1939 Florin

Im guessing the 1939 is the one we were talking about (above) which is way overgraded by pcgs. coin 3 (1931) I actual don't have a problem with the ms-63. What I am seeing here is that they believe that the 1939 florin (ms-62) rates higher than the 1931 florin which is definitely wrong

Whats the priced difference in grading fee's between the two of them?

I've seen a handful of "APCGS"-holdered coins and the grades are totally hit and miss. Remember, it was only a few months ago that they figured out that MS actually stood for "Mint State". They used to have MS20, MS40, MS50, MS58 grades on their holders!
Anyway, I would never send my coins to a grading company without an international reputation all to save a couple of dollars on the grading fees. I find it difficult to see how an "APCGS"-holdered coin would sell better than a PCGS-graded coin in the international market.

Whoever told you that doesn't know anything about the way PCGS grades. If a coin has heavy bagmarks and is uncirculated (that is, it has no wear from circulation) then it'll get an MS grade. Sure, it might be MS60, or MS61, MS62. But it's still uncirculated. If the marks are too bad, then it may be details graded. How the PCGS grades transfer to Australian grades is always a bit fuzzy. There are no hard and fast rules because the systems are different.

+1 to what Eric had to say. As I said on another forum about APCGS a few months ago, given that they had to be taught what the prefixes on the Sheldon grading system meant (they were slabbing coins as MS45) I'd suggest that their grades should be taken with a rather large grain of salt.

I have nothing but respect for someone trying to make a go of it in a tough market. But, if APCGS are keen on becoming a legitimate player then I'd made three strong recommendations to them:

1. They buy back all of the slabs that are graded MS-XX where XX is some number less than 60. Those slabs just look silly and let everyone know that APCGS didn't know even the most basic thing about the Sheldon system when they started out.

2. They get a new name. Whether the name was chosen deliberately to leverage off of the PCGS name or not, it looks like a cheap, tacky, "me too" marketing ploy. Plus if PCGS ever wake up to it they'll most likely happily sue APCGS in an Australian court. And they have very deep pockets.

3. They look into more conventional and sensible marketing of their services. Right now their marketing seems to have been exclusively confined to several attempts to spam this and other forums. How about attending an ANDA show? Getting an article in CAB? Contacting some dealers about slabbing some of their stock for free to promote the brand? There's a lot of things they could try if they want to cement themselves in the market place.

Derro and coinaus are the same person just trying to prop up APCGS. They both use the word 'there' incorrectly.

Bejesus, looks like another "Bridge troll" has infiltrated CCF

Regarding the allegations that coinsaus and Derro are alt-IDs for the APCGS troll, we can see no evidence for it from our end, apart from circumstantial. If they are trolls, then they've certainly learned a lot about how to hide their trollishness since APCGS/investego/Aussiegrading first struck here in 2011. There is certainly nothing worth banning either of them for, yet, though it is certainly suspicious that they are the only two people on this forum with good words to say for this so-called " TPG". I would also point out that our two alleged troll-clones are misusing the word "there" differently; one means to say "they're", the other should be "their".

That being said, I should point out that APCGS is already on very thin ice with the CCF admins due to their earlier efforts at spam-advertising and if it proves that they are indeed spamming the forum we will ensure that their brand name is never mentioned on CCF again. Ask the people at (124) Not Allowed - Auto-Removed and you will discover that this is no idle threat. Even a moderator can't mention them without being auto-redacted.

APCGS have gotten off on the very, very wrong foot here on CCF with both the forum admins and the general Australian membership and it is up to them to seriously lift their game in the fashion which markn has outlined if they wish to make amends. I'm a softie and a little bit of repentance goes a long way with me; I'm always prepared to give people another chance to prove themselves.