@MasonG said:
There are no answers, just opinions. If it took six submissions to get the coin back with the original grade, that would seem to indicate that particular grade was about as high as one could reasonably hope for. Probably best to not send that kind of coin in for regrading, you think?
Right, I was newly returned to the hobby and didn't know what I was doing. The point of the story is you never know what a TPG will grade a coin on any given day. I take back my statement about not cracking a coin of value ever again. A little while back I cracked out an early commem from an NGC 67 (with CAC) holder and sent it to PCGS. Result: MS65. Now I'm definitely cured!
Anyway, this is getting OT, so I'll leave it there.
@MasonG said:
There are no answers, just opinions. If it took six submissions to get the coin back with the original grade, that would seem to indicate that particular grade was about as high as one could reasonably hope for. Probably best to not send that kind of coin in for regrading, you think?
Right, I was newly returned to the hobby and didn't know what I was doing. The point of the story is you never know what a TPG will grade a coin on any given day. I take back my statement about not cracking a coin of value ever again. A little while back I cracked out an early commem from an NGC 67 (with CAC) holder and sent it to PCGS. Result: MS65. Now I'm definitely cured!
Anyway, this is getting OT, so I'll leave it there.
Oh, dear. Cue the CAC-haters....
Maybe it was the new CAC black and blue label that indicates a two point over grade.
@MasonG said:
There are no answers, just opinions. If it took six submissions to get the coin back with the original grade, that would seem to indicate that particular grade was about as high as one could reasonably hope for. Probably best to not send that kind of coin in for regrading, you think?
Right, I was newly returned to the hobby and didn't know what I was doing. The point of the story is you never know what a TPG will grade a coin on any given day. I take back my statement about not cracking a coin of value ever again. A little while back I cracked out an early commem from an NGC 67 (with CAC) holder and sent it to PCGS. Result: MS65. Now I'm definitely cured!
Anyway, this is getting OT, so I'll leave it there.
Oh, dear. Cue the CAC-haters....
Maybe it was the new CAC black and blue label that indicates a two point over grade.
LOL. There's a company no one would ever submit coins to. It's like asking for a scarlet letter to be affixed.
Help me out here. I don't submit much. A regrade is when you send a coin in and it comes back in a new holder, whether it upgrades or not, but you're guaranteed it can't downgrade. A reconsideration is like a regrade, except the coin stays in its original holder.
I have been charged for value increments. All submissions either stayed in the same holder if the grade did not change, and were placed in new holders if they got a + or the full upgrade. I let my rep send the coins in for me. It looks like my coins were sent via reconsideration Is this correct?
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@Elcontador said:
Help me out here. I don't submit much. A regrade is when you send a coin in and it comes back in a new holder, whether it upgrades or not, but you're guaranteed it can't downgrade. A reconsideration is like a regrade, except the coin stays in its original holder.
I have been charged for value increments. All submissions either stayed in the same holder if the grade did not change, and were placed in new holders if they got a + or the full upgrade. I let my rep send the coins in for me. It looks like my coins were sent via reconsideration Is this correct?
Yes, entirely correct. Regrades get cracked unconditionally. Reconsideration coins only if they get a grade bump (numeric or a plus). The latter makes the most sense for older holders that typically command a premium (rattler, green label, etc.).
@Lakesammman said:
The only thing I don't like is it's an incentive to overgrade .......
I think it's an incentive to undergrade.
I don’t know how or if it could be accomplished, but it sure would be nice if submitters weren’t worried about incentives to under-grade or over-grade.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I’m not aware of any other industry whether you can pay a company for their opinion and then pay again to see if they’ll change their opinion. Maybe there are some. To anyone outside the hobby it just seems odd........ and perhaps a bit like buying lottery tickets.
Its just wrong, it sets the stage for many many problems for PCGS ethically and legally. Whats even more onerous on the 1% fee...guess who gets to set the value? So they also have incentive to inflate the price. Everything here is about the appearance of impropriety. By putting themselves into a position of being financially rewarded to undergrade initially, overgrade secondly, and make more money by inflating the prices, they are putting themselves at risk of losing credibility in all stages. I hope that enough people point this out to them and I hope that they have a legal team that have looked carefully at this and have demonstrable safeguards to protect the process being driven by making more money instead of just honestly grading coins.
@BryceM said:
I’m not aware of any other industry whether you can pay a company for their opinion and then pay again to see if they’ll change their opinion. Maybe there are some. To anyone outside the hobby it just seems odd........ and perhaps a bit like buying lottery tickets.
Medicine
"Are you sure you won't do that surgery after all doc?"
@coinbuf said:
...it certainly could be an effect that gets passed down to the end buyer.
Grading fees NEVER get passed along to the buyer. Look at it this way. Yes, a buyer might very well pay more for a coin if it’s slabbed, but he completely doesn’t care if it took $25 or $2500 in fees before the coin found its way into the holder. And because smart sellers know this, they price their coins accordingly, ignoring the certification costs.
When a coin goes from $2,500 in value to $25,000, I would say all of the grading fees (including for multiple submissions) are baked in.
@cnncoins said:
I think the reality is that PCGS wants to share in the value of your upgrade. In general, the business model of the grading services is a little backwards. If they undergrade a coin, they will actually generate more revenue. It's one of the few businesses that where they actually get more revenue for "getting the grade wrong." Not saying this is done intentionally, but clearly that is the result. The other "hidden" increase in fees for 2020 is the lowering of Maximum Insurance values for certain tiers. For example, the Express maximum insurance value is now $10,000 instead of $20,000. If you have a coin worth $12,500, you'll now need to submit it "Walkthrough" which costs $150 instead of $65 (Their published prices). These are, technically, price increases in my opinion. Any thoughts?
Agreed, it is a price hike of shorts. Coins worth $10,001-20,000 now cost $150 instead of $65 (lower max value for express tier). Coins worth $2,501-$3,000 now cost $65 instead of $35 (lower max value for regular tier). Auction houses have increased their cut over the years (15% to 17.5% to 20% with 25% "buyer's premiums" probably not far off). The sticker man wants his chunk and has increased prices/added invoice fees. USPS/courier services constantly go up with insurance and postage. With an already declining market, there are fewer and fewer reasons to submit or buy coins. The extra icing on the cupcake isn't helping. Yes it may seem the fee changes are trivial, but collectors and small dealers are being nickel and dimed to death.
The wealthier (read as likely much older collectors) will be less effected, but as they die off they are unlikely to be replaced by millenials who are already resistant to hoarding/collecting type behavior to begin with. This is probably yet another nail in the future coffin of our hobby. I also noticed that this was one of Laura's suggestions (price hike) if I recall correctly as was the CAC registry. I wonder what other goodies from her wish list will come to fruition.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
@drddm said:
Very interesting points have been raised so far.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
Coins which fail to sticker at CAC aren’t necessarily over-graded in CAC’s opinion. And while your post focuses on large numbers of (newly graded) over-graded coins, that scenario is purely speculative.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Coins which fail to sticker at CAC aren’t necessarily over-graded in CAC’s opinion. And while your post focuses on large numbers of (newly graded) over-graded coins, that scenario is purely speculative.
Although not all coins that fail to sticker are overgraded, some are. I have spoken to JA on several occasions when reviewing my coins and was told that some were in fact overgraded. Granted, there were not many, at least in my submissions, but there were some.
And yes, my scenario was speculative, but with what has been posted in this thread so far, it makes me wonder if more and more people are beginning to think this same way.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
A lot of coins are overgraded now. The "average collector" is likely not even aware of the price structure of PCGS grading categories. In other words, adding a 1% charge to Regrades is probably not a watershed event in the grand scheme of existing coin market trends. Just my humble opinion.
@drddm said:
Very interesting points have been raised so far.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
Coins which fail to sticker at CAC aren’t necessarily over-graded in CAC’s opinion.
I agree, but many market participants treat those coins as over graded or worse. So even if properly graded, an increase in maxed out coins could affect the market.
@BryceM said:
I’m not aware of any other industry whether you can pay a company for their opinion and then pay again to see if they’ll change their opinion. Maybe there are some. To anyone outside the hobby it just seems odd........ and perhaps a bit like buying lottery tickets.
@drddm said:
Very interesting points have been raised so far.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
Coins which fail to sticker at CAC aren’t necessarily over-graded in CAC’s opinion. And while your post focuses on large numbers of (newly graded) over-graded coins, that scenario is purely speculative.
I don't see the point in assuming any more overgraded coins than now.
I would point out the other "incentive" you are missing: PCGS provides a FINANCIAL GUARANTEE. That is an incentive to get it right not wrong.
And, even if what you say is true, the Market is self-correcting. Either people will stop trusting PCGS grades OR price guides will reflect the new standards. Either way, you get to vote with your dollars as time goes on.
I'd also repeat what I said earlier: PAYING A PERCENTAGE FOR EXPERTIZATION HAS BEEN STANDARD IN PHILATELY for longer than PCGS has existed. It has not created any of the suspicions you currently have. There is, a slight difference, in that most expertization does not include a numerical grade.
While it's not happening now, They did go through about 3 years of over grading or grading coins problem free that should not have with Mid Grade Barber Halves. Almost every thing you see in auctions these days is cleaned over graded crap in problem free holders. There are a few exceptions but not many.
@drddm said:
Very interesting points have been raised so far.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
I don't understand this stuff. It seems to me that it's all about the money.
There is a saying which you probably have heard that money begets money. Sure seems that way to me. Like I said ... I don't understand this stuff.
Guarantee premium. Basically 1% charge on the full value of the coin if it crosses or upgraded via reconsideration or regrade.
I am doing a regrade submission online. They have an estimated guarantee premium fee and the information does not state anything about an upgrade. It looks like this fee applies to all regrades regardless if they end up being nothing more than a re-holder.
Perhaps I am reading this incorrectly, but this is what is stated.
The Guarantee Premium is equal to 1% of the value of the coin in its final grade. The value of the coin is determined as the higher of the Declared Value or the PCGS Price Guide value for that grade. The minimum amount for the Guarantee Premium is $5. PCGS reserves the right to make the final determination of the coin’s value.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Guarantee premium. Basically 1% charge on the full value of the coin if it crosses or upgraded via reconsideration or regrade.
I am doing a regrade submission online. They have an estimated guarantee premium fee and the information does not state anything about an upgrade. It looks like this fee applies to all regrades regardless if they end up being nothing more than a re-holder.
Perhaps I am reading this incorrectly, but this is what is stated.
The Guarantee Premium is equal to 1% of the value of the coin in its final grade. The value of the coin is determined as the higher of the Declared Value or the PCGS Price Guide value for that grade. The minimum amount for the Guarantee Premium is $5. PCGS reserves the right to make the final determination of the coin’s value.
Below, I have copied what I found for regrades and it states that coins that upgrade will be charged a “Guarantee Premium”. The implication is that coins which don’t upgrade won’t be charged that premium.
REGRADE: For a coin previously graded by PCGS you feel might be worthy of a higher grade, submit coin in the holder. The coin will be removed from the PCGS holder and regraded. Grading fees will apply whether the coin upgrades or not. Coins that do upgrade will also be charged a Guarantee Premium based on the value of the coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@divecchia said:
I agree with @Boosibri as I see no added risk on the part of PCGS, so why the premium?
As far as the OP's question of how it will affect me, the answer is in two parts. Directly it will not effect me in the least as I don't sub coins for Reconsideration or any other service. Indirectly is another story. It may affect me in that if a coin was just bumped, the seller may bump up the price of the coin I'm trying to buy, not just to the upgraded level, but a bit more to recoup some or all of the 1% cost for getting the bump.
Donato
If a submitter/seller gets a $1000 value upgrade on a regrade submission, he will pay an extra $10 to PCGS. I’m not convinced that a lot of sellers will bump up their prices, as a result of the 1% fee.
I am curious as to what justification, if any, PCGS gives for the added fee.
actually, if the coin jumps $1000, its probably already multiple thousand. your example sucks.
N + $10 --> so if it raised by $1000, its probably already a ... $5000? coin. = $50 (not $10) + cost of grade.
Basically, it sucks away the incentive to regrade coins with smaller bumps.
I think this will hurt them in the short term from their total submissions.
@Alltheabove76 said:
Seems unethical and something that hurts buyers who already have to pay multiple times to have a coin graded correctly. One of those most surprising and disappointing moves I have ever seen from PCGS
Aren't they paying multiple times to try and get the coin graded INCORRECTLY.
In this case they are charging you a penalty to acknowledge what they believe to be a mistake they made. And it gives them a financial incentive to both undergrade initially and then overgrade on the second try. The appearance here is wrong in every direction.
I kind of agree. It really should be 1% of the value on all submissions to be consistent (or 0.5% or whatever). That way it is clearly an insurance cost for the guarantee you are getting.
That makes sense. A flat rate for the service level and a small percentage based on value.
I'd be fine with 1% of value - 1% of previous value.
The eventual impact depends on the rate of gradeflation. If there is no gradeflation, this is only a fee for a few coins that get the bump. With gradeflation it eventually affects all slabbed coins.
@divecchia said:
I agree with @Boosibri as I see no added risk on the part of PCGS, so why the premium?
As far as the OP's question of how it will affect me, the answer is in two parts. Directly it will not effect me in the least as I don't sub coins for Reconsideration or any other service. Indirectly is another story. It may affect me in that if a coin was just bumped, the seller may bump up the price of the coin I'm trying to buy, not just to the upgraded level, but a bit more to recoup some or all of the 1% cost for getting the bump.
Donato
If a submitter/seller gets a $1000 value upgrade on a regrade submission, he will pay an extra $10 to PCGS. I’m not convinced that a lot of sellers will bump up their prices, as a result of the 1% fee.
I am curious as to what justification, if any, PCGS gives for the added fee.
actually, if the coin jumps $1000, its probably already multiple thousand. your example sucks.
N + $10 --> so if it raised by $1000, its probably already a ... $5000? coin. = $50 (not $10) + cost of grade.
Basically, it sucks away the incentive to regrade coins with smaller bumps.
I think this will hurt them in the short term from their total submissions.
I’m sorry you think my example sucked. A $1000 value increase, resulting from a grade increase, could occur on all sorts of coins of considerably less than $5000 in value. It could be a $2000 coin, a $500 coin or even a lower value coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@divecchia said:
I agree with @Boosibri as I see no added risk on the part of PCGS, so why the premium?
As far as the OP's question of how it will affect me, the answer is in two parts. Directly it will not effect me in the least as I don't sub coins for Reconsideration or any other service. Indirectly is another story. It may affect me in that if a coin was just bumped, the seller may bump up the price of the coin I'm trying to buy, not just to the upgraded level, but a bit more to recoup some or all of the 1% cost for getting the bump.
Donato
If a submitter/seller gets a $1000 value upgrade on a regrade submission, he will pay an extra $10 to PCGS. I’m not convinced that a lot of sellers will bump up their prices, as a result of the 1% fee.
I am curious as to what justification, if any, PCGS gives for the added fee.
actually, if the coin jumps $1000, its probably already multiple thousand. your example sucks.
N + $10 --> so if it raised by $1000, its probably already a ... $5000? coin. = $50 (not $10) + cost of grade.
Basically, it sucks away the incentive to regrade coins with smaller bumps.
I think this will hurt them in the short term from their total submissions.
I’m sorry you think my example sucked. A $1000 value increase, resulting from a grade increase, could occur on all sorts of coins of considerably less than $5000 in value. It could be a $2000 coin, a $500 coin or even a lower value coin.
--> the part that sucked was the 1% applies to the whole value, not just the increase.
@divecchia said:
I agree with @Boosibri as I see no added risk on the part of PCGS, so why the premium?
As far as the OP's question of how it will affect me, the answer is in two parts. Directly it will not effect me in the least as I don't sub coins for Reconsideration or any other service. Indirectly is another story. It may affect me in that if a coin was just bumped, the seller may bump up the price of the coin I'm trying to buy, not just to the upgraded level, but a bit more to recoup some or all of the 1% cost for getting the bump.
Donato
If a submitter/seller gets a $1000 value upgrade on a regrade submission, he will pay an extra $10 to PCGS. I’m not convinced that a lot of sellers will bump up their prices, as a result of the 1% fee.
I am curious as to what justification, if any, PCGS gives for the added fee.
actually, if the coin jumps $1000, its probably already multiple thousand. your example sucks.
N + $10 --> so if it raised by $1000, its probably already a ... $5000? coin. = $50 (not $10) + cost of grade.
Basically, it sucks away the incentive to regrade coins with smaller bumps.
I think this will hurt them in the short term from their total submissions.
I’m sorry you think my example sucked. A $1000 value increase, resulting from a grade increase, could occur on all sorts of coins of considerably less than $5000 in value. It could be a $2000 coin, a $500 coin or even a lower value coin.
--> the part that sucked was the 1% applies to the whole value, not just the increase.
your numbers are off.
I understand that - it was pointed out to me earlier in the thread. I thought you were talking about something else. Thanks.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Comments
Oh, dear. Cue the CAC-haters....
Maybe it was the new CAC black and blue label that indicates a two point over grade.
LOL. There's a company no one would ever submit coins to. It's like asking for a scarlet letter to be affixed.
Help me out here. I don't submit much. A regrade is when you send a coin in and it comes back in a new holder, whether it upgrades or not, but you're guaranteed it can't downgrade. A reconsideration is like a regrade, except the coin stays in its original holder.
I have been charged for value increments. All submissions either stayed in the same holder if the grade did not change, and were placed in new holders if they got a + or the full upgrade. I let my rep send the coins in for me. It looks like my coins were sent via reconsideration Is this correct?
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Yes, entirely correct. Regrades get cracked unconditionally. Reconsideration coins only if they get a grade bump (numeric or a plus). The latter makes the most sense for older holders that typically command a premium (rattler, green label, etc.).
I think it's an incentive to undergrade.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I don’t know how or if it could be accomplished, but it sure would be nice if submitters weren’t worried about incentives to under-grade or over-grade.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Agree
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I’m not aware of any other industry whether you can pay a company for their opinion and then pay again to see if they’ll change their opinion. Maybe there are some. To anyone outside the hobby it just seems odd........ and perhaps a bit like buying lottery tickets.
Its just wrong, it sets the stage for many many problems for PCGS ethically and legally. Whats even more onerous on the 1% fee...guess who gets to set the value? So they also have incentive to inflate the price. Everything here is about the appearance of impropriety. By putting themselves into a position of being financially rewarded to undergrade initially, overgrade secondly, and make more money by inflating the prices, they are putting themselves at risk of losing credibility in all stages. I hope that enough people point this out to them and I hope that they have a legal team that have looked carefully at this and have demonstrable safeguards to protect the process being driven by making more money instead of just honestly grading coins.
My Early Large Cents
I don't like the optics of it. It looks like you are paying extra for the virtue of having it upgrade regardless of whether that is the intent or not.
Medicine
"Are you sure you won't do that surgery after all doc?"
You're both right. It is an incentive to under grade the first time and max it out/over grade through subsequent submission(s).
Edit: typo
When a coin goes from $2,500 in value to $25,000, I would say all of the grading fees (including for multiple submissions) are baked in.
Agreed, it is a price hike of shorts. Coins worth $10,001-20,000 now cost $150 instead of $65 (lower max value for express tier). Coins worth $2,501-$3,000 now cost $65 instead of $35 (lower max value for regular tier). Auction houses have increased their cut over the years (15% to 17.5% to 20% with 25% "buyer's premiums" probably not far off). The sticker man wants his chunk and has increased prices/added invoice fees. USPS/courier services constantly go up with insurance and postage. With an already declining market, there are fewer and fewer reasons to submit or buy coins. The extra icing on the cupcake isn't helping. Yes it may seem the fee changes are trivial, but collectors and small dealers are being nickel and dimed to death.
The wealthier (read as likely much older collectors) will be less effected, but as they die off they are unlikely to be replaced by millenials who are already resistant to hoarding/collecting type behavior to begin with. This is probably yet another nail in the future coffin of our hobby. I also noticed that this was one of Laura's suggestions (price hike) if I recall correctly as was the CAC registry. I wonder what other goodies from her wish list will come to fruition.
Very interesting points have been raised so far.
Here are some more questions to ponder based on this new change by PCGS....
When a coin upgrades and is then submitted to CAC...and fails to sticker because it is now overgraded, does this help or hurt the market if it continues to happen more and more?
What happens when more and more overgraded coins start flooding the market?
When these overgraded coins are then sold way below price guide values, will the price guides reflect these changes and start to decline? Is this good for the long term value of coins in our collections or will it just make the CAC stickered coins (“properly graded coins”) more valuable or command an even higher premium going forward?
Will the average collector start to wonder if many of the coins without stickers are just overgraded because of the presumed “incentive” by PCGS to award a higher grade on resubmissions?
Coins which fail to sticker at CAC aren’t necessarily over-graded in CAC’s opinion. And while your post focuses on large numbers of (newly graded) over-graded coins, that scenario is purely speculative.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Although not all coins that fail to sticker are overgraded, some are. I have spoken to JA on several occasions when reviewing my coins and was told that some were in fact overgraded. Granted, there were not many, at least in my submissions, but there were some.
And yes, my scenario was speculative, but with what has been posted in this thread so far, it makes me wonder if more and more people are beginning to think this same way.
A lot of coins are overgraded now. The "average collector" is likely not even aware of the price structure of PCGS grading categories. In other words, adding a 1% charge to Regrades is probably not a watershed event in the grand scheme of existing coin market trends. Just my humble opinion.
I agree, but many market participants treat those coins as over graded or worse. So even if properly graded, an increase in maxed out coins could affect the market.
Sports have instant replay.
I don't see the point in assuming any more overgraded coins than now.
I would point out the other "incentive" you are missing: PCGS provides a FINANCIAL GUARANTEE. That is an incentive to get it right not wrong.
And, even if what you say is true, the Market is self-correcting. Either people will stop trusting PCGS grades OR price guides will reflect the new standards. Either way, you get to vote with your dollars as time goes on.
I'd also repeat what I said earlier: PAYING A PERCENTAGE FOR EXPERTIZATION HAS BEEN STANDARD IN PHILATELY for longer than PCGS has existed. It has not created any of the suspicions you currently have. There is, a slight difference, in that most expertization does not include a numerical grade.
While it's not happening now, They did go through about 3 years of over grading or grading coins problem free that should not have with Mid Grade Barber Halves. Almost every thing you see in auctions these days is cleaned over graded crap in problem free holders. There are a few exceptions but not many.
I don't understand this stuff. It seems to me that it's all about the money.
There is a saying which you probably have heard that money begets money. Sure seems that way to me. Like I said ... I don't understand this stuff.
I am doing a regrade submission online. They have an estimated guarantee premium fee and the information does not state anything about an upgrade. It looks like this fee applies to all regrades regardless if they end up being nothing more than a re-holder.
Perhaps I am reading this incorrectly, but this is what is stated.
The Guarantee Premium is equal to 1% of the value of the coin in its final grade. The value of the coin is determined as the higher of the Declared Value or the PCGS Price Guide value for that grade. The minimum amount for the Guarantee Premium is $5. PCGS reserves the right to make the final determination of the coin’s value.
Below, I have copied what I found for regrades and it states that coins that upgrade will be charged a “Guarantee Premium”. The implication is that coins which don’t upgrade won’t be charged that premium.
REGRADE: For a coin previously graded by PCGS you feel might be worthy of a higher grade, submit coin in the holder. The coin will be removed from the PCGS holder and regraded. Grading fees will apply whether the coin upgrades or not. Coins that do upgrade will also be charged a Guarantee Premium based on the value of the coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
What does the guarantee really mean the first time a grading fee is paid to slab a raw coin, aside from authenticity?
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
actually, if the coin jumps $1000, its probably already multiple thousand. your example sucks.
N + $10 --> so if it raised by $1000, its probably already a ... $5000? coin. = $50 (not $10) + cost of grade.
Basically, it sucks away the incentive to regrade coins with smaller bumps.
I think this will hurt them in the short term from their total submissions.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
I'd be fine with 1% of value - 1% of previous value.
Insurance on insurance on insurance.
It's just a money grab.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
The eventual impact depends on the rate of gradeflation. If there is no gradeflation, this is only a fee for a few coins that get the bump. With gradeflation it eventually affects all slabbed coins.
I’m sorry you think my example sucked. A $1000 value increase, resulting from a grade increase, could occur on all sorts of coins of considerably less than $5000 in value. It could be a $2000 coin, a $500 coin or even a lower value coin.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
--> the part that sucked was the 1% applies to the whole value, not just the increase.
your numbers are off.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
I understand that - it was pointed out to me earlier in the thread. I thought you were talking about something else. Thanks.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.