| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 2,829 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
402 Posts |
Went to one of my favorite coin shows Saturday 22nd. Know most of these fellows personally and find them to be a very honest group. Every one of them was  ing (is that word allowable?) about NGC and PCGS returning a lot of their submissions as upgradable for various purposes. These guys are professionals and would not waste their money or time sending in stuff that could not be graded. They are saying sometimes almost half of the coins are returned without a grade. Most said it rarely ever happened in years previous. So what they did was bust a few coins that had previously been graded OK out of the slabs and submitted them all over again. Three out of eight came back from both companies without a grade being assigned for one reason or another. These are coins that had been graded before with no problem at all. Everyone wants to know what these companies are up to by doing this all of a sudden. Sounds like some profit ploy or something. Thought I would run that by you. Once a month after a meeting they have a "Submission Forum" in that any member sending in coins to be graded has them checked by three others before sending them in to see if there could be a problem. Nice thing to do for each other. I just brought up this subject because I hear it everywhere I go anymore even on this forum. Sorry for rambling on. edg  man |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
689 Posts |
I don't know much about TPGs but if it was a profit ploy woiuldnt they accepting more coins to make more money?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
They've come to their senses after years of progressively lowering their standards. Stuff that used to grade (when it never should have in the first place) now doesn't.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5953 Posts |
I switched to ANACS because PCGS returned a couple of coins as not gradable they claimed altered surfaces or cleaned. neither of which were true in my opinion or ANACS for that matter.
I Also like that ANACS give a details grade on problem coins.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
402 Posts |
jakeW
Don't know what the ploy is. Their sure not getting a good rep lately from this. I will buy a slabbed coin but not submit one. Two reasons. First I don't care to pay the submission fee and secondly I don't want the possible disappointment if it comes back with a problem even though I inspect carefully before I buy.
nohope587
Most of these fellows were also switching to ANACS.
SuperDave
You may be right about that too. I dont know enough about their standards so debate it.
edgman
|
|
Valued Member
United States
323 Posts |
ANACS sounds like a good idea if you want a grade. However, I agree with superdave - I am new to coin collecting but somethings in slabs confuses me as to why it got that grade. Maybe they are being more stringent.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
924 Posts |
I bought a couple of NGC graded coins recently. A 1981 S Type 2 SBA proof graded PF69 and a 2010 ASE graded MS69. I actually thought both were over graded. Edited by RPT
05/24/2010 2:41 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Quote:
ANACS sounds like a good idea if you want a grade. PCGS is still the most renowned regardless of their standards and coins can definitely be graded at PCGS or NGC- They give out grades too. It is just that ANACS assigns a Details grade if the coin has been cleaned or has a problem. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2335 Posts |
Quote:
They've come to their senses after years of progressively lowering their standards. Stuff that used to grade (when it never should have in the first place) now doesn't. We all know that people have been buying the older PCGS slabs because many were "undergraded" & therefore good candidates for the crack out game. IMO that's clear evidence that grading standards have relaxed over time. |
|
Valued Member
United States
207 Posts |
Most of the guys that I know will submit a coins several times (if not dozens) if they think it should be slabbed or if the grade is under what they think it should be. They all seem to complain about it..lol but I have seen a few coins that should have never been slabbed. I even saw one a few months back that was a counterfeit in a PCGS slab. Who knows maybe PCGS and NGC are getting more strict because of all the crap that has been going on over the last few years.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
They've come to their senses after years of progressively lowering their standards. Stuff that used to grade (when it never should have in the first place) now doesn't.
We all know that people have been buying the older PCGS slabs because many were "undergraded" & therefore good candidates for the crack out game. IMO that's clear evidence that grading standards have relaxed over time. I agree with superdave on this. They are way tougher now than they used to be. I think a lot of the reason is that both NGC and PCGS now will holder problem coins, so the don't give coins a "pass" like they used to. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
It's quite obvious what is going on. The big TPG's do market grading. When times are good and the market is rising rapidly there aren't enough coins to make the grade to fill demand so grading standards loosen. When there is uncertainty or the market is flat or falling grading standards tighten and coins which used to make the grade no longer will. (This explains the coins which failed to grade now that were previously graded.) Although they deny it the grading standards at all the TPG's DO go through these tightening and loosening cycles. (This is one of the reasons the services will not say WHEN a coin was graded. They want to maintain the fiction of an unvarying standard and that a grade granted back then is the same as one granted now and will be the same as one granted in the future. Those of us who have been around long enough know this is not true.) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
870 Posts |
Interesting! So, Conder - if you know the year a coin was graded, that grade may be more "valuable" in terms of when the grade happened in the cycle... so if you had a year x coin graded ms-62 in a tight cycle, it might be a more "relevant" grade than an MS-62 in a looser year?
That's interesting and it makes a lot of sense. It seems you might be able to track these cycles to know when to get your coins graded and far more interestingly - to see what the market has been doing historically.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
76 Posts |
I don't know that I can explain the varying standards over time, but it is not limited to the coin community. If you look at some other philatelic websites there has been an ongoing debate as to how picayune should expertizing committees be in calling faults on stamps and for example, whether it is fair to call a flaw that can only be seen using a 50X magnifier. It has been argued that the older certificates for stamps placed more of an emphasis on identification and authenticity and less on mentioning flaws. Myself personally, I think the expertizing organizations have swung too much the other way. Genuiness should be able to be guaranteed by a expertizing group and it actually is the main thing I am looking for from an expertizing group. The problem becomes when an expertizing group feels the need to bash an otherwise rare and attractive item by mentioning a truly insignificant flaw in the overall scheme of things that effectively kills the collectible and removes it from the market. The experience pointed out above where coins that were graded and then cracked out and now determined to be ungradeable show how frivilous these "opinions" can be in the first place. Sometimes, the referee needs to keep his whistle in his pocket.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
323 Posts |
@Wheatguy - Yes, that is what I meant. If you turn it into ANCAS you get the details grade for problem coins whereas you wouldnt for others
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 2,829 |
|
Posted 05/23/2010 11:00 pm
