Options
GENUINE service changes
DonWillis
Posts: 961 ✭✭✭
Due to popular demand we are making a couple changes to our Genuine program. In addition to the previous no grade codes we will now holder 'Holed & Plugged', and 'Rim Filed' coins. Since both of these impairments can be very difficult to recognize we will print the no grade reason on the front of the insert (only for these two no grades). We are also creating a new no grade code for 'Peeling Lamination'. These will not be holdered as we consider them to be active. Also, note that 'Holed' coins will be holdered as code 98 - damaged.
Here is a recap of our no grade codes, print status as well as holder status.
Code/ Description / Printed Description / Holder
82 Filed Rims / Yes / Yes
83 Peeling Lamination / No / No
84 Holed and Plugged / Yes / Yes
90 Not Genuine / No / No
91 Questionable Color / No / Yes
92 Cleaned / No / Yes
93 Planchet Flaw / No / Yes
94 Altered Surface / No / Yes
95 Scratch or Rim Nick / No / Yes
97 Environmental Damage / No / Yes
98 Damage or Tooling / No / Yes
99 PVC Residue / No / No
btw - I've seen a few posts wondering what code 80 means. That was the code used for the old Genuine program. We are no longer holdering coins as code 80.
Here is a recap of our no grade codes, print status as well as holder status.
Code/ Description / Printed Description / Holder
82 Filed Rims / Yes / Yes
83 Peeling Lamination / No / No
84 Holed and Plugged / Yes / Yes
90 Not Genuine / No / No
91 Questionable Color / No / Yes
92 Cleaned / No / Yes
93 Planchet Flaw / No / Yes
94 Altered Surface / No / Yes
95 Scratch or Rim Nick / No / Yes
97 Environmental Damage / No / Yes
98 Damage or Tooling / No / Yes
99 PVC Residue / No / No
btw - I've seen a few posts wondering what code 80 means. That was the code used for the old Genuine program. We are no longer holdering coins as code 80.
0
Comments
I'll start a thread and lets see what the crowd says.
Thanks
<< <i>what can we do about a Trueview photo with every coin graded >>
Great idea. Could also help to inhibit fraud.
Don - That's good news. One tiny suggestion, though. Instead of "Rim Filed", how about "Rim Damage"? That will also cover coins that have other types of rim damage, which should be treated the same way, for the same reason.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>what can we do about a Trueview photo with every coin graded? >>
Do you know how long processing orders would take if this were the case?
They would have to hire a couple more photographers and they would have to add the photo fee for every submission, only making it less likely that "less-valuable" coins are submitted.
BTW- Thanks Don for responding VERY quickly with these changes. New Years resolution for PCGS came just in the nick of time
I'm not thinking of rim bumps and nicks. I'm thinking of prong marks and/or missing reeding from a mount. Those would not be visible in a slab.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>what can we do about a Trueview photo with every coin graded? >>
Do you know how long processing orders would take if this were the case?
They would have to hire a couple more photographers and they would have to add the photo fee for every submission, only making it less likely that "less-valuable" coins are submitted.
BTW- Thanks Don for responding VERY quickly with these changes. New Years resolution for PCGS came just in the nick of time
Stone---That's a valid point. I started a thread about this.
Trueview for every coin
<< <i>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag? >>
Removes the soon-to-be-popular parlor game threads, "Guess What's Wrong with this Coin".
peacockcoins
<< <i>90 Not Genuine / No / No..... >>
Are you saying there is a category for non genuine coins? I am confused. I thought this was a genuine slab service.
I would respectfully state that non genuine coins should be slabbed in a non PCGS slab or in a very different looking label making it clear it is an non genuine coin.
Otherwise, I like it.
Please reread the thread. Non genuine coins do NOT get slabbed.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Can we get Hobo nickels and "Potty Dollars" into Genuine holders?
Ultimately, the holder should be designed in a way that will please the collector that puts the coin in his collection. And few collectors will want the holder screaming the coin's problem at him every time he looks at it. I think PCGS finally has this just about right.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Oh!
I was wondering what all those yes and nos were for.
Perhaps a reading lesson is in order for me.
I will recap this to make it easier for me:
IN A SLAB/HOLDER:
82 Filed Rims / Yes / Yes
84 Holed and Plugged / Yes / Yes
91 Questionable Color / No / Yes
92 Cleaned / No / Yes
93 Planchet Flaw / No / Yes
94 Altered Surface / No / Yes
95 Scratch or Rim Nick / No / Yes
97 Environmental Damage / No / Yes
98 Damage or Tooling / No / Yes
NO SLAB/HOLDER:
83 Peeling Lamination / No / No
90 Not Genuine / No / No
99 PVC Residue / No / No
<< <i>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag?
Ultimately, the holder should be designed in a way that will please the collector that puts the coin in his collection. And few collectors will want the holder screaming the coin's problem at him every time he looks at it. I think PCGS finally has this just about right. >>
If that is the reason I still think it would be better to use something easier to remember than numbers.
Cleaned could be /CL
Altered Surface /AS
Planchet Flaw /PF
ect.
Perhaps PCGS could make a business card/credit card laminated cheat sheets available at their tables for the folks to carry around at shows??? that would be handy
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
maybe a less offense blanket term like, `mis-handled`or `mis-treated`
<< <i>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag? >>
Second the motion.
NCS does that, ANACS, SEGS, etc. PCGS has gone its own way on this, and in the wrong direction, in my opinion.
With nothing on the label but obscure code numbers, sellers of shady character (and there are many such crooks polluting our hobby) now have a new opportunity to misrepresent what they're selling to anyone unaware of defects that are not obvious.
edited to add: And what's so hard about adding a letter grade, like "XF Details'?
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
<< <i>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag?
Ultimately, the holder should be designed in a way that will please the collector that puts the coin in his collection. And few collectors will want the holder screaming the coin's problem at him every time he looks at it. I think PCGS finally has this just about right. >>
Also, it makes it more difficult for a coin dealer to sell a problem coin to a new collector as a problem free coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag?
Ultimately, the holder should be designed in a way that will please the collector that puts the coin in his collection. And few collectors will want the holder screaming the coin's problem at him every time he looks at it. I think PCGS finally has this just about right. >>
Also, it makes it more difficult for a coin dealer to sell a problem coin to a new collector as a problem free coin.
Is it PCGS's primary job to protect every coin collector from every fraud? (If so, they're going to fail.) Or is their primary job to earn money for their shareholders by selling a product that people will want to buy? If it's the latter, then it's important to holder coins in the way that the end user wants them holdered.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
It's not hard, but it's confusing, and it's a waste of time.
Consider two 1893-S Morgans. One is a lightly wiped but attractive high end XF. The other is a barely XF that has been whizzed and artificially toned. To call both of the coins "XF Details" without saying more eliminates any usefulness of the "details grade".
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
In my opinion that's been happening for years as the unknowning public is sold non-PCGS coins at PCGS price levels.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag?
Ultimately, the holder should be designed in a way that will please the collector that puts the coin in his collection. And few collectors will want the holder screaming the coin's problem at him every time he looks at it. I think PCGS finally has this just about right. >>
Also, it makes it more difficult for a coin dealer to sell a problem coin to a new collector as a problem free coin. >>
All he has to do is crack it out and sell it raw. That has been going on as long as their has been 3rd party grading.
<< <i>With nothing on the label but obscure code numbers, sellers of shady character (and there are many such crooks polluting our hobby) now have a new opportunity to misrepresent what they're selling to anyone unaware of defects that are not obvious.
In my opinion that's been happening for years as the unknowning public is sold non-PCGS coins at PCGS price levels. >>
True, but now you're getting a problem coin that is not listed as a problem coin with the exception of a small number. If a coin has been bagged for cleaning or another problem and it's going to be in a PCGS slab it should state the problem on the tag! Otherwise you are just asking for problems.
<< <i>All he has to do is crack it out and sell it raw. >>
Q. Coins in non-PCGS holders get cracked out for what reason?
A. To be submitted to PCGS in hopes of getting a PCGS label.
Q. Why is that?
A. Because it is perceived that the PCGS label adds value.
Q. So would someone crack out a PCGS-labeled coin to sell it raw?
A. I really don't think so.
On eBay, unsophisticated and/or new collectors buy bad coins all the time, including Chinese fakes. Some people re-sell them knowingly, to make a profit, or to recoup their loss, once they discover they were hoodwinked. Others do so unwittingly (non-collecting heirs, for example). The result is recycled junk, and eBay is rightly held in disrepute as a risky place to buy coins.
Since the PCGS label is what's valuable (not the plastic), why risk diminishing that value by using it in such a careless manner? Once enough people get cheated, will they start blaming PCGS for not making it clear that not every coin with a PCGS label is equally valuable?
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
The sad truth is beginners will always be suckered into buying sub-prime coins. No single individual or group can prevent this.
Some newbies may think buying a coin labeled as 'Cleaned' is a good thing, because now they don't have to worry about cleaning it themselves, or they consider it a value-add. "Wow! See how shiny it is! It looks way nicer than the one I saw at the last booth, and for the same price! What a deal!"
Do those in favor of putting the flaw description on the label feel that the text "You don't want to buy this" or "Not desirable" should be added as well?
<< <i>People have been defrauded in the past, and will continue to be defrauded regardless of what information PCGS puts on the labels.
The sad truth is beginners will always be suckered into buying sub-prime coins. No single individual or group can prevent this.
Some newbies may think buying a coin labeled as 'Cleaned' is a good thing, because now they don't have to worry about cleaning it themselves, or they consider it a value-add. "Wow! See how shiny it is! It looks way nicer than the one I saw at the last booth, and for the same price! What a deal!"
Do those in favor of putting the flaw description on the label feel that the text "You don't want to buy this" or "Not desirable" should be added as well? >>
The FDA requires "black box" warnings to be placed on certain drugs, in order to protect consumers from their own ignorance. Please understand that I do not use the word ignorance in the perjorative sense, but rather that the consumer has not taken the time nor has made the effort to research the potential downsides of taking an action.
Is it ultimately the responsability of business and/or the government to protect the ignorant from the results of their own actions? Where does it stop?
At what point should people be accountable to their own judgements?
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>
<< <i>With nothing on the label but obscure code numbers, sellers of shady character (and there are many such crooks polluting our hobby) now have a new opportunity to misrepresent what they're selling to anyone unaware of defects that are not obvious.
In my opinion that's been happening for years as the unknowning public is sold non-PCGS coins at PCGS price levels. >>
True, but now you're getting a problem coin that is not listed as a problem coin with the exception of a small number. If a coin has been bagged for cleaning or another problem and it's going to be in a PCGS slab it should state the problem on the tag! Otherwise you are just asking for problems. >>
I agree with MadMarty. State the reason. If you're okay with buying a problem coin you should be okay with a label that clearly states the problem. "Geniune" is being taken advantage of. You see it on auction sites all the time. "Look at this incredible, authentic coin, certified by the best in the business, PCGS. This is the real deal, folks. It's GENIUNE". Damned shame.
Lance.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>With nothing on the label but obscure code numbers, sellers of shady character (and there are many such crooks polluting our hobby) now have a new opportunity to misrepresent what they're selling to anyone unaware of defects that are not obvious.
In my opinion that's been happening for years as the unknowning public is sold non-PCGS coins at PCGS price levels. >>
True, but now you're getting a problem coin that is not listed as a problem coin with the exception of a small number. If a coin has been bagged for cleaning or another problem and it's going to be in a PCGS slab it should state the problem on the tag! Otherwise you are just asking for problems. >>
I agree with MadMarty. State the reason. If you're okay with buying a problem coin you should be okay with a label that clearly states the problem. "Geniune" is being taken advantage of. You see it on auction sites all the time. "Look at this incredible, authentic coin, certified by the best in the business, PCGS. This is the real deal, folks. It's GENIUNE". Damned shame.
Lance. >>
I respectfully disagree. The determination if the coin is genuine is a black and white, clear line answer and a guarantee. For other problems, the line can blur. Examples would be questionable color or downright AT? Damage, or grafitti? The list goes on. The holder clearly states that the coin is not gradeable. PCGS gives us a coded reason without certifying the rest of the problems, if any, and I am fine with that. I also agree with no MS or PR grade listed on the holder.
==Looking for pre WW2 Commems in PCGS Rattler holders, 1851-O Three Cent Silvers in all grades
Successful, problem free and pleasant transactions with: illini420, coinguy1, weather11am,wayneherndon,wondercoin,Topdollarpaid,Julian, bishdigg,seateddime, peicesofme,ajia,CoinRaritiesOnline,savoyspecial,Boom, TorinoCobra71, ModernCoinMart, WTCG, slinc, Patches, Gerard, pocketpiececommems, BigJohnD, RickMilauskas, mirabella, Smittys, LeeG, TomB, DeusExMachina, tydye
<< <i>I like the fact that when I own one of these coins it'll just say PCGS Genuine. Like others have said, I don't need it to be screaming altered surfaces, or cleaned or whatever at me everytime me or another looks at it. When it comes time to purchase or sell, it isn't that hard to figure out what the code means...
Perhaps PCGS could make a business card/credit card laminated cheat sheets available at their tables for the folks to carry around at shows??? that would be handy >>
I have a coin holdered with a grade MS61----I am the end user. Everytime I look at this coin, the MS61 grade screams at me, even though I know that this coin is properly graded. Can we get a more subtle code for grades also? As an end user, I do not want to have the a lower condition indicated on my coin and screaming at me when I look at it. Thank You.
Also, it makes it more difficult for a coin dealer to sell a problem coin to a new collector as a problem free coin.
Agreed!
Open disclosure is more important than a bunch of obscure numbers. PCGS owes it to collectors to present their professional opinion in the clearest, most forthright manner: plain language on the front of the holder.
<< <i>I do not want to have the a lower condition indicated on my coin and screaming at me when I look at it. >>
Excellent suggestion. Let's really streamline those label inserts. There's no need to put PL or DMPL on them, because it's obvious that really great coins like that are PL or DMPL.
Those messy Variety numbers can go, too. If you have the proper references, you can look the coin up, and if you don't, then you don't need to know that, anyway. The date and Mintmark can go, too. Those are right on every coin, after all.
edited to add: Why the word GENUINE, anyway? If it's in a PCGS holder, it must be genuine, right?
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
<< <i>
<< <i>what can we do about a Trueview photo with every coin graded >>
Great idea. Could also help to inhibit fraud. >>
I agree. You all have my vote
A numerical code, whether is it a coded sell-by date on a can of beans or a defect code on a coin slab, is simply a way of hiding information from consumers. By using a numeric code for defects, PCGS is telling everyone there is something to hide, or they have something they want only a few cognoscenti to understand.
PCGS has already demonstrated they have the capability to print defect descriptions in English on the holders, and now plan to do so for certain categories of defect. Any prior argument against printing plain language defect descriptions on the holders, must now disintegrate into nothing more than “We just don’t want to.”
This is a very simple matter of consumer information and consumer protection. PCGS has taken its first step by putting damaged but genuine coins in marked holders. That is good for everyone. PCGS now should take the next step and disclose in plain English words the nature of the defect.
Roger W. Burdette
Numismatic Researcher and Author
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>With nothing on the label but obscure code numbers, sellers of shady character (and there are many such crooks polluting our hobby) now have a new opportunity to misrepresent what they're selling to anyone unaware of defects that are not obvious.
In my opinion that's been happening for years as the unknowning public is sold non-PCGS coins at PCGS price levels. >>
True, but now you're getting a problem coin that is not listed as a problem coin with the exception of a small number. If a coin has been bagged for cleaning or another problem and it's going to be in a PCGS slab it should state the problem on the tag! Otherwise you are just asking for problems. >>
I agree with MadMarty. State the reason. If you're okay with buying a problem coin you should be okay with a label that clearly states the problem. "Geniune" is being taken advantage of. You see it on auction sites all the time. "Look at this incredible, authentic coin, certified by the best in the business, PCGS. This is the real deal, folks. It's GENIUNE". Damned shame.
Lance. >>
<< <i>I apologize to Don Willis and the other PCGS folks for my “denseness” on this, but I do not comprehend the resistance to printing the reason on the holder in plain English.
A numerical code, whether is it a coded sell-by date on a can of beans or a defect code on a coin slab, is simply a way of hiding information from consumers. By using a numeric code for defects, PCGS is telling everyone there is something to hide, or they have something they want only a few cognoscenti to understand.
PCGS has already demonstrated they have the capability to print defect descriptions in English on the holders, and now plan to do so for certain categories of defect. Any prior argument against printing plain language defect descriptions on the holders, must now disintegrate into nothing more than “We just don’t want to.”
This is a very simple matter of consumer information and consumer protection. PCGS has taken its first step by putting damaged but genuine coins in marked holders. That is good for everyone. PCGS now should take the next step and disclose in plain English words the nature of the defect.
Roger W. Burdette
Numismatic Researcher and Author >>
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< <i>Due to popular demand we are making a couple changes to our Genuine program. In addition to the previous no grade codes we will now holder 'Holed & Plugged', and 'Rim Filed' coins. Since both of these impairments can be very difficult to recognize we will print the no grade reason on the front of the insert (only for these two no grades). We are also creating a new no grade code for 'Peeling Lamination'. These will not be holdered as we consider them to be active. Also, note that 'Holed' coins will be holdered as code 98 - damaged.
Here is a recap of our no grade codes, print status as well as holder status.
Code/ Description / Printed Description / Holder
82 Filed Rims / Yes / Yes
83 Peeling Lamination / No / No
84 Holed and Plugged / Yes / Yes
90 Not Genuine / No / No
91 Questionable Color / No / Yes
92 Cleaned / No / Yes
93 Planchet Flaw / No / Yes
94 Altered Surface / No / Yes
95 Scratch or Rim Nick / No / Yes
97 Environmental Damage / No / Yes
98 Damage or Tooling / No / Yes
99 PVC Residue / No / No
btw - I've seen a few posts wondering what code 80 means. That was the code used for the old Genuine program. We are no longer holdering coins as code 80. >>
Don---Why do some defects have a "Printed Description" on the label while others don't? Why the inconsistency?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
In big type, the seller states:
<< <i>1875-CC Trade Dollar PCGS Genuine, Nice Coin!
We can't figure out why they didn't grade this coin MS-61 or 62!
Sure to be cracked-out and sold as a "Mail Order Ch. BU" ! >>
Guess they just don't know what the "94" means.
And they save space by not showing the reverse insert label, which reads "GENUINE NOT GRADABLE"
Caveat emptor.LINK
my early American coins & currency: -- http://yankeedoodlecoins.com/
The ebay seller seems to be doing his/her best to mislead potential buyers. With a numeric defect code buried with other numbers, few would know what to look for. Many "caveats" before "emptor-ing" on this one....
At what point should people be accountable to their own judgements? "
If people were entirely dependant on their own judgement, PCGS would be out of business, right? They "protect" the "ignorant" from buying counterfeit, or overgraded (sometimes), coins, so why not help protect them from damaged or altered coins? Before the "Genuine" holder, they were "protected" from damaged/altered coins, since they were NOT holdered. Now that they are holdered, a simple plain english description could continue the protection...
<< <i>A numerical code, whether is it a coded sell-by date on a can of beans or a defect code on a coin slab, is simply a way of hiding information from consumers. By using a numeric code for defects, PCGS is telling everyone there is something to hide, or they have something they want only a few cognoscenti to understand.
PCGS has already demonstrated they have the capability to print defect descriptions in English on the holders, and now plan to do so for certain categories of defect. Any prior argument against printing plain language defect descriptions on the holders, must now disintegrate into nothing more than “We just don’t want to.”
This is a very simple matter of consumer information and consumer protection. PCGS has taken its first step by putting damaged but genuine coins in marked holders. That is good for everyone. PCGS now should take the next step and disclose in plain English words the nature of the defect.
Roger W. Burdette
Numismatic Researcher and Author >>
I respectfully disagree, for the following reasons:
A tag stating a specific problem in such an explicit manner is NOT presentable, which adversely affects one's ability to sell (or re-sell) the coin for fair market value.
Two coins could have the same problem: one severely damaged; the other having just a minor flaw... yet both coins would be equally "penalized" with the same verbiage, which is hard to justify.
Net-grading of problem coins is highly subjective, and therefore cannot be adequately accomplished by over-generalizing the description.
While the seller has an ethical responsibility to represent the coin honestly, ultimately it is the BUYER's responsibility to be educated and knowledgeable as to exactly what he/she is buying.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I'm with rbf! >>
I'm with rwb!
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
However, you are talking about marketability; I am talking about openness and basic honesty.
As another poster reminded all, PCGS and the other major services were formed to provide a valuable service: identify counterfeit and altered coins. Back then, it was obvious to most that those who intentionally misrepresent a coin have a huge advantage over all but the most sophisticated collectors. PCGS and others applied the best available knowledge to examining coins under controlled conditions and certified the authenticity of coins they put in holders.
That is still the primary purpose of PCGS.
Coins in “Genuine” holders will, overtime, tend to sequester large numbers of better-condition, but damaged coins. A few buyers will recognize the obtuse numeric codes specifying the damage, but most will not. Just like the ebay auction noted above, ambiguity creates opportunity for misrepresentation and deception.
To respond to your statements:
• A tag stating a specific problem in such an explicit manner is NOT presentable, which adversely affects one's ability to sell (or re-sell) the coin for fair market value.
The specific problem information is already present, but hidden from most consumers. Hiding known information is an excellent way to make consumers suspicious of the motive behind obfuscation. As for “fair market” – that only exists between knowledgeable, willing seller and buyer. You propose to reduce the buyer’s knowledge potential thus removing the idea of “fair market” and converting it to "seller's market" - think car sales techniques.
• Two coins could have the same problem: one severely damaged; the other having just a minor flaw... yet both coins would be equally "penalized" with the same verbiage, which is hard to justify.
Again, the information is already present, only coded. Do you propose decimals of the codes to indicate the extent of the damage? There is no “penalty” to the coin. The “penalty” is to the potential buyer, particularly unsophisticated ones, for whom the secret code is a barrier to full, open, honest disclosure.
• Net-grading of problem coins is highly subjective, and therefore cannot be adequately accomplished by over-generalizing the description.
So-called net-grading is irrelevant. PCGS has not proposed to “grade” damaged coins. All they state is that the coin is genuine, but damaged or altered in some manner.
• While the seller has an ethical responsibility to represent the coin honestly, ultimately it is the BUYER's responsibility to be educated and knowledgeable as to exactly what he/she is buying.
What can be more honest that to have PCGS - a disinterested third party - state in plain language the nature of the damage? Anything less is to play the Chinese counterfeiter and milk producer game – show the item to the consumer: and if they can’t find the melamine in the milk, or can’t find the fake Lafayette dollar, too bad…pocket the profit and run.
I expect, rbf, that you are an upstanding person of high ethical character and would do all you could to educate a potential buyer about a “Genuine” slab coin. I’m confident you would explain the secret numeric code and then point out the damage to your customer. Regrettably, a great many would not. It is they, and their potential customers, going back to the founding purpose of PCGS, for whom full, plain English descriptions are imperative.
<< <i>rbf: I understand your comments.
However, you are talking about marketability; I am talking about openness and basic honesty.
As another poster reminded all, PCGS and the other major services were formed to provide a valuable service: identify counterfeit and altered coins. Back then, it was obvious to most that those who intentionally misrepresent a coin have a huge advantage over all but the most sophisticated collectors. PCGS and others applied the best available knowledge to examining coins under controlled conditions and certified the authenticity of coins they put in holders.
That is still the primary purpose of PCGS.
Coins in “Genuine” holders will, overtime, tend to sequester large numbers of better-condition, but damaged coins. A few buyers will recognize the obtuse numeric codes specifying the damage, but most will not. Just like the ebay auction noted above, ambiguity creates opportunity for misrepresentation and deception.
To respond to your statements:
• A tag stating a specific problem in such an explicit manner is NOT presentable, which adversely affects one's ability to sell (or re-sell) the coin for fair market value.
The specific problem information is already present, but hidden from most consumers. Hiding known information is an excellent way to make consumers suspicious of the motive behind obfuscation. As for “fair market” – that only exists between knowledgeable, willing seller and buyer. You propose to reduce the buyer’s knowledge potential thus removing the idea of “fair market” and converting it to "seller's market" - think car sales techniques.
• Two coins could have the same problem: one severely damaged; the other having just a minor flaw... yet both coins would be equally "penalized" with the same verbiage, which is hard to justify.
Again, the information is already present, only coded. Do you propose decimals of the codes to indicate the extent of the damage? There is no “penalty” to the coin. The “penalty” is to the potential buyer, particularly unsophisticated ones, for whom the secret code is a barrier to full, open, honest disclosure.
• Net-grading of problem coins is highly subjective, and therefore cannot be adequately accomplished by over-generalizing the description.
So-called net-grading is irrelevant. PCGS has not proposed to “grade” damaged coins. All they state is that the coin is genuine, but damaged or altered in some manner.
• While the seller has an ethical responsibility to represent the coin honestly, ultimately it is the BUYER's responsibility to be educated and knowledgeable as to exactly what he/she is buying.
What can be more honest that to have PCGS - a disinterested third party - state in plain language the nature of the damage? Anything less is to play the Chinese counterfeiter and milk producer game – show the item to the consumer: and if they can’t find the melamine in the milk, or can’t find the fake Lafayette dollar, too bad…pocket the profit and run.
I expect, rbf, that you are an upstanding person of high ethical character and would do all you could to educate a potential buyer about a “Genuine” slab coin. I’m confident you would explain the secret numeric code and then point out the damage to your customer. Regrettably, a great many would not. It is they, and their potential customers, going back to the founding purpose of PCGS, for whom full, plain English descriptions are imperative. >>
I do understand what you are presenting here... however, while this may be "cutting hairs a bit too finely" ...
Quite a few times I have been asked by a potential customer at a show "What does MS65 or AU55 mean?"... seriously... these folks had no idea... so of course I explained it to them as best I could and suggested they pick up a good Grading Book...
So, based on your line of reasoning... perhaps PCGS should also put "in plain English" what the grade is... no "esoteric" letter/number code BUT a description... certainly this would be awkward at best... if not possible due to space...
Should there also be a warning label that reads "Grading is subjective and not all coins labeled with the same grade will be identical"? ... I recently told this to a new collector and he was confused and surprised by this revelation... (edited to add... how about another label..."If this coin is cracked out and resubmitted...there is every chance that it will receive a different grade or be determined to be "not gradeable"
IMHO...anyone who buys coins without educating themselves first (at least with some basic knowledge) is a fool. I was that fool once and blame no one but myself for the bad purchases I made.
<< <i>>>Why not print the problem of every coin on the tag?
Also, it makes it more difficult for a coin dealer to sell a problem coin to a new collector as a problem free coin.
Agreed!
Open disclosure is more important than a bunch of obscure numbers. PCGS owes it to collectors to present their professional opinion in the clearest, most forthright manner: plain language on the front of the holder. >>
<< <i>IMHO...anyone who buys coins without educating themselves first (at least with some basic knowledge) is a fool. I was that fool once and blame no one but myself for the bad purchases I made. >>
In California if you sell a house without disclosing a known problem you're liable. Even though thorough inspections were done by experts who didn't find it. Disclosure is a good thing. Helping new collector's ease into the hobby without having to undergo painful lessons is a good thing.
To me, the most mysterious thing about all this is PCGS's decision to print in english, on the cert, some flaws but not others. I just don't see any reasonable downside.
I would love Don to share the logic. And I think a forum poll on this topic would be interesting too.
Lance.