@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.
Thank you for the clarification, I presume this will eventually be offered to all submitters.
I stopped buying NGC graded coins long ago. I don't like the holders, and their standards aren't quite what PCGS is, IMHO. I know I am in a small minority, but I stick to PCGS graded coins, or raw. On rare occasions, I find a coin I can't pass up in an NGC holder, and cross it over to PCGS, knowing it might take a grade hit of a point, but some cross at the same grade. It's about 50/50. I have been called a PCGS snob, and I'm okay with that.
As somebody who was hired to be a professional grader back in 1978, I can say that the time to adopt a 100-point grading scale was in 1976, before the ANA Board adopted the Sheldon 1-70 scale. That would have created the opportunity to fix the uneven progression of the Sheldon numbers, and expand the Mint State numbers without creating eleven of them.
However, when I suggested this to Ed Rochette, he said that they had already printed the books with the 1-70 system and sold a bunch of them, and it was too late to redo it.
It looks as this system maintains the uneven progression of the Sheldon system, and maintains the eleven Mint State grades. I do not see how anything has been improved just by being renamed.
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.
Is this a ploy to get collectors to submit their already-slabbed coins for regrading so the grading companies can profit a second time? It sure appears that way.
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
Regrading doesn’t add value - it becomes a carrying cost for preserving value.
This is probably my biggest complaint. Grading services are in business first and foremost to make money, be it for themselves or for a corporate overlord. Having parallel grading scales, each tailored to different markets being driven apart by different grading scales, will lead to coins being regraded for no other purpose than to appeal to a different market segment. This "grading churn" will raise cost of the coins that live in both markets for reasons that have nothing to do with the demand for the coin itself.
I don't collect moderns so no impact on me. I'm interested in seeing how this goes though with coins as I had sports cards and was used to that grade scale with them.
This is a play to try to pull some income from the card/comic crowd who are used to this grading scale. Frankly I'm surprised they hadn't done it before now seeing how their parent company is the 800 lb. gorilla of the card and comic grading industry. I don't like it personally but see the business logic behind it.
I see that many are speaking against the adoption of this scale for classics, but I’m not sure if that’s what the intention is here. NGC’s new parent company coming through loud and clear, this type of marketing appeals to the comics/sports card/other collectibles crowd and may be a way to introduce new collectors to the hobby. I see this scale being used only for bullion rounds and Franklin mint infomercial type products.
The only scale that might make sense to replace Sheldon would be the 100 point scale. Fortunately, as we all know, coin collectors are progressive, young, adventurous types who question tradition and are very open to change
I'd wager PCGS will follow suit and offer 10/100 point grading on coins within the next few years. The 70 point scale will go the way of the dodo bird not long after that. A little transition over from old to new, but 9.0 through 10.0 lining up 0.1 to 1 with 60 through 70 will make it pretty easy for most.
This has been a long time coming, in my opinion. The Sheldon scale has overstayed its welcome. Being twisted to fit current day grading nuances worked for a while. But going from "this large cent is a 4, and this one is an 8- double the value of the 4" to the distinctions between Unc/Choice Unc/Gem to separating higher grades into 40/45/50/53/55/58/60/61/62/63/64/65.. And now more recently with plus grades entering the mix. It's time to reset.
As someone previously pointed out, this new scale makes more sense, relates better to other collectibles/existing scales, and actually has less grades available than the current numbering/plus grades system.
British/European grading will continue to largely not care, and stick with their own systems/descriptions.
@Stingray63 said:
I don't collect moderns so no impact on me. I'm interested in seeing how this goes though with coins as I had sports cards and was used to that grade scale with them.
If it's popular with moderns, you can count on it spreading to older coins.
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
I really don't think this changes much at all for the average collector. First, it's only for moderns post 1982. Second, it can only be done for select dealers. Third, it's just renumbering the Sheldon scale.
I think this is a clever strategy for speeding up some modern subs. Plus, how many of you actively collect slabbed modern coinage?
@PerryHall said:
Is this a ploy to get collectors to submit their already-slabbed coins for regrading so the grading companies can profit a second time? It sure appears that way.
Holy cow! Businesses trying to develop products/services that people will voluntarily pay for? What's the world coming to?
@Maywood said: @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
chas·tise
/ˈCHasˌtīz,ˌCHaˈstīz/
verb
verb: chastise; 3rd person present: chastises; past tense: chastised; past participle: chastised; gerund or present participle: chastising
rebuke or reprimand severely.
LOL. That I did not do, I instead
recommended
that said poster hold off on the negative name calling of NGC for making a bold move until we see how it works out.
@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.
Certification only adds value because the market has come to accept and even demand it. It wasn't always so.
@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.
Certification only adds value because the market has come to accept and even demand it. It wasn't always so.
I value a professional grading and authentication opinion as an independent proposition - particularly when I make purchases outside my areas of expertise.
Market acceptance and liquidity add more value, but are not the only (or even primary) reason to have a coin certified.
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
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.
Reading this thread I do see it is limited on what coins and who can submit for now.
One item I think of is how to value these graded coins. NGC could put in their price guide the information for each coin and listed in the new grading system. However, if other guides don't follow, then it would seem to have use of other information or auction records these new grades would need to be directly tied to an existing one. That is NGC would need to clarify that a 9.3 is the same as a 63 in grade and guidelines. Essentially graded as a 63 and labeled as a 9.3 (without pluses?). If not, then would be starting over on grades and valuation.
@CaptHenway said:
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
@MasonG said:
The Sheldon 70 point scale was intended for grading large cents. If this new scale catches on, fine. If not, fine.
Aren't there some counterfeits on eBay to get upset about?
It's all about money. This has nothing to do with collecting.
You're right. The Sheldon scale was designed for large cents. Then US collecting applied it to all US coins and then the TPG and US collectors decided to apply it to world coinage which never should have happened. I've objected to this practice several times, here and elsewhere.
TPG's would love to convince (or essentially force) collectors to resubmit their entire collection to keep it marketable in order to maximize the selling price. If this catches on, that's presumably what someone would have to do or else potentially leave money on the table when selling. Somewhat similar to some complaints about CAC.
This is the result of financializing collecting.
Those who don't have collections where it's financially meaningful won't care Most others will. My collection is somewhat in the middle, but I definitely have no interest in potentially spending thousands of dollars just to line the pockets of the TPGs. It's zero value add to me.
@J2035 said:
It’s fine until you go to sell your collection and have to pay thousands of dollars to have it all regraded to the new system. We don’t need more grading systems, grades, TPGs or stickers.
It's entirely voluntary. Nobody has to have their coins regraded.
If you want to sell for top dollar, your coins need to be in the best plastic. Right now, that’s PCGS with a green bean for most US coins.
If that becomes NGCX or another TPG then you will need to have your coins regraded, otherwise you leave money on the table.
If getting them regraded gets you more money, get them regraded and thank the grading company.
There is also an option 3 which I tried to outline in my last reply to you. It's wasting more money on grading fees to get the same result you would have received before this change.
That's what I assume the prior poster means by "leaving money on the table".
@CaptHenway said:
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
So with this information nothing is changing except the number on the label? Not sure about the plus or how NGC is doing that. Just need an App to convert the new number to the old number to get the values and stuff. Or as someone suggested previously could put the old number in small letters/numbers below the big 9.3 as (MS63) 7.0 as (XF40). Same grading. So as Sheryl Crow said - If It Makes You Happy.
@CaptHenway said:
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
Well kind of you are missing something here. You get the point - 'restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to'. That is called good marketing and some or many of those folks will end up liking numismatics beyond bullion coins. That means good things for all. So yes, you see the point, but now think of the value for everyone.
Change is good, stagnation, bad............... NGC good............................
@spacehayduke said:
Change is good, stagnation, bad............... NGC good............................
If PCGS buys into this, I predict a lot (well... some, anyway) of people will come to embrace the change.
Maybe a few more. But fundamentally they hate all change.
I can see why, when you send your coins in for grading to keep up with "The Next Big Thing".
Careful. You are poking the curmudgeons.
I read a blog today sent via email to me by a prominent numismatic company that criticized to no end about this innovative move by NGC. I have always felt this company can't see the forest through the trees so I guess I should not be surprised. One time the company pres (same guy who probably wrote the blog today) responded here (these boards) to criticism about their atrocious online images of their listings. He remarked that he wanted to improve them and wanted feedback from us. I did some photoshopping of some of his listings, where I took the white backgrounds and made them black, and sent them to him on a PM here - he said 'well we can't change our background that is too much trouble', despite how it made the coin images look soooo much better, and well he asked and there it was. LOL, folks can't deal with change even when they are shown they can do better with the change, said blogger claims "I don't dislike change" in his blog. Yet his actions speak otherwise. So NGC will continue to get flak until folks realize how successful they are with this. Then when other TPG's do the same thing or similar, hey this will be great and all coinee curmudgeons will be on board!!! Can't wait for that blog from this numismatic company!
@spacehayduke said:
Change is good, stagnation, bad............... NGC good............................
If PCGS buys into this, I predict a lot (well... some, anyway) of people will come to embrace the change.
Maybe a few more. But fundamentally they hate all change.
I can see why, when you send your coins in for grading to keep up with "The Next Big Thing".
Careful. You are poking the curmudgeons.
I read a blog today sent via email to me by a prominent numismatic company that criticized to no end about this innovative move by NGC. I have always felt this company can't see the forest through the trees so I guess I should not be surprised. One time the company pres (same guy who probably wrote the blog today) responded here (these boards) to criticism about their atrocious online images of their listings. He remarked that he wanted to improve them and wanted feedback from us. I did some photoshopping of some of his listings, where I took the white backgrounds and made them black, and sent them to him on a PM here - he said 'well we can't change our background that is too much trouble', despite how it made the coin images look soooo much better, and well he asked and there it was. LOL, folks can't deal with change even when they are shown they can do better with the change, said blogger claims "I don't dislike change" in his blog. Yet his actions speak otherwise. So NGC will continue to get flak until folks realize how successful they are with this. Then when other TPG's do the same thing or similar, hey this will be great and all coinee curmudgeons will be on board!!! Can't wait for that blog from this numismatic company!
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit.
If the major grading services go to a 10-point grading system, how many of you will resubmit all of your slabbed coins to get them regraded? I sure won't.
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
@PerryHall said:
If the major grading services go to a 10-point grading system, how many of you will resubmit all of your slabbed coins to get them regraded? I sure won't.
I won't. Then again I have hundreds of raw coins that I won't submit on the 70 point scale.
Maybe they will offer a cross-sticker service for your previously graded coins whereby they put a NGCX Sticker with your 10 point grading scale grade on the sticker,,,,,,,,,,,, you know it is coming,,,,,,,,,,
I think this will encourage young (and new) collectors to start collecting. Anything that can help our hobby is good. We have to stop resisting change, mos change is good and works.
@spacehayduke said:
I read a blog today sent via email to me by a prominent numismatic company that criticized to no end about this innovative move by NGC. I have always felt this company can't see the forest through the trees so I guess I should not be surprised. One time the company pres (same guy who probably wrote the blog today) responded here (these boards) to criticism about their atrocious online images of their listings. He remarked that he wanted to improve them and wanted feedback from us. I did some photoshopping of some of his listings, where I took the white backgrounds and made them black, and sent them to him on a PM here - he said 'well we can't change our background that is too much trouble', despite how it made the coin images look soooo much better, and well he asked and there it was. LOL, folks can't deal with change even when they are shown they can do better with the change, said blogger claims "I don't dislike change" in his blog. Yet his actions speak otherwise. So NGC will continue to get flak until folks realize how successful they are with this. Then when other TPG's do the same thing or similar, hey this will be great and all coinee curmudgeons will be on board!!! Can't wait for that blog from this numismatic company!
There has been speculation that the blogger you’re referring to may be associated with the new CAC Grading business, given JA announced operations will be located in Virginia Beach. If true, that may be coloring his perspective.
@jmlanzaf said:
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit. .
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
@jmlanzaf said:
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit. .
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
The reflexive near rage of some people to the announcement is about aversion to change.
I don't care if there are no new collectors. There is still no reason to be so mad about it.
All other collectibles are on 10 or 100 point scales. It simply makes marketing easier. Try the experiment at home. Ask non coin people how they feel about a coin that is a 9.5 and ask a group of people about a 65 and see how many think the 65 is worth buying and how many think the 95 is worth buying.
BTW Ancient coins have never been on the Sheldon scale. I don't hear people clamoring to apply it.
@jmlanzaf said:
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit. .
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
PS I'd make a side wager that you will hear just as much angst about AI grading.
Check out your average CAC thread for a measure of how readily people embrace change.
And I don't know how long you've been collecting but people despised the whole idea of TPGs well into the 1990s. This has never been a hobby that has readily embraced change.
@jmlanzaf said:
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit. .
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
PS I'd make a side wager that you will hear just as much angst about AI grading.
Check out your average CAC thread for a measure of how readily people embrace change.
And I don't know how long you've been collecting but people despised the whole idea of TPGs well into the 1990s. This has never been a hobby that has readily embraced change.
I don’t want to have to resubmit my moderns (especially PCGS 70s) in 25yrs for regrading to make them salable to a collecting community that has completely adopted 1-10.
I would flip the question around. If cards or video games adopted the Sheldon scale, would anyone here begin collecting because the grading system is similar to what they already understand? I doubt it.
By the way - if PCGS could develop an AI app that grades coins through a smartphone camera in real time, I’d happily pay a subscription fee or pay per coin. Best of both worlds - raw coin with a PCGS grade. That’s the future.
@jmlanzaf said:
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit. .
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
PS I'd make a side wager that you will hear just as much angst about AI grading.
Check out your average CAC thread for a measure of how readily people embrace change.
And I don't know how long you've been collecting but people despised the whole idea of TPGs well into the 1990s. This has never been a hobby that has readily embraced change.
I don’t want to have to resubmit my moderns (especially PCGS 70s) in 25yrs for regrading to make them salable to a collecting community that has completely adopted 1-10.
I would flip the question around. If cards or video games adopted the Sheldon scale, would anyone here begin collecting because the grading system is similar to what they already understand? I doubt it.
By the way - if PCGS could develop an AI app that grades coins through a smartphone camera in real time, I’d happily pay a subscription fee or pay per coin. Best of both worlds - raw coin with a PCGS grade. That’s the future.
You don't have to resubmit anything. In fact, submitting them the first time was completely optional.
The whole world understands "perfect 10". The question about switching the rest of the world to perfect 70s is interesting but misses the point. I do think that you would find it easier to market non- coin items to coin people if they were slabbed and graded on the Sheldon scale because they would be more familiar.
While AI grading may happen. It will not be readily received, especially in the manner you suggest. I also can't imagine a TPGS providing any guarantees to a coin that is neither slabbed nor seen in hand. While such a thing might happen, I guarantee you will see huge discounts when selling such coins relative to traditionally slabbed coins. Consider that CAC coins carry a premium because people don't fully trust the slab. Do you think they will trust the raw coin never seen in hand by a professional?
Comments
Think of all the registry sets you could have.
Thank you for the clarification, I presume this will eventually be offered to all submitters.
Certification adds value and liquidity, because the 'customer base/market' views it favorably.
IMHO, the 'customer base/market' will also decide whether this change is value-added.
I stopped buying NGC graded coins long ago. I don't like the holders, and their standards aren't quite what PCGS is, IMHO. I know I am in a small minority, but I stick to PCGS graded coins, or raw. On rare occasions, I find a coin I can't pass up in an NGC holder, and cross it over to PCGS, knowing it might take a grade hit of a point, but some cross at the same grade. It's about 50/50. I have been called a PCGS snob, and I'm okay with that.
As somebody who was hired to be a professional grader back in 1978, I can say that the time to adopt a 100-point grading scale was in 1976, before the ANA Board adopted the Sheldon 1-70 scale. That would have created the opportunity to fix the uneven progression of the Sheldon numbers, and expand the Mint State numbers without creating eleven of them.
However, when I suggested this to Ed Rochette, he said that they had already printed the books with the 1-70 system and sold a bunch of them, and it was too late to redo it.
It looks as this system maintains the uneven progression of the Sheldon system, and maintains the eleven Mint State grades. I do not see how anything has been improved just by being renamed.
Is this a ploy to get collectors to submit their already-slabbed coins for regrading so the grading companies can profit a second time? It sure appears that way.
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
This is probably my biggest complaint. Grading services are in business first and foremost to make money, be it for themselves or for a corporate overlord. Having parallel grading scales, each tailored to different markets being driven apart by different grading scales, will lead to coins being regraded for no other purpose than to appeal to a different market segment. This "grading churn" will raise cost of the coins that live in both markets for reasons that have nothing to do with the demand for the coin itself.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I don't collect moderns so no impact on me. I'm interested in seeing how this goes though with coins as I had sports cards and was used to that grade scale with them.
Pocket Change Inspector
I was unconvinced until I saw this hype trailer. Now I will never grade on a 70-point scale again!!!
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
This is a play to try to pull some income from the card/comic crowd who are used to this grading scale. Frankly I'm surprised they hadn't done it before now seeing how their parent company is the 800 lb. gorilla of the card and comic grading industry. I don't like it personally but see the business logic behind it.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
I see that many are speaking against the adoption of this scale for classics, but I’m not sure if that’s what the intention is here. NGC’s new parent company coming through loud and clear, this type of marketing appeals to the comics/sports card/other collectibles crowd and may be a way to introduce new collectors to the hobby. I see this scale being used only for bullion rounds and Franklin mint infomercial type products.
The only scale that might make sense to replace Sheldon would be the 100 point scale. Fortunately, as we all know, coin collectors are progressive, young, adventurous types who question tradition and are very open to change
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I'd wager PCGS will follow suit and offer 10/100 point grading on coins within the next few years. The 70 point scale will go the way of the dodo bird not long after that. A little transition over from old to new, but 9.0 through 10.0 lining up 0.1 to 1 with 60 through 70 will make it pretty easy for most.
This has been a long time coming, in my opinion. The Sheldon scale has overstayed its welcome. Being twisted to fit current day grading nuances worked for a while. But going from "this large cent is a 4, and this one is an 8- double the value of the 4" to the distinctions between Unc/Choice Unc/Gem to separating higher grades into 40/45/50/53/55/58/60/61/62/63/64/65.. And now more recently with plus grades entering the mix. It's time to reset.
As someone previously pointed out, this new scale makes more sense, relates better to other collectibles/existing scales, and actually has less grades available than the current numbering/plus grades system.
British/European grading will continue to largely not care, and stick with their own systems/descriptions.
If it's popular with moderns, you can count on it spreading to older coins.
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
I really don't think this changes much at all for the average collector. First, it's only for moderns post 1982. Second, it can only be done for select dealers. Third, it's just renumbering the Sheldon scale.
I think this is a clever strategy for speeding up some modern subs. Plus, how many of you actively collect slabbed modern coinage?
Coin Photographer.
Only time will tell if this works or fails. Me I'm not a fan of changing the scale after all of these years.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
Holy cow! Businesses trying to develop products/services that people will voluntarily pay for? What's the world coming to?
As far as I’m concerned, my SIG line still applies after all these years. 😎😆
chas·tise
/ˈCHasˌtīz,ˌCHaˈstīz/
verb
verb: chastise; 3rd person present: chastises; past tense: chastised; past participle: chastised; gerund or present participle: chastising
LOL. That I did not do, I instead
recommended
that said poster hold off on the negative name calling of NGC for making a bold move until we see how it works out.
Should I also play Bolero when viewing coins on this 10 point scale?
Certification only adds value because the market has come to accept and even demand it. It wasn't always so.
.> @jmlanzaf said:
I value a professional grading and authentication opinion as an independent proposition - particularly when I make purchases outside my areas of expertise.
Market acceptance and liquidity add more value, but are not the only (or even primary) reason to have a coin certified.
Leave everything alone. The system works well as it is.
Pete
LOL. I suppose you have to be a certain age to get this joke.
If, as we assume, that X-9.3 is the equivalent of MS-63 and X-8.0 is the equivalent of AU-50, etc., are the grading standards for each new grade exactly the same as under the existing grading system?
As far as I can tell, the renumbering accomplishes absolutely nothing except to restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to. Sort of like grading a coin "Mint, Unhinged" to put it in terms that a stamp collector can relate to. Or having the TV weatherman in Detroit give the temperature in Celsius for the benefit of viewers across the river in Canada. Am I missing something here?
Reading this thread I do see it is limited on what coins and who can submit for now.
One item I think of is how to value these graded coins. NGC could put in their price guide the information for each coin and listed in the new grading system. However, if other guides don't follow, then it would seem to have use of other information or auction records these new grades would need to be directly tied to an existing one. That is NGC would need to clarify that a 9.3 is the same as a 63 in grade and guidelines. Essentially graded as a 63 and labeled as a 9.3 (without pluses?). If not, then would be starting over on grades and valuation.
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
Per NGC:
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/ngcx-10-point-grading-scale/
Based on this information, @EliteCollection created a cross-reference.
It's all about money. This has nothing to do with collecting.
You're right. The Sheldon scale was designed for large cents. Then US collecting applied it to all US coins and then the TPG and US collectors decided to apply it to world coinage which never should have happened. I've objected to this practice several times, here and elsewhere.
TPG's would love to convince (or essentially force) collectors to resubmit their entire collection to keep it marketable in order to maximize the selling price. If this catches on, that's presumably what someone would have to do or else potentially leave money on the table when selling. Somewhat similar to some complaints about CAC.
This is the result of financializing collecting.
Those who don't have collections where it's financially meaningful won't care Most others will. My collection is somewhat in the middle, but I definitely have no interest in potentially spending thousands of dollars just to line the pockets of the TPGs. It's zero value add to me.
There is also an option 3 which I tried to outline in my last reply to you. It's wasting more money on grading fees to get the same result you would have received before this change.
That's what I assume the prior poster means by "leaving money on the table".
So with this information nothing is changing except the number on the label? Not sure about the plus or how NGC is doing that. Just need an App
to convert the new number to the old number to get the values and stuff. 
Or as someone suggested previously could put the old number in small letters/numbers below the big 9.3 as (MS63) 7.0 as (XF40). Same grading. So as Sheryl Crow said - If It Makes You Happy.
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
You're right. It's what companies (people) do- see if they can come up with a product or service that others will pay for and generate a profit.
They slab stamps on a 10 point grading scale.
o > @CaptHenway said:
Well kind of you are missing something here. You get the point - 'restate the grades on a scale that people who do not collect coins now can relate to'. That is called good marketing and some or many of those folks will end up liking numismatics beyond bullion coins. That means good things for all. So yes, you see the point, but now think of the value for everyone.
Change is good, stagnation, bad............... NGC good............................
If PCGS buys into this, I predict a lot (well... some, anyway) of people will come to embrace the change.
Maybe a few more. But fundamentally they hate all change.
I can see why, when you send your coins in for grading to keep up with "The Next Big Thing".
Careful. You are poking the curmudgeons.
I read a blog today sent via email to me by a prominent numismatic company that criticized to no end about this innovative move by NGC. I have always felt this company can't see the forest through the trees so I guess I should not be surprised. One time the company pres (same guy who probably wrote the blog today) responded here (these boards) to criticism about their atrocious online images of their listings. He remarked that he wanted to improve them and wanted feedback from us. I did some photoshopping of some of his listings, where I took the white backgrounds and made them black, and sent them to him on a PM here - he said 'well we can't change our background that is too much trouble', despite how it made the coin images look soooo much better, and well he asked and there it was. LOL, folks can't deal with change even when they are shown they can do better with the change, said blogger claims "I don't dislike change" in his blog. Yet his actions speak otherwise. So NGC will continue to get flak until folks realize how successful they are with this. Then when other TPG's do the same thing or similar, hey this will be great and all coinee curmudgeons will be on board!!! Can't wait for that blog from this numismatic company!
What is the point?
To be more understandable to the general public. To match what is done with every other collectible.
Totally agree. And if it expands the collector base, we all benefit.
If the major grading services go to a 10-point grading system, how many of you will resubmit all of your slabbed coins to get them regraded? I sure won't.
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
I won't. Then again I have hundreds of raw coins that I won't submit on the 70 point scale.
Maybe they will offer a cross-sticker service for your previously graded coins whereby they put a NGCX Sticker with your 10 point grading scale grade on the sticker,,,,,,,,,,,, you know it is coming,,,,,,,,,,
I think this will encourage young (and new) collectors to start collecting. Anything that can help our hobby is good. We have to stop resisting change, mos change is good and works.
There has been speculation that the blogger you’re referring to may be associated with the new CAC Grading business, given JA announced operations will be located in Virginia Beach. If true, that may be coloring his perspective.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
The proponents - @spacehayduke, @MasonG and @jmlanzaf are making assumptions that the opposition “hates change” and that this will attract new hobbyists. Neither of those assumptions are necessarily true.
I think many numismatists would welcome change with demonstrable value. AI grading which provides the benefits of consistency and reduced grading fees due to lower labor costs is an example of change that I think many in the hobby would appreciate.
Do you really think there’s a material number of prospective hobbyists out there that will start buying coins because the NGC label on a silver eagle says PR10 instead of PR70? I guess we will find out.
The reflexive near rage of some people to the announcement is about aversion to change.
I don't care if there are no new collectors. There is still no reason to be so mad about it.
All other collectibles are on 10 or 100 point scales. It simply makes marketing easier. Try the experiment at home. Ask non coin people how they feel about a coin that is a 9.5 and ask a group of people about a 65 and see how many think the 65 is worth buying and how many think the 95 is worth buying.
BTW Ancient coins have never been on the Sheldon scale. I don't hear people clamoring to apply it.
PS I'd make a side wager that you will hear just as much angst about AI grading.
Check out your average CAC thread for a measure of how readily people embrace change.
And I don't know how long you've been collecting but people despised the whole idea of TPGs well into the 1990s. This has never been a hobby that has readily embraced change.
I don’t want to have to resubmit my moderns (especially PCGS 70s) in 25yrs for regrading to make them salable to a collecting community that has completely adopted 1-10.
I would flip the question around. If cards or video games adopted the Sheldon scale, would anyone here begin collecting because the grading system is similar to what they already understand? I doubt it.
By the way - if PCGS could develop an AI app that grades coins through a smartphone camera in real time, I’d happily pay a subscription fee or pay per coin. Best of both worlds - raw coin with a PCGS grade. That’s the future.
You don't have to resubmit anything. In fact, submitting them the first time was completely optional.
The whole world understands "perfect 10". The question about switching the rest of the world to perfect 70s is interesting but misses the point. I do think that you would find it easier to market non- coin items to coin people if they were slabbed and graded on the Sheldon scale because they would be more familiar.
While AI grading may happen. It will not be readily received, especially in the manner you suggest. I also can't imagine a TPGS providing any guarantees to a coin that is neither slabbed nor seen in hand. While such a thing might happen, I guarantee you will see huge discounts when selling such coins relative to traditionally slabbed coins. Consider that CAC coins carry a premium because people don't fully trust the slab. Do you think they will trust the raw coin never seen in hand by a professional?