TPG Assessment

You know, all you have to do is sit back and think about what has just been said here.

The market will eventually correct itself to the better when faced with these situations.......

1...... ANACS starts being seen as CONSERVATIVE in relation to other TPGs.

2...... The public comes to that realization and begins to seek out more and more ANACS material.

3...... As that happens, supply and demand factors do what they always do. Dealers start moving toward ANACS because the public has already done so.

I think ANACS is on the right track. Conservative grading is always going to be in the buyer's best interest, and also the sellers once they figure out that accurate grading is more important than periodic profit. Liberality of past grades given are no excuse not to return to honest, objective grading standards across the board. Those who compete will prosper. Those who don't will shrivel and fail.

True. What hasn't been said in the TPG wars says volumes more than anything ever written here in the forums. That particular silence...... as they say...... is deafening. But all it really takes is a trip to a good sized regional coin show and striking up conversation with various dealers about their opinions on TPG services, and you might just get more information than you bargained for. It only takes two questions: 1 - If you were buying a coin, which holder would you want it in ? 2 - If you were selling a coin, which holder would you want it in ? Just common sense, but it's really not rocket science either.

There is always more known than divulged.........

...........or like the old saying goes, "There are two secrets to success. 1. Never reveal everything that you know, and 2.............

We think alot alike apparently. One of my specialties was Period One California Fractional Gold, the early issues that actually traded hands as small change in gold rush California days. These coins are tiny, the largest one dollar pieces about 12mm or so. I tend to be attracted to raw circulated pieces that have a "history" rather than BU slabbed pieces that never served their real purpose. I also detest these small coins being placed in slabs, as many times the slabbing process itself will damage them, especially the very thin small denomination octagonal pieces, where the points can easily be bent with applied pressure. I've seen many damaged in such a way. Besides the possibility of damage, slabs are just not conducive to these tiny coins, since the slabbing material itself often obscures parts of the design and makes it difficult to inspect the edges.

On the subject of TPGs- when it comes to ANACS- being conservative is great, but they still have to be realistic. I am a very accurate grader in relation to PCGS's standards. I slab about 200 coins a month with the top 2 TPGs and am rarely surprised with the grades given. I also send about 30 coins a month to ANACS. I've been doing business with them since before their staff change a couple of years ago. Recently, I've gotten coins back that I'd bet a C-note would grade MS-65 Red or better with PCGS, ANACS sees fit to grade them MS-63. I'm all for being realistic and conservative in grading, but with the grades I've gotten back from ANACS in the last year, I have to wonder if they're cutting their own throats. And this being said without mention of the fact that nearly every other Cent they grade is called "recolored", most of which have come from OBWs. I'm just referring to my own experience with the company, not those of others.

I have a difficult time imagining that the market will lean towards ANACS because of their skewed perspective on grading. I have seen a decent volume of their product to arrive at this conclusion. I have 5 examples of 1963-D DDO #1 with black spots all over the obverses and reverses of the coins, all graded MS-64 Red. I also have a 1942-D/D without ANY contact marks, the coin is incredibly well struck and stands out as a shining example of everything an impressive Lincoln should be, just incredible. Grade? MS-64 Red, same as the coins with horrific blemishes. Conservative? Maybe. Consistent? NO.

Regardless of what perspective a TPG looks at a coin with, they must have consistency in their grading. PCGS has done an incredible job of marketing their name, NGC has not, but both companies have maintained regularity in their grading standards. Yes, when the companies first began they were strict. They've now redefined modern grading. BUT, you will find consistency with their grades when compared chronologically. By this I mean that if you take 10 coins of the same grade graded in the last couple of years, PCGS and NGC's coins will resemble each other. ANACS is much more of a wild card, and for that reason will never enjoy the market shares that their competitors have.

And ICG? Yeah- they're fantastic! I've gotten a couple of coins that had issues that would have gotten body bags from the other TPGs, but on the whole, you can usually expect their coins to cross over at the same grade or better when cracked and submitted to PCGS or NGC.

Just my own observations, but these opinions are from my experiences with each company.

And as for those who prefer to pay for plastic over a fine coin- Caveat emptor!

I can't disagree- but mis-labeling is a dumb mistake, maybe not very forgivable but clearly a clerical error, not pertaining to the actual grade of the coin. I don't doubt that grades are mis-labeled as often as mintmarks, but let's not mix the two.

We're talking about grading standards- right?

I think that ultimately, the lesson is "learn to grade yourself". If one depends on the opinions of others, they're at the mercy of other's opinions.

There are guys out there who travel from show to show, cherrypicking slabbed coins and cracking them out to be re-graded. Some of these folks make six figure incomes and work 7 months a year.....they don't bow down to the opinions of TPGs. Nor should anyone other than the casual collector/investor.

I think it all goes back to the old adage of "buy the coin, not the holder" which closely relates to "buy the book before the coin". You can't just throw money at a hobby expecting it to pay off without educating yourself.

There is consensus in grading, if not consistency.

I have to completely agree Maineman- too many people assume that a grading service is the final word. Couldn't be further from the truth. But the only ones who know that are the ones who have taken the time to study and learn on their own. I don't just question authority- I simply question. And in the process, I learn a heck of a lot!

The concept is simple (if simply explained- no promises!)

When a die is clashed or receives other damage- It can be simply "polished out". Not too different from buffing a ding out of a car body or sanding out a gouge on a nice hardwood antique piece. The idea is to smooth out a blemish.

When this is done on a coin die it amounts to sanding the surface down until the distraction is obliterated. If my explanation is at all lucid, you can see how the 4th leg of the '37-D buffalo was polished off, how the D became missing on the '22 Plain cent and discover where the FG on all of those Kennedys went.

It's simply a matter of reducing surface area- when you polish down the surface of a die, some of the detail will be lost if you polish too far. In regard to this description only- imagine substituting the word polish for sanding.