CAC scrubbed from PCGS message boards

On Apr 29, 1:52*pm, "1787" wrote:

I believe I have misinterpreted your original statement. *Certainly junk
recycles. *If by "and in effect set the market price for all coins in that
grade, truly nice specimens" you mean that they define a baseline for the
truly nice specimens, then I suppose that would have to be true. *The quoted
sentence is likely missing a word before "truly" and I'm still not sure what
you meant. *Sorry.

The good coins in a PCGS MS63 slab are kept in collections or as
retail inventory.

The ugly coins in PCGS MS63 trade in the "sight unseen" market,
Teletrade, eBay,
Heritage "bullet" auctions with a lot more volume, and since the price
guides reflect
current transactions, the reported price for a articyular coin in a
PCGS MS63 slab
represents lower quality coins, and makes it hard for owners of
superior or even average
coins to get fair value.


Here is more information

http://www.biddlesbank.com/page37.html

"RF" wrote in message
...
On Apr 28, 11:15 am, Frank Provasek wrote:



.Why should PCGS allow their board to be used to promote the services
of another company?

CAC is a complimentary service to PCGS and NGC. CAC does not COMPETE with
them.
Apparently David Hall, who once supported CAC, finds it inconvenient that a
number of
overhyped overgraded PCGS coins are being returned by CAC as not solid for
the grade.

--
Helen Wallace
R.E. Wallace Stamps & Coins
Fort Worth, Texas
"Since 1948"

On Apr 30, 3:49*am, "Helen Wallace"
wrote:
"RF" wrote in message

...
On Apr 28, 11:15 am, Frank Provasek wrote:

.Why should PCGS allow their board to be used to promote the services
of another company?

CAC is a complimentary service to PCGS and NGC. *CAC does not COMPETE with them.

Please point out where I claimed CAC was in competition with PCGS/NGC.
Oh that's right, you can't.

Apparently David Hall, who once supported CAC, finds it inconvenient that a
number of
overhyped overgraded PCGS coins are being returned by CAC as not solid for
the grade.

Have you proof of that assertion or is it just more of your usual
balloon juice Fwankie?