CAC scrubbed from PCGS message boards

The topic of "Collectors Acceptance Corporation," the grading
verification service founded by John Albanese (an original partner in
PCGS who later founded NGC) , has had EVERY message with CAC in the
subject or in the message text deleted from the PCGS.com message
boards.

CAC examines PCGS and NGC coins, and puts a sticker on slabs that are
solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

When CAC was announced, David Hall commented something like "if the
market wants it, we support it"

But now the hostility is to the point that bringing up the subject is
completely forbidden.

"Frank Provasek" wrote in message
...
The topic of "Collectors Acceptance Corporation," the grading
verification service founded by John Albanese (an original partner in
PCGS who later founded NGC) , has had EVERY message with CAC in the
subject or in the message text deleted from the PCGS.com message
boards.

CAC examines PCGS and NGC coins, and puts a sticker on slabs that are
solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

When CAC was announced, David Hall commented something like "if the
market wants it, we support it"

But now the hostility is to the point that bringing up the subject is
completely forbidden.

The NGC forum still has several threads on CAC. Go to
http://boards.collectors-society.com...php?ubb=search
and use the search term
CAC -cache
(The -cache eliminates irrelevant posts with the word cache.)

PCGS must have really thin skin compared to NGC.

On Apr 28, 11:18*am, "John Mazor" wrote:
"Frank Provasek" wrote in message

...





The topic of "Collectors Acceptance Corporation," the grading
verification service founded by John Albanese (an original partner in
PCGS who later founded NGC) , has had EVERY message with CAC in the
subject or in the message text deleted from the PCGS.com message
boards.

CAC examines PCGS and NGC coins, and puts a sticker on slabs that are
solid for the grade. *Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" *of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

When CAC was announced, David Hall commented something like "if the
market wants it, we support it"

But now the hostility is to the point that bringing up the subject is
completely forbidden.

The NGC forum still has several threads on CAC. *Go tohttp://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=search
and use the search term
CAC -cache
(The -cache eliminates irrelevant posts with the word cache.)

PCGS must have really thin skin compared to NGC.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thin skined says it. They even deleted hundreds of posts relating to
the
Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee (CCAC) which "we are desperately
trying to restore."

On Apr 28, 11:15*am, Frank Provasek wrote:
Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" *of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

Do you have any proof of that assertion or are you off on one of your
wild conspiracy theories again?

When CAC was announced, David Hall commented something like "if the
market wants it, we support it"

Again, please provide proof.

But now the hostility is to the point that bringing up the subject is
completely forbidden.

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

"Frank Provasek" wrote in message
...
The topic of "Collectors Acceptance Corporation," the grading
verification service founded by John Albanese (an original partner in
PCGS who later founded NGC) , has had EVERY message with CAC in the
subject or in the message text deleted from the PCGS.com message
boards.

CAC examines PCGS and NGC coins, and puts a sticker on slabs that are
solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

I would presume that PCGS and NGC would claim ALL coins slabbed by them are
solid for the grade.

I've seen a lot of slabbed coins in your auctions, Frank. Is that what you
mean by "... traded from sucker to sucker in auctions" ?

On Apr 28, 8:05*pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:

I've seen a lot of slabbed coins in your auctions, Frank. * Is that what you
mean by "... traded from sucker to sucker in auctions" ?

Hoist with his own petard!
But does it occur to anyone that Frank is getting a lot of exposure
for his auctions by us responding to his nonsensical posts?

"Frank Provasek" wrote in message
...
snip

solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

This is a bold statement based on a specious argument. I can think of
several auction houses regularly providing coins of exceptional quality that
disprove that statement.

W.

"RF" wrote in message
...

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

Credibility and marketing.

First, not all discussions about CAC are intended to promote it.

Second, it's stupid because it sends the message "If they won't let us talk about it, they
must be afraid of it. If they're afraid of it, there must be something good to it that's
not in their selfish interests."

Any competent PR professional would have told them that. It's a basic rule for corporate
blogs. If you hope to build constituencies (i.e., customers) on a blog, you can't limit
your content to Happy Face corporate hype on the controversial issues plus whatever
neutral filler material doesn't hurt you. You're wasting your time and money if you
censor alternate views and open dissent. At least 99% of the people you hope to build
relationships with will see right through it. If you must be a control freak, stick to
paid advertising, where you can and are expected to control all the content.

"1787" wrote in message
m...

"Frank Provasek" wrote in message
...
snip

solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

This is a bold statement based on a specious argument. I can think of several auction
houses regularly providing coins of exceptional quality that disprove that statement.

I think the answer to that would be "They're not the ones who are guilty of facilitating
this practice." So your refutation is not dispositive.

I don't take his characterization of an "ugly bottom 5%" of slabbings at literal face
value, but given the range of accuracy in gradings even by the top-level services, the
basic concept does hold water.

"John Mazor" wrote in message
news:G0wRj.6246$zw6.5261@trnddc06...

"1787" wrote in message
m...

"Frank Provasek" wrote in message
...
snip

solid for the grade. Dealers and collectors have long realized that
the ugly "bottom 5%" of slabs are the ones traded from sucker to
sucker in auctions, and in effect set the market price for all coins
in that grade, truly nice specimens.

This is a bold statement based on a specious argument. I can think of
several auction houses regularly providing coins of exceptional quality
that disprove that statement.

I think the answer to that would be "They're not the ones who are guilty
of facilitating this practice." So your refutation is not dispositive.

I don't take his characterization of an "ugly bottom 5%" of slabbings at
literal face value, but given the range of accuracy in gradings even by
the top-level services, the basic concept does hold water.

It's analogous to the observation that the prettiest girls get asked to
dance first.

James