CCCS, ICCS, Or PCGS Pro And Cons Of Each Grading Services For First Time

I think basebal21 has some good points here. I personally learned a lot from sending my coins to TPGs and I've never had issues selling them. Not a single return. Not so true with raw coins. If you buy coins at coin shows it probably does not make any difference because you can examine the coin. Buying from a picture is a different story. TPGs are there to offer a 'second opinion'. As a buyer, you can take it or leave it.

It's all up to you. But with all the fakes I'd think twice before buying expensive raw coins. Even from so-called reputable sources.

I agree these people are getting good, hands-on experience. The education the learner gets though, is taylored to the specimens they use for the study - which are the TPGs slabs.

In effect, what these collectors learn is how certain TPGs will grade different coins. I think people learning about slabs from slabs is also why there is so much online discussion of which TPG does the job "best," which pays more attention to {fill in the blank}, which one is more consistent with {FITB}, etc.



Sounds good. I figured you were just busy.




Well - making it short, I personally used a scanning device in the late 90s - at a plastics plant QR dept - which was designed to find microscopic anomalies with the parts we were making. This machine could report all sorts of numbers and imperfections accurately and consistently down to the micron level. This is more than enough scanning a coin, setting parameters as to even what kind of damage, /cleaning etc. A machine is NOT capable though of grading eye appeal - Eye appeal could be a single point (and stated as such) after the machine does the verifiable and highly accountable job of grading the coin. And this was almost 20 years ago now. Imagine what our computers nowadays could do as compared to systems back then. Do we really think that nowadays data as to how a coin received its grade is beyond our reach?

Personally, I *think* some of our phones might very well have the ability to grade coins consistently seeing as facial recognition is no big deal anymore - even at differing angles. Any programmer familiar with facial recognition programming and algorithms want to make a million on the app store?



Exactly. Two points:
1. The dog being called beautiful was simply the technical grade which could be authenticated/consistent. A point would need be given by a human for eye appeal.
However, I would like to see slabbing companies announce they will now only be grading on a technical, verifiable grade - the grade is ONLY about wear and details. Aprt of this would be the TPGs saying they leave the eye appeal up to the collector (where it originated and is anyway).
The mindset shift would be from, "Was this coin graded accurately," to "do I want this MS70 without as much color/luster as this other MS70?" But again, by keeping the "art" at the company, the unknown gamble is always there and generates more business.

2. This internet generation now trust computers a lot more than in the late 90s (understatement). Back then comuters were far from being in every home, they were seen as maybe "taking over the world," and our system now being run by these crazy machines meant the Y2K bug was going to put us back into the stone age (yes - the warnings were this persistent). The grading shift by TPGs even could have been made 10 years ago or more. But marketers are smarter than this. The shift would be a very bad business strategy though.

The result is that instead of having an accountable system, we have CAC.



The very idea that CAC could have come as far as they have shows a progression of increased acceptance of typical marketing strategies. Everything is always NEW and IMPROVED! Last year's model is no longer the "perfect answer to all our problems" it was touted to be - this years model is such a great improvement!

The very idea that CAC stickers exist in the numbers they do could only happen if the experts were not the experts they claimed to be. CAC is also after profits (legitimate), and they are now simply just acquiring the status they hoped they would receive - instead of ridicule - when they started out.




Getting a second opinion is done when there is doubt about your original Dr.'s diagnosis and how that mistake could affect your life.

Paying for a second opinion is different when health and life are not on the line.

When someone hires an expert to fix their car, do they hire (key word) people after the job is done to verify the job was done right? Why not?

How many people buy and carry their own pool PH testing kits to the YMCA to make sure the PH levels are within proper levels? Why not?

When we get gas, do we have our own personal meters we attach to the hose to make sure the pump meters are measuring properly? Why not?

Redundancy is normally seen as foolish when someone pays hard earned cash for an expert's services.

If company B can make a business by showing a good number of company A's product is not worthy of the expert level claimed by company A, then company A is either incapable of, or simply not doing, what they claim.

As much as TPGs are perceived as being THE coin experts, should it not be expected that a second opinion is not only redundant, but shouldn't it be expected so few slabs would NOT get a CAC sticker that the market would not support the CAC sticker business?

In other words, if the TPGs were up to what they claim, then the minsdet should/would be one of, "Why bother wasting my money paying for a CAC sticker - almost all of the slabs submitted get them anyway?"



Computerized technical grading of the coin's actual features would alleviate this to a very great degree - but be bad for business.

quote] The idea that everything CAC doesn't sticker is wrong is one of the great misunderstands that people who really didn't know what they were talking about started spreading around. Unfortunately too many people believe that now. For example a coin can be a low end 65 and not sticker and be properly graded.

The programs are there, they did experiments and didn't like the results. I would much rather have human experts grading my coins than lines of code the IT department wrote that very few if any of the actual experts would be able to tell if the code was being manipulated or not. You also have to code every series differently and even different dates and different mints differently and then you end up using a human anyway. Not to mention trying to code luster grading would be a pain and someone would figure out what the program isn't able to pick up on when it comes to doctoring. Tricking a computer would be easier than an expert when it comes to authenticity as well.




There is nothing wrong with you wanting that, but the market has rejected and penalized any TPG that overemphasized technical grading. Eye appeal is will and always has been king when it comes to collecting. There are always people who are exceptions to that but as a whole the market has always preferred eye appeal. If you want TPGs to solely grade technically convince everyone else to start demanding they do it and it will happen. They don't because that isn't what collectors want.




Again that's the misunderstanding that has been spread around the internet. To put CAC in it's most simple basic forum, they identify premium coins they would want to buy. Nothing more. People need to let go of the misconception that things that don't sticker have to be graded wrong. Every grade will always have premium coins, average coins, low end coins, fantastic eye appeal coins, average looking coins, and below average looking coin. Just because something is low end for the grade and doesn't sticker doesn't mean it is graded wrong. The truth is the majority of coins that don't sticker are graded properly, some even don't sticker that are strong for the grade because of a minor thing that CAC just doesn't like on it.

But if you take nothing else away from this take this: CAC is NOT judging whether or not coins are properly graded, they are identifying the ones that are premium quality for the grade nothing more




Completely disagree, if I had a surgery coming up I am getting a second opinion no matter what. If I am about to spend 5k/10k/50k ect on a coin I want every relevant opinion on it. The only difference between asking a dealer friend and CAC for their thoughts is that JA and the CAC crew are better graders than the majority of dealers. They're just simply aren't that many people out there on that level, some work at TPGs, some are dealers, a couple even collectors but it is an elite club at that skill level.




Again CAC has nothing to do with saying something is graded wrong. They're essentially like the pro scout who is looking to identify the premier players, if they don't have interest it doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them it's just that they aren't in the upper level of the group.




The only way for almost all of them to get them anyway is to just intentionally undergrade low end coins. Otherwise you already start out with at least half of every grade range that won't get stickered if they are properly grading the coins instead of saying lets drop this a grade so it'll sticker.




It's really mostly the anti-slab/anti-cac crowd that keeps hounding that fallacy. The market drivers such as the respected expert dealers understand that CAC is picking premium quality not just saying that anything without a sticker is graded wrong. Of course the CAC coins sell for more, they're generally the nicer ones. The majority of people that use the service and like it understand that unstickered coins don't mean it's wrong, its mostly the critics that keep trying to use CAC to say the TPGs cannot grade when really they are just misrepresenting what CAC actually is doing.



It's very unlikely. The thing everyone seems to forget is that CAC only works because of the level of expertise they hold. There are several spin off versions for different coin types currently and the market is very meh about them. Photoseal is respected and desired for Indians, but CAC is by far the most successful and respected simply because of the truly elite graders they have. They don't even charge collectors for coins that don't sticker and you can request feedback on why they did or did not.




Lots of people claim to be ex-graders that weren't, even if they were for all I know they were fired or have a bone to pick such as many ex-employees do in other lines of work. If a large conspiracy existed it would have come out by now. I've used the TPGs many times and there has been no favoritism or holding my grades back because I am just a collector. I have even gotten a top pop grade before and I am a nobody to them which I would have never gotten if they only saved those for the big dealers like some people suggest. Regardless of any conspiracies people may want to try and push which is almost always for personal gain and/or getting lower grades than they wanted, experience will show you they are nothing more than just people talking.

Also 20% isn't the standard ASE monster box rate. The rate is generally consistent to within a plus or minus range of a percentage given the larger submission number going in and the fairly consistent quality making those now a days, but it does vary from year to year. Some years it is much higher and other times occasionally a product comes out that falls way short of expectations like the 2012 ASE set where the 70 rate was lower then normal. There is nothing random about how they assign 70s. Sure there will be some mistakes as nothing in this world is perfect, but he likely needs to freshen his grading skills and/or has a beef to pick with them. You can read plenty of threads on the CU forum by the major dealers about 70 rates who have much more experience and do much larger volume then him and their accounts directly contradict such conspiracies.




A true slider coin can have that happen. However the crack out game is much much harder than the internet or people make it sound. Anyone who believes it to be that easy can try for themselves if they don't believe me. The majority of coins have a plus or minus grade range of 1. The exceptions being where the next grade up is a significant value jump and people would honestly be surprised how consistent they are around those jumps. I've seen a plus graded CAC stickered coin come back with the exact same grade many multiples of times that was tried numerous times because of the mid 4 figure value jump in the next grade. The population reports wouldn't be so inflated below the big jumps if it was simply as easy as resubmitting.

But really that plus or minus of 1 is really just how the subjective aspects of a grade can change. If I gave anyone a 100 coins to grade, then had you grade 1000 more coins in between and mixed the same 100 in with another 1000 over the coming months they wouldn't grade the 100 exactly the same every-time. There's no conspiracy when a grade shifts a little, that's just the nature of grading and the standards themselves have evolved over the years as our knowledge base of the series has grown with the plethora of research that has been done in the last couple decades.

Sssssh. Don't let the cat out of the bag.

Of course not, which cleanly illustrates the absolute need for the TPG system.

That said, I personally view that system with contempt, an Easy Button facilitating lazy collectors who want their lunch for free and are unwilling to exert the slightest effort to, you know, learn something about their coins. If you're gonna collect coins, you're gonna learn to grade. That should be axiomatic.

However, the majority of the underpinning for coin values - and high coin values benefit all of us, buyers and sellers alike, when you think about it - rests upon the shoulders of folks whose purpose for collecting vitally factors resale value above other considerations.

If there weren't a plurality of such folks involved in collecting, where would we dump our dogs in slabs?

So, yeah, let the TPG system continue. I own one single coin for which the slab played an important factor in the purchase, since it is Top Pop for the color and CAC'd (it's copper, and worthy of the given grade), but it's the only coin I've ever bought with that in mind. I don't like the system, but here it is and one might as well leverage it in their favor.

Given the original title and intent of this thread, especially from a Canadian collector, we have strayed off on a pretty good tangent...

I have moved this thread to a sub-forum where it is more at home...

I think grading is essential and a must when your ready to sell. Its no secret that selling can be a challenge to get what you believe is a good price. When selling a non graded coin, it is subjected to buyers evaluation. You my believe a coin is in MS condition but the potential buyer thinks is AU. This can be a huge discrepancy in value.

Where if the coin is graded by a reputable third party the negotiations will always hoover around the suggested book value of a coin in that graded condition. Thus negating the buyers leverage and challenging your grading experience.

A non graded coin in my opinion, is an opportunity for a buyer to negotiate great price on a desired piece.

Moxking, thank you for answering my questions before I asked them