Home U.S. Coin Forum

PCGS Grading Tiers & Inflation

ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

Over the years inflation has impacted everything including grading fees, but the grading tiers (as I can recall) have remained the same. Is it time for PCGS to increase the Modern and Modern Value tier from under $300 to something higher? And the Regular and Modern tiers from $2500 to something higher? We are at the point where a proof gold buffalo is too valuable for this tier. Even the Express tier limit at $10k is kind of low nowadays.

Thoughts?

«1

Comments

  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,323 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Don't hold your breath waiting for something like this to happen.

    All glory is fleeting.
  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If I recall correctly the tier levels did change but they went down. I believe it was 3000 and 20,000 (now 2500 and 10,000) but would need to check that. Not sure if others changed.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=_KWVk0XeB9o - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Piece Of My Heart
    .
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=D0FPxuQv2ns - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Maybe I'm Amazed

    RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lilolme said:
    If I recall correctly the tier levels did change but they went down. I believe it was 3000 and 20,000 (now 2500 and 10,000) but would need to check that. Not sure if others changed.

    Sometimes companies listen if the customers clamor for something. Sometimes. It doesn't hurt to raise the issue.

  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Understand and maybe if they did go down (as I recall) then that might strengthen the request.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=_KWVk0XeB9o - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Piece Of My Heart
    .
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=D0FPxuQv2ns - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Maybe I'm Amazed

    RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,812 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    Over the years inflation has impacted everything including grading fees, but the grading tiers (as I can recall) have remained the same. Is it time for PCGS to increase the Modern and Modern Value tier from under $300 to something higher? And the Regular and Modern tiers from $2500 to something higher? We are at the point where a proof gold buffalo is too valuable for this tier. Even the Express tier limit at $10k is kind of low nowadays.

    Thoughts?

    I agree, the tiers should increase when the grading fees increase. I was not happy when they decreased the regular limit to $2,500.

  • stawickstawick Posts: 469 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 10, 2022 3:44PM

    I agree.
    I submit primarily Modern and Modern Value. I wish the tiers were closer to $5000 and $500 respectively.
    I used to be able to grade the 1 oz AGE (on occasion) and Buffalo at the Modern level. Sometimes gotta spring all the way to Express - when I dont really need the faster level, and spring for the $65. Too much dollah!!

    Case in point, the Buffalo is gonna run ~$2750+ this year (on Thur 5/12) ... so, Express??? BLAH. :#

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It would be a bad decision from PCGS's point of view, just think about how much more revenue they pull in by having the coins go up in grading tier and therefore grading fees.

    Coin Photographer.

  • amwldcoinamwldcoin Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So you want to pay more to submit your coins??? Please don't get the corporate wheels a turning!

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @FlyingAl said:
    It would be a bad decision from PCGS's point of view, just think about how much more revenue they pull in by having the coins go up in grading tier and therefore grading fees.

    But how much do they miss out on because people don't want to pay the higher fees and go to a cheaper TPG or just keep raw?

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @FlyingAl said:
    It would be a bad decision from PCGS's point of view, just think about how much more revenue they pull in by having the coins go up in grading tier and therefore grading fees.

    But how much do they miss out on because people don't want to pay the higher fees and go to a cheaper TPG or just keep raw?

    Based on their decision to not change it, I would guess less than they are making with the tiers the way they are.

    Coin Photographer.

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,086 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @FlyingAl said:
    It would be a bad decision from PCGS's point of view, just think about how much more revenue they pull in by having the coins go up in grading tier and therefore grading fees.

    But how much do they miss out on because people don't want to pay the higher fees and go to a cheaper TPG or just keep raw?

    Good point. How does the price fee schedule of NGC grading compare to that of PCGS?

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • jt88jt88 Posts: 2,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think it might happen along with big fee increase.

  • BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BryceM said:
    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

    They could potentially get more submissions. When the price escalates, the calculation of what is worth sending changes.

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,086 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BryceM said:
    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

    Perhaps to stay competitive with NGC. It's not like they have a monopoly.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 11, 2022 12:11PM

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @BryceM said:
    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

    They could potentially get more submissions. When the price escalates, the calculation of what is worth sending changes.

    Possibly true. I'm pretty sure they have a good feel for their pricing, submission volumes, and profit margins. It's unclear to me that inflation alone would push them out of their sweet spot.

    @PerryHall said:

    @BryceM said:
    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

    Perhaps to stay competitive with NGC. It's not like they have a monopoly.

    I suppose, but the effect of competition on pricing goes well beyond the influence of inflation. Mostly inflation is an independent factor theoretically affecting all TPGs equally.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    It may be cost prohibitive to expand. I don't know. But it is worth considering the possibility.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    That's a different topic altogether. PCGS should staff at appropriate levels to handle demand.
    If grading 500k coins/year is profitable then grading 600k coins a year will be more profitable. (No clue if those numbers are realistic).

    @BryceM said:
    What’s the incentive for them to do this?

    a) It's the fair/right thing to do. If $300 coins from 2010 are on average worth $500 now, then it stands to reason that the tier should still be valid with a $500 limit.
    b) To stay competitive and not drive customers to the competition
    c) To maintain/increase market share which IMO leads to increased demand

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

    Why does PCGS staffing and capacity have to remain the same?

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

    Why does PCGS staffing and capacity have to remain the same?

    Exactly this. You may not want to expand for what you view as a temporary spike, but you would for a permanent shift.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

    Why does PCGS staffing and capacity have to remain the same?

    It doesn't. I was responding to the suggestion that the tier valuations be revised. Nothing was said about hiring more people.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

    Why does PCGS staffing and capacity have to remain the same?

    It doesn't. I was responding to the suggestion that the tier valuations be revised. Nothing was said about hiring more people.

    Then why did you ask about increased wait times? The unstated assumption is the PCGS management is competent and will staff appropriately to maintain acceptable wait times. You'd only be concerned about increased wait times if you felt PCGS would not respond to changes in demand levels appropriately.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    Thoughts?

    People keep posting threads about how long it's taking to get coins graded. With that in mind, why would PCGS think it was necessary to do anything to increase submissions?

    They may want to expand to make more money. They certainly weren't bought because the investors want to make less money.

    Well, sure. But if your customers are already complaining about wait times, does it make sense to do something that would likely increase them? Adding to a backlog doesn't generate income.

    Why does PCGS staffing and capacity have to remain the same?

    It doesn't. I was responding to the suggestion that the tier valuations be revised. Nothing was said about hiring more people.

    I think it would have to be part of a strategy change. There is no driving force to ONLY change the tiers, as you suggest.

    Oddly, the original suggestion did seem to be to simply increase the tier limits due to inflation. At the very least, that would logically come with an increase in cost, due to the same inflation.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    Then why did you ask about increased wait times?

    Because I was addressing the suggestion that tier valuations be revised. Nothing was said about hiring more people.

    @ProofCollection said:
    The unstated assumption is the PCGS management is competent and will staff appropriately to maintain acceptable wait times.

    Reading the threads here, the natives are already getting restless due to extended wait times.

    @ProofCollection said:
    You'd only be concerned about increased wait times if you felt PCGS would not respond to changes in demand levels appropriately.

    See above.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I think it would have to be part of a strategy change. There is no driving force to ONLY change the tiers, as you suggest.

    It's not my suggestion, it's a suggestion from the first post. I just responded to it.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Oddly, the original suggestion did seem to be to simply increase the tier limits due to inflation. At the very least, that would logically come with an increase in cost, due to the same inflation.

    The counter to that is that they have increased the fee several times without increasing the tier (and even reducing the tier) so there is no direct correlation. If they can grade a $300 coin for X, they should also be able to grade a $500 coin for the same fee. Really the only thing that changes is perhaps a little bit more liability/insurance for PCGS Guarantee coverage (which incidentally covers that $300 coin even if it eventually doubles or triples or more in value.).

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    The unstated assumption is the PCGS management is competent...

    If they're competent, they've probably already thought out the pricing of their product and considered the implications of making changes, don't you think?

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    The unstated assumption is the PCGS management is competent...

    If they're competent, they've probably already thought out the pricing of their product and considered the implications of making changes, don't you think?

    I do.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @ProofCollection said:
    The unstated assumption is the PCGS management is competent...

    If they're competent, they've probably already thought out the pricing of their product and considered the implications of making changes, don't you think?

    I don't. I think they are operationally competent (eg, wait times, capacity), but sometimes business strategy tweaks (eg, adjusting tiers) need to be inspired by customers.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    I don't. I think they are operationally competent (eg, wait times, capacity)

    The posters here who have complained about wait times might disagree...

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 12, 2022 3:43PM

    I guess a prime example is a 2022 Proof Gold Buffalo.
    US Mint price $2790.
    If I had my way it would be eligible for "Modern" tier and cost $53 to grade with first strike.
    But now, the only choice is Express which not only requires more urgency from PCGS, boosts grading price to $83 with first strike.

    Charging $83 to grade a common modern issue is excessive, especially when you consider the high likelihood of getting a 69 (or lower) in which case the submitter is likely to lose money.

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

  • GoldbullyGoldbully Posts: 17,234 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

    It's one troy ounce of gold, so the submitter surely can afford the extra bucks to get a certified graded coin.

    It's that simple.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 12, 2022 4:53PM

    @Goldbully said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

    It's one troy ounce of gold, so the submitter surely can afford the extra bucks to get a certified graded coin.

    It's that simple.

    So prices should be set based on how much we can afford to pay? I'm sure there are members here who can easily afford to pay thousands to grade a coin. :/

    In this example, for $83 all we're getting is a grading opinion (requiring no special or advanced grading knowledge/skill), a label, a piece of plastic, and a guarantee which realistically will never be claimed.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 13, 2022 2:41AM

    @ProofCollection said:

    @Goldbully said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

    It's one troy ounce of gold, so the submitter surely can afford the extra bucks to get a certified graded coin.

    It's that simple.

    So prices should be set based on how much we can afford to pay? I'm sure there are members here who can easily afford to pay thousands to grade a coin. :/

    In this example, for $83 all we're getting is a grading opinion (requiring no special or advanced grading knowledge/skill), a label, a piece of plastic, and a guarantee which realistically will never be claimed.

    What you're getting is the faster turnaround for the $30 difference... whether you want it or not, of course.

    I would point out that PSA grading is $100 minimum cost, making your $83 a bargain.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,410 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    I guess a prime example is a 2022 Proof Gold Buffalo.
    US Mint price $2790.
    If I had my way it would be eligible for "Modern" tier and cost $53 to grade with first strike.
    But now, the only choice is Express which not only requires more urgency from PCGS, boosts grading price to $83 with first strike.

    Charging $83 to grade a common modern issue is excessive, especially when you consider the high likelihood of getting a 69 (or lower) in which case the submitter is likely to lose money.

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

    Do you think fees should be based, in part, upon whether the submitter will lose (or make) money?

    It’s not “necessary” to charge an extra $30 for this coin. But you could say the same about various fees charged for many or most other coins, as well. Even though submitters don’t like the results, grading companies are in business to make money and increase profits.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,505 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If you value the coin at the minimum wholesale value if you were unlucky in grading, and at a lower tier are they going to care if the coin ends up grading at a higher level?

  • stawickstawick Posts: 469 ✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @Goldbully said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    It's unclear why it's necessary to charge an extra $30 for this coin.

    It's one troy ounce of gold, so the submitter surely can afford the extra bucks to get a certified graded coin.

    It's that simple.

    So prices should be set based on how much we can afford to pay? I'm sure there are members here who can easily afford to pay thousands to grade a coin. :/

    In this example, for $83 all we're getting is a grading opinion (requiring no special or advanced grading knowledge/skill), a label, a piece of plastic, and a guarantee which realistically will never be claimed.

    What you're getting is the faster turnaround for the $30 difference... whether you want it or not, of course.

    I would prefer to not have that choice made for me. Especially with current turnaround times, I'd rather pocket the $30 and wait. Plus ... I'm a cheep bastyd! :D

    I've also had recent orders that in past years coulda been combined in 1 submission that I had to break up. The gold / silver eagles have had limited mintage due to covid or whatever circumstances, or just set low by the mint.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stawick said:

    I would prefer to not have that choice made for me. Especially with current turnaround times, I'd rather pocket the $30 and wait. Plus ... I'm a cheep bastyd! :D

    If you were really cheap, you could pocket a lot more than $30 by enjoying your coins raw, you know. :)

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    Do you think fees should be based, in part, upon whether the submitter will lose (or make) money?

    No, but it's something the TPGs need to understand that every submitter is considering on modern widgets.
    NGC will grade the same Buffalo for $19 + $12 Early/First Release with a turnaround of 28 days if I read their site correctly. How can NGC do it so much cheaper? FWIW, ANACS is $29 and I don't think they do First Strike equivalent.

    @stawick said:
    I would prefer to not have that choice made for me. Especially with current turnaround times, I'd rather pocket the $30 and wait. Plus ... I'm a cheep bastyd! :D

    Exactly. I understand that for premium tier coins they automatically get and deserve the express service levels, but the 2022 Gold Buffalo is a widget, and those who don't mind waiting shouldn't be forced into paying more.

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I would point out that PSA grading is $100 minimum cost, making your $83 a bargain.

    I would argue PSA grading requires special skills, knowledge, and talent. Grading a widget such as the 2022 Gold Buffalo is entry-level grader material, and the fee should reflect this.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @MFeld said:

    Do you think fees should be based, in part, upon whether the submitter will lose (or make) money?

    No, but it's something the TPGs need to understand that every submitter is considering on modern widgets.
    NGC will grade the same Buffalo for $19 + $12 Early/First Release with a turnaround of 28 days if I read their site correctly. How can NGC do it so much cheaper? FWIW, ANACS is $29 and I don't think they do First Strike equivalent.

    @stawick said:
    I would prefer to not have that choice made for me. Especially with current turnaround times, I'd rather pocket the $30 and wait. Plus ... I'm a cheep bastyd! :D

    Exactly. I understand that for premium tier coins they automatically get and deserve the express service levels, but the 2022 Gold Buffalo is a widget, and those who don't mind waiting shouldn't be forced into paying more.

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I would point out that PSA grading is $100 minimum cost, making your $83 a bargain.

    I would argue PSA grading requires special skills, knowledge, and talent. Grading a widget such as the 2022 Gold Buffalo is entry-level grader material, and the fee should reflect this.

    Now you're just being silly. Gold Buffalos don't have their own tier much less their own dedicated graders

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now you're just being silly. Gold Buffalos don't have their own tier much less their own dedicated graders

    That's not at all what I said.

  • stawickstawick Posts: 469 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 13, 2022 9:35AM

    @MasonG said:

    @stawick said:

    I would prefer to not have that choice made for me. Especially with current turnaround times, I'd rather pocket the $30 and wait. Plus ... I'm a cheep bastyd! :D

    If you were really cheap, you could pocket a lot more than $30 by enjoying your coins raw, you know. :)

    Theres a fine line between cheap and chintzy. :D

    And on a serious note, I realize there is NO incentive for PCGS to change their pricing. Just some wishful thinking on my part.

    Also (not directed at this quote), I've found the Proof Buffalos to straddle the tier line in recent years. In the past I could include them with my other annual gold proofs (when I typically buy the fractionals, like 1/4 oz).

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now you're just being silly. Gold Buffalos don't have their own tier much less their own dedicated graders

    That's not at all what I said.

    It's kind of what you implied when you contrasted PSA fees (which could be for a brand new card, no special knowledge required) with gold Buffalo fees.

    Ultimately, it's supply and demand with cost as the floor at such the service ceases to exist.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now you're just being silly. Gold Buffalos don't have their own tier much less their own dedicated graders

    That's not at all what I said.

    It's kind of what you implied when you contrasted PSA fees (which could be for a brand new card, no special knowledge required) with gold Buffalo fees.

    Ultimately, it's supply and demand with cost as the floor at such the service ceases to exist.

    OK, I'm not that familiar with PSA, I didn't know that fee applied to brand new trading cards, I don't know that market at all. However, I do recognize that it's vastly different in that while it is practical to collect and certify one of every mint issued product for a given year, doing the same for a card for every baseball and football player would be arduous and cost prohibitive even at much lower fees.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 33,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now you're just being silly. Gold Buffalos don't have their own tier much less their own dedicated graders

    That's not at all what I said.

    It's kind of what you implied when you contrasted PSA fees (which could be for a brand new card, no special knowledge required) with gold Buffalo fees.

    Ultimately, it's supply and demand with cost as the floor at such the service ceases to exist.

    OK, I'm not that familiar with PSA, I didn't know that fee applied to brand new trading cards, I don't know that market at all. However, I do recognize that it's vastly different in that while it is practical to collect and certify one of every mint issued product for a given year, doing the same for a card for every baseball and football player would be arduous and cost prohibitive even at much lower fees.

    Yeah, the cards are crazy. There's a 9 month backlog even at $100 each

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stawick said:
    Also (not directed at this quote), I've found the Proof Buffalos to straddle the tier line in recent years. In the past I could include them with my other annual gold proofs (when I typically buy the fractionals, like 1/4 oz).

    It doesn't matter where you draw the tier line, there will be coins that straddle it. Is there anything special about proof buffalos that makes it important that they not be affected by this?

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @stawick said:
    Also (not directed at this quote), I've found the Proof Buffalos to straddle the tier line in recent years. In the past I could include them with my other annual gold proofs (when I typically buy the fractionals, like 1/4 oz).

    It doesn't matter where you draw the tier line, there will be coins that straddle it. Is there anything special about proof buffalos that makes it important that they not be affected by this?

    True, but competitors have higher limits and PCGS should, IMO, as a goal, try to include or accommodate all US Mint issues with a non-express, non-premium tier. Nothing special about the buffaloes, the same issue applies to the 1oz Palladium eagles and 1oz Gold Eagles.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    and PCGS should, IMO, as a goal, try to include or accommodate all US Mint issues with a non-express, non-premium tier.

    If they're doing something differently than you would like, you might consider that they are acting on information unavailable to you. It's also possible that their goals do not match yours.

    Just a thought...

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file