| Author |
 Replies: 37 / Views: 4,155 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
933 Posts |
I have a question. If a person buys a graded coin by ICCS (or any other TPG), takes it out of the coin holder and re-submits the same coin to get graded again. If a person keeps doing this, the TPG has no way of knowing if it was the same coin, so they will just give it the same grade and send it back. Wouldn't this just raise the amount of THAT coin in a particular grade? Thus making it lose trends value by artificially inflating the population of that coin in a particular grade? Now I dont know WHY someone would want to do this, but perhaps they are looking for a higher grade and may re-submit without holder...or send to another TPG just as a raw coin. |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1949 Posts |
PCGS says it has some program which recognizes the coins which are submitted under secure plus, so I guess that would make it more difficult to do with the higher value coins...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2301 Posts |
If find that Trends has little notice of ICCS pop. reports. Thank goodness. ICCS pop reports are inaccurate at every turn. From them (ICCS) not counting properly to re-submits.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3234 Posts |
 with Nicklesguy...ICCS has some cleaning up to do. I can easily see why many collectors would re-submit to another TPG for that newer/higher grade. I can see a lot of my older ICCS's going 'down south' in the future. The system is not perfect when every high grade "point up" often doubles the listed value.. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
I'm told that if you mail in your old holders, ICCS will remove them from the population report.
I think there are many legitimate reasons why the same coin could be re-submitted more than once.
I had a 1906 Small Crown that I bought in a ICCS holder, graded G-4. At the time, I had been keeping my coins in 2x2s, so I removed it from the ICCS holder. A couple years later, I decided to keep my coins in ICCS holders again, so I resubmitted. It came back AG-3. I was a little irritated with this, so I sent it in again a few months later, for it to come back AG-3 again. I've given up on re-submitting it, but that's one coin counted 3 times.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1581 Posts |
Did you send them their original certificate? That may have swayed them.
But, the vast majority of the 1906 Small Crown are retrieved from scrap silver bags. A gold mine from old silver, so to speak.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1700 Posts |
Coins sent to ICCS are all graded by one person, which means that things could get really messy when there are too many coins submitted.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
743 Posts |
I thought they graded father and son! Maybe they should recruit or the family business will fade away with them! Or they could sell the brand!
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
148 Posts |
I think grading by consensus is, as a consumer, a much better indication of a reliable grade.I hear some do some don't.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
Everybody knocks the 'Father and son' team at ICCS, but if you really had experience sending many coins to both ICCS and PCGS you would agree with me 100% that there is a GREAT deal more variance in grading from PCGS than ICCS.
I have many submissions from PCGS that would boggle your mind of different grades for the same coin.
Two coins recently that came back were two (easily identifiable) proofs (1899 Morgan and an 1875 20c piece) that PCGS graded as MS business strikes!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
933 Posts |
Now what about cross grading? For example sending an ICCS coin raw out of holder to PCGS, then resending that PCGS coin out of holder to NGC...
Now that one coin is shown 3 times across all TPGs...I guess we cant trust most pop. reports...at least not for lower end coins.
Im sure they have a better system (probably like a finger print matching) for coins such as 1921 5c .... ?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1554 Posts |
 I don't place a lot of faith in Population Reports. I know for a fact dozens of Dealers, Collectors and Investors that "regularly" re-submit high end coins simply for the potential of a point or two upgrade. Imagine an I.C.C.S., 1890 half dollar in AU-55 being upgraded to an MS-60 for the cost of a T.P.G. submission fee? That's a whopping $25,000 increase for a few dollars. Common coins in lesser grades with little value are less likely to be cracked out and resubmitted, simply for the fact that there is not a wide scale jump in price making it worthwhile to resubmit. I've spoken to well known dealers that have openly bragged to me about buying high end I.C.C.S. graded coins (especially in the "old" Certificate holders) and resubmitting to P.C.G.S. to acquire anywhere between 1-5 points higher on mintstate RARE coins. Can you imagine the instant investment income after selling those coins on the open market via HeritageAuctions.com! I would speculate that over the past 30 years, 30% of all coins valued at $500.00+ have been re-submitted at least twice to a T.P.G. I've been told by a well respected dealer/investor that 70% of I.C.C.S. coins slabbed with the "old" Certificate's (with/seal) will upgrade when re-submitted. Whether one refers to this as "grade creep" or what have you, it is a simple issue to understand. Ten+ years ago I.C.C.S. had betweeen 3/5 graders full time graders. Now they have 1 or 2. It is far more difficult to acquire a higher grade from a coin when there 3/5 judges vs. 1 or 2 judges, simply because there is the grade is chosen on an average of what is decided upon by all. With all I have mentioned above, this is my reason for not placing too much faith in Population reports. In a sense anyone that re-submits is creating a deception for the Hobby, since trend prices are based on "availability and demand" of a particular coin. If Population Reports show that a particular coin is increasing in supply, when in fact it's two or three of the same coins being re-submitted dozens of times over a 20 year period, guess what happens to the value of that coin? Glenn  Edited by glenzy1
08/30/2013 08:19 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
933 Posts |
Very good post glenzy. I am going to stop replying as much on Pop reports because of this issue. I believe that the coin it's self and its original mintage should be the major deciding factor. In a perfect world, where coins are somehow tracked, and not doubled or tripled in pop reports....it would make sense to pay a premium for "Only 2 graded higher!" ... however, that statement becomes irrelevant pretty quick when considering this issue.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
629 Posts |
There has been a relaxing of the standards by which coins are supposed to meet in order for them to qualify for a particular grade. I have seen it with Canadian and USA coins especially during the last 5 years. Recently my coin club did a discussion of Buffalo nickels and we all agreed that an old time VF is now a EF, just because of the horn. And we came to the general conclusion that other denominations have also allowed for "leniency" in what is graded, boosting more common coins into a high price category. We felt that the TPGs help to create this demand as our collections though a hobby quickly turn into an investment. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
548 Posts |
I think grade creep is inevitable when you have several competing TPGs. None of them want to get a reputation, deserved or otherwise, of being too strict, because that would cost them business. It is up to the consumer of these services to decide which is a truer grade for a coin - AU55 or MS60 say - but human nature being what it is, most would prefer to think their coin is an MS60.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
933 Posts |
I think that most "serious" collectors, and I mean TRUE collectors who buy the coin not the holder only use TPGs as a way of security...in order to be 100% sure the coin is real
|
| |
Replies: 37 / Views: 4,155 |
Posted 08/29/2013 1:25 pm
