Good call by @wooglout! I agree this is a move to unify grading across multiple collectibles like coins, cards, comics, video games, etc.
While there is some short-term pain for the coin market, overall, I think it will be good for collectibles as it will make it easier for collectors to collect across multiple areas. It will also make it easier for grading companies to sync their grading policies across areas they cover.
I do think the major TPGs that grade cards have been thinking about this for a while, and the pros are finally outweighing the cons.
For unification, it's either this or converting everything else to a 70 scale
@ianrussell said:
I know we've all thought about a 100 point scale for a while, and it appears NGC's 10 point scale is really a disguised 100 point scale.
I am interested if there's been any successful conversion of a grading scale of anything in the past few decades for other collectibles or anything else?
Ian
Not that I'm aware of. The other markets automatically chose 10 or 100 point grading systems when they started because it is more understandable. Ask any teacher (my day job) what confusion occurs if they grade a quiz or exam on anything but a 10 or 100 point system.
I don't think it's anything to do with helping new collectors. It's a way to reinvent your service to make it fresh and get more revenue.
Keep in mind that the other services run by NGC or PCGS already use 10 point systems. It is definitely better for new collectors. Would NGC do it uf it didn't enhance revenue? No. And you know what? NGC only started using the Sheldon scale for the same reason.
@Catbert said:
I think it’s a smart move that focuses on moderns and those who buy from the telemarketers. Explaining the Sheldon scale to the bullion collector or casual modern buyer probably confuses more than helps.
People resist change, yet I think the target audience will readily accept.
Now about those ugly white prongs…….
I suppose this all is a commentary on the state of the world. Instead of introducing new collectors to a scale that has served the hobby well, let’s establish a new system the spoiled little darlings can “identify” with. Sports cards and coins have nothing in common.
Sports cards, stamps and coins share collector bases. There are plenty of people on this very forum that dabble in more than one. Anything that eases new collectors into the hobby is good for the hobby, right?
I was in one of the PCGS luncheons years ago when David Hall brought up the 100 point scale. It was not well received by the group, and I never heard PCGS mention it again.
This would work if NGC showed the grade using their 10-point scale in bold numbers with the equivalent Sheldon grade just below it in smaller letters and numbers. For example, show "9.5" with "MS65" just below it in smaller case. In a few years after the 10-point scale is firmly established, the equivalent Sheldon scale grade could be eliminated.
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
@Zoins said:
Good call by @wooglout! I agree this is a move to unify grading across multiple collectibles like coins, cards, comics, video games, etc.
While there is some short-term pain for the coin market, overall, I think it will be good for collectibles as it will make it easier for collectors to collect across multiple areas. It will also make it easier for grading companies to sync their grading policies across areas they cover.
I do think the major TPGs that grade cards have been thinking about this for a while, and the pros are finally outweighing the cons.
For unification, it's either this or converting everything else to a 70 scale
Including Ancients currently on a 5 point scale:
But it took me YEARS to figure out the 5 point scale.
And when I started buying comics, I missed a lot of deals because I thought that 10 isn't a collectible grade.
Well now 🤨
Gee wiz. Cracker Jack offer. “ you could find a “special coin” worth READY…..a gazillion bucks.
This changes my entire buying worries. Just let them send me what they think I want. Amazing , no longer have to think about which coins are for me. Thanks, I really could never imagine how I survived thinking I could decide on my own what to collect.
This is sounding better than Chompers “evidence bags”.
Thanks again 🤨🙀🦫😸😻
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
The times they are a-changing.... Should be interesting to see which way the new CAC group moves.... The new CAC group was an industry impact event.... Now the NGC grading change...
Fasten your seat belts people.... We are witnessing a major wave in the TPG realm.... More to come. Cheers, RickO
@JeffersonFrog said:
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
Saw this on instagram last night thought hmm interesting and kept scrolling. Not sure why so many get riled up over things in this hobby it's supposed to be something you enjoy not stress over every change.
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back and a 10 or 100 point system, where everyone else understands these numbers, is needed and opens the door to generating alot more interest in numismatic coins. NGC is moving the future to now, kudos go to this innovative TPG.
@spacehayduke said:
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back and a 10 or 100 point system, where everyone else understands these numbers, is needed and opens the door to generating alot more interest in numismatic coins. NGC is moving the future to now, kudos go to this innovative TPG.
I clicked agree. However I think this deserves a more vocal AGREE!
My only fear is that some poor newbie is going to show up at his local coin club to proudly show them his set of Perfect 10 ASE's only to have the curmudgeons tell them they are a "worthless gimmick" and graded incorrectly.
@spacehayduke said:
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back and a 10 or 100 point system, where everyone else understands these numbers, is needed and opens the door to generating alot more interest in numismatic coins. NGC is moving the future to now, kudos go to this innovative TPG.
I clicked agree. However I think this deserves a more vocal AGREE!
My only fear is that some poor newbie is going to show up at his local coin club to proudly show them his set of Perfect 10 ASE's only to have the curmudgeons tell them they are a "worthless gimmick" and graded incorrectly.
Change is not inherently good or bad. The only argument I’ve heard so far is that 0-10 is easier to understand for prospective collectors. On the contrary, introducing more grades and hair splitting will just as likely make mastering grading even more difficult. It will also confuse existing collectors and eventually require them to spend money on regrading for resale which is money that could be spent on acquisitions.
@spacehayduke said:
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back ...
Has it, though? Are there legions of people who are avoiding numismatics because of the 70-point scale? It's sort of like saying people are avoiding learning how to play tennis because of the scoring system.
It is for sure... innovation. Will it succeed.... beats me. It is geared towards the younger groups who are already familiar with the type of grading numbers in other fields.
Times change. Perhaps there are many younger potential collectors.. who don't understand the 70 point grading system, and thus avoid getting involved. If they are more comfortable with the 10 point (actually a 100 point system as previously pointed out), then the system might fill a demand, and bring more into the hobby.
@spacehayduke said: Love it. Brilliant move and NGC continues to impress me in all ways a grading company should. Innovative and a way to engage one facet of the market in a positive way. It is nice to see change and adaptation in an established company like NGC that is moving forward and up. Thumbs up!
to quote you chastising someone else: I'd hold off that calling it that until you see whether it succeeds and whether other TPG's in that part of the market follow suit or also come up with something new to capture more market share there
@J2035 said:
The only argument I’ve heard so far is that 0-10 is easier to understand for prospective collectors. On the contrary, introducing more grades and hair splitting will just as likely make mastering grading even more difficult. It will also confuse existing collectors...
It won't be any more "hair splitting" than breaking down grades into "A", "B" and "C" coins within a numerical grade and confusing collectors by not noting that anywhere.
@J2035 said:
and eventually require them to spend money on regrading for resale which is money that could be spent on acquisitions.
Nobody is required to spend money getting their coins regraded. It's entirely voluntary.
This is incredibly dumb. Seems to be a response to challenge CAC for the precious grading $$$.
Certainly looks like the next few years will be interesting in terms of grading.
Before all these gimmicks, how about we get normal turnaround times??? LOL
@JeffersonFrog said:
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
My only surprise is that you're surprised. Lol
Sounds a lot like the objections when CAC was getting started.
There is nothing wrong with the 70-point scale with respect to collector engagement. I don't fault NGC here at all, this is an interesting move that will harmonize the scales with other collectibles, it will provide a new revenue stream for resubmissions, and still maps to the 70-point scale.
@JeffersonFrog said:
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
My only surprise is that you're surprised. Lol
Sounds a lot like the objections when CAC was getting started.
@JeffersonFrog said:
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
Computer or AI grading solves two problems - consistency and cost. More consistent grading and cheaper grading fees would benefit collectors.
It’s not apparent to me how a revised 1-10 grading scale benefits collectors. It’s expensive and disruptive with an unclear value proposition.
@jerseycat101 said:
There is nothing wrong with the 70-point scale with respect to collector engagement. I don't fault NGC here at all, this is an interesting move that will harmonize the scales with other collectibles, it will provide a new revenue stream for resubmissions, and still maps to the 70-point scale.
Actually, if you read the press release, you can't currently submit to that tier. It is initially only for commercial submitters.
@J2035 said:
The only argument I’ve heard so far is that 0-10 is easier to understand for prospective collectors. On the contrary, introducing more grades and hair splitting will just as likely make mastering grading even more difficult. It will also confuse existing collectors...
It won't be any more "hair splitting" than breaking down grades into "A", "B" and "C" coins within a numerical grade and confusing collectors by not noting that anywhere.
@J2035 said:
and eventually require them to spend money on regrading for resale which is money that could be spent on acquisitions.
Nobody is required to spend money getting their coins regraded. It's entirely voluntary.
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material. If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified. The difference here is that a change to a 1-10 scale doesn’t benefit owners of existing coins in the same way that the advent of TPGs and CAC did.
@spacehayduke said:
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back and a 10 or 100 point system, where everyone else understands these numbers, is needed and opens the door to generating alot more interest in numismatic coins. NGC is moving the future to now, kudos go to this innovative TPG.
I clicked agree. However I think this deserves a more vocal AGREE!
My only fear is that some poor newbie is going to show up at his local coin club to proudly show them his set of Perfect 10 ASE's only to have the curmudgeons tell them they are a "worthless gimmick" and graded incorrectly.
Change is not inherently good or bad. The only argument I’ve heard so far is that 0-10 is easier to understand for prospective collectors. On the contrary, introducing more grades and hair splitting will just as likely make mastering grading even more difficult.
It's actually fewer grades than we have now. Far fewer if you also consider pluses as part of the 70-point scale. As a 100-point scale, it leaves room for more grades than the 70-point scale but doesn't use them.
The quality of the coin should speak volumes over plastic and stickers. The look of the coin is constant... and it is only the impressions of that coin that can change based on external factors such as plastic and what has evolved with an obsessive need of confirmation of a subjective opinion. Continue to look for what matters and leave the rest for a Seinfeld episode and watch to see if it passes the straight face test.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material.
If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified.
Auction companies will accept consignments of raw coins. Plenty of coins are bought and sold raw. Nobody has to have their coins graded.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material.
If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified.
Auction companies will accept consignments of raw coins. Plenty of coins are bought and sold raw. Nobody has to have their coins graded.
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
I haven’t seen any raw coins auctioned in recent years by GC, HA, Stacks or Legend outside of certain tokens, medals and exonumia.
@J2035 said:
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
You posted this earlier:
"CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material."
@J2035 said:
I haven’t seen any raw coins auctioned in recent years by GC, HA, Stacks or Legend outside of certain tokens, medals and exonumia.
I didn't say they auctioned them, I said they'd accept raw coin consignments. Also, auctions are not the only way to sell coins.
How does changing the grading scale equate to the service from CAC - you’re making a false equivalency. If I own a PQ MS65 coin, getting a green bean increases its value. If I have to re-slab to a 9.5, that adds no value, it’s merely extra cost to maintain liquidity and current value. Collectors are the ones who will pay for the transition to a new grading scale. Is the cost worth the benefit to the collecting community? What is the benefit exactly?
The argument was never about auction companies accepting raw coins. It’s about the fact that auction buyers and sellers have to pay TPG costs which are passed along either explicitly or implicitly by the auction houses. Regrading to a new scale increases costs but will be necessary if that becomes the new standard.
Edited to add that CAC also provides a second set of eyes and further facilitates sight unseen transactions among other benefits.
I find this interesting, and perhaps good to have a scale that matches other collectibles. As far as the “numbers” go, to me it’s like imperial vs. metric, same measurement just expressed differently.
@J2035 said:
How does changing the grading scale equate to the service from CAC - you’re making a false equivalency.
No, I'm not. NGC/PCGS grade MS65, CAC refines (regrades) to MS65A, MS65B or MS65C.
@J2035 said:
If I own a PQ MS65 coin, getting a green bean increases its value. If I have to re-slab to a 9.5, that adds no value, it’s merely extra cost to maintain liquidity and current value.
You seem to be insisting on a guarantee of liquidity/value. Perhaps your expectations are unreasonable?
@J2035 said:
Collectors are the ones who will pay for the transition to a new grading scale. Is the cost worth the benefit to the collecting community? What is the benefit exactly?
People won't submit their coins unless they perceive a benefit. What that might be depends on each individual, I wouldn't presume to know what everybody else is thinking.
@J2035 said:
The argument was never about auction companies accepting raw coins. It’s about the fact that auction buyers and sellers have to pay TPG costs which are passed along either explicitly or implicitly by the auction houses. Regrading to a new scale increases costs but will be necessary if that becomes the new standard.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material.
If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified.
Auction companies will accept consignments of raw coins. Plenty of coins are bought and sold raw. Nobody has to have their coins graded.
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
I haven’t seen any raw coins auctioned in recent years by GC, HA, Stacks or Legend outside of certain tokens, medals and exonumia.
For what it is worth, HA and Stacks continue to auction raw coins. Most are in the categories you mention as well as in the non-U.S. coin category. However they do continue to auction raw coins.
Shouldn't you also be mad at the auction companies for forcing you to get your material certified in the first place?
@goodmoney4badmoney said:
I find this interesting, and perhaps good to have a scale that matches other collectibles. As far as the “numbers” go, to me it’s like imperial vs. metric, same measurement just expressed differently.
Remember when Nadia Comanici thrilled the world with the first Perfect 10 in gymnastics. Wouldn't that have sounded silly if she scored a perfect 70?
Remember when Bo Derek starred in the movie 10 about an incredibly beautiful woman. I don't think the movie 70 starring Betty White was about the same thing.
You're right, it is just the same measurement expressed differently but, to your other point, I think it will resonate much better with the general collecting public who are used to a 10 or 100 point definition of perfection.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material.
If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified.
Auction companies will accept consignments of raw coins. Plenty of coins are bought and sold raw. Nobody has to have their coins graded.
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
I haven’t seen any raw coins auctioned in recent years by GC, HA, Stacks or Legend outside of certain tokens, medals and exonumia.
For what it is worth, HA and Stacks continue to auction raw coins. Most are in the categories you mention as well as in the non-U.S. coin category. However they do continue to auction raw coins.
Shouldn't you also be mad at the auction companies for forcing you to get your material certified in the first place?
No - because certification adds value and liquidity. Switching from a 70pt scale to 100pt scale does not add value.
I don't like the present system, for three principal reasons: (i) the word-names for most of the grades are not accurate (no, a "VG" coin is not "very good"; it's very worn), (ii) we only use about 30 of the 71 grades, which is silly, and (iii) it's not linear (my observation is that there is a large jump in quality and price when going from 35 to 40 and 45 to 50).
I understand that grading coins is a combination of objective and subjective factors; it's not simple at all. But the existence of CAC illustrates that more granularity is needed in the grading system. A 100-point system (without word/letter labels) would be great, although I would think that 40 or 50 points for teh entire scale would work well.
This is like recasting the lead actor of your favorite show after it has been on for fourteen seasons. As confusing as it is when compared to the 10-point or 100-point scale, the Sheldon scale benefits from generations of establishment. It has a precursor in the time it was nurtured by the hobby, evolving out of the basic common lingo of Good, Fine, and Uncirculated. How many millions of coins have been graded with those terms and then under the Sheldon scale? Other collectibles do not share the long history that coin collecting has and therein lies the resistance to changing over. Why break that tradition now?
@Omegaraptor said:
Wonder when 10 point EAC grading will happen.
When there are ice skates in Hell!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in".
Good call by @wooglout! I agree this is a move to unify grading across multiple collectibles like coins, cards, comics, video games, etc.
While there is some short-term pain for the coin market, overall, I think it will be good for collectibles as it will make it easier for collectors to collect across multiple areas. It will also make it easier for grading companies to sync their grading policies across areas they cover.
I do think the major TPGs that grade cards have been thinking about this for a while, and the pros are finally outweighing the cons.
For unification, it's either this or converting everything else to a 70 scale
Including Ancients currently on a 5 point scale:
Ref: https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/8938/paramount-collection-ancient-preview/
Not that I'm aware of. The other markets automatically chose 10 or 100 point grading systems when they started because it is more understandable. Ask any teacher (my day job) what confusion occurs if they grade a quiz or exam on anything but a 10 or 100 point system.
Keep in mind that the other services run by NGC or PCGS already use 10 point systems. It is definitely better for new collectors. Would NGC do it uf it didn't enhance revenue? No. And you know what? NGC only started using the Sheldon scale for the same reason.
Sports cards, stamps and coins share collector bases. There are plenty of people on this very forum that dabble in more than one. Anything that eases new collectors into the hobby is good for the hobby, right?
I was in one of the PCGS luncheons years ago when David Hall brought up the 100 point scale. It was not well received by the group, and I never heard PCGS mention it again.
This would work if NGC showed the grade using their 10-point scale in bold numbers with the equivalent Sheldon grade just below it in smaller letters and numbers. For example, show "9.5" with "MS65" just below it in smaller case. In a few years after the 10-point scale is firmly established, the equivalent Sheldon scale grade could be eliminated.
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
considering the grade is carried to one decimal point it is effectively a 100 poins scale.
The only way to make an economic system truly stable is to permit the free market to take over.
But it took me YEARS to figure out the 5 point scale.
And when I started buying comics, I missed a lot of deals because I thought that 10 isn't a collectible grade.
(End sarcasm)
I can't wait to get my first NGCX coin!
HOLD EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!! ✋🛑
Well now 🤨
Gee wiz. Cracker Jack offer. “ you could find a “special coin” worth READY…..a gazillion bucks.
This changes my entire buying worries. Just let them send me what they think I want. Amazing , no longer have to think about which coins are for me. Thanks, I really could never imagine how I survived thinking I could decide on my own what to collect.
This is sounding better than Chompers “evidence bags”.
Thanks again 🤨🙀🦫😸😻
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
I'd go IX.IX "Super Spiffy" on this one.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't an optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
I still can't convert from our measurement to metric.
It'll take me until I'm 115 to figure this out
BHNC #203
I'm old and I'm cranky, but the vitriol I've read so far is a surprise. Folks, change happens, and tpgs are in business to make money, not to placate old, cranky Board members. This is an idea that has been around for a while and its implementation was/is inevitable. Hang on to your seats and get ready to pound out the next batch of scathing posts, computer grading is next.
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
The times they are a-changing.... Should be interesting to see which way the new CAC group moves.... The new CAC group was an industry impact event.... Now the NGC grading change...
Fasten your seat belts people.... We are witnessing a major wave in the TPG realm.... More to come. Cheers, RickO
My only surprise is that you're surprised. Lol
Saw this on instagram last night thought hmm interesting and kept scrolling. Not sure why so many get riled up over things in this hobby it's supposed to be something you enjoy not stress over every change.
Politicians run on change to win elections. But in reality, most folks hate change, as exemplified by the comments on this thread. Rather ironic.....
Reality is that the archaic 70 point system has held numismatic collectables back and a 10 or 100 point system, where everyone else understands these numbers, is needed and opens the door to generating alot more interest in numismatic coins. NGC is moving the future to now, kudos go to this innovative TPG.
If a TPG wants to cross pollinate a 10 point scale to attract collectors from other categories what is the issue?
Its marketing 101, there is no real innovation, the question will be how effective/acceptable is the change in terms of submission volume and values.
I clicked agree. However I think this deserves a more vocal AGREE!
My only fear is that some poor newbie is going to show up at his local coin club to proudly show them his set of Perfect 10 ASE's only to have the curmudgeons tell them they are a "worthless gimmick" and graded incorrectly.
Change is not inherently good or bad. The only argument I’ve heard so far is that 0-10 is easier to understand for prospective collectors. On the contrary, introducing more grades and hair splitting will just as likely make mastering grading even more difficult. It will also confuse existing collectors and eventually require them to spend money on regrading for resale which is money that could be spent on acquisitions.
Has it, though? Are there legions of people who are avoiding numismatics because of the 70-point scale? It's sort of like saying people are avoiding learning how to play tennis because of the scoring system.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
The market will decide.
It is for sure... innovation. Will it succeed.... beats me. It is geared towards the younger groups who are already familiar with the type of grading numbers in other fields.
Times change. Perhaps there are many younger potential collectors.. who don't understand the 70 point grading system, and thus avoid getting involved. If they are more comfortable with the 10 point (actually a 100 point system as previously pointed out), then the system might fill a demand, and bring more into the hobby.
So it doesn't bother me. The market will decide.
@spacehayduke said: Love it. Brilliant move and NGC continues to impress me in all ways a grading company should. Innovative and a way to engage one facet of the market in a positive way. It is nice to see change and adaptation in an established company like NGC that is moving forward and up. Thumbs up!
to quote you chastising someone else:
I'd hold off that calling it that until you see whether it succeeds and whether other TPG's in that part of the market follow suit or also come up with something new to capture more market share there
I'd like to add that the current mousetrap I've used for years still tends to work well.
Interesting
It won't be any more "hair splitting" than breaking down grades into "A", "B" and "C" coins within a numerical grade and confusing collectors by not noting that anywhere.
Nobody is required to spend money getting their coins regraded. It's entirely voluntary.
This is incredibly dumb. Seems to be a response to challenge CAC for the precious grading $$$.
Certainly looks like the next few years will be interesting in terms of grading.
Before all these gimmicks, how about we get normal turnaround times??? LOL
Wonder when 10 point EAC grading will happen.
"You can't get just one gun." "You can't get just one tattoo." "You can't get just one 1796 Draped Bust Large Cent."
Sounds a lot like the objections when CAC was getting started.
There is nothing wrong with the 70-point scale with respect to collector engagement. I don't fault NGC here at all, this is an interesting move that will harmonize the scales with other collectibles, it will provide a new revenue stream for resubmissions, and still maps to the 70-point scale.
And when TPG's were started.
Computer or AI grading solves two problems - consistency and cost. More consistent grading and cheaper grading fees would benefit collectors.
It’s not apparent to me how a revised 1-10 grading scale benefits collectors. It’s expensive and disruptive with an unclear value proposition.
Actually, if you read the press release, you can't currently submit to that tier. It is initially only for commercial submitters.
Collectors will be required to spend money for regrading. When CAC first arrived on the scene, there was no clear market accepted solution to identify the best coins in a particular grade. CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material. If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified. The difference here is that a change to a 1-10 scale doesn’t benefit owners of existing coins in the same way that the advent of TPGs and CAC did.
It's actually fewer grades than we have now. Far fewer if you also consider pluses as part of the 70-point scale. As a 100-point scale, it leaves room for more grades than the 70-point scale but doesn't use them.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
The quality of the coin should speak volumes over plastic and stickers. The look of the coin is constant... and it is only the impressions of that coin that can change based on external factors such as plastic and what has evolved with an obsessive need of confirmation of a subjective opinion. Continue to look for what matters and leave the rest for a Seinfeld episode and watch to see if it passes the straight face test.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
If regrading adds value, what is the problem?
If the new 1-10 scale is adopted, collectors will have to submit for regrade to sell into a market that expects a 1-10 grade. Eventually the auction companies will require it - just like they began requiring all coins to be TPG certified.
Auction companies will accept consignments of raw coins. Plenty of coins are bought and sold raw. Nobody has to have their coins graded.
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
I haven’t seen any raw coins auctioned in recent years by GC, HA, Stacks or Legend outside of certain tokens, medals and exonumia.
You posted this earlier:
"CAC added value by providing that service to collectors with PQ material."
I didn't say they auctioned them, I said they'd accept raw coin consignments. Also, auctions are not the only way to sell coins.
How does changing the grading scale equate to the service from CAC - you’re making a false equivalency. If I own a PQ MS65 coin, getting a green bean increases its value. If I have to re-slab to a 9.5, that adds no value, it’s merely extra cost to maintain liquidity and current value. Collectors are the ones who will pay for the transition to a new grading scale. Is the cost worth the benefit to the collecting community? What is the benefit exactly?
The argument was never about auction companies accepting raw coins. It’s about the fact that auction buyers and sellers have to pay TPG costs which are passed along either explicitly or implicitly by the auction houses. Regrading to a new scale increases costs but will be necessary if that becomes the new standard.
Edited to add that CAC also provides a second set of eyes and further facilitates sight unseen transactions among other benefits.
At least there will be no change to my PO1s...
Smitten with DBLCs.
I find this interesting, and perhaps good to have a scale that matches other collectibles. As far as the “numbers” go, to me it’s like imperial vs. metric, same measurement just expressed differently.
No, I'm not. NGC/PCGS grade MS65, CAC refines (regrades) to MS65A, MS65B or MS65C.
You seem to be insisting on a guarantee of liquidity/value. Perhaps your expectations are unreasonable?
People won't submit their coins unless they perceive a benefit. What that might be depends on each individual, I wouldn't presume to know what everybody else is thinking.
Then don't auction your coins.
For what it is worth, HA and Stacks continue to auction raw coins. Most are in the categories you mention as well as in the non-U.S. coin category. However they do continue to auction raw coins.
Shouldn't you also be mad at the auction companies for forcing you to get your material certified in the first place?
Remember when Nadia Comanici thrilled the world with the first Perfect 10 in gymnastics. Wouldn't that have sounded silly if she scored a perfect 70?
Remember when Bo Derek starred in the movie 10 about an incredibly beautiful woman. I don't think the movie 70 starring Betty White was about the same thing.
You're right, it is just the same measurement expressed differently but, to your other point, I think it will resonate much better with the general collecting public who are used to a 10 or 100 point definition of perfection.
o
No - because certification adds value and liquidity. Switching from a 70pt scale to 100pt scale does not add value.
I don't like the present system, for three principal reasons: (i) the word-names for most of the grades are not accurate (no, a "VG" coin is not "very good"; it's very worn), (ii) we only use about 30 of the 71 grades, which is silly, and (iii) it's not linear (my observation is that there is a large jump in quality and price when going from 35 to 40 and 45 to 50).
I understand that grading coins is a combination of objective and subjective factors; it's not simple at all. But the existence of CAC illustrates that more granularity is needed in the grading system. A 100-point system (without word/letter labels) would be great, although I would think that 40 or 50 points for teh entire scale would work well.
But that train already has left the station.
This is like recasting the lead actor of your favorite show after it has been on for fourteen seasons. As confusing as it is when compared to the 10-point or 100-point scale, the Sheldon scale benefits from generations of establishment. It has a precursor in the time it was nurtured by the hobby, evolving out of the basic common lingo of Good, Fine, and Uncirculated. How many millions of coins have been graded with those terms and then under the Sheldon scale? Other collectibles do not share the long history that coin collecting has and therein lies the resistance to changing over. Why break that tradition now?
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer, see my portfolio here: (http://www.donahuenumismatics.com/).
When there are ice skates in Hell!
Think of all the registry sets you could have.