@jmlanzaf said:
They don't have to want to be "numismatists".
What I was referencing with some humor is that the Coin 10 point scale is not like most other 10 point scales. So a person familiar with most other 10 point scales won't understand the Coin 10 point scale (and moderns in particular). As I noted a 9.0 or 9.5 in most 10 point scales is very or extremely good. But a 9.0 in the coin scale and especially for moderns is the bottom end. Not worth grading unless it is some special variety or something (and even 9.5 not so good for moderns).
I actually think that applies to most "post-collector" items. Think about sports cards and comic books. It's really the ones before they became collectors items and saved where lower conditions are valuable. Once things are recognized as a collectors item, many people will save later versions in pristine condition.
I understand that but it was not my point. I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number.
But all of this is still not the point of my original post. I will try to clarify once more.
I quoted MLC post of:
"I wonder why people think it's hard to teach new collectors about the 70 scale. Seemed pretty easy when I learned it. Do people really think that YNs and other new collectors are that mentally challenged?"
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
I then concluded that I agreed with MLC that they are Not mentally challenged and could/would figure it out (both the 70 and the Coin 10).
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
@jmlanzaf said:
They don't have to want to be "numismatists".
What I was referencing with some humor is that the Coin 10 point scale is not like most other 10 point scales. So a person familiar with most other 10 point scales won't understand the Coin 10 point scale (and moderns in particular). As I noted a 9.0 or 9.5 in most 10 point scales is very or extremely good. But a 9.0 in the coin scale and especially for moderns is the bottom end. Not worth grading unless it is some special variety or something (and even 9.5 not so good for moderns).
I actually think that applies to most "post-collector" items. Think about sports cards and comic books. It's really the ones before they became collectors items and saved where lower conditions are valuable. Once things are recognized as a collectors item, many people will save later versions in pristine condition.
I understand that but it was not my point. I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number.
But all of this is still not the point of my original post. I will try to clarify once more.
I quoted MLC post of:
"I wonder why people think it's hard to teach new collectors about the 70 scale. Seemed pretty easy when I learned it. Do people really think that YNs and other new collectors are that mentally challenged?"
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
I then concluded that I agreed with MLC that they are Not mentally challenged and could/would figure it out (both the 70 and the Coin 10).
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
I am not misreading it. I stated:
" I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number."
I was clarifying my previous post about how the Coin 10 does not agree with most other 10 scales. A Coin 9.0 or 60 can be a fairly beat up coin. This is not true with most other 10 scales. That is a 9.0 is a fairly nice condition in most other collectable. The difference being that the Coin 10 scale has this Unc/MS thing from 9 to 10 and then shifts to circulated below 9. So a Coin 9.0 could be quite different in look to other collectable with a 9.0 which don't allow so much 'beating up'. I then reference the ngc scale for the comic books which indicates this.
And again this is not the point of my initial post.
@jmlanzaf said:
They don't have to want to be "numismatists".
What I was referencing with some humor is that the Coin 10 point scale is not like most other 10 point scales. So a person familiar with most other 10 point scales won't understand the Coin 10 point scale (and moderns in particular). As I noted a 9.0 or 9.5 in most 10 point scales is very or extremely good. But a 9.0 in the coin scale and especially for moderns is the bottom end. Not worth grading unless it is some special variety or something (and even 9.5 not so good for moderns).
I actually think that applies to most "post-collector" items. Think about sports cards and comic books. It's really the ones before they became collectors items and saved where lower conditions are valuable. Once things are recognized as a collectors item, many people will save later versions in pristine condition.
I understand that but it was not my point. I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number.
But all of this is still not the point of my original post. I will try to clarify once more.
I quoted MLC post of:
"I wonder why people think it's hard to teach new collectors about the 70 scale. Seemed pretty easy when I learned it. Do people really think that YNs and other new collectors are that mentally challenged?"
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
I then concluded that I agreed with MLC that they are Not mentally challenged and could/would figure it out (both the 70 and the Coin 10).
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
I am not misreading it. I stated:
" I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number."
I was clarifying my previous post about how the Coin 10 does not agree with most other 10 scales. A Coin 9.0 or 60 can be a fairly beat up coin. This is not true with most other 10 scales. That is a 9.0 is a fairly nice condition in most other collectable. The difference being that the Coin 10 scale has this Unc/MS thing from 9 to 10 and then shifts to circulated below 9. So a Coin 9.0 could be quite different in look to other collectable with a 9.0 which don't allow so much 'beating up'. I then reference the ngc scale for the comic books which indicates this.
And again this is not the point of my initial post.
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
@J2035 said:
Unlike the advent of TPGs and CAC, I fail to see how this change adds any value for the collector.
It's voluntary. You don't have to participate if you don't want to.
@J2035 said:
I see ... eventual pressure to reholder existing coins which costs money with no added benefit (preserving current liquidity as a carrying cost).
Who are you thinking it is that would be pressuring you?
In your first point, you are responding to an argument I never made. Of course anyone is free to participate or not participate and spend their dollars as they see fit. Companies are free to test any product or innovation they wish. This is how products improve. Doesn’t mean I have to like every new product or innovation.
Second, if there is pressure to reslab, then the concept must have caught on. If it does catch on, that does not mean it comes without cost. My point is simple - the costs outweigh the benefits for collectors. My PR70 moderns have liquidity now, why should I want to pay more money to maintain that liquidity?
I will concede that if this change brings in a large number of new collectors that would not have otherwise collected and that provides market price, then potentially it could be a benefit for collectors despite the costs.
Why do you pay to slab the coins in the first place? Your raw moderns have liquidity and are all 69s and 70s even when raw. Answer: 70s carry a premium in the market. You get more than it costs to slab. Why do people CAC coins that are already slabbed by a premier grading service? Answer: Because the CAC has cachet in the market and you get more than it costs to CAC. If you have to reslab your coins to the 10 scale, it is because there is more value in the 10 scale and so you reap more than you sow. If you don't, you can leave the coins just as they are.
You are still missing the point. If I have to reslab to preserve liquidity it is because the value in the current slab has declined. It’s an unnecessary carrying cost.
This differs from CAC which signifies PQ to buyers who may be unsure whether to pay a premium for a particular coin absent CAC’s blessing.
Similarly, TPG certification provides assurance of authenticity and an opinion of grade.
Converting my MS69 to MS9.9 adds no value. There is no opinion, assurance, or any other value added service - only an expense to reslab to ensure salability.
@J2035 said:
My point is simple - the costs outweigh the benefits for collectors.
If people choose to use the service, they obviously disagree that the costs outweigh the benefits.
What applies to an individual consumer does not apply to the industry/hobby as a whole.
There are only individuals. People do not buy/sell/collect "as a whole". Each person makes their own choice, even if that choice is to agree with others about a certain course of action.
Do you think that people willingly make choices where the costs outweigh the benefits?
@J2035 said:
My point is simple - the costs outweigh the benefits for collectors.
If people choose to use the service, they obviously disagree that the costs outweigh the benefits.
What applies to an individual consumer does not apply to the industry/hobby as a whole.
There are only individuals. People do not buy/sell/collect "as a whole". Each person makes their own choice, even if that choice is to agree with others about a certain course of action.
Do you think that people willingly make choices where the costs outweigh the benefits?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to the TPGs to reslab PR70 coins as PR10 is good for collectors? Where is the value to the hobby as a whole in that?
@jmlanzaf said:
They don't have to want to be "numismatists".
What I was referencing with some humor is that the Coin 10 point scale is not like most other 10 point scales. So a person familiar with most other 10 point scales won't understand the Coin 10 point scale (and moderns in particular). As I noted a 9.0 or 9.5 in most 10 point scales is very or extremely good. But a 9.0 in the coin scale and especially for moderns is the bottom end. Not worth grading unless it is some special variety or something (and even 9.5 not so good for moderns).
I actually think that applies to most "post-collector" items. Think about sports cards and comic books. It's really the ones before they became collectors items and saved where lower conditions are valuable. Once things are recognized as a collectors item, many people will save later versions in pristine condition.
I understand that but it was not my point. I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number.
But all of this is still not the point of my original post. I will try to clarify once more.
I quoted MLC post of:
"I wonder why people think it's hard to teach new collectors about the 70 scale. Seemed pretty easy when I learned it. Do people really think that YNs and other new collectors are that mentally challenged?"
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
I then concluded that I agreed with MLC that they are Not mentally challenged and could/would figure it out (both the 70 and the Coin 10).
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
I am not misreading it. I stated:
" I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number."
I was clarifying my previous post about how the Coin 10 does not agree with most other 10 scales. A Coin 9.0 or 60 can be a fairly beat up coin. This is not true with most other 10 scales. That is a 9.0 is a fairly nice condition in most other collectable. The difference being that the Coin 10 scale has this Unc/MS thing from 9 to 10 and then shifts to circulated below 9. So a Coin 9.0 could be quite different in look to other collectable with a 9.0 which don't allow so much 'beating up'. I then reference the ngc scale for the comic books which indicates this.
And again this is not the point of my initial post.
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
According to the descriptions, a 9.0 is a 60 and an 8.8 is a 58.
@jmlanzaf said:
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
I have done a quick side-by-side comparison of the two scales (i.e., NGCX vs. traditional numeric scale).
@J2035 said:
Do you think that millions of dollars going to the TPGs to reslab PR70 coins as PR10 is good for collectors?
It's good for those who perceive a benefit from it.
You might as well ask...
Do you think that millions of dollars going to sellers of numismatic publications is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to makers of coin holders and albums is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to convention centers for coin shows is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to rent for B&M stores is good for collectors?
Because the people who use those products/services are paying for them.
@J2035 said:
Where is the value to the hobby as a whole in that?
There is no unified "hobby as a whole" to recognize value. There are individuals, each with their own ideas about what's of value which are not always in alignment with the ideas of others.
I get that you don't think this is a good idea. That's fine but it doesn't mean that other people won't find value in it.
@jmlanzaf said:
They don't have to want to be "numismatists".
What I was referencing with some humor is that the Coin 10 point scale is not like most other 10 point scales. So a person familiar with most other 10 point scales won't understand the Coin 10 point scale (and moderns in particular). As I noted a 9.0 or 9.5 in most 10 point scales is very or extremely good. But a 9.0 in the coin scale and especially for moderns is the bottom end. Not worth grading unless it is some special variety or something (and even 9.5 not so good for moderns).
I actually think that applies to most "post-collector" items. Think about sports cards and comic books. It's really the ones before they became collectors items and saved where lower conditions are valuable. Once things are recognized as a collectors item, many people will save later versions in pristine condition.
I understand that but it was not my point. I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number.
But all of this is still not the point of my original post. I will try to clarify once more.
I quoted MLC post of:
"I wonder why people think it's hard to teach new collectors about the 70 scale. Seemed pretty easy when I learned it. Do people really think that YNs and other new collectors are that mentally challenged?"
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
I then concluded that I agreed with MLC that they are Not mentally challenged and could/would figure it out (both the 70 and the Coin 10).
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
I am not misreading it. I stated:
" I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number."
I was clarifying my previous post about how the Coin 10 does not agree with most other 10 scales. A Coin 9.0 or 60 can be a fairly beat up coin. This is not true with most other 10 scales. That is a 9.0 is a fairly nice condition in most other collectable. The difference being that the Coin 10 scale has this Unc/MS thing from 9 to 10 and then shifts to circulated below 9. So a Coin 9.0 could be quite different in look to other collectable with a 9.0 which don't allow so much 'beating up'. I then reference the ngc scale for the comic books which indicates this.
And again this is not the point of my initial post.
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
@jmlanzaf said:
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
I have done a quick side-by-side comparison of the two scales (i.e., NGCX vs. traditional numeric scale).
@J2035 said:
Do you think that millions of dollars going to the TPGs to reslab PR70 coins as PR10 is good for collectors?
It's good for those who perceive a benefit from it.
You might as well ask...
Do you think that millions of dollars going to sellers of numismatic publications is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to makers of coin holders and albums is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to convention centers for coin shows is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to rent for B&M stores is good for collectors?
Because the people who use those products/services are paying for them.
@J2035 said:
Where is the value to the hobby as a whole in that?
There is no unified "hobby as a whole" to recognize value. There are individuals, each with their own ideas about what's of value which are not always in alignment with the ideas of others.
I get that you don't think this is a good idea. That's fine but it doesn't mean that other people won't find value in it.
All of your other examples provide value that can be articulated. Publications educate and disseminate information, coin albums provide a place for safekeeping, convention centers and shops provide a venue for conducting physical business.
What value does changing the grading system add?
To your point about the whole - unintended consequences and costs to society are very much in play as a result of individual decision making. In fact, so much so, that government often steps in to regulate how, when and where consumers may purchase and use certain products. While this would certainly not rise to such a level, it’s perfectly valid to consider the potential cost to the hobby that a redirection of collector dollars and marketplace confusion may cause.
@Chevyrose said:
I’m sure PCGS will still carry the highest premium for slab coins using the Sheldon scale
Ngc is just trying to keep up by doing something new but not necessary
But hey they want the grading cost right in their pocket and want to stay in business
Im actually am a big fan of the Sheldon scale
I think you are missing their argument, so here it is: The idea is that the rest of the world does not work on a scale devised for large cents a century ago and that is also not base 10. In other collectables, they use a 10 point scale, if the 'hobby' wishes to evolve/integrate to the bigger collectable world, and bring in more folks to enjoy coins, using a 10 point scale is obvious for all of the correct reasons.
PCGS only brings highest premiums in a niche market of US coins. Do they for ancients and world coins, still dominated by NGC?
This might start with moderns, but it will quickly consume the rest of the market. Why? Because companies innovate or perish. The plus thing lasted for a while, but it's about run its course. The reconsideration and regrade games have given people reasons to keep turning the grading crank, but after a while, there's nowhere else to go unless you change the rules.
"A rose, by any other name would smell as sweet."
I'm pretty sure when the labels change the coins stay the same. Good coins are good coins irrespective of the labels or stickers they wear. I don't particularly care about the heavily modified "Sheldon" scale we're using now, Contemporary grading doesn't even follow its own written rules, so why not change them? Coins with wear are showing up in holders all the way up to MS64. The majority of nice AU coins are superior to the majority of MS60 and MS61 coins. it's a mess, really. We all learned it, just like we all have a conceptual understanding of designations, plusses, stickers, different eras of holders and the rest. Through it all, the actual coins have just been sitting there, quietly observing our gyrations and handwaving.
I just don't want the market to force me to have everything regraded before its eventual sale and dispersal.
I just don't want the market to force me to have everything regraded before its eventual sale and dispersal.
If the base 10 system takes hold, it will be interesting to see how NGC and other TPG's take on what to do about this and a very good point........... It could be that the offer an option that does not include regrade but instead simply a new slab with a grade on base 10 considered equivalent to the base 70 system grade, at a price of reholdering. We will see how this plays out. Exciting times when innovation like this happens.
@J2035 said:
What value does changing the grading system add?
Since I don't currently have any plans to use it, I can't tell you. You need to ask people who will use it.
@J2035 said:
To your point about the whole - unintended consequences and costs to society are very much in play as a result of individual decision making. In fact, so much so, that government often steps in to regulate how, when and where consumers may purchase and use certain products.
The government is made up of individual people. When they step in to make decisions for everybody, it's still individuals making those decisions.
@J2035 said:
While this would certainly not rise to such a level, it’s perfectly valid to consider the potential cost to the hobby that a redirection of collector dollars and marketplace confusion may cause.
Those "collector dollars" belong to the individual collectors and it's their option as to how they're spent. There is no omniscient being in charge of coin collecting, forcing you to spend your money (or not) for your own good.
I just don't want the market to force me to have everything regraded before its eventual sale and dispersal.
This reminds me of the CAC concern raised by collectors!
This is a good observation. HST, I am one of those that will pay for the cross to CAC or even cross from sticker to CAC slab. Many probably won't but I am in it for collecting and all in on CAC so...................
So in response to this post about teaching the 70 scale and being mentally challenged I responded with some sarcasm (and labeled it as so and with smiley faces) that if they can't understand the 70 scale how could we expect them to understand the Coin 10 point scale when it is somewhat different than the normal 10 point scale. Again this was being sarcastic and labeled as so.
As an analogy, in the science I did for a career, some of the most brilliant minds in the world did not understand when others of us were quoting differences in values to the 5th to 7th decimal place. For example, we would argue that there was a huge difference between 0.512638 and 0.512738 and the other clan of brilliant folks eyes would glaze over. So we invented a normalization scheme where 0.512638 now equals 0, and 0.512738 is 10^4 parts deviation from 0.512638, so now equals +2. etc. etc. So then the other brilliant folks understood the whole numbers versus the 6 decimal place discussions we were having and voila everyone could talk to each other!
So this is similar to base 70 versus base 10. Alot of folks eyes are going to glaze over using the ancient large cent grading scheme when they first try out coin collecting, but those same folks are trained to understand base 10. I am pretty sure they will understand that scale even when having glazed eyes for the 70 scale......... Human nature is what it is.
@J2035 said:
What value does changing the grading system add?
Since I don't currently have any plans to use it, I can't tell you. You need to ask people who will use it.
@J2035 said:
To your point about the whole - unintended consequences and costs to society are very much in play as a result of individual decision making. In fact, so much so, that government often steps in to regulate how, when and where consumers may purchase and use certain products.
The government is made up of individual people. When they step in to make decisions for everybody, it's still individuals making those decisions.
@J2035 said:
While this would certainly not rise to such a level, it’s perfectly valid to consider the potential cost to the hobby that a redirection of collector dollars and marketplace confusion may cause.
Those "collector dollars" belong to the individual collectors and it's their option as to how they're spent. There is no omniscient being in charge of coin collecting, forcing you to spend your money (or not) for your own good.
Collectors will be forced to reslab if a new system becomes the standard. The adoption of a new system will cause collectors’ current coins to decline in value relative to others in the new slabs. Inevitably, reslabbing becomes in collectors best interest to regain value and marketability. This constitutes unnecessary dollars funneled to the grading companies. There is a term for this: rent-seeking.
@J2035 said:
What value does changing the grading system add?
Since I don't currently have any plans to use it, I can't tell you. You need to ask people who will use it.
@J2035 said:
To your point about the whole - unintended consequences and costs to society are very much in play as a result of individual decision making. In fact, so much so, that government often steps in to regulate how, when and where consumers may purchase and use certain products.
The government is made up of individual people. When they step in to make decisions for everybody, it's still individuals making those decisions.
@J2035 said:
While this would certainly not rise to such a level, it’s perfectly valid to consider the potential cost to the hobby that a redirection of collector dollars and marketplace confusion may cause.
Those "collector dollars" belong to the individual collectors and it's their option as to how they're spent. There is no omniscient being in charge of coin collecting, forcing you to spend your money (or not) for your own good.
Collectors will be forced to reslab if a new system becomes the standard. The adoption of a new system will cause collectors’ current coins to decline in value relative to others in the new slabs. Inevitably, reslabbing becomes in collectors best interest to regain value and marketability. This constitutes unnecessary dollars funneled to the grading companies. There is a term for this: rent-seeking.
I don't see it. It's not like people won't know what a 65 is even if everything newly slabbed is in a 10 scale.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be forced to reslab if a new system becomes the standard.
You've said this more than once. The truth is- nobody will be forced to do anything.
@J2035 said:
The adoption of a new system will cause collectors’ current coins to decline in value relative to others in the new slabs.
Have you considered the possibility that a new system will cause coins in the new slabs to increase in value relative to current ones? You might.
@J2035 said:
Inevitably, reslabbing becomes in collectors best interest to regain value and marketability.
When you bought your coins, who guaranteed you that their marketability would not ever be negatively affected?
@J2035 said:
This constitutes unnecessary dollars funneled to the grading companies.
Those dollars are not all yours to spend. The fact that other people may make a choice with which you do not agree does not make those expenditures unnecessary.
@J2035 said:
There is a term for this: rent-seeking.
Offering a product/service to willing buyers who are free to decline is not rent-seeking.
@MidLifeCrisis said:
I don't have a strong opinion about it one way or the other...
I guess I do have an opinion about this, and it's negative. The saying 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' comes to mind. So far nobody has convinced me that our current 70 system is broke...at least enough to warrant this change.
@J2035 said:
Collectors will be forced to reslab if a new system becomes the standard.
You've said this more than once. The truth is- nobody will be forced to do anything.
@J2035 said:
The adoption of a new system will cause collectors’ current coins to decline in value relative to others in the new slabs.
Have you considered the possibility that a new system will cause coins in the new slabs to increase in value relative to current ones? You might.
@J2035 said:
Inevitably, reslabbing becomes in collectors best interest to regain value and marketability.
When you bought your coins, who guaranteed you that their marketability would not ever be negatively affected?
@J2035 said:
This constitutes unnecessary dollars funneled to the grading companies.
Those dollars are not all yours to spend. The fact that other people may make a choice with which you do not agree does not make those expenditures unnecessary.
@J2035 said:
There is a term for this: rent-seeking.
Offering a product/service to willing buyers who are free to decline is not rent-seeking.
You keep oversimplifying by arguing that if collectors pay to reslab that there must be value. You fail to realize that this is an unproductive use of capital since absent the change collectors value was already maximized.
You've also again responded to arguments that I didn’t make. I never argued i had a guarantee, or that I control or should control where others spend their dollars.
Wiki has a good explanation of rent-seeking - check it out. Using your social and political clout to institute an unproductive change to make money for yourself is rent-seeking.
You are free to argue how this change is productive (i.e. adds value) - but a simple “because people are buying it” is an insufficient argument.
Unfortunately at this point I can’t do any more to help you understand the economic arguments against the change.
@J2035 said:
You keep oversimplifying by arguing that if collectors pay to reslab that there must be value. You fail to realize that this is an unproductive use of capital since absent the change collectors value was already maximized.
You think it's an unproductive use of capital but your opinion is not binding on others, who may consider it a productive use. By your argument, you refuse to recognize that fact.
Wiki has a good explanation of rent-seeking - check it out. Using your social and political clout to institute an unproductive change to make money for yourself is rent-seeking.
Your definition of "unproductive" seems to keep coming around to being based on "what's good for me".
When McDonald's opens a restaurant across the street from Wendy's, that's an unproductive change for Wendy's but it's not rent seeking. NGC certainly isn't using political clout and I'm not seeing where they're using social clout (saying "Here's our new product" is nothing more than marketing something new- all businesses do it) to institute anything. I understand you are set on the idea it's unproductive, but be that as it may, others will have their own ideas which may not be in alignment with yours.
I read the Wikipedia article- thanks. Would you be willing to copy/paste the part of it that explains how NGC's actions constitute "rent seeking"?
@J2035 said:
You keep oversimplifying by arguing that if collectors pay to reslab that there must be value. You fail to realize that this is an unproductive use of capital since absent the change collectors value was already maximized.
You think it's an unproductive use of capital but your opinion is not binding on others, who may consider it a productive use. By your argument, you refuse to recognize that fact.
Wiki has a good explanation of rent-seeking - check it out. Using your social and political clout to institute an unproductive change to make money for yourself is rent-seeking.
When McDonald's opens a restaurant across the street from Wendy's, that's an unproductive change for Wendy's but it's not rent seeking.
Your definition of "unproductive" keeps coming around to being based on "what's good for me".
These arguments are mad boring
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Mason just send all you coins to ngcx and stop talking about it
@MidLifeCrisis said:
I don't have a strong opinion about it one way or the other...
I guess I do have an opinion about this, and it's negative. The saying 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' comes to mind. So far nobody has convinced me that our current 70 system is broke...at least enough to warrant this change.
It is broke, it was broken from the start, but the kinetics to change it to a logical grading system is sluggish. Folks love to talk about change in politics but in reality most want things just as they are because change can be difficult on the short term (and even long term). It is the bold and innovative that change things for the better, like NGC is putting forth in grading with NGCX...............
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
@spacehayduke said: It is broke, it was broken from the start, but the kinetics to change it to a logical grading system is sluggish. Folks love to talk about change in politics but in reality most want things just as they are because change can be difficult on the short term (and even long term). It is the bold and innovative that change things for the better, like NGC is putting forth in grading with NGCX...............
Fact Check: False.
The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -Thomas Jefferson
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
John Albanese is 63 years old
PCGS has been around 35 years
“A better numeric grading system”
What the Sheldon scale is too hard for you?
Remember the last time John albanese started a grading company what was it called again? It’s on the tip of my tongue oh yeah NGC. Yeah they love being in second place. I’m sure this time around it’s gonna be much different
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
And sorry to beat a dead horse here but the new cac slabs they’re using the Sheldon scale
So idk man maybe start a new thread about how you’re “all in” over at cac that could be fun
My thoughts are that this concept will ultimately fail. The only coins that make sense to slab in the X holders are the Minnie Mouse Niue dreck of the world, because those coins don’t have to be explained to grandpa/ma buying the coin for the grandkids or as a store of value.
I do see value in slabbing lowball modern coins in the X holders. I think they will be intriguing and rare because the labeling will be limited / short lived.
Tightening the grading scale down to 10 from 70 doesn’t excite me. Widening it to 100 is when you’ll see the huge influx of regrading.
@1madman said:
My thoughts are that this concept will ultimately fail. The only coins that make sense to slab in the X holders are the Minnie Mouse Niue dreck of the world, because those coins don’t have to be explained to grandpa/ma buying the coin for the grandkids or as a store of value.
I do see value in slabbing lowball modern coins in the X holders. I think they will be intriguing and rare because the labeling will be limited / short lived.
Tightening the grading scale down to 10 from 70 doesn’t excite me. Widening it to 100 is when you’ll see the huge influx of regrading.
It's not "down" to 10. With decimals, it is 100 point scale. But you don't use all 70 anyway. Show me a VF22 or an XF43.
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
John Albanese is 63 years old
PCGS has been around 35 years
“A better numeric grading system”
What the Sheldon scale is too hard for you?
Remember the last time John albanese started a grading company what was it called again? It’s on the tip of my tongue oh yeah NGC. Yeah they love being in second place. I’m sure this time around it’s gonna be much
You really shouldn't be trolling JA. HE can actually tell when a 55 doubled die has been cleaned.
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
John Albanese is 63 years old
PCGS has been around 35 years
“A better numeric grading system”
What the Sheldon scale is too hard for you?
Remember the last time John albanese started a grading company what was it called again? It’s on the tip of my tongue oh yeah NGC. Yeah they love being in second place. I’m sure this time around it’s gonna be much
You really shouldn't be trolling JA. HE can actually tell when a 55 doubled die has been cleaned.
Still waiting on that 3 legged buffalo on gold planchet
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
John Albanese is 63 years old
PCGS has been around 35 years
“A better numeric grading system”
What the Sheldon scale is too hard for you?
Remember the last time John albanese started a grading company what was it called again? It’s on the tip of my tongue oh yeah NGC. Yeah they love being in second place. I’m sure this time around it’s gonna be much
You really shouldn't be trolling JA. HE can actually tell when a 55 doubled die has been cleaned.
Still waiting on that 3 legged buffalo on gold planchet
As soon as payment arrives, the coin will ship. No returns or bullhorns.
@1madman said:
My thoughts are that this concept will ultimately fail. The only coins that make sense to slab in the X holders are the Minnie Mouse Niue dreck of the world, because those coins don’t have to be explained to grandpa/ma buying the coin for the grandkids or as a store of value.
I do see value in slabbing lowball modern coins in the X holders. I think they will be intriguing and rare because the labeling will be limited / short lived.
Tightening the grading scale down to 10 from 70 doesn’t excite me. Widening it to 100 is when you’ll see the huge influx of regrading.
Show me a VF22 or an XF43.
That’s the point of it. A 1794 half currently in pcgs xf40 might change to an xf43 in a 100 point system, most likely adding value. That’s what the grading companies goals are, so that people continue to use their services. Just gotta create & teach the 100 point scale grading technique to the graders, which couldn’t be that difficult. From my understanding pcgs already uses a 700 point scale in order to determine plus grades.
I bet the graders at NGC on the 10 point scale have no clue about assigning those arbitrary grades. They probably still use the 70 point scale, and someone in the encapsulation process converts it. Like if grades say au53, the encapsulation person converts that to 8.3 (or whatever new number they use).
Comments
You're reading it wrong VF is not the Sheldon VF. A VF comic book is nearly flawless. If you compare their 10 scale to the CGC 10 scale, you'll see that they've adopted the same terminology and numbering. A 9 cannot be "beat up". A 9 is approximately an MS65 on the Sheldon scale.
Thus illustrating how easily this new scale might cause confusion.
I am not misreading it. I stated:
" I was noting that the Coin 10 has a shift in the grading above or below 9. The Coin 10 goes from Unc/Ms to Circ. grades. The 9.0 can be a really beat up coin. Other collectibles do not do this. Below is a screen shot of the ngc grade scale. The condition goes down with the number."
I was clarifying my previous post about how the Coin 10 does not agree with most other 10 scales. A Coin 9.0 or 60 can be a fairly beat up coin. This is not true with most other 10 scales. That is a 9.0 is a fairly nice condition in most other collectable. The difference being that the Coin 10 scale has this Unc/MS thing from 9 to 10 and then shifts to circulated below 9. So a Coin 9.0 could be quite different in look to other collectable with a 9.0 which don't allow so much 'beating up'. I then reference the ngc scale for the comic books which indicates this.
And again this is not the point of my initial post.
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
Again, I don't think a9.0 is a 60. But even if it were, the distinction is between handling damage/circulation and lack thereof. You're right, if a 9 is a 60, it might look more "circulated" to the uninitiated. But, again, I think 8.0 is 60 which will look very much like the other collectible scales.
You are still missing the point. If I have to reslab to preserve liquidity it is because the value in the current slab has declined. It’s an unnecessary carrying cost.
This differs from CAC which signifies PQ to buyers who may be unsure whether to pay a premium for a particular coin absent CAC’s blessing.
Similarly, TPG certification provides assurance of authenticity and an opinion of grade.
Converting my MS69 to MS9.9 adds no value. There is no opinion, assurance, or any other value added service - only an expense to reslab to ensure salability.
What applies to an individual consumer does not apply to the industry/hobby as a whole.
There are only individuals. People do not buy/sell/collect "as a whole". Each person makes their own choice, even if that choice is to agree with others about a certain course of action.
Do you think that people willingly make choices where the costs outweigh the benefits?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to the TPGs to reslab PR70 coins as PR10 is good for collectors? Where is the value to the hobby as a whole in that?
According to the descriptions, a 9.0 is a 60 and an 8.8 is a 58.
https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/ngcx-10-point-grading-scale/
I have done a quick side-by-side comparison of the two scales (i.e., NGCX vs. traditional numeric scale).
It appears that a NGCX 9.0 is a traditional 61.
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/ngcx-10-point-grading-scale/
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/
Edited for a typo, and to add:
It also appears that NGCX 8.0 is a traditional 50.
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/ngcx-10-point-grading-scale/
Source: https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/
I’m sure PCGS will still carry the highest premium for slab coins using the Sheldon scale
Ngc is just trying to keep up by doing something new but not necessary
But hey they want the grading cost right in their pocket and want to stay in business
Im actually am a big fan of the Sheldon scale
It's good for those who perceive a benefit from it.
You might as well ask...
Do you think that millions of dollars going to sellers of numismatic publications is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to makers of coin holders and albums is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to convention centers for coin shows is good for collectors?
Do you think that millions of dollars going to rent for B&M stores is good for collectors?
Because the people who use those products/services are paying for them.
There is no unified "hobby as a whole" to recognize value. There are individuals, each with their own ideas about what's of value which are not always in alignment with the ideas of others.
I get that you don't think this is a good idea. That's fine but it doesn't mean that other people won't find value in it.
Edited to add: I stand corrected. 9 is 60.
https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/ngcx-10-point-grading-scale/
I agree. I just found that same NGC scale. It is very useful and I have amended my prior comment to admit/correct my error.
All of your other examples provide value that can be articulated. Publications educate and disseminate information, coin albums provide a place for safekeeping, convention centers and shops provide a venue for conducting physical business.
What value does changing the grading system add?
To your point about the whole - unintended consequences and costs to society are very much in play as a result of individual decision making. In fact, so much so, that government often steps in to regulate how, when and where consumers may purchase and use certain products. While this would certainly not rise to such a level, it’s perfectly valid to consider the potential cost to the hobby that a redirection of collector dollars and marketplace confusion may cause.
I think you are missing their argument, so here it is: The idea is that the rest of the world does not work on a scale devised for large cents a century ago and that is also not base 10. In other collectables, they use a 10 point scale, if the 'hobby' wishes to evolve/integrate to the bigger collectable world, and bring in more folks to enjoy coins, using a 10 point scale is obvious for all of the correct reasons.
PCGS only brings highest premiums in a niche market of US coins. Do they for ancients and world coins, still dominated by NGC?
Best, SH
This might start with moderns, but it will quickly consume the rest of the market. Why? Because companies innovate or perish. The plus thing lasted for a while, but it's about run its course. The reconsideration and regrade games have given people reasons to keep turning the grading crank, but after a while, there's nowhere else to go unless you change the rules.
"A rose, by any other name would smell as sweet."
I'm pretty sure when the labels change the coins stay the same. Good coins are good coins irrespective of the labels or stickers they wear. I don't particularly care about the heavily modified "Sheldon" scale we're using now, Contemporary grading doesn't even follow its own written rules, so why not change them? Coins with wear are showing up in holders all the way up to MS64. The majority of nice AU coins are superior to the majority of MS60 and MS61 coins. it's a mess, really. We all learned it, just like we all have a conceptual understanding of designations, plusses, stickers, different eras of holders and the rest. Through it all, the actual coins have just been sitting there, quietly observing our gyrations and handwaving.
I just don't want the market to force me to have everything regraded before its eventual sale and dispersal.
If the base 10 system takes hold, it will be interesting to see how NGC and other TPG's take on what to do about this and a very good point........... It could be that the offer an option that does not include regrade but instead simply a new slab with a grade on base 10 considered equivalent to the base 70 system grade, at a price of reholdering. We will see how this plays out. Exciting times when innovation like this happens.
>
This reminds me of the CAC concern raised by collectors!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Since I don't currently have any plans to use it, I can't tell you. You need to ask people who will use it.
The government is made up of individual people. When they step in to make decisions for everybody, it's still individuals making those decisions.
Those "collector dollars" belong to the individual collectors and it's their option as to how they're spent. There is no omniscient being in charge of coin collecting, forcing you to spend your money (or not) for your own good.
This is a good observation. HST, I am one of those that will pay for the cross to CAC or even cross from sticker to CAC slab. Many probably won't but I am in it for collecting and all in on CAC so...................
>
Like Bo Derek?! 😉
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
1 is the best for the registry sets, the lowball sets that is!
As an analogy, in the science I did for a career, some of the most brilliant minds in the world did not understand when others of us were quoting differences in values to the 5th to 7th decimal place. For example, we would argue that there was a huge difference between 0.512638 and 0.512738 and the other clan of brilliant folks eyes would glaze over. So we invented a normalization scheme where 0.512638 now equals 0, and 0.512738 is 10^4 parts deviation from 0.512638, so now equals +2. etc. etc. So then the other brilliant folks understood the whole numbers versus the 6 decimal place discussions we were having and voila everyone could talk to each other!
So this is similar to base 70 versus base 10. Alot of folks eyes are going to glaze over using the ancient large cent grading scheme when they first try out coin collecting, but those same folks are trained to understand base 10. I am pretty sure they will understand that scale even when having glazed eyes for the 70 scale......... Human nature is what it is.
Best, SH
Collectors will be forced to reslab if a new system becomes the standard. The adoption of a new system will cause collectors’ current coins to decline in value relative to others in the new slabs. Inevitably, reslabbing becomes in collectors best interest to regain value and marketability. This constitutes unnecessary dollars funneled to the grading companies. There is a term for this: rent-seeking.
I don't see it. It's not like people won't know what a 65 is even if everything newly slabbed is in a 10 scale.
You've said this more than once. The truth is- nobody will be forced to do anything.
Have you considered the possibility that a new system will cause coins in the new slabs to increase in value relative to current ones? You might.
When you bought your coins, who guaranteed you that their marketability would not ever be negatively affected?
Those dollars are not all yours to spend. The fact that other people may make a choice with which you do not agree does not make those expenditures unnecessary.
Offering a product/service to willing buyers who are free to decline is not rent-seeking.
I dunno...The metric system is a base 10 system and look how successful that has been in the US.
I guess I do have an opinion about this, and it's negative. The saying 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' comes to mind. So far nobody has convinced me that our current 70 system is broke...at least enough to warrant this change.
You keep oversimplifying by arguing that if collectors pay to reslab that there must be value. You fail to realize that this is an unproductive use of capital since absent the change collectors value was already maximized.
You've also again responded to arguments that I didn’t make. I never argued i had a guarantee, or that I control or should control where others spend their dollars.
Wiki has a good explanation of rent-seeking - check it out. Using your social and political clout to institute an unproductive change to make money for yourself is rent-seeking.
You are free to argue how this change is productive (i.e. adds value) - but a simple “because people are buying it” is an insufficient argument.
Unfortunately at this point I can’t do any more to help you understand the economic arguments against the change.
You think it's an unproductive use of capital but your opinion is not binding on others, who may consider it a productive use. By your argument, you refuse to recognize that fact.
Your definition of "unproductive" seems to keep coming around to being based on "what's good for me".
When McDonald's opens a restaurant across the street from Wendy's, that's an unproductive change for Wendy's but it's not rent seeking. NGC certainly isn't using political clout and I'm not seeing where they're using social clout (saying "Here's our new product" is nothing more than marketing something new- all businesses do it) to institute anything. I understand you are set on the idea it's unproductive, but be that as it may, others will have their own ideas which may not be in alignment with yours.
I read the Wikipedia article- thanks. Would you be willing to copy/paste the part of it that explains how NGC's actions constitute "rent seeking"?
These arguments are mad boring
Real ones will keep using pcgs and the Sheldon scale
Mason just send all you coins to ngcx and stop talking about it
Then stop reading them.
Nobody has even hinted that they can't keep doing that.
I already said I had no plans to.
Oh no! Thread Police on duty!
Every scientist in the US uses it. And EVERY other country in the world uses it.
And degrees Kelvin too.
It is broke, it was broken from the start, but the kinetics to change it to a logical grading system is sluggish. Folks love to talk about change in politics but in reality most want things just as they are because change can be difficult on the short term (and even long term). It is the bold and innovative that change things for the better, like NGC is putting forth in grading with NGCX...............
These kinds of humor are a dime a dozen.
Follow me on MyCollect!
Real ones - who? Be specific, I am a 'real one' and probably won't do as you say above if given the chance to have a better numeric system of grading, and certainly I am all in for CACG for a TPG for US coins as least.
Best, SH
@spacehayduke said:
It is broke, it was broken from the start, but the kinetics to change it to a logical grading system is sluggish. Folks love to talk about change in politics but in reality most want things just as they are because change can be difficult on the short term (and even long term). It is the bold and innovative that change things for the better, like NGC is putting forth in grading with NGCX...............
Fact Check: False.
What does CACG have to do with NGCX?
John Albanese is 63 years old
PCGS has been around 35 years
“A better numeric grading system”
What the Sheldon scale is too hard for you?
Remember the last time John albanese started a grading company what was it called again? It’s on the tip of my tongue oh yeah NGC. Yeah they love being in second place. I’m sure this time around it’s gonna be much different
And sorry to beat a dead horse here but the new cac slabs they’re using the Sheldon scale
So idk man maybe start a new thread about how you’re “all in” over at cac that could be fun
My thoughts are that this concept will ultimately fail. The only coins that make sense to slab in the X holders are the Minnie Mouse Niue dreck of the world, because those coins don’t have to be explained to grandpa/ma buying the coin for the grandkids or as a store of value.
I do see value in slabbing lowball modern coins in the X holders. I think they will be intriguing and rare because the labeling will be limited / short lived.
Tightening the grading scale down to 10 from 70 doesn’t excite me. Widening it to 100 is when you’ll see the huge influx of regrading.
It's not "down" to 10. With decimals, it is 100 point scale. But you don't use all 70 anyway. Show me a VF22 or an XF43.
You really shouldn't be trolling JA. HE can actually tell when a 55 doubled die has been cleaned.
Still waiting on that 3 legged buffalo on gold planchet
As soon as payment arrives, the coin will ship. No returns or bullhorns.
That’s the point of it. A 1794 half currently in pcgs xf40 might change to an xf43 in a 100 point system, most likely adding value. That’s what the grading companies goals are, so that people continue to use their services. Just gotta create & teach the 100 point scale grading technique to the graders, which couldn’t be that difficult. From my understanding pcgs already uses a 700 point scale in order to determine plus grades.
I bet the graders at NGC on the 10 point scale have no clue about assigning those arbitrary grades. They probably still use the 70 point scale, and someone in the encapsulation process converts it. Like if grades say au53, the encapsulation person converts that to 8.3 (or whatever new number they use).
I think cac and pcgs will lead the industry
Ngc in 3rd place
And the 10 point scale only for 1982-present? Who even collects those coin?
There should soon be a thriving market in programs.
Like sideshow programs. Program,... getcha program heah! See the hootchy kootchy grades!!!
Replete with an index table to cross reference all slabs from the past to the newest and mostest bestest!