| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,597 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
166 Posts |
Hello,
I've noticed what appear some surprising trends in what crosses between ICCS and American TPGs. Canadian large cents in ANACS holders (and ANACS is not very respected in the US, or at least their grades are not) seem cross very well at ICCS.
I read a post recently about NGC PL coins (from the 1950s) crossing well at ICCS. I found several cross graded 1950s PL coins and usually NGC was one grade HARDER on these than ICCS.
Anyone else see crossing trends?
It is not really surprising that there may be some because different specialists who revived different type coins probably are quite different in their standards and a given service might be expected to be easier or harder (compared to ICCS or any other individual) depending on the grader(s).
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
Grading coins subjective. Even the so called pros get it wrong or right depending on the day. I have seen coins in major TPG holders in AU58, come back MS64 in another TPG's holder or better yet, a supposed problem free coin come back a problem coin. Keep in mind, these are the top 3 US TPG's. I know nothing about ICCS, I can only comment on the American TPG's. As far as professional graders are concerned, yes they see a zillion more coins than we do or ever will but again, a subjective practice. swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
166 Posts |
Hello Vermontensium, I'm sorry. I keep forgetting I am up here in Canada now (after a life in the US collecting coins). ICCS is sort of the combined PCGS + NGC of Canada. They are generally considered to be about 1 grade (or 1 point for MS) stricter that PCGS. They make crappy "slabs", but are extremely respected graders up here. "Crack outs" come back the same grade well over 90% of the time, Canadians hate NGC for reasons I don't understand, but you can get some Canadian best graded by NGC very reasonably. Since I've been reading a lot about why the US TPGs opened, as I recall (and I was a US collector from 1958-2004) ANACS came into being to assure users that a certain coin was real. PCGS came a couple of years later because in 1986 (and well before) dealers (even "good" dealers) would buy the same coin at one (or several) grade below where they would sell the same coin. "Slabbing" ended the argument, even if the grade was arbitrary. NGC came along very shortly after because PCGS grades were technical (which is why many PCGS "old holder" coins are considered under graded) and NGC applied "market grading" including things like eye appeal that increased the marketability of coin and could effectively raise (or lower) its grade. Now you have China. I hope these ( TPG) guys know what they are doing because eventually the Chinese will make coins with the same (or better) care than the governments that issued them, Or.....put premium real coins into the next grade slab up. That might really damage the market. |
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
Quote:
"Slabbing" ended the argument, even if the grade was arbitrary. I somewhat agree. I am extremely thankful the major TPG (not the snake oil TPG's like SGS,PGCS,RDFT,IGHJ,NCC,XYZ...you know what I mean) came along to "mediate" this dilemma. You are certainly guaranteed the grade and authenticity at PCGS and I believe the other American TPG's as well. It's funny, I recently attended a major show out here in Southern California (Santa Clara Coin Expo) and always bring a few PCGS coins along to hopefully trade or for an upgrade if the dealers price meets mine. I had a PCGS graded coin that was a definite F15 in my eyes as well as PCGS's eyes. In fact, I graded this coin a F15 prior to sending it off. To make a long story short, I found a coin I wanted at this particular dealers table and mind you, I have known this dealer for quite a while and he is very fair. Well, he saw it as a F12 and wanted to give me F12 money for it when in fact, it commanded a substantial amount more in F15. He was also using the greysheet. Needless to say, I passed and respectfully took the coin back and moved on. I believe you should grade the coin and not rely on the holder, but this was clearly one instance where PCGS nailed it. Unfortunately, the TPG's are not coin dealers. As far as the Chinese counterfeiters, we can only hope that the major TPG's figure something out soon or we are all in trouble. They will find a way to market everything from P01-MS70. swcoin.ecrater.com
Edited by vermontensium
04/19/2009 3:58 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
166 Posts |
Hello Vermontensium
He wanted to take you down a grade and THEN pay wholesale He would have fit right in in 1985!
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
That's why I walked away :-)
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
New Member
United States
27 Posts |
Actually, ANACS is highly respected as having very high standards, and a very conservative grading system.
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
Quote:
Actually, ANACS is highly respected as having very high standards, and a very conservative grading system.
One of the "Big 3" and the oldest. For purposes of the marketplace and long term storage (integrity of the slab) I prefer PCGS,NGC,ANACS in that order. That's just my preference. swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
166 Posts |
Since PCGS and NGC started in the 1980s, I have never heard anyone favorably compare ANACS to them.
Does anyone contend that ANACS is first tier? It may be the oldest and "the collectors friend" but it is heavily discounted vs the 2 larger services.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
With regard to attribution, I consider ANACS and ICG to be the "go-to" firms. Someone once attempted to stump ICG (it was an involved thread over on the PCGS forum a while back); he threw a spectrum of miscellaneous stuff at them, and they not only got it all right, but they attributed non-monetary coins and didn't draw the line until he submitted a wooden token. Seriously. ANACS is the top of the heap when it comes to VAM's. Their VAM guy, Senior Grader (I think) John Roberts is acknowledged to be one of the very best in the field; he doesn't miss an attribution, he's the discoverer of numerous VAM's, and in addition they'll attribute pretty much any variety of any issue. I've seen numerous errors in PCGS/NGC slabs which ANACS simply wouldn't have made. As regards grading, we're discussing a moving target due to changing "market" standards and changing personnel at the TPG's. Currently, I'm seeing quality in the newer ANACS slabs which equals that of PCGS at its' best, and PCGS is not currently at its' best. Indeed, IMO they're swung too far to the conservative side. With all that said, I think ICCS is the only grader which approaches near-universal approval. I envy you Canadians.  |
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,597 |
|
Posted 04/18/2009 10:37 pm
