Conflict Of Interest? Grading And Publications?

Coinsrfun,you continue to sound like you want the existing establishment to change to suit some idea you have in mind.

You're asking lots of questions, accused one member of avoiding your questions but I didn't see you answer the question you asked directly either. In order to correctly understand your point of view you should state your position in a clinical, reasonable fashion.

You asked the questions, reasonable ones I feel. Some of us gave you succinct answers yet your response isn't helpful nor conducive to furthering the topic. What exactly do you want?

Ugly, the existing establishment must change. The "old boys net" as it pertains to Canadian Numismatics is beginning to fail. ICCS is grading coins that can NOT exist. The holders that ICCS uses have been compromised to the point of humour, but the company that did this is now the Auction company used by cand...........So, Charleton's owns a stake in ICCS who grades coins and attributes varieties which will command a premium but only once published in Charelton's....but Canadian Coin News waits for an answer from ICCS about the coin that can not exist.......oh yeah....please do not forget........that is a total of 3 people........does that adequately define my concerns? Or shall we drag the colored re-engraved coin into it as well?

Ugly, would you please explain this...I am honestly not sure HOW to understand it , or maybe I do not understand it at all.

I will clarify that, it was poorly phrased. Like it or not people often buy slabs based on third party opinions. Therefore it's often the opinion that is purchased and not the coin at all. What I'm saying is the high bidder most often buys the opinion and not the coin.

Effectively, coin prices are driven by nothing more than opinions and these opinions happen to be purchasable by anyone with ten bucks and an envelope to mail a coin in.

When your opinion is for sale, you need repeat business. Repeat customers are happy customers who achieved the high grades they think (maybe legitimately maybe not) their merchandise deserves.

It's a built in flaw to the model of opinions for sale. I see it all the time with the big etailers who send in thousands of coins. I can grade a coin in hand to my own satisfaction. I know what an MS-65 looks like. I'm pretty sure if I cracked a dozen Colonial Acres MS 65 dimes and resubmitted half would come back MS 63. I'm not a big enough sale to worry about making happy. Shrug.

I don't think we're off track HH. I think the small Canadian coin market combined with the fact that people are selling their opinions yet still need other revenue sources will almost always guarantee an appearance of conflict of interest.

If you could send your coins into to a double blind service staffed only by collectors who don't deal and only work on a cost recovery basis then you might get what I'd consider to be an honest opinion. As long as it's a for profit business it's always going to give an appearance of bias.

So which of you are volunteering to work for free? We can form a not for profit coin grading council of Canada and publish our own books on varieties as the only profitable revenue source.

I don't expect any takers. It's easier to complain than do anything about it I suppose.

That's an easy question and an even easier answer. Any organization (profit or non profit) that decides to grade coins should publish their grading criteria or guidelines used. End of story.

As to your geography assertion, you're finding problems with my proposal. I'm not surprised because I see issues as well, but how about finding some answers? I mean if some of you want a totally transparent and unbiased grading service, then you'll have to construct a model that would be acceptable and work since the current ones don't meet with some peoples approval.

I'm not a flavour of the day guy. ICCS or CCCS or US TPG. They are all the same to me - Opinions for sale and everything that means.