@neildrobertson said:
I would love to see them drop prefixes. No VG, AU, etc. I'm sick of the AU vs MS arguments when people should just be talking about how nice the coin is.
Then shouldn't you drop the numbers also...
No. The prefixes tell you nothing useful that the number doesn't also tell you, and they bring some "baggage" with them from eras before grading.
But you said "...just be talking about how nice the coin is." I just don't see how 45 or XF45 is any different in that regard.
@jmlanzaf said:
But you said "...just be talking about how nice the coin is." I just don't see how 45 or XF45 is any different in that regard.
That comment is driven by the notion that discussions about whether something is MS or AU includes some level of understanding of use and intent. Use and intent only indirectly influence the condition of the coin, if at all. The only thing that should matter is the current physical state of the coin. That's all that can be seen and assessed. And it can be done without any understanding of the pathway the coin took to get from the dies into the grader's hands.
Competition is a good thing. If they merge into a single company, you essentially have a monopoly and there's nothing preventing them from raising their fees.
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
Competition is a good thing. If they merge into a single company, you essentially have a monopoly and there's nothing preventing them from raising their fees.
As a professional coin grader for nearly 42 years, this is what I would like to see introduced. That the Q.C., or final grader to give a brief written description on the characteristics, pro or con. Or potentially answer a short question as to strike, luster, surface reflection, toning, or reasons why it's bad, or did not make the the next grade, proof or business strike. It's not hard to do generally. I'm sure any additional written info given will be subject to an argument and that's probably why it is not done. I have thought about introducing this at ANACS. J.P. Martin
Don't some of the services do this already for the circulated grades? It does not make sense for MS coins that are cleaned but would work for rim file, scratches, holes.
@DeplorableDan said:
I would humbly like to ask a question of the King, if permissible. @MFeld, what feasible change would YOU like to see the TPG’s make?
You can ask whatever you want…but that doesn’t mean you’ll get an answer. 😈 😉
My answer, which will follow, will be boring, far from imaginative, lacking in specific details and perhaps infeasible. However, I feel that the most important potential change/improvement, by far, would be better consistency in grading.
That was the easy part. The hard part would be how to try to accomplish it. Maybe a good first step would be to start a thread, asking for ideas/suggestiins?
I've thought about this before. At our club we had an educational program where we were asked to rank 12 images of Jefferson nickels by increasing grade. Most of us got them correct with one or two coins out of place. Three members got everything in the right order. If collectors can do this with that level of accuracy...
So, if there were a way to harmlessly mark every morgan dollar so it could be identified and returned to is' owner as fast as they were input they went to a grading table that was constantly being filled and emptied (once graded) there would always be examples of all grades in the sections so that the grading would be more precise. All the grader had to do was place it somewhere along the table with similar graded coins. Nickels, halves, etc. would have their own grading lines. Eventually all the different coins in a person's order would be reunited. Just a fanciful dream but after all of us are dead, all this will be automated.
Comments
But you said "...just be talking about how nice the coin is." I just don't see how 45 or XF45 is any different in that regard.
Abandon the "plus" designations.
That comment is driven by the notion that discussions about whether something is MS or AU includes some level of understanding of use and intent. Use and intent only indirectly influence the condition of the coin, if at all. The only thing that should matter is the current physical state of the coin. That's all that can be seen and assessed. And it can be done without any understanding of the pathway the coin took to get from the dies into the grader's hands.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
Big 3 merge into one...
Lower fees, higher volumes, lower overhead, more margin, faster turnaround, better consistency...everybody wins.
😉
Competition is a good thing. If they merge into a single company, you essentially have a monopoly and there's nothing preventing them from raising their fees.
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
Monopolies don’t usually result in lower prices or better service.
While lowering standards
Latin American Collection
Faster turnaround would seem to
be something very achievable. Not sure why this is an issue at all nor why it has gone on for so long.
As a professional coin grader for nearly 42 years, this is what I would like to see introduced. That the Q.C., or final grader to give a brief written description on the characteristics, pro or con. Or potentially answer a short question as to strike, luster, surface reflection, toning, or reasons why it's bad, or did not make the the next grade, proof or business strike. It's not hard to do generally. I'm sure any additional written info given will be subject to an argument and that's probably why it is not done. I have thought about introducing this at ANACS. J.P. Martin
Don't some of the services do this already for the circulated grades? It does not make sense for MS coins that are cleaned but would work for rim file, scratches, holes.
I've thought about this before. At our club we had an educational program where we were asked to rank 12 images of Jefferson nickels by increasing grade. Most of us got them correct with one or two coins out of place. Three members got everything in the right order. If collectors can do this with that level of accuracy...
So, if there were a way to harmlessly mark every morgan dollar so it could be identified and returned to is' owner as fast as they were input they went to a grading table that was constantly being filled and emptied (once graded) there would always be examples of all grades in the sections so that the grading would be more precise. All the grader had to do was place it somewhere along the table with similar graded coins. Nickels, halves, etc. would have their own grading lines. Eventually all the different coins in a person's order would be reunited. Just a fanciful dream but after all of us are dead, all this will be automated.
Provider a date on the label when the item was graded.