I Wonder... Did ACG Threaten to Quit Advertising in CoinWorld??

itsnotjustme

Read this... a Coin World editorial pretty much dismisses the grading survey results as worthless. Wow... they only just published them the other week.

Link

Gilbert

Well, it is! Do you agree with the editorial? Or do you feel the results are valid as taken?

itsnotjustme

I agree it did not fall into the category of an accurately conducted scientific survey. No dispute with the results though. Thought it was pretty funny when ACG said everyone knew in advance what (at least part of) the results would be!

dorkkarl

the editorial accurately reflects my opinions, as expressed in a previous thread.

K S

Russ

No question the survey methodology was bogus and biased. But, the results did reflect reality.

Russ, NCNE

Outhaul

itsnotjustme <<ACG said everyone knew in advance what (at least part of) the results would be! >>

Sounds like ACG already knew what everyone else has been saying. But the fact that they do nothing to improve their reputation speaks volumes of their lack of respect for serious collectors and their contempt for newbies.

Cheers,

Bob

Rover

My bet is that Coin World got a call from the Hager's lawyer threatening a law suit.

Dan

nwcs

There could be no lawsuit from ACG. Nothing was illegally represented. From a scientific basis, the survey is meaningless. From an opinion basis, it was interesting. It means nothing more than that those dealers who were surveyed ranked ACG last.

But this sort of survey shouldn't surprise us. Many political surveys (and others) are done the exact same way and trumpeted as fact.

Rover

The mere threat of a lawsuit could have caused CW to issue the editorial.

Defending themselves against a suit with no merit is still more expensive than writing a retraction oh wait I mean counterpoint editorial.

Dan

tradedollarnut

If you click in Beth's name you can send her an email. Mine:

Congratulations. In defaming the PNG survey you are directly contributing to thousands of collectors who are ripped off daily by purchasing Accugrade coins. Did you check your ethics at the door when you wrote that editorial? I am amazed and astonished. This is a sad day for numismatics.

BlueCole

wow. that was pretty weak.

B.

Pushkin

Dorkkarl and Beth are absolutely correct. The survey was nothing more than opinion - not scientific analysis, not unbiased evaluations and conclusions, just opinion. To say that objections to the survey somehow give credence to AGC, or any other grading service, is just not true.

No matter how much many of us may hate and despise ACG, or any other service - we only demonstrate a lack of ethical behavior and are guilty of hypocrisy if we use false evidence or hearsay to support our personal opinions. If a grading service is to be condemned, or praised, lets do it by giving the service a fair trial; not an inquisition followed by a witch burning - including suggesting that we burn those who expose our own hypocrisy. If we aren't fair, then what makes us better than those we would condemn?

dorkkarl

<< <i>Congratulations. In defaming the PNG survey >>

please point out where this occurred. i found beth's editorial to be uncharacteristically neutral. how do you support your contention that she defamed the PNG survey?



<< <i>Did you check your ethics at the door when you wrote that editorial? >>

what ethics are involved here???

i hope they print your response. it'll be interesting to see what responses are like. i'm just curious where in her editorial you found support for your statements.

K S

BillJones

ACG picked their nitch in the grading and authentication market many years ago, and they should not complain when knowledgeable people confirm that. I don’t think that they can improve their standing. It would be like Yugo going into the luxury car market or Ripple getting into the vintage wine trade. Their only hope would be to come up with a new brand name, and hope that no one catches wise to their “evil sibling.”

griffin6

A survey may either measure the opinions of a completely random sampling or the opinions of a specific group of people. I certainly agree that statistically, the group needs to be random to be deemed "scientific," but consider this... Name me a group that excludes the people in this survey and spends more grading dollars with the services than the PNG and ICTA! If this survey mix doesn't know the reality of the grading game, who does????

This survey simply puts into writing what everyone in the wholesale community knows. PCGS and NGC, because they have established market systems for their products, are ten steps ahead of the game. No matter how hard anyone tries to color it differently, the others are all niche services with varying degrees of institutional value. Some of them do good things and all of them have some happy customers, but for the moment, a group opinion of their RELATIVE merit is in the active media.

The sad thing is that at some (near) future point, this furor will die down and the survey will be forgotten by most. Some will benefit from having seen it, but others never will be aware that it ever existed and things will return to business as usual. If there's an amusing thought, it's that those who are complaining would be better off letting it drop. The more vocal they are in their denials, the more attention they draw to themselves. Well, then there was also that comment about the results being a foregone conclusion... DUH!

bgman

I received a reponse from the editor and started a thread for it.

Randy

tradedollarnut

My reply in the other thread:

I think Beth cares more about ANACS grading revenue and AccuGrade advertising revenue than the method of the survey.

Would Coin World ever have the nads to stand up and say AccuGrade is bad for the industry and should be banned? Obviously not, since they continue to take their advertising revenue. It may be horridly shortsighted on their part, but it appears that it's all that matters to them.

I don't care how flawed the survey was, at least the PNG took a stand and made it known who is unacceptable. How many newbies have to be ripped a new one before responsible people act for the benefit of the hobby?

keets

i'm supposing here that some would think a survey using random participants instead of leaders in the field would somehow lend more credibility to a survey such as this. my questions are why and how?? perhaps we could design some type of a double blind test with people off the street and you know what, i'm willing to wager my entire collection that they would place ACG at the bottom of the heap. as far as the other services, i wouldn't make a wager such as that with confidence ACROSS THE BOARD, but i would with ACG!!!!

al h.

Nevertheless, the survey instrument has much greater failings than logic. For example, it allows those who have no actual experience with a grading service to render opinions

i was rather amused with this line in the editorial. hey dorkkarl, that reminds me suspiciously of an anti-slab guy like you. doesn't collect/deal slabs yet has strong opinions on them. i guess that means your replies are meaningless!!!!