LS-- I live on Capitol Hill in Seattle. Spent last night on Guemes Island, which is right across from Anacortes. There are quite a few of us from Washington on the board I am finding. One of these days I may start a thread and ask us all to step forward. I sold a coin to a board member and when the transaction was done it turned out he was in Bellevue.
I can tell you sincerely, that if I came off too strong in any of my responses to you in this thread, that it is not my desire to offend or leave bad feelings. I do think you made some good points as things progressed, and I hope you are not regreting getting involved. Carl
crowded I can live with (ex-New Yorker), but this traffic........ Its worse than those graders at.....Look, I made a funny And on this thread of all places. But I would be up for a meeting locally anytime. Someone suggest a date and we can see how many could meet for dinner. Everybody brings 3 coins they consider that have real interest to them and we bore the dickins out of the other guests.
I'll relate a story as close to the truth as I can remember. It was posted here or in the "set registry" forum in the last couple of months. Its how the only MS69RD early date lincoln came to be. Stewart Blay somehow got a magic roll, probably a common occurrence for Stewart judging by his set, of 1919-P Lincoln's. He sent 5 or so in for grading and a few came back MS68RD's. A true wonder since no coin had graded 68RD ever. So he sends in a bunch more and they all come back MS68RD. Stewart is on a roll so he picks out the top 68RD's and send them in for regrade. One of the coins is clearly better than the others and is crowned an MS69RD. The highest of any Lincoln cent from 1909-1958. Since the PCGS graders did not see the MS 69 in the first go around, they missed it. Of the 12 know early date Lincoln's at 68 and above we are talking, I believe, of 9 of them, in these 3 very related submissions. So now I ask, how many early date Lincoln's have been seen by your 9-5 PCGS grader? Does your top pop argument still hold water? Are there MS 67'S that when put up against one of the 68RD 1919's that are as good or even better? What percentage of mistakes at this grade level exist?
I probably got a little bit of the story wrong but its real close on the numbers and illustrates the point.
I may trek up to the Tacoma show if anyone wants to meet there. LS, I think the point of Clackamas' post was that even the PCGS graders haven't seen many of these high grade coins yet, and even missed the one they did see, as evidenced by their later upgrade of a 68 to a 69 (the crackout game I referred to before).
>Of the 12 know early date Lincoln's at 68 and above we are talking, I believe, of 9 of them, in these 3 very related submissions.
It does not make much sense. Sorry for the confusion. This accounts for 13 (see bottom part of post) of the 19 pre 1934 Lincolns graded 68 or higher and 35 of the 67'S, More than 68% of the MS68+ coins. See my point?
Here is the text to the original post from Stewart with and the link to the thread.Thread
"When I submitted the first ten coins ( all 1919 cents ) eight came back ms 67 and two came back ms 68. PCGS had never previously graded a wheat cent ms 68. When I submitted the next ten pieces, eight graded ms 68 and two pieces graded ms 67. I then submitted five ms 68's for review. One was clearly better. I earned the ms 69 grade.The coin glows in the light, has full mint bloom and frost like no other cent .
Stewart
The MS69 coin was not cracked but sent in with other suberb MS68's for a regrade and stood out and then was upgraded.
Further down the thread you will read the following:
"SOG - I made all but one of the 1919 ms 68 red Lincoln cents.Yes, I made 13 of the 14.The other one was made by Heritage and as far as I was concerned,it was a mistake. Of the seventy coins I bought, at the time was a record price, 13 graded ms 68, about 35 graded ms 67,1 graded ms69 and the rest graded ms 65 and ms 66.
Rella - Andy and I split a roll deal from 1934-1958. We paid stupid money for it because of the roll of 1954 P. Andy bought me out and then went partners with someone else. Then Andy had to buy out the other follow.This weekend he got the first two 1954 P's to go 67. I bought one of them.Alot of money,time and work is the reason these
clackamas - I must go back to my earlier post and explain. There are 12 MS68 pop 1 coins in the early date lincoln series. There is 1 ms69. I'm not counting the 14 ms68's for the date 1919. The 13 coins I'm talking about here are above and beyond the next levels (ms67's). These top pop coins are presumed to be superior to the 67's graded below them. And my point was that very few collectors if even a handful have ever seen them. But I assure you the PCGS graders have. Now not many of the graders have seen all this high grade material, but if you can put yourself in their job for just a moment, wouldn't you admit that they all probably gather around the old water cooler and chat about these high grade babies? I bet they take it upon themselves to make sure that everybody gets to see the really rare coins in all series to keep them all sharp.
If you go down the pop report you will see that there is alot of material that collectors never get to see. The graders do, and IMHO my theory (being polite) is correct.
PS: when is the next Tacoma show? I would very much like to meet some of you.
The question I have is Which graders? My dealer graded for PCGS. He may have seen some of these, but is not grading there now. How many of the current graders have seen these pieces? PCGS graders are changing. There was a recent thread about how Dale will be going to Spectrum because Thad Olsen is going to PCGS to be a grader. Will he automatically be considered a specialist in all areas of grading where he was not in the past?
On the other side, we have had recent threads by a person who is listing things on Ebay and giving descriptions like:
PCGS will grade this MS65 for sure. Members of a popular forum all agreed this coin is woderful blah, blah, blah. This I will agree is worth basically nothing as you really cannot grade nice MS pieces by a scan, and many who are giving the opinions could not grade a MS coin if it was in their hand. (but some of these members certainly can).
As for why you would send it to PCGS if you can grade yourself. It is called saleability. Just because you can grade a coin as well as anyone alive does not mean much to the next person who comes into your shop. Having it in a PCGS holder allows you to sell it for the grade it is. If PCGS does not give you the grade you know it deserves, many times you will re-submit until it gets it. It does not take anything away from you as a grader or PCGS as a grading company. (The MS69 cent is a prime example. By itself, it was a MS68. With a group of MS68's, it stood out and thus was a MS69)
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
People do not like losing money because they buy overgraded coins. Most people who first attend a grading seminar invariably are looking for some magic potion that will make grading a science and take the guesswork out of it... doesn't happen and frustration results.
This gets extrapolated over onto the grading services. Institutionally, PCGS gets the slight nod as grading the most marketable coins OVERALL. That, obviously, does not mean they are error-free, and when you buy one of the errors or don't get an "obvious" grade you expected, you don't care about OVERALL... and frustration results.
I think I have some idea of where LS is coming from. I am a competent grader. Some might consider me expert in some areas or the overall if you use a bell curve. I make my living with coins but I routinely make purchasing mistakes that cost me money. I've got an ego like everyone else, and yet I EXPECT to make those mistakes because grading is an art and markets are fluid. It's a whole process. When I was younger and less experienced, I made rookie mistakes and (hopefully) learned from them. I've bought counterfeit coins, artificially enhanced coins, overgraded coins and even a few "too good to be true bargains" that were. What I don't do is to whine about my mistakes or attempt to place the blame for a bad transaction on someone else. In short, I take responsibility for my actions, good and bad.
The fact is that like any other marketplace, the coin industry is full of risks and pitfalls. Some are inadvertent and others are set with malice aforethought. Everyone knows they exist (OK, maybe there are a couple of people that are THAT naive, but not many), but almost everyone allows either ego, greed or carelessness dictate a bad decision or two. It's the same story with grading. Howland Wood once said, "It is necessary for the astute collector to learn each dealer's standard of grading in order to make intelligent bids." That was in 1907! Likewise, the grading services are not as consistent as we'd like, but we all know THAT, too! I think LS is frustrated by listening to the outrage expressed by people who knew better in the first place. The ironic thing is that his outrage is equivalent!
Your theory may hold for Lincolns graded above MS-67, but that's about it. There is no way that you can apply that theory to all grades and all series. Because I have not seen every MS-66 and higher Saint, does that mean I cannot tell the difference between an MS-62, MS-63, MS-64 and MS-65? There is no way you can logically make that conclusion from the facts you present. Similarly, since many board members haven't seen the top Lincolns, does that mean they automatically can't tell a 63 from a 64, or a 65 from an XF? That seems to be the position you are taking, and your conclusion does not follow your argument. So unless you've made a hidden assumption that is not a part of your argument, you theory only holds for top graded Lincolns and cannot be applied to anything else.
jtryka - your right. I'm really restricting this theory to the top (MS66, 67, 68, and that one ms69) graded early date (09 - 33) lincoln coins. I don't know any other series, but I suspect this theory applies as well. You will have to analyze the pop data to judge for yourself. My point was that many collectors are at a loss when they do not receive a favorable or expected grade. I am assuming that most of the time this occurs with 66 and better grades. I could be wrong here, and maybe most complaints are occuring between 62's and 63's, or possibly 64's and 65's. But I'm just not sure. It may be a bad assumption, but for registry caliber issues, I am assuming registry caliber complaints. This is just my opinion....usual disclaimer to follow...........
I called over to PCGS today and spoke to someone in customer service. He informed me that a 5th grader was added recently. So that means over the last 5 months they operated with 4. The number of coins graded over the last 5 months looks as follows: - March: 61,292 - April: 71,107 - May: 104,883 - June: 61,788 - July: 66,452
or thereabouts. Now some more assumptions:
- each grader took no vacation time in this period - there were 109 working days in this period - each grader spends only 5 hours a day grading (the remaining time is spent on .... whatever we all do during a work day when we are not doing what we are supposed to be doing )
Possible conclusions: - doing the math - each coin on average gets a 2 minute 50 second look. Now this does include time to enter the results into their computer. And based on that last picture someone posted it could be that they need 2 minutes and 45 seconds to enter this data. - they have successfully convinced management to add a fifth grader when they clearly have more than enough time to grade each specimen - they actually spend more time grading each coin and really need the extra help - they actually spend more time on the higher graded coins so they get it right the 1st time - or lastly, they just know who to jerk around.
My guess (and it is only a guess) is that they spend more time on the higher end coins so as not to overgrade. The other observation this customer service rep made was that they have not had any turnover in recent years with these graders. In an earlier post dbldie55 was concerned that this could be happening.
Regarding that MS69 - I think it is probably a near perfect coin. I personally would love to own it. I'm digging in for the long haul though on this one. But I can wait.
Again, relating it back to this forum, I see more complaints about grades other than, "I didn't get a PR-70 on my 2002 Sac" etc. For gold, I think far more contoversy occurs between MS-63 and MS-65 than anywhere else, not to mention the AU/MS debate, where some technically AU coins may rate MS-61 or MS-62 due to market grading considerations, or some nice MS coins that get kicked down to AU-58 due to low eye appeal. So if I complain about PCGS not giving me an MS-67 on a Saint, you can call BS on me, and you'd be right. But if they grade a coin I believe is a solid MS-63 as an MS-61, I think I have the expertise to complain. I would just caution you about making the blanket statements as you did to start this thread when later you provide an argument that only pertains to a minor subset of the population.
Comments
I live on Capitol Hill in Seattle. Spent last night on Guemes Island, which is right across from Anacortes. There are quite a few of us from Washington on the board I am finding. One of these days I may start a thread and ask us all to step forward. I sold a coin to a board member and when the transaction was done it turned out he was in Bellevue.
I can tell you sincerely, that if I came off too strong in any of my responses to you in this thread, that it is not my desire to offend or leave bad feelings. I do think you made some good points as things progressed, and I hope you are not regreting getting involved.
Carl
Russ, NCNE
I probably got a little bit of the story wrong but its real close on the numbers and illustrates the point.
I'm sorry I didn't understand this sentence. Please clarify.
It does not make much sense. Sorry for the confusion. This accounts for 13 (see bottom part of post) of the 19 pre 1934 Lincolns graded 68 or higher and 35 of the 67'S, More than 68% of the MS68+ coins. See my point?
Here is the text to the original post from Stewart with and the link to the thread.Thread
"When I submitted the first ten coins ( all 1919 cents ) eight came back ms 67 and two came back ms 68. PCGS had never previously graded a wheat cent ms 68. When I submitted the next ten pieces, eight graded ms 68 and two pieces graded ms 67. I then submitted five ms 68's for review. One was clearly better. I earned the ms 69 grade.The coin glows in the light, has full mint bloom and frost like no other cent .
Stewart
The MS69 coin was not cracked but sent in with other suberb MS68's for a regrade and stood out and then was upgraded.
Further down the thread you will read the following:
"SOG - I made all but one of the 1919 ms 68 red Lincoln cents.Yes, I made 13 of the 14.The other one was made by Heritage and as far as I was concerned,it was a mistake. Of the seventy coins I bought, at the time was a record price, 13 graded ms 68, about 35 graded ms 67,1 graded ms69 and the rest graded ms 65 and ms 66.
Rella - Andy and I split a roll deal from 1934-1958. We paid stupid money for it because of the roll of 1954 P. Andy bought me out and then went partners with someone else. Then Andy had to buy out the other follow.This weekend he got the first two 1954 P's to go 67. I bought one of them.Alot of money,time and work is the reason these
P mints are so... expensive
Stewart
If you go down the pop report you will see that there is alot of material that collectors never get to see. The graders do, and IMHO my theory (being polite) is correct.
PS: when is the next Tacoma show? I would very much like to meet some of you.
PACIFIC NORTHWEST COIN, CURRENCY & BULLION SHOW®
Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Wa.
I will be going on Saturday. Hopefully some of us can arrange to meet.
On the other side, we have had recent threads by a person who is listing things on Ebay and giving descriptions like:
PCGS will grade this MS65 for sure. Members of a popular forum all agreed this coin is woderful blah, blah, blah. This I will agree is worth basically nothing as you really cannot grade nice MS pieces by a scan, and many who are giving the opinions could not grade a MS coin if it was in their hand. (but some of these members certainly can).
As for why you would send it to PCGS if you can grade yourself. It is called saleability. Just because you can grade a coin as well as anyone alive does not mean much to the next person who comes into your shop. Having it in a PCGS holder allows you to sell it for the grade it is. If PCGS does not give you the grade you know it deserves, many times you will re-submit until it gets it. It does not take anything away from you as a grader or PCGS as a grading company. (The MS69 cent is a prime example. By itself, it was a MS68. With a group of MS68's, it stood out and thus was a MS69)
This gets extrapolated over onto the grading services. Institutionally, PCGS gets the slight nod as grading the most marketable coins OVERALL. That, obviously, does not mean they are error-free, and when you buy one of the errors or don't get an "obvious" grade you expected, you don't care about OVERALL... and frustration results.
I think I have some idea of where LS is coming from. I am a competent grader. Some might consider me expert in some areas or the overall if you use a bell curve. I make my living with coins but I routinely make purchasing mistakes that cost me money. I've got an ego like everyone else, and yet I EXPECT to make those mistakes because grading is an art and markets are fluid. It's a whole process. When I was younger and less experienced, I made rookie mistakes and (hopefully) learned from them. I've bought counterfeit coins, artificially enhanced coins, overgraded coins and even a few "too good to be true bargains" that were. What I don't do is to whine about my mistakes or attempt to place the blame for a bad transaction on someone else. In short, I take responsibility for my actions, good and bad.
The fact is that like any other marketplace, the coin industry is full of risks and pitfalls. Some are inadvertent and others are set with malice aforethought. Everyone knows they exist (OK, maybe there are a couple of people that are THAT naive, but not many), but almost everyone allows either ego, greed or carelessness dictate a bad decision or two. It's the same story with grading. Howland Wood once said, "It is necessary for the astute collector to learn each dealer's standard of grading in order to make intelligent bids." That was in 1907! Likewise, the grading services are not as consistent as we'd like, but we all know THAT, too! I think LS is frustrated by listening to the outrage expressed by people who knew better in the first place. The ironic thing is that his outrage is equivalent!
Peak Numismatics
Monument, CO
Your theory may hold for Lincolns graded above MS-67, but that's about it. There is no way that you can apply that theory to all grades and all series. Because I have not seen every MS-66 and higher Saint, does that mean I cannot tell the difference between an MS-62, MS-63, MS-64 and MS-65? There is no way you can logically make that conclusion from the facts you present. Similarly, since many board members haven't seen the top Lincolns, does that mean they automatically can't tell a 63 from a 64, or a 65 from an XF? That seems to be the position you are taking, and your conclusion does not follow your argument. So unless you've made a hidden assumption that is not a part of your argument, you theory only holds for top graded Lincolns and cannot be applied to anything else.
I called over to PCGS today and spoke to someone in customer service. He informed me that a 5th grader was added recently. So that means over the last 5 months they operated with 4. The number of coins graded over the last 5 months looks as follows:
- March: 61,292
- April: 71,107
- May: 104,883
- June: 61,788
- July: 66,452
or thereabouts. Now some more assumptions:
- each grader took no vacation time in this period
- there were 109 working days in this period
- each grader spends only 5 hours a day grading (the remaining time is spent on .... whatever we all do during a work day when we are not doing what we are supposed to be doing )
Possible conclusions:
- doing the math - each coin on average gets a 2 minute 50 second look. Now this does include time to enter the results into their computer. And based on that last picture someone posted it could be that they need 2 minutes and 45 seconds to enter this data.
- they have successfully convinced management to add a fifth grader when they clearly have more than enough time to grade each specimen
- they actually spend more time grading each coin and really need the extra help
- they actually spend more time on the higher graded coins so they get it right the 1st time
- or lastly, they just know who to jerk around.
My guess (and it is only a guess) is that they spend more time on the higher end coins so as not to overgrade. The other observation this customer service rep made was that they have not had any turnover in recent years with these graders. In an earlier post dbldie55 was concerned that this could be happening.
Regarding that MS69 - I think it is probably a near perfect coin. I personally would love to own it. I'm digging in for the long haul though on this one. But I can wait.
Regards, LS
Again, relating it back to this forum, I see more complaints about grades other than, "I didn't get a PR-70 on my 2002 Sac" etc. For gold, I think far more contoversy occurs between MS-63 and MS-65 than anywhere else, not to mention the AU/MS debate, where some technically AU coins may rate MS-61 or MS-62 due to market grading considerations, or some nice MS coins that get kicked down to AU-58 due to low eye appeal. So if I complain about PCGS not giving me an MS-67 on a Saint, you can call BS on me, and you'd be right. But if they grade a coin I believe is a solid MS-63 as an MS-61, I think I have the expertise to complain. I would just caution you about making the blanket statements as you did to start this thread when later you provide an argument that only pertains to a minor subset of the population.