of Legend and others. That may not change anyone’s view, but it is something to be aware of. PNG dealers all adhere to the strongest ethics code in the business.
In addition, I would point out that Mr. Albanese founded a non-profit which recovers millions of dollars for coin buyers who got scammed. He is not paid for that work.
Whether or not you agree with the CAC approach, I can say from personal experience that Mr. Albanese is a man of integrity. And I Know people like Scott and Shutter will disagree, but when it comes to very high end certified coins, CAC stickers make a big difference in what coins bring at auction and give both the seller and buyer more confidence. For a coin valued in the tens of thousands or more, I would definitely prefer CAC over non-CAC and that is very much the trend in today’s marketplace.
Louis, you’re totally wrong! I am not disagreeing about the value of CAC sticker. And I said nothing about Albanese’s integrity. I simply would want to know if a non-stickered coin has been reviewed or not. Obviously when buying one of those types of coins, you would prefer one that has not been reviewed to one that has been reviewed and did not get a sticker.
Shutter,
I don’t know why you think everything is about you! The point about John’s integrity was not linked to or in response to anything you said. Anyone reading this thread can see that it is Mr. Barman who has questions about that, not you. The sentence I wrote that refers to you deals with the value of the stickers. The sentence on integrity does not refer to you. And Mr. Barman has raised the same issues in posts on his blog. I enjoy his posts, but I think one should be more careful about making accusations as he did in his blog posts and to a lesser degree above.
On the issue of the value of the stickers, I will agree I misunderstood your view, and I agree it would be useful to know if CAC has already reviewed a coin.
I have never to this day received a coin with a CAC sticker and felt it did not deserve it. I have sent in coins that did not receive the CAC sticker and after a second review of the coin 95% of the time I would have to agree with CAC. For people buying coins from Ebay or the internet CAC is like insurance. I think it is a great idea. Not to mention it test your skills as a collector of coins. Also it’s fun to send off coins from your collection to see if they meet CAC’s high standard. Being a collector of coins CAC only charges you for the coins they sticker. I would say that’s a pretty fair deal.