New Paramount Grading Service at FUN?
stockdude_
Posts: 487 ✭✭✭
Did anyone see the table where the gentleman had his own slabs ? I believe he called it Paramount Grading Co (PGC?) He said he had just started this year. The slabs were the same as the PCGS slabs though obviously with different labels. I found it interesting. Thoughts?
0
Comments
Was the person also selling coins in these slabs? Could be a conflict of interest if the person is truly hoping to make it in the grading business.
Q David Bowers’ and James Ruddy formed Empire Coin Co. in 1958, which was later acquired by Paramount international Coin Corp. in 1965. This company slabbed many of the Redfield silver dollar hoard. Whether this is the same Paramount coin as you are referring to I don’t know.
From the initial post: “He said he had just started this year. The slabs were the same as the PCGS slabs though obviously with different labels.” So it can’t be the same company.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree, but these are the only slabs I’ve ever seen with the name “paramount”.
Thank you Mark, I also said " i believe" since i want 100% sure that Paramount was the name.
Yes he was.
I don't consider that a TPGS. It's just a self-slabber. There are a lot of those. Did you ask how MANY graders he had? I would guess the answer is one.
Self slab operators are out there. I don’t consider them a TPG.
How could it be a conflict of interest unless he was also working for a TPG other than his own?
Using DIY slabs instead of cardboard 2x2s does not turn you into a grading service.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Genuine question--where do you draw the line/what factors make the two distinct?
I realize you didn’t ask me but I’ll answer, anyway.😉
First and foremost, I’d draw the line at someone slabbing and then offering/selling their own coins.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
saw them at FUN
good looking holder, very similar to pcgs holders
Had a cooked nickel in the new holder, blatant AT , SOSDD
When you grade, slab, and sell your own coins you don't think there is an opportunity for a conflict of interest? Do you recall the grading company ACG and how that went?
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
@stockdude_ Did you take any pictures of these "slabs"?
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
You're selling an opinion whether it be yours or someone else's. I remember ACG. Was PCGS Presidential review a conflict of interest situation? I suppose in a disagreement situation there is always a possibility to resolve it by you ruling in your own favor. You're also selling integrity.
I don't think PCGS, NGC or CACG has anything to worry about.
What about ANACS?
You would have to be slabbing someone else's coins, for one.
You don't think that he might be tempted to bump his coins to sell them for more money?
And ICG. also safe
It's not whose opinion it is. It is that you materially benefit from the opinion. PCGS or NGC dOn't sell the coins they slab. That makes their opinion more likely to be objective.
I've seen some ugly babies out there. But I've never met a woman who thought her baby was ugly.
Agree. Assume coins of other are done. Would coins of the company's owner(s) that are also graded be self-slabbed?
It now becomes semantic. Is there a grading team? If not, definitely self-slabbing. If there is an independent grading team, maybe not.
But I wouldn't trust any of the slabs, no matter what you call them. They are hopelessly compromised by the conflict of interest. If you want to be a TPGS, you don't slab your own submissions.
You seem to be missing the point, because the seller is doing the grading he is incentivized to give his inventory grades that are higher than they deserve. And even worse give straight grades to damaged or cleaned coins, that is the conflict of interest. From your answer it does not seem that you know anything about ACG and how that went down.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
If I worked for PCGS and consulted for NGC THAT woul> @coinbuf said:
I remember a few things about ACG. AH knew how to grade. Also claimed his scale was different than/from the Sheldon scale. Straight grading cleaned or damaged coins is deceit. Every grade ever written on a 2 x 2 is a conflict then. As long as you know how to grade his[the dealer in FL, not AH] opinion doesn't mean squat to you.
What does the "T" in TPG stand for? Does the discussion really need to go beyond that, regardless of how many graders are involved, the integrity of the seller, or anything else for that matter?
Dealers have been grading their own inventory since forever. Decades before there was such a thing as slabs. Or TPGs. They have continued to do so to the present day. The original Paramount slabs are but one example.
It's fine, and it's legitimate. But it's not a TPG slab as we understand that to be today.
And any similarity to an actual TPG slab, no matter how accurate the grading might turn out to be, if the grading is done by any entity that is also engaged in the buying and selling of collector coins, is nothing more than an attempt to confuse the uninformed, and the slabs will not meet the definition of a TPG. Period.
Even CAC, in making markets in CAC approved coins, did not also slab the coins. They simply agreed with the grade assigned by a TPG, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the color of the bean, and stood behind that opinion with a bid.
And my understanding is that CACG does not also make markets in the coins it grades. Someone please correct me if I am wrong about that.
wouldn't that be a T is Two?
For me. For you.
Every grade ever written in a 2x2 IS a conflict of interest. It's not THIRD PARTY grading if you do it. The point is that his "slabs" are equivalent to writing on a 2x2. It's not an independent opinion by an objective entity
Could that be our member, Finn?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13702720#Comment_13702720
There have been all types of quality controls to avoid conflicts of interest. Many companies don't permit graders to buy and sell certified coins. When ICG came about 20 plus years ago they spoke about things they did to avoid conflicts of interest. I don't think that NGC ever had graders buying and selling their coins. I'm a little surprised that neither NGC nor PCGS would have tried to compete with CAC with a platform such as "Coinplex" was doing.
The only ones who may have to worry is the unaware general public who purchase these type of slabs. When it comes time to sell them. But I guess that is tuition.
Put another way, a first party grader trying to misrepresent themselves as a third party grader.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
My all time favorite is still the guy who sold NGC and PCGS slabs, but would use a sharpie to "correct" the grades on the coins he was selling.
So he's a first party grader just getting started. BFD. Lots of people sell coins in their own slabs. How the hell do you get started in the business otherwise? Is Acme coin going to pay an independent grader? Who would even believe that? There is a gent who attends our local show and always has coins in his own slabs. Has been doing that for years. If you have the interest such that you spend the time and money to go to FUN you won't get suckered in by him. Sounds like you could cherrypick him maybe. Anyone have the stones to get in his face about it? Maybe risk getting your gluteus maximus bounced from the bourse floor. Does he have any kind of stature in the hobby?
Did his stuff seem accurately graded? Maybe he buys graded rolls of coins and slabs them at the grade on the roll. On a scale of 1-10 this would be C of I level 2 to me.
There’s a huge difference between a person/dealer (first party grader) selling his coins in whatever type of holder vs. one doing so, while representing himself as an independent third party grader.
I don’t know if that was really being done in this case, but if so, some of us think it’s problematic. You’re free to disagree.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You really are completely missing the point. No one said there was anything wrong with him grading his own coins. What we said is that he is IN NO WAY a TPGS and the conflict of interest makes it impossible for him to be one.
He is selling raw coins and no one suggested that there is anything wrong with his selling of coins. And we don't know if he was even trying to pretend he was a slabbing service. But the OP asked about him being a slab service and we said he wasn't. For some reason, you want to argue that there is no conflict of interest.
As a coin seller, he has zero conflict of interest.
As a grading service (if he is trying to be one) he has a 4 alarm level one conflict of interest.
As soon as PCGS starts slabbing their own coins and retailing them, they also cease to be a TPGS BECAUSE THEY ARE NO LONGER A 3rd PARTY.
Agree with much of what you wrote before the ellipsis.
The major TPG’s are owned by stockholders, or members in the case of LLC’s. Do you view coins submitted by those with more than just a de minis ownership interest in a TPG as self-slabbed? '
More precisely, at what point does a third party become a first party?
If the grading is done by any entity that is also engaged in the buying and selling of collector coins, is nothing more than an attempt to confuse the uninformed, and the slabs will not meet the definition of a TPG.
I tend to agree. Any time a dollar changes hands, or has the possibility of changing hands, a potential conflict of interest arises. TPG's, as I understand them, provide a wall of separation between the grader and the seller. While no system is perfect, TPG's do seem to increase confidence in the authenticity, grade and value of a coin.
This is a valid, but complex issue. As long as the graders and finalizers don't know, there is zero conflict. If they do know, we can debate ad nauseum whether there is a conflict and how deep it goes.
For example, I've never really liked that JA makes a market on CAC coins. Not that I don't trust him, but there is a bit of a COI there of a different type. While he's not submitting coins himself, I don't think, he does potentially benefit from what is or isn't stickered. In some ways that guarantees strictness, especially for widgets. But for a rare coin, he could keep the price down by not stickering it, for example.
This is exactly what I thought the minute I saw this thread!!! Could it be our old buddy Finn hawking his 1945 Full Band MS66 dime, which also earned his own self-stickering!
New website: Groovycoins.com Capped Bust Half Dime registry set: Bikergeek CBHD LM Set
I would treat it like any other "raw" coin. Their slab would have very little to do with my decision to buy it or not.
>
Not to cause anyone to reach for a bottle of Dramamine
.....
Our host is publicly traded, so substantive ownership interests are public.
What are your thoughts on whether privately held TPGS should disclose both non-trivial ownership interests, and/or control mechanisms in the event an owner submits? Even with all feasible controls in place, might some coins/submissions be of such magnitude that anonymity /a Chinese wall, is really not possible?
Not meant to elicit any discussion of any particular individual ---asked solely (and abstractly) from a market integrity perspective.
Considering that you’ve asked and/or commented multiple times about a particular named grading company and individual, it’s hard for me to believe that your last sentence above wasn’t more of the same. Why don’t you just go ahead and start a thread about it instead of bringing it up in different threads from time to time?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Our host hasn't been publicly traded for years.
Not sure what I might have said in those prior posts which caused you to call my veracity into question here-publicly. I may be of strong opinions, but I do not post false information, and am not "agenda drive." Just a person who likes history/numismatic history. Also someone with a bit of experience dealing with ethics.
Believe my comments are relevant to the discussion at hand. They were posted to highlight nuisances and the blur between a First/Third Party. See no need for a separate thread.
Copied below is your most recent additional reference to that subject that I recall - it’s from this thread:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1110849/declared-finest-known-1794-dollar-is-now-graded-cacg-ms67-and-insured-for-15-million#latest
Your hidden profile makes it difficult for me to locate your other posts in that topic in a timely fashion.
CH22 Posts: 239 ✭✭✭✭ January 23, 2025 4:35PM
Beautiful historic coin.
@SanctionII said:
...... What is the explanation for the higher grade of MS67 being assigned to this particular coin?
Regret-can't you read
Seems a regrettable self-kicking decision was made when it was given a green, rather than a gold bean last time around. Thankfully, an opportunity to remedy that presented.
See CAC is still using the closing tag line in press material which omits any reference to Hansen affiliates' ownership interests.“
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark: I think it a bit heavy handed to presume to tell others how/where to post. That was the point of my reply. Welcome disagreement, good way to learn from others. But do think I have the right to post information not violative of forum guidelines in any way I, myself, choose.
Have much respect for you, your reputation, knowledge, experience, and informed opinions. Without reservation, all are impressive.
Not so much a fan of being ascribed a lack of veracity here on gossamer light and attenuated suppositions.
Thread deals with self-slabbing. Think the distinction between who is a First/Third Party in the TPG world is an interesting and nuanced question—a good one to kick around and get the views of others. Yes, that might involve CAC/CACG---but it also involves other entities. Hence, why I tried to keep it abstract.
Could very well have misconstrued it, but took you reply as an attempt to silence/shut me down on this thread. My reaction after reading was.... if I said something of no interest, isn't up to the forum to just pay no notice, and not for someone else to tell me where, or how, I can post.
Would welcome your thoughts on the questions I had posed—if you wish—or more than fine if you don't.
Went to the FUN website. Do they offer a list of who had which table/s at the most recent show?
I didn’t tell you how or where to post. I asked a question. Or, if you prefer, I made a suggestion. And no, I wasn’t attempting to silence you or shut you down. I know I couldn’t do that even if I wanted to, which I don’t.
Regarding the questions you posed previously:
“What are your thoughts on whether privately held TPGS should disclose both non-trivial ownership interests, and/or control mechanisms in the event an owner submits? Even with all feasible controls in place, might some coins/submissions be of such magnitude that anonymity /a Chinese wall, is really not possible?”
1) I believe that such disclosures should be made.
2) I think it’s possible that “anonymity /a Chinese wall” might not be possible for some submissions. And although you didn’t raise the question, with respect to 2) above, the same could be said about publicly held TPGS and/or submissions by non-owners.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.