1853/2 $20 Gold....it's Not What You Know, It's Who You Know

Good point. You'd think that if NGC found out that someone cracked out a coin and resubmitted it, they would give it the original grade simply based on principal. You could infer from the response I received that they knew, but I don't think that would necessarily be correct. In my opinion there's just too much potential for liability and reputation damage for NGC to be in on it. I think they had one pulled over on them. They (and PCGS) really need to use some sort of scanning software to prevent this sort of thing.

Bingo.

Nobody knows how subjective this whole thing is better than a professional grader. You get jaded after a while, especially since a substantial portion of the people who pay your salary - the collectors who keep the high-end dealers in the business - are throwing around discretionary money which makes even the graders (6-figure salary) look poor. They don't know from coins, they don't care from coins.

For every Newman there are ten fat cats who wouldn't know a die crack if one clamped onto their....

Anyway, you get jaded. No, this is not right, but it isn't difficult for me to walk in their shoes. They're handling stuff worth 5 and 6 figures on an assembly-line basis, and it all really doesn't mean that much to them on a personal basis. I don't think many graders are also collectors, even if employment covenants allow them to be.

Perhaps I'm wrong, I hope I am. I want graders to be coin geeks who pore over their own coins when they get home at night, but how are you going to buy coins when most dealers represent a conflict of interest?

I already stated that I am sure this thing happens in this business but just because you know it happens in general doesn't mean you know case by case. Since grading and even labeling things like "Cleaned" or "Edge Damage" are subjective and your average joe (see my first post) can have this happen to them I would think it's best to avoid slandering someone on a specific crackout unless you know more than just the general "favoritism in coin grading exists". And my comments are not just based off this one thread as I have seen others by this poster that were similar in nature over the months.

I don't really see how I'm being abusive but I'll drop it nonetheless.

The scanning software you speak of has been in the hands of at least PCGS for a LONG time. It was part of ther Expert system that they rolled out in 1991. It was to scan every coin submitted and create a digital "fingerprint" for it so that if it was ever resubmitted when the computer scanned it it was be recognized as a resubmission and given it's original grade. When they dumped the computer grading idea a few months later they dumped the scanning idea as well.

Jump forward to about 2007 when they introduced their "Secure Plus" tier. Along with the "coin sniffer" they also reintroduced the scan and digital fingerprint concept "as a new inovation". But now instead of being used on all coin it will only be used on coins submitted for Secure Plus grading. So if a Secure Plus coin gets cracked out and resubmitted it won't be recognized unless it is again submitted for Secure Plus. A resubmission under a lower tier won't be identified.

I suspect they dumped the idea back in 91 because it would cut into the crackout game profits.