@HJP said: "I’ll let this thread die & think about a more constructive way to bring forth what we are working on - quite diligently - in areas that directly correlate to coins. Among the investigations that can be digitally today is the ability for authentication, surface quality image capture & data processing and some level of quality attribution."
HJP, Decades ago, Computer grading was tried at least twice without success. In the passing years, technology has certainty been greatly improved. Nevertheless, coins are still not graded by computers.
I've said this before but not to you. If coin A comes into a TPGS and it is weighed, and imaged (Yawn - just as we did in the early 1970's) and then graded very carefully (not rushed thru three graders ASAP) by humans and stored into a data base - Then anytime (except being really altered later) that coin is sent in to the TPGS, it will be ID'ed as having been there before and its original grade will be assigned, Now that is precision. The same grade assigned to the coin every time it is seen now & forever.
BINGO. Actual "COMPUTER GRADING" that can be started at the two top TPGS's next week. End of gradeflation. End of Crack-outs. End of $$$$$.
My suggestion is to keep working to improve computers in your field. They cannot grade coins! Computers can pick up the technical aspects of grading - just as humans. They cannot account for all the other subjective aspects of assigning a grade. If I'm alive in twenty years, I write "I told you so."
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
I'm not sure how much crack outs add to the profits. I mean, I'm sure it adds something. But it looks to me like there is a LOT of slabbing of new issues at both major firms. I'm talking hundreds of thousands of coins. And most dealer submissions that I've been privy to are usually mostly new submissions not crack outs.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
The other thought that occurs to me is whether crack-outs result from "errors in judgment" or shifting standards. If it is the latter, it is easy to shift the standards even for the AI.
One might think that "shifting standards" may actually encourage more crackouts. IIRC from reading on this forum that standards do vary from time to time. So when grading is perceived to be looser, reviews/crackouts may actually increase. And when grading is perceived as "tight" collectors will hold pat with their examples. If AI grading were an absolute, without "shifting standards", CO's would have little reason to exist. The amount of profit gained from CO's may not be great,we don't know the figures, but nonetheless it still amounts to a contribution to the revenue profit stream. Most business will not inhibit any profitable income opportunity.
Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
The other thought that occurs to me is whether crack-outs result from "errors in judgment" or shifting standards. If it is the latter, it is easy to shift the standards even for the AI.
Reasons for crack-outs: **Please see new discussion...
The grading companies were created for one thing and that is to make money. Anything they can do to increase profits will be done including creating excitement about registry and series collections. Nothing against the grading companies but I would like to get back to basics like determining if coin is genuine or damaged. Let buyers and sellers determine grade and thus value. I know its silly to think like this and that it will ever happen. One reason grading companies were created was to protect buyers from crooked sellers.
@Larrob37 said: The grading companies were created for one thing and that is to make money. Anything they can do to increase profits will be done including creating excitement about registry and series collections. Nothing against the grading companies but I would like to get back to basics like determining if coin is genuine or damaged. Let buyers and sellers determine grade and thus value. I know its silly to think like this and that it will ever happen. One reason grading companies were created was to protect buyers from crooked sellers.
Actually, that is only true AFTER the ANA started to grade coins. The little known fact is that the first coin grading service - INSAB - graded coins at no charge. The INS Authentication Bureau was the second authentication service. It was established in DC when the ANA's authentication Service was moved to Colorado. A major reason for this move was to get the authentication revenue "in house." Authenticators' in DC would joke that they were the "tail" wagging the dog (ANA). Coins were graded, weighed, and imaged in order to ID them in the future. The assigned grade (a true technical system) was only kept for internal records.
After the "split" of personnel, INSAB continued to authenticate coins in DC and our internal opinion of the coin's grade was given forfree to anyone who asked. Our grade opinion was kept separate from the photo certificate of authenticity because grading is subjective and knowledgeable numismatists can disagree. When the ANA started grading coins for a fee, we followed ($5 @ as I remember). Today the ANACS is the oldest authentication and grading service as INSAB went out of business decades ago. They are no longer considered #1 or #2.
Thank you for the education. Guess I wasn't as far off as I thought. I would love to find a company that for a reasonable price just tell me if my coin is genuine, Leave the rest up to me to determine value if any. I personally think the professionally grading of coins along with the cac stickers have taken the fun out of collecting. Now more emphasis is placed on value. More of a business then a hobby. Still love the coins but I don't give a rip what their value is. My stocks and mutual funds are a different matter but they are not considered a hobby.
Collectors are lucky the four major TPGS are around. Grading is still "free" when you think about it. You are paying for authentication and prices vary according to speed and service tier. AFAIK, you can request "GENUINE ONLY" service.
Just as an aside, why would anyone w> @Insider2 said:
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
As for your two points:
First, it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever.
Second, I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service but it's a big world. Plenty of fools, plenty of money, and plenty of ideas. Someone's going to do it, and someone's probably going to do it right.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Interesting discussion. My humble contribution is that while beauty and value certainly intersect at some point, they don't always have to. Beautiful doesn't have to mean expensive. Expensive doesn't have to mean beautiful.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
As for your two points:
First, it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever.
Second, I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service but it's a big world. Plenty of fools, plenty of money, and plenty of ideas. Someone's going to do it, and someone's probably going to do it right.
It would be pretty cheap to start a slab service IF you are already recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
As for your two points:
First, it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever.
Second, I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service but it's a big world. Plenty of fools, plenty of money, and plenty of ideas. Someone's going to do it, and someone's probably going to do it right.
Well for once in my life< I feel may have a chance to educate you about something....
POINT ONE: "...it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever."
As you imply, a small percentage of coins are under graded. Today, they don't stay that way for long! In the case that the coin was actually under graded in the "new mock computer grading system" at a TPGS, it is a very easy thing to correct with a simple review. Additionally, once gradeflation is eliminated by the computer ID, we'll reach a point that a TPGS slab will display a universally market acceptable grade with the "original" standards set at the time this service is offered. THEN THE GRADE OF A COIN WILL NEVER CHANGE YET ITS VALUE WILL GO UP OR DOWN THROUGH THE YEARS.
POINT TWO: "...I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service..."
I was going to start a TPGS in the late 1980's as grading standards started to slip. I had backers but we decided that the startup cost was ridiculous! Later, around 1989 I decided a "sticker service" would work, require virtually nothing to start, and be very profitable separating true original MS coins from the rest of the junk in slabs. We had self-destruct stickers w/ a tiny microscope printed. Unfortunately (in hindsight) I was hired by a TPGS and my plan was shelved. Today, CAC is done on a similar model My service would have been tougher, faster, and cost less.
I still predict that slabs will eventually become the size of a simple capsule with laser engraved info on the edge. The coins will be "fingerprinted" like diamonds.
PS NOTE: This was never done. I suggested that the edge of coins submitted be marked in some way so a simple check would indicate they had been seen before. A microscopic mark on the edge was immediately ruled out. LOL.
Probably a chem dot visible under a certain light would have worked.
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
@TwoSides2aCoin said:
Then there was that hair-brained idea of shorting true collectors by not producing Proof Eagles that one year. 2009, as I recall.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
As for your two points:
First, it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever.
Second, I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service but it's a big world. Plenty of fools, plenty of money, and plenty of ideas. Someone's going to do it, and someone's probably going to do it right.
It would be pretty cheap to start a slab service IF you are already recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
LOL, I guess that words like cheap, expensive, etc. are meaningless. Perhaps, before commenting, you should consult a tool and die maker.
BTW, this cost before the first 1c comes in was the MAIN REASON that two of the TPGS I formerly worked for did not start grading paper money! You'll note that currency is put into cheap plastic holders rather than the hard cases used for coins.
@Baley said:
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
Please define and tell us how you would identify “unquestionably original surfaces” from 2) above?
And what would constitute “essentially identical quality” from 3) above ?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
dy recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
LOL, I guess that words like cheap, expensive, etc. are meaningless. Perhaps, before commenting, you should consult a tool and die maker.
BTW, this cost before the first 1c comes in was the MAIN REASON that two of the TPGS I formerly worked fordid not start grading paper money! You'll note that currency is put into cheap plastic holders rather than the hard cases used for coins.
A good friend of mine was a tool maker, I know what they cost. But in 1980, you didn't have china. You can get custom slabs made in China for probably a buck or two each in bulk. Computers and printing are also easier and cheaper today.
I stand by my cost estimates. Go to aliexpress and see what they sell fake PCGS slabs for. I'm sure they would do a similar price on a custom order in bulk. If you stick to U.S. coins initially, your required sizes are limited.
@Baley said:
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
Please define and tell us how you would identify “unquestionably original surfaces” from 2) above?
And what would constitute “essentially identical quality” from 3) above ?
As determined by the even sharper eyes and consensus of the backers, who have standing bids for it.
@Baley said:
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
Please define and tell us how you would identify “unquestionably original surfaces” from 2) above?
And what would constitute “essentially identical quality” from 3) above ?
IMO, it is EXTREMELY EASY to determine originality if you know what an original coin looks like in the first place. And when SUITABLE coins are conserved "properly" there is often no clue at all that they are not original and unmolested.
@Baley said:
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
Please define and tell us how you would identify “unquestionably original surfaces” from 2) above?
And what would constitute “essentially identical quality” from 3) above ?
As determined by the even sharper eyes and consensus of the backers, who have standing bids for it.
I don't know who the "backers" are but in my experience there are three types of examiners. One cannot tell an original coin from a spit ball and the other tends to ignore what they see under the guise of "market acceptability."
@BLUEJAYWAY said:
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
dy recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
LOL, I guess that words like cheap, expensive, etc. are meaningless. Perhaps, before commenting, you should consult a tool and die maker.
BTW, this cost before the first 1c comes in was the MAIN REASON that two of the TPGS I formerly worked fordid not start grading paper money! You'll note that currency is put into cheap plastic holders rather than the hard cases used for coins.
A good friend of mine was a tool maker, I know what they cost. But in 1980, you didn't have china. You can get custom slabs made in China for probably a buck or two each in bulk. Computers and printing are also easier and cheaper today.
I stand by my cost estimates. Go to aliexpress and see what they sell fake PCGS slabs for. I'm sure they would do a similar price on a custom order in bulk. If you stick to U.S. coins initially, your required sizes are limited.
Just curious, what did your friend quote for the 2 slab dies today?
First of all, if you let the Chinese make your dies and plastic....
Second, don't forget the inserts, label programming, etc. How would you like to spend much of your day reproducing the entries for popular countries in several centuries of Krause as one of my coworkers was tasked to do over twenty years ago and it is still not complete!
Since it is so cheap, I'll expect to see a brand new service in the next five years started by a group of dreamers who will deserve what they'll get. However, IMO there is more of a chance of some group buying an established TPGS like ANACS in a few years.
Usually when a company or someone has a market cornered, it's very difficult to get a share of that profit with an idea apart from that company. One usually sells their idea to that company or somehow manages or brokers a deal that one would receive a percentage of profit which usually tends to be an extremely small percentage, a fraction of 1%. Unless it's an idea that revolutionizes a product's marketability, for instance; with cars, computers, phones.......the guy who invented wind shield wipers really got screwed, didn't he? But anyways, somehow CGC is doing something different with coins, as is QA. Something along that nature where the larger companies would make a rule.....toned coins or coins with EDS strikes would be handled by another party. They would be allowed that part of the pie although there would be a price to pay, percentage-wise, of course. But it would create another market as long as it doesn't cut into their profit too badly and they're receiving kickbacks. But I wouldn't hold my breath for that to occur any time soon.
My collection of EDS Jefferson nickels would have been a good example had I kept the set intack. No-way do I expect anyone to look at my coins the way I do with 30 years of experience into a series. Not to blow my horn here
but no-one has ever come close to matching the percentage of my coins in strike, grade and steps. A few collectors today may have reached 65 to 70%, another few unbeknownst to me are higher and may still be around (50 to 60% in the Registry) but not the 91% I've achieved. But this was the way members of the old FSNC collected their coins, according to the strike, grade than the counting of quarter steps. I can produce a PINK sheet from those days and poorly struck coins did just that....poorly. Point is, I'm not expecting a personal grading feature included on a label......not even a faded asterisk.
But a company would need to let go a piece of their pie before another market could manifest into something else and would require some great bucks. Again, don't hold..........
Oh....and here's one of those exceptional coins I have. It may not grade very high in some folks eyes but the EDS strike and proof-like fields does give the coin some dynamic eye appeal....and that can't be beat!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
This is a really good thread and I've enjoyed it, but the lovely Mrs. Hydrant just brought me a chocolate milkshake and it's even better. Than this thread. Uummm....ummm!!
Comments
Then there was that hair-brained idea of shorting true collectors by not producing Proof Eagles that one year. 2009, as I recall.
But in the end: whatever.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
@HJP said: "I’ll let this thread die & think about a more constructive way to bring forth what we are working on - quite diligently - in areas that directly correlate to coins. Among the investigations that can be digitally today is the ability for authentication, surface quality image capture & data processing and some level of quality attribution."
HJP, Decades ago, Computer grading was tried at least twice without success. In the passing years, technology has certainty been greatly improved. Nevertheless, coins are still not graded by computers.
I've said this before but not to you. If coin A comes into a TPGS and it is weighed, and imaged (Yawn - just as we did in the early 1970's) and then graded very carefully (not rushed thru three graders ASAP) by humans and stored into a data base - Then anytime (except being really altered later) that coin is sent in to the TPGS, it will be ID'ed as having been there before and its original grade will be assigned, Now that is precision. The same grade assigned to the coin every time it is seen now & forever.
BINGO. Actual "COMPUTER
GRADING" that can be started at the two top TPGS's next week. End of gradeflation. End of Crack-outs. End of $$$$$.
My suggestion is to keep working to improve computers in your field. They cannot grade coins! Computers can pick up the technical aspects of grading - just as humans. They cannot account for all the other subjective aspects of assigning a grade. If I'm alive in twenty years, I write "I told you so."
If computer grading ever became an exact science might that end the crack out game? Hence lower submission profits? Maybe this is why it will never come into being even if possible.
That's a really good point!
I'm not sure how much crack outs add to the profits. I mean, I'm sure it adds something. But it looks to me like there is a LOT of slabbing of new issues at both major firms. I'm talking hundreds of thousands of coins. And most dealer submissions that I've been privy to are usually mostly new submissions not crack outs.
The other thought that occurs to me is whether crack-outs result from "errors in judgment" or shifting standards. If it is the latter, it is easy to shift the standards even for the AI.
One might think that "shifting standards" may actually encourage more crackouts. IIRC from reading on this forum that standards do vary from time to time. So when grading is perceived to be looser, reviews/crackouts may actually increase. And when grading is perceived as "tight" collectors will hold pat with their examples. If AI grading were an absolute, without "shifting standards", CO's would have little reason to exist. The amount of profit gained from CO's may not be great,we don't know the figures, but nonetheless it still amounts to a contribution to the revenue profit stream. Most business will not inhibit any profitable income opportunity.
Reasons for crack-outs: **Please see new discussion...
The grading companies were created for one thing and that is to make money. Anything they can do to increase profits will be done including creating excitement about registry and series collections. Nothing against the grading companies but I would like to get back to basics like determining if coin is genuine or damaged. Let buyers and sellers determine grade and thus value. I know its silly to think like this and that it will ever happen. One reason grading companies were created was to protect buyers from crooked sellers.
Actually, that is only true AFTER the ANA started to grade coins. The little known fact is that the first coin grading service - INSAB - graded coins at no charge. The INS Authentication Bureau was the second authentication service. It was established in DC when the ANA's authentication Service was moved to Colorado. A major reason for this move was to get the authentication revenue "in house." Authenticators' in DC would joke that they were the "tail" wagging the dog (ANA). Coins were graded, weighed, and imaged in order to ID them in the future. The assigned grade (a true technical system) was only kept for internal records.
After the "split" of personnel, INSAB continued to authenticate coins in DC and our internal opinion of the coin's grade was given forfree to anyone who asked. Our grade opinion was kept separate from the photo certificate of authenticity because grading is subjective and knowledgeable numismatists can disagree. When the ANA started grading coins for a fee, we followed ($5 @ as I remember). Today the ANACS is the oldest authentication and grading service as INSAB went out of business decades ago. They are no longer considered #1 or #2.
Thank you for the education. Guess I wasn't as far off as I thought. I would love to find a company that for a reasonable price just tell me if my coin is genuine, Leave the rest up to me to determine value if any. I personally think the professionally grading of coins along with the cac stickers have taken the fun out of collecting. Now more emphasis is placed on value. More of a business then a hobby. Still love the coins but I don't give a rip what their value is. My stocks and mutual funds are a different matter but they are not considered a hobby.
Collectors are lucky the four major TPGS are around. Grading is still "free" when you think about it. You are paying for authentication and prices vary according to speed and service tier. AFAIK, you can request "GENUINE ONLY" service.
Just as an aside, why would anyone w> @Insider2 said:
Not really. If today’s leading TPG’s aren’t the first to offer good computer-assisted grading, some newcomer will do it and eat their lunch. No doubt PCGS and NGC know that.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
As I wrote: PCGS & NGC could start "computer recorded grading" starting Monday. All they need to do is image EVERYTHING except the modern stuff and check every new submission with the database.
As far as "lunch." It will take so much money to start a new slab service that only a fool would attempt it.
As for your two points:
First, it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever.
Second, I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service but it's a big world. Plenty of fools, plenty of money, and plenty of ideas. Someone's going to do it, and someone's probably going to do it right.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Interesting discussion. My humble contribution is that while beauty and value certainly intersect at some point, they don't always have to. Beautiful doesn't have to mean expensive. Expensive doesn't have to mean beautiful.
It would be pretty cheap to start a slab service IF you are already recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
Well for once in my life< I feel may have a chance to educate you about something....
POINT ONE: "...it's in nobody's best interest to require that undergraded coins remain so forever."
As you imply, a small percentage of coins are under graded. Today, they don't stay that way for long! In the case that the coin was actually under graded in the "new mock computer grading system" at a TPGS, it is a very easy thing to correct with a simple review. Additionally, once gradeflation is eliminated by the computer ID, we'll reach a point that a TPGS slab will display a universally market acceptable grade with the "original" standards set at the time this service is offered. THEN THE GRADE OF A COIN WILL NEVER CHANGE YET ITS VALUE WILL GO UP OR DOWN THROUGH THE YEARS.
POINT TWO: "...I don't know how much it will cost to start a new slab service..."
I was going to start a TPGS in the late 1980's as grading standards started to slip. I had backers but we decided that the startup cost was ridiculous! Later, around 1989 I decided a "sticker service" would work, require virtually nothing to start, and be very profitable separating true original MS coins from the rest of the junk in slabs. We had self-destruct stickers w/ a tiny microscope printed. Unfortunately (in hindsight) I was hired by a TPGS and my plan was shelved. Today, CAC is done on a similar model My service would have been tougher, faster, and cost less.
I still predict that slabs will eventually become the size of a simple capsule with laser engraved info on the edge. The coins will be "fingerprinted" like diamonds.
PS NOTE: This was never done. I suggested that the edge of coins submitted be marked in some way so a simple check would indicate they had been seen before. A microscopic mark on the edge was immediately ruled out. LOL.
Probably a chem dot visible under a certain light would have worked.
I've long predicted on here that someone will start a new sticker or tamper evident plastic "Frame" service that only STARTS with PCGS CAC and then further critically select a subset that are also:
1) older that a certain cutoff date (1935, or 1909, for example)
2) have not just "acceptable" but unquestionably original surfaces
3) are scarce enough in the marketplace that one cannot find an essentially identical quality piece in a few minutes online
And
4) keeps an active, funded market un such coins that they are instantly liquid at publicly published bid prices
Any deep pocket investors want to run with this, my standing offer to be a part time consultant for sweat equity, blaze me a pm 😉
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Why were they not produced that year,
Ended up being a great opening for Dan Carr.
LOL, I guess that words like cheap, expensive, etc. are meaningless. Perhaps, before commenting, you should consult a tool and die maker.
BTW, this cost before the first 1c comes in was the MAIN REASON that two of the TPGS I formerly worked for did not start grading paper money! You'll note that currency is put into cheap plastic holders rather than the hard cases used for coins.
Please define and tell us how you would identify “unquestionably original surfaces” from 2) above?
And what would constitute “essentially identical quality” from 3) above ?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
dy recognized for your "eye". It would only be expensive if you need to hire known experts and go out and build a reputation. If you are John Albanese, you could start a slab service for the cost of office staff to open and log submissions. The technology to seal the coins in plastic already exists and can't be that expensive.
A good friend of mine was a tool maker, I know what they cost. But in 1980, you didn't have china. You can get custom slabs made in China for probably a buck or two each in bulk. Computers and printing are also easier and cheaper today.
I stand by my cost estimates. Go to aliexpress and see what they sell fake PCGS slabs for. I'm sure they would do a similar price on a custom order in bulk. If you stick to U.S. coins initially, your required sizes are limited.
https://aliexpress.com/item/33062271749.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.7125abf8qJDSOS&algo_pvid=0dbaf809-12d6-42ae-8a13-b9145f8d4305&algo_expid=0dbaf809-12d6-42ae-8a13-b9145f8d4305-4&btsid=d7bc980b-c85d-4550-bf09-1d4551123f53&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_1,searchweb201603_52
Put all coins in rattler holders!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
As determined by the even sharper eyes and consensus of the backers, who have standing bids for it.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
IMO, it is EXTREMELY EASY to determine originality if you know what an original coin looks like in the first place. And when SUITABLE coins are conserved "properly" there is often no clue at all that they are not original and unmolested.
IMO, the second part is nonsense and so what?
I don't know who the "backers" are but in my experience there are three types of examiners. One cannot tell an original coin from a spit ball and the other tends to ignore what they see under the guise of "market acceptability."
The ones who say, "I'll buy it as a..."
And back the opinion with a cash bid.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
@jmlanzaf said:
Just curious, what did your friend quote for the 2 slab dies today?
First of all, if you let the Chinese make your dies and plastic....
Second, don't forget the inserts, label programming, etc. How would you like to spend much of your day reproducing the entries for popular countries in several centuries of Krause as one of my coworkers was tasked to do over twenty years ago and it is still not complete!
Since it is so cheap, I'll expect to see a brand new service in the next five years started by a group of dreamers who will deserve what they'll get. However, IMO there is more of a chance of some group buying an established TPGS like ANACS in a few years.
Usually when a company or someone has a market cornered, it's very difficult to get a share of that profit with an idea apart from that company. One usually sells their idea to that company or somehow manages or brokers a deal that one would receive a percentage of profit which usually tends to be an extremely small percentage, a fraction of 1%. Unless it's an idea that revolutionizes a product's marketability, for instance; with cars, computers, phones.......the guy who invented wind shield wipers really got screwed, didn't he? But anyways, somehow CGC is doing something different with coins, as is QA. Something along that nature where the larger companies would make a rule.....toned coins or coins with EDS strikes would be handled by another party. They would be allowed that part of the pie although there would be a price to pay, percentage-wise, of course. But it would create another market as long as it doesn't cut into their profit too badly and they're receiving kickbacks. But I wouldn't hold my breath for that to occur any time soon.
My collection of EDS Jefferson nickels would have been a good example had I kept the set intack. No-way do I expect anyone to look at my coins the way I do with 30 years of experience into a series. Not to blow my horn here
but no-one has ever come close to matching the percentage of my coins in strike, grade and steps. A few collectors today may have reached 65 to 70%, another few unbeknownst to me are higher and may still be around (50 to 60% in the Registry) but not the 91% I've achieved. But this was the way members of the old FSNC collected their coins, according to the strike, grade than the counting of quarter steps. I can produce a PINK sheet from those days and poorly struck coins did just that....poorly. Point is, I'm not expecting a personal grading feature included on a label......not even a faded asterisk.
But a company would need to let go a piece of their pie before another market could manifest into something else and would require some great bucks. Again, don't hold..........
Oh....and here's one of those exceptional coins I have. It may not grade very high in some folks eyes but the EDS strike and proof-like fields does give the coin some dynamic eye appeal....and that can't be beat!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
This is a really good thread and I've enjoyed it, but the lovely Mrs. Hydrant just brought me a chocolate milkshake and it's even better. Than this thread. Uummm....ummm!!