The Great TPG debate and some reflections
U1chicago
Posts: 6,092 ✭✭✭✭✭
TLDR version: it's complicated; there are good, bad, and average coins in all slabs; see bottom for some nice coins.....but better yet, read the whole thing. 
Every so often a thread pops up where we debate the merits of the grading companies (which is better, who is more consistent, and whose slab brings the bigger return). Well I don’t think that will be completely solved here (or anywhere) but I still wanted to reflect on my own journey and what has shaped my opinions on the subject.
It all starts with the 50 State Quarters series-that is where my collection began; first it was simply filling the holes of an album with one of each mint. In those days I had no idea what grading services were and had not signed up for any forums. Raw quarters from circulation were followed by discovering the US Mint website and adding the proof sets. Eventually I picked up a Redbook and became interested in wheat cents (again raw in an album). Those could not be completed from pocket change so it led me to visit the local coin store. This was still the early 2000s and the shop did not have slabs. In fact, I recall one time when someone asked the owner (who was an older gentleman and had been in business well before the services started) about slabs, he dismissed it as not something he was interested in. It would take several years and a change of ownership before slabs showed up at that store. And my first slab bought was a high grade ICG wheat cent for $5 that I picked up as a curiosity. A side note-that was also the first coin I ever sold on eBay (I was happy to get something like $35 for it).
My first forum was CoinTalk and that is where I started reading more about the various slab companies. Now I don’t think this is quite common, but what caught my eye were the threads about the “lesser” third party graders (particularly from the likes of Conder101). So my first main slabbed collection was a hodgepodge of these slabs (ACG, NTC, Compugrade, Blanchard, etc). I enjoyed finding the unusual ones and it was a bonus if the coin inside was nice. The next major undertaking for me was cameo Franklins. There I did not go with the less known TPGs but stuck with NGC and PCGS. I did not have a preference for one over the other; I just wanted to find the nicest example of each at the most reasonable price. I had more NGC examples than PCGS but did not give it much thought.
After a few years, the Franklin collection was dispersed. I did not keep records of which coins sold faster (PCGS vs NGC) but I do recall that one PCGS Franklin that fortunately did not sell later received a gold CAC (then it sold quite well). The only Franklin that I did keep from that collection was an NGC.
The next phase of collecting saw me drift towards a collection of toners (mainly Morgans) plus some type/world coins. Here the focus is on eye appeal and the grading company is not the primary focus. Ok so that was not always quite true. Initially I had a mix of slabs. Actually my first ever grading submission was to Anacs (in large part because they had a special and the coins were not worth the grading costs at the other services). A few years later, I tried NGC for the first time. And finally I gave in and went to PCGS. That included cracking several of the NGC slabbed coins. I had partially bought in to the belief that PCGS was better and did see higher auction results for certain coins. I also heard many people praise TrueViews and some even would not buy a toned coin that did not have one (how times have changed!). There was a period where I had no NGC toned Morgans, only PCGS. I never got to the point of having only PCGS coins (because I still liked my NGC, Anacs, etc slabbed coins but could not justify the costs of reslabbing all of them at PCGS). I would say that over the years my total PCGS slabs outnumber any other slab in my collection. However, I believe there are good, bad, and average coins in all slabs. I won’t pass on a coin because of the slab it resides in and I will pay an appropriate premium for eye appeal in any slab that holds a coin I like. I have not submitted anything to PCGS in a while now (combination of nothing worthy, the wait times, and the current state of the photos) but could see sending something in the future (including cracking some NGC or Anacs slabs if I think the potential value increase justifies it).
And what is a thread without some photos! Here are two of my favorite Morgans that were cracked from NGC holders and sent to PCGS.
NGC MS 65 * to PCGS MS 65
NGC MS 64 * to PCGS MS 64
But there are coins that I have kept in NGC holders and don’t intend to change that. A favorite is this Columbian.
Comments
Excellent writeup. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. They are well grounded in reality.
Edited to add:
On a side note, I stumbled upon your 1881-S's twin.
(Although the color progression is in the opposite direction!)
peacockcoins
Join the services and the fees add up.
Especially if you submit less than you expect.
Married to PCGS for subs and mostly for purchases. Crossovers need to be bangers, and that means some skill in knowing standards.
NGC and ANACS offer world class service. It is just the market has become more saturated with CAC.
Theoretically it should not matter. Buy the coin blah blah... But the real market is the hammer price.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
The fees definitely add up and I’d like to think that I’ve come close to breaking even on them. One of my first NGC subs yielded an MS 64 1921 Peace Dollar; it came from a raw set so that was a nice win even though this was before the prices spiked in 2020/2021. I’ve had a few upgrades and crosses at grade mixed in with some details slabs and downgrades. Overall my sample size is still fairly small (especially compared to some of the seasoned submitters). I would like to say I’ve learned something but that doesn’t mean I won’t make at least a few more silly submissions in the future!
Thank you!
And I believe I saw that other Morgan before (maybe a GC auction). It’s a nice one. I have this one (MS 63) as one of my favorites among “O” mint reverse toners (I bought it as-is; there was no cracking or slabbing on my end).
As our hobby evolves and the world market gradually embraces slabbing, the TPG companies will be there. So, if you're blessed with the skill set to grade and evaluate all things numismatics, you'll be able to navigate the changes. I've run a few crossovers by David Kahn in the past and he always asks hard questions about value added etc.
My few success stories are crosses from ANACS & NGC (World & US). Small potatoes compared to some on the forum.
I think almost everyone makes the lower tier slab mistake early on. I did with an ACG Columbian. I had actively collected from around 1965 for 10 years and then again for a few years in the late 1980's. When I came back in 1999 it was my first exposure to encapsulated coins.
I will no longer get TVs or use Goldshield but my last sub was lightning fast. Arrived 11-14 and grades popped 12-3 using regular.
Outside of NCLT, I see limited evidence that the world market is embracing it. It's prevalent in China and I know from personal experience and the population counts it's definitely preferred in South Africa (over 20 years now), but not much elsewhere. I've seen more graded coins in foreign auctions in more recent years, but these are usually more expensive and more likely graded primarily to market to US based collectors.
It's my inference (not fact) that most of the demand for graded non-US coinage is from US based buyers. Collectors elsewhere will buy a coin already in a slab but mostly aren't looking for it. I haven't seen any evidence that non-US based buyers have an inclination to pay large premiums for the highest labels, as there is no practical difference to most buyers in most markets vs. coins graded slightly lower.
The combination of a frequently much lower price level and for many markets, much greater scarcity, limits the potential for the TPGs, outside of NCLT.