Response from Beth Deisher, Editor for Coin World
bgman
Posts: 473 ✭✭
After I read the editorial that itsnotjustme linked to, I thought I would send her an e-mail. Here is the e-mail I sent to her. I was very impressed with her response time, I sent the e-mail at 4:24 and had a response at 5:26
I have been collecting for only a few years now, and I do understand what you are saying in your editorial, but I think we need more "polls" such as this one. When I first started buying certified coins I figured they were all about the same, but when I wanted to upgrade coins and trade in my other coins, I learned a hard lesson. If your coins are in an ACG slab, you will get next to nothing for the coins. Just ask any dealer what he will offer for an ACG graded coin and you will see what I mean. I feel the survey was not done "fairly", but it is better than nothing, so new buyers do not run into the same thing I did.
I think that Coinworld should do a survey of all of its subscribers and see what happens. I bet the outcome will be the same, as most people that subscribe are better informed. I learned my lesson the hard way and if this survey, or something similar, had been in Coinworld, at least I could have done a little more checking.
By the way, I had let my subscription expire and after a friend told me this survey was going to be in Coinworld, I was going to renew my subscription, as feel more needs to be done to let new collectors inform themselves.
Randy
This is her response to my e-mail:
Randy,
One of the difficulties of doing surveys is that you have to have a knowledgeable sample of a certain size to have any validity in the responses. We know from our readership surveys (scientific and conducted by one of the top firms in the country) that the universe of Coin World readers that buy and sell slabbed coins is relatively small as compared to the number of collectors who do not buy and sell slabbed coins. We believe, based on the activity we see at eBay, there are probably more eBay buyers and sellers who trade in ACG slabbed coins than Coin World readers. The same maybe true for PCI and some of the other services. It is possible to carefully construct questions so as to identify possible bias and identify actual experience. It is difficult, however, to locate actual users of the various services. (None of the services were willing to share their customer lists for the purpose of conducting a survey.) My point in the editorial -- I'm not sure I made it clear enough -- is that PNG/ICTA had an opportunity to do the survey of their own members correctly and they didn't. They may well have obtained the same results, but had the survey been more carefully constructed, the results would have had more meaning.
Beth Deisher, Editor
COIN WORLd
I have been collecting for only a few years now, and I do understand what you are saying in your editorial, but I think we need more "polls" such as this one. When I first started buying certified coins I figured they were all about the same, but when I wanted to upgrade coins and trade in my other coins, I learned a hard lesson. If your coins are in an ACG slab, you will get next to nothing for the coins. Just ask any dealer what he will offer for an ACG graded coin and you will see what I mean. I feel the survey was not done "fairly", but it is better than nothing, so new buyers do not run into the same thing I did.
I think that Coinworld should do a survey of all of its subscribers and see what happens. I bet the outcome will be the same, as most people that subscribe are better informed. I learned my lesson the hard way and if this survey, or something similar, had been in Coinworld, at least I could have done a little more checking.
By the way, I had let my subscription expire and after a friend told me this survey was going to be in Coinworld, I was going to renew my subscription, as feel more needs to be done to let new collectors inform themselves.
Randy
This is her response to my e-mail:
Randy,
One of the difficulties of doing surveys is that you have to have a knowledgeable sample of a certain size to have any validity in the responses. We know from our readership surveys (scientific and conducted by one of the top firms in the country) that the universe of Coin World readers that buy and sell slabbed coins is relatively small as compared to the number of collectors who do not buy and sell slabbed coins. We believe, based on the activity we see at eBay, there are probably more eBay buyers and sellers who trade in ACG slabbed coins than Coin World readers. The same maybe true for PCI and some of the other services. It is possible to carefully construct questions so as to identify possible bias and identify actual experience. It is difficult, however, to locate actual users of the various services. (None of the services were willing to share their customer lists for the purpose of conducting a survey.) My point in the editorial -- I'm not sure I made it clear enough -- is that PNG/ICTA had an opportunity to do the survey of their own members correctly and they didn't. They may well have obtained the same results, but had the survey been more carefully constructed, the results would have had more meaning.
Beth Deisher, Editor
COIN WORLd
0
Comments
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?
And we will continue to suck up money from the very orifice of the a$$hole of coin grading.
I'm gonna run and get THAT magazine.
Does anyone here truly doubt that Accugrade is bad for the hobby? Does anyone doubt that in the long run Coin World would be better off taking a stand against them for the betterment of the hobby (and ultimately themselves)? They just can't see beyond their precious advertising dollars and their precious ANACS reputation.
ANACS is a fine grading company but in overtly defending their sister company, Coin World has done a serious disservice to numismatics.
Can anyone including Accugrade provide a poll where it's determined that Accugrade's grading is #1?
How about #2?
How about #3?
How about #4,5 6?
You get my drift. They are always by far on the bottom. I think the only things they would be #1 in is least cost for slabbing and for trying to make excuses for their company.
Dan
<< <i>Would Coin World ever have the nads to stand up and say AccuGrade is bad for the industry and should be banned? >>
this is an extremely dangerous thinking process, imo. "banning" a company, such as acg, because you disagree w/ their OPINION on a subject (grading coins) is exactly the same as censorship, which under our current government, is just not acceptable.
<< <i>I don't care how flawed the survey was, at least the PNG took a stand and made it known who is unacceptable. >>
again, dangerous thinking. a flawed survey is WORTHLESS, no matter how much you agree w/ its results. i do not like to manipulated, & touting this type of biased & bogus survey as being worthwhile is manipulative.
<< <i>How many newbies have to be ripped a new one before responsible people act for the benefit of the hobby? >>
again, this bothers me. exactly how many newbies HAVE been ripped? do you have numbers? statistics? any kind of data whatsoever that could be used in this argument?
what makes this survey utter garbage is that obviously, the participant's experience w/ acg is virtually nonexistent. so how can they be questioned about something the know very little about?
if you really want to speak out against acg, i think it could be done in a non-manipulative manner. why not compile a little research about actual resale values from legitimate parties? compare like grade to like grade? tally the number of actual transactions? find out from a general population actual satisfaction with each of the dozen or so services? then you would have something useful. but a stupid survey like png's does the opposite - anyone can see right through their manipulative tactics, & that immediately casts doubt about all of their conclusions.
BTW, tradedollarnut, not picking on you in particular, but i do not agree w/ the idea that getting the "right" result with the "wrong" methods is any more acceptable than acg's grading standards. especially since it could be done in an unbiased manner.
K S
<< <i>The fact is you can obtain very accurate estimates of the population from some very small samples, depending on how the samples are defined. >>
the point is that the coin-collecting population, who we are allegedly trying to "protect from acg" was not the population sampled. the population sampled was a group of dealers with a large investment in acg's competitors, & therefore w/ potential ulterior motives for voting against acg.
<< <i>...a major issue that CW long chose to ignore, and now is critical of the scientific nature of the results >>
the results are a far cry from "scientific". they are downright manipulative.
<< <i>Instead of ...harping about other survey techniques, CW would be better served having been ... more gracious to those who had the courage to proceed with this effort. >>
sorry, but i just don't think that filling out this frivolous survey required a whole lot of courage on any png member's part.
K S
The vast majority of dealers have absolutely NO vested interest in NGC or PCGS. They DO have a vested interest in the long term health of the hobby. To infer that the survey results are self interested because of who the members surveyed are is utter nonsense. The only self interest here is protecting the newbies who lose thousands and thousands of dollars buying overgraded garbage. Almost every one of them is never going to continue on with the hobby when they find out how badly they were ripped off. If they had a better experience they might continue with the hobby and make it grow.
Accugrade deserves to be banned. Their grading is of value only to shysters. And business practices are nowhere near free speech. Or perhaps Enron deserved to continue to fleece the citizens of California out of their hard earned cash because it's the American way?!!!!
3 In this house.Me ,my fiance and her daughter.
They bought me a couple coins for presents on my B-day.
Turned My fiance off to collecting compleatly.
ACG SUCKS.In my opinion they are the lowest of the low.
Edited to Add,That would be 75% of the people who I care about the most in this world.My youngest is 16 months old and I will insure she is educated to the likes of that fat bloated pig al.
What would be really the best thing to do is instead of putting the money into an expensive survey requiring sampling and selection to preclude bias, why not take a representative sample of coins from each service, crack them out and submit them raw to the other services and see the grades that come back.
For example, take ANACS Morgans in 66,65,63,55 and 45 and submit them to NGC, record the results, crack them and send them to PCGS...etc. Do this for 3 or 4 of the popular series (including one modern). This would be some money, 4 series times six submissions times five coins. The cost would be 120 times the average submission price. You are talking about a couple of grand in fees. Hmmmm, that is not so expensive after all, perhaps someone will do it one day.
Coin World is well positioned to conduct an objective, scientifically based survey of grading services. One approach would be to evaluate "consistency of grading". Coin World could send a sample of coins to the same service enough times to establish a consistency factor. Then, by sending the same sample to another service an equal number of times, a qualitative measure of "grading standards between services" can be determined.
Coin World could use some of the advertising revenue from the grading services to conduct such surveys. While they're at it, Coin World could buy raw coins from some of their large, multi-page advertisers for use in the surveys. Imagine what that approach would show.
<< <i>The vast majority of dealers have absolutely NO vested interest in NGC or PCGS. >>
BINGO! AND, the vast majority of dealers WAS NOT represented, png WAS.
<< <i>Almost every one of them is never going to continue on with the hobby when they find out how badly they were ripped off. >>
so you can't get ripped off buying from pcgs, ngc, icg, ins, anacs, or segs??? is buying an acg coin more of a ripoff than buying those wacky ngc ms-70 silver eagles that pop up on late-night television??? who's got the bigger rip-off here?
<< <i>Accugrade deserves to be banned. Their grading is of value only to shysters. And business practices are nowhere near free speech. Or perhaps Enron deserved to continue to fleece the citizens of California out of their hard earned cash because it's the American way?!!!! >>
censorship is basically what got enron in trouble - they censored the accountants who wanted to put out the truth about their finances. censorship is ALWAYS wrong.
K S
Tradedollarnut, I can understand why you are hot concerning this, but why is it Coin World's responsibility to ban ACG, or speak out against them? The ANA, the leading coin collecting organization, took money from them. Wouldn't it be more sensible for the ANA, or PNG to make a vocal stand against them and not the publisher of a trade magazine? How about COINS magazine?
How about the organizers of any of the major shows that allow ACG to set up and slab coins at the show? The responsibility of "passing the word" can be spread all over the place, and NO ONE seems to be making a public stand against ACG.
Wouldn't you fall off your chair if the ANA, or PNG actually made a public statement concerning the poor, or loose grading standards of ACG graded coins? They are the major organizations that should be "putting out the word" on a public basis. Not the trade magazines, in my opinion.
I'm not jumping on you here, I just want to know why you put Coin World at so much fault here.
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
Technically, there has been no scientific study done to my knowldge about how ACG stacks up against the others. But I've hung around numismatic circles long enough over the past three years to tell you that NO ONE I've ever talked to has ever seriously endorsed Accugrade coins, except for a couple of dealers who were trying to pull a fast one on me. And yes, when I was a newbie, I bought a few ACG items thinking I could trust the grade, finding out only later that the coins had been doctored or overgraded, and that I had simply been robbed.
The world of commerce is not based on scientific studies. It is based altogether on the OPINIONS, whether scientifically derived or not, of the customers. Finally, some organizations have asked a number of customers what they thought of the grading services, and they have published the results. And I'll bet you anything, the VAST majority of the Coin Boarders here nodded in unequivocal agreement with those results.
Yet the only time Coin World has even taken an editorial position about the grading services since I've been subscribing, was to attack and to focus on the non-scientific nature of this survey!! Where was Coin World's outrage when ICG published their stupid survey over on the Ebay Board, as proof that coin collectors preferred ICG above all others??
Everybody here knows what ACG is about. We know because we have pooled our experiences with them over time. I have NO recollection of anybody coming to their defense as a reputable service, since I've been coming on these Boards. And believe me, the folks around here are not shy about arguing, if they feel somebody is being unfairly taken to task.
If this is "unfair" to publically mention customer sentiment, then surely Accugrade has an much responsibility for the "unfair" public perception of them, as anybody's opinion survey.
If they were genuinely interested in being perceived as a reputable, reliable service, they would work hard to issue such a product and bring respected people into their operations to observe the change. They would NOT just let loose with their typical, preposterous barrages of denials!
Coin World SHOULD look into this, as a matter of investigative reporting! I'll bet you ANYTHING the Coin World staff is as aware of ACG as anybody here. They have no guts at all.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
It worked for "New Coke" and it'll work with ACG, if that is what the community wants.
peacockcoins
I went to my first coin show and only one table had ACG coins, while PCGS, NGC and ICG coins were at almost every table. I talked with at least five different dealers about the ACG coins I had, and what they would pay for them. Two of the dealers would not even look at the coins, and the others offered next to nothing for the coins. I ended up selling the coins for a little less than half of what I paid for them. Then I found the PCGS site.
I have really learned a lot from the boards and all of the wonderful people that post here. I just wish there was something we could all do to warn people, mostly on Ebay, that they are buying "junk". I fault the ANA and the other organiztions more than Coinworld, but maybe this will be the first step in getting the word out.
Randy
al h.
As a professional journalist, I have reported and published several similar kinds of articles and would be happy to volunteer to do this one if a coin publication would fund and publish it. Lawsuits aren't a problem if the results are fairly and accurately reported and opinions are left to the reader, because without false information there is no libel. The trick, however, is to convince the numismatic press that they'll gain more in readership from publishing such a study than they could lose in angry advertisers.
Chuck
Welcome aboard. Glad you joined in, and I agree fully that such a test would speak for itself. Excellent idea.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Chuck,
Excellent idea. I would think that one of the pubs would love it - it would really generate interest throughout the numismatic community, and sell copy.
Super!
I agree with Don and Pushkin. Welcome to the forum. I hope you become an active contributor here.
#1 Their sister organization Amos Press (really their owner?) is allowed to advertise in Coin World against other dealers who pay Coin World to advertise and sell their books and coin supplies. That is despicable and loaded with the worst conflict of interest you can imagine. They compete with their own customers (advertisers).
#2 Amos Press also owns ANACS which does lend itself to the same kind of vertical monopolies that CLCT and ACG suffers from. Selling publications, books, supplies and disseminating information to the hobby (newspaper) while controlling one of the grading services is as unethical as it gets. JMHO.
While I do not disagree with Beth calling the PNG survey a "glass house" she offered no alternatives and no path to making a better survey. Unfortunately, Beth works for a company that has one of the BIGGEST GLASS HOUSE OF ALL.
However, I feel the real problem rests with the ANA in their policy of having a recommended grading service (NGC) which I believe, NGC pays some kind of annual contribution for. This must stop!!!
In my opinion, the ANA should not have ANY recommended grading service in return for contributions but should certify only the grading services (possibly 3 or more) that meet the consistent and proper grading standards of the ANA and for which NO CONTRIBUTIONS should be allowed. Every two years such grading services would have to be recertified through some means of a valid review of the grading services practices and scientific surveys of the collectors AND dealers who deal or even refuse to deal with such grading services.
<< <i>However, I feel the real problem rests with the ANA in their policy of having a recommended grading service (NGC) which I believe, NGC pays some kind of annual contribution for. This must stop!!!
In my opinion, the ANA should not have ANY recommended grading service in return for contributions but should certify only the grading services (possibly 3 or more) that meet the consistent and proper grading standards of the ANA and for which NO CONTRIBUTIONS should be allowed. Every two years such grading services would have to be recertified through some means of a valid review of the grading services practices and scientific surveys of the collectors AND dealers who deal or even refuse to deal with such grading services. >>
It is my understanding the more 'reputable' grading companies grade by consensus - 3 graders or a couple and a finalizer or whatever.... The point I am trying to make is they do not have unlimited time and end up doing some Monday mornings after a tough weekend - or late in the day or whatever.
The opinions are more consistent with a better group of graders with more experience/reference material/etc. You are still buying the coin not the slab right?
I have read previous threads about NGC or PCGS coins being cracked out and grades going up a couple points - what happened? did the coin get better while sleeping in the last slab? did the standards or relative 'tightness' of standards change?
I have learned alot about grading by buying ACG slabs - cracked them out and sent them off to see what happens - I think I can probably grade just as good as the ACG crew now - (probably not saying alot)
I like the construction of ACG slabs - they crack out nicely - the plastic does not get the hairline sratches on the slab I always seem to get with PCGS and NGC slabs - even though the coin is not harmed it is difficult to take a good picture and hide the scratches on the slab (not the coin)
The next ACG slab I get I am going to try to keep the slab intact and reinsert another coin and superglue it shut and sell it for lots of money (I'm not sure I'll get as much as ANACONDA's nickel)
In the United States businesses get closed mostly because of lack of profit (or desire) = If a business has very POOR service or quality - they eventually go out of business because another company comes along and takes their business away.
Why should CoinWorld publically say anything bad about anyone? Their service is providing a periodical (and other stuff) and make their money through sales of magazines and advertisements in those magazines. Before long you'll be suggesting they tell everyone not to buy from DEALER A because they sell artificially toned coins or DEALER B because they grade to high or DEALER C because they just sold a coin for 50% more than they paid for it 2 months ago- oor don't ever buy coins in such and such state because the sales tax on collectibles is too high.
If you don't like ACG don't buy from them -> or start your own company to squeeze more money out of the market -> maybe ACG would fold!!!
DorkKarl - I guess I can see why you have that name, and what planet do you live on?
Greg
Edited for spelling
<< <i>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.
Agreed TDN.
It seems that some of the advertisers of raw coins in that "coin paper"would make accugrade slabs seem UNDERGRADED!
<< <i>The essence of the PNG survey was "How do you ev
Coin World is well positioned to conduct an objective, scientifically based survey of grading services.
Huh?!
I envision big multi-page ads by the slabbing companies trying to buy "that coin papers" vote, much like they do kinda already.
You would be hard-pressed to find a true objective conductor of a grading service survey.
We've known for many years that they will never criticize nor condemn one of their valued advertisers, no matter how unscrupulous or dishonest they may be.
Dr. Steve
Looking for uncirculated Indian Heads and PRS electric guitars
with PCGS and NGC. Why take a step backwards for the sake of the constitutional rights of ACG and its dealer clientele to ripoff the public again? NCI did the same thing during the 1980's. I doubt their grading was much better than ACG. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that several grading services don't have a clue as to how to grade. They should not be in the market. No different than used car dealer Lefty Lemon being allowed to sell rolled back junkers as low mileage cream puffs. Both examples are fraud. Any hobbyist or dealer who knows how to grade knows this is the truth. Why do we need to survey the public in any way shape or form? ACG was a con game when they first opened 20 or so years ago. Not too many were fooled back then. I guess there are more potential "fish" around today due to the internet.
roadrunner
Why should CoinWorld publically say anything bad about anyone? Their service is providing a periodical (and other stuff) and make their money through sales of magazines and advertisements in those magazines. Before long you'll be suggesting they tell everyone not to buy from DEALER A because they sell artificially toned coins or DEALER B because they grade to high or DEALER C because they just sold a coin for 50% more than they paid for it 2 months ago- oor don't ever buy coins in such and such state because the sales tax on collectibles is too high.
If you don't like ACG don't buy from them -> or start your own company to squeeze more money out of the market -> maybe ACG would fold!!! >>
The "coin paper" did (and does?) have some kind of statement about coin grading and what minimum requirements should be met for a coin in a particular grade.They also mention when coins are scratched,cleaned,or altered, that the problems should/must? be described.
Why should the "coin paper" allow a grading company to advertise their product when the slabbing company consistently fails to follow those guidelines(just like many other advertisers!)The paper does it for the $$$!
Pat! Here`s a customer for that acg JEWEL you bought at PAN!!!
ALL GRADING SERVICES SHOULD BE NON PROFIT. The ANA should have NO public affilations with ANY service accept to set strict guidelines for accreditation. And then maybe a rag like Coin World would be forced to limit which ones they allow to advertise (like ACG). I also feel Ebay needs to be brought in line too. Ever try complaining to them? At least Coin World responds!
I will say this, from the little I know, ever since Amo Press bought ANACS, I know for fact from the founders of NGC that Coin World has not been very positive and certainly wrote many controverisal articles against them. The editors of that paper behave like they still rule the kindom. They better realize that the internet (and places like this chat room) spread more honest views of the real broad based collectors in the current markets or say good bye to their subscription base. After all, look at the types of companies that advertise heavily in every issue. How many of them don't sell cleaned or coins that will never be certifiable for one reason or another? So it comes as no surprise to me that the editorial staff of CW would choke when they say the results of the ICTA/PNG survey.
Laura Sperber
lsperber1@hotmail.com
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
If they had any interest in doing a scientific survey all they have to do is hire a company that specializes in that field.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
Coin World Net Paid as of October 28, 2002...78.087
Hmmm.....Coin World is not doing too well as it is????????????
More collectors in the hobby today than 2 1/2 years ago???????
This CLCT web site much more active now than in March 2000.
I would like to see an editorial by Beth on that problem........
The newstand price only went up by 5c in the last 2 1/2 years so that cannot be the reason.
Are the advertisers getting concerned?
I still like the publication despite all its faults, but the advertising by Amos Press in CW has got to go.
Yes, a non profit grading service would have been best but didn't the ANA already do it? They botched it since the for profit PCGS and NGC beat them at their own game with smart entrepeneuership (sic).
You hit the nail right on the head. Except you didn't mention their advertising rates increased!
Laura Sperber
lsperber1@hotmail.com
JUST SAY NO TO WANNABES! They lurk and prey on unwitting collectors in chatrooms!
<< <i>The "elephant in the room" is that ACG does not grade coins reputably and responsibly. ACG leaches off the premise established by others, that graded coins have met certain standards of authenticity and quality, and that experts in the field have reviewed the coins in question with this certification in mind. >>
i have never seen anywhere where acg claims to grade according to ANA standards. i posed the question before: where does acg make this claim?
<< <i>Technically, there has been no scientific study done to my knowldge about how ACG stacks up against the others. >>
that's to the point! by calling their propaganda a "survey", the PNG is making it appear to the newbie that it WAS ascientific study. that is deceptive.
<< <i>But I've hung around numismatic circles long enough over the past three years to tell you that NO ONE I've ever talked to has ever seriously endorsed Accugrade coins.... >>
this is where a serious study would have to start, before a "survey" would have any value whatsoever. a representative population.
<< <i>The world of commerce is not based on scientific studies. It is based altogether on the OPINIONS, whether scientifically derived or not, of the customers. >>
TOTALLY disagree here. you can't make me believe that ford, GM, GE, IBM, EXXON, ANHEUSER-BUSCH, BOEING, MICROSOFT, etc etc etc base their commerce on OPINIONS. absolutely no way, scientific study IS what makes them successful. if the PNG wants to do something useful, an unbiased, scientific study is the only way to make a convincing argument
<< <i>I'll bet you anything, the VAST majority of the Coin Boarders here nodded in unequivocal agreement with those results. >>
the coin board represents another extremely narrowly-focused population. this is the pcgs board, after all.
<< <i>i think that those who take the self-righteous high ground regarding the supposed slant of the PNG survey really need to step up and make a statement as to their opinion on ACG slabbed coins and the company as a whole. >>
i will state my opinion of "ACG slabbed coins": my opinion of acg is EXACTLY the same as for pcgs, ngc, anacs, or any other service. they provide a grading opinion which i sometimes agree with, & sometimes do not. it has NO effect on whether i buy a coin or not, unless the dealer implies that the price is higher strictly because of the grading service. in that case, i move on. my opinion of "ACG the company": i do not like Mr. Hager on a personal basis, nor do i like his wife. i also do not like their assistant. again, this has NO effect on whether i buy coins certified by their company.
<< <i>I wasn't going to say anything, but TDN has hit the nail directly on the head. DorkKarl - I guess I can see why you have that name, and what planet do you live on? >>
i'm sorry, but i simply will not jump on the bandwagon for bashing acg! again, if you truly want to do a service, provide convincing, unbiased evidence that the newbies can feel comfortable was not designed to get them to buy certain slabs (ngc/pcgs). propaganda as transparent as the png "survey" is just not going to fool anybody.
<< <i>Forget the freedom of speech BS >>
dude, NEVER give up your constitutional rights!!!
<< <i>ALL GRADING SERVICES SHOULD BE NON PROFIT >>
Ms Sperber, you really need to explain this one. i don't understand why one would want to start such a business if not for profit! more explanation, please!
<< <i>How many people buy the slab and not the coin. How many really look at the coin and forget looking at the slabbing companys name >>
i'm one. i honest to goodness couldn't care less about who's name is on a slab. & i'm not the only 1.
<< <i>If you don't like ACG don't buy from them >>
THAT was far & away the most sensible statement in this entire thread.
K S
"Accugrade is the only Grading Certification Service to ever write three comprehensive books on grading of coins with a copyrighted Accugrade™ grading system based on strike and luster. With over 12,000 Accugrade™ books sold to date, they were the number one selling books in their field. Accugrade™ also developed a course entitled "How To Become A Coin Dealer The Professional and Ethical Way." Over 500 people took the course, and over 100 became professional coin dealers - and all were taught by Mr. Hager."
Maybe someone needs to find their book and see what they actually claim is their grading standard. That would create a legitimate platform to debate merits. (note, I am clearly not an ACG fan but I agree with dorkkarl that we need more information than simply opinion to draw comparisons) Interesting that on their book page, they have only 50 books left of the how to grade morgan/peace dollars and it can be autographed by Mr. Hagar...
K S
Setting aside the issue of whether ACG is not as good at weeding out counterfeit or treated coins, I agree you with you when you state that all grades are an opinion only. But I think an issue can be made of the fact that ACG claims to use the "copyrighted Accugrade™ grading system" which is NOT an industry standard grading system and the fact that they use their own system is nowhere noted on their slabs. I think we all can agree that the industry standard, though not precisely defined, is significantly more closely adhered to by PCGS and NGC. (I have no experience with other grading companies.) It also does not matter that we sometimes say that "PCGS is harder than NGC" because the difference between PCGS, NGC, and the industry standard is apparently much smaller than the difference between the grades generated by the "copyrighted Accugrade™ grading system" and the industry standard.
If ACG noted on their slabs that they use a unique system, which would suggest that that their MS65 might not correspond to anyone else's MS65, I think there would less room for concern. But they do not do so, thereby leaving the (false?) impression that their opinion of what makes an MS65 is the equivalent of an opinion from PCGS or NGC.
Of course, if one company slabs signficantly more counterfeit, treated (whizzed, thumbed, etc.) and AT coins, that's another reason to believe that the company is inferior to its competitors.
Mark
A MAJOR part of the problem that is being largely ignored in this debate, is the sleazy dealers who screw over uninformed buyers, in charging the prices they do for ACG coins. Yes, the ACG grading makes it easier for those dealers to do their dirty work, but I have seen unethical (I'm being polite here) dealers do the same with NGC and PCGS coins too.
Regardless of the coin, itself, or what holder it's in, if the wrong seller finds the right buyer, the buyer is in big trouble. The grading can be wonderfully consistent and correct/perfect but a seller can still bury a novice buyer, big time.
I believe that education of uninformed buyers is a key. Why not devote some energy to that end?
I will also say that the line of debate here is extremely frustrating. Everyone has been in arms for a couple years over the grading service issue, particularly why no one has "done anything" about it. PNG/ICTA make the attempt, and too many people are harping that it "wasn't scientific." Believe me, the results are just EXACTLY how the professional community views the services. I took the survey, and while I will not elaborate on my individual answers, I concur with the consensus. I've bought hundreds of millions of dollars worth of coins in my career and though there are always individual exceptions, PCGS coins cost the most money IN GENERAL, with NGC close behind. The others IN GENERAL, are discounted accordingly. Obviously, there's just no pleasing some people!!!!
Peak Numismatics
Monument, CO
<< <i>I think an issue can be made of the fact that ACG claims to use the "copyrighted Accugrade™ grading system" which is NOT an industry standard grading system and the fact that they use their own system is nowhere noted on their slabs. >>
unfortuantely, in an area where the PNG AND ANA could actually do some good, ie establishing an OFFICIAL standard & requiring anyone who quotes that standard to abide by specific guidlelines, png & ana have failed miserably. ie. if there were a copyrighted & trademarked grading system, then slabing companies would be required to follow it if they want to use the trademarked grades. very poor effort has been made by either entity in this regard.
<< <i>I think we all can agree that the industry standard, though not precisely defined, is significantly more closely adhered to by PCGS and NGC. >>
see billjones wording of this same thought above.
<< <i>If ACG noted on their slabs that they use a unique system ....I think there would less room for concern. >>
unfortuantely, they don't have to - again because of png's & ana's shortcomings, described above.
<< <i>I will also say that the line of debate here is extremely frustrating >>
i think that is due entirely to the poor quality of the survey - it being completely biased, non-scientific & therefore not credible & open to debate. if it were a fair & substantive survey, we could be debating facts instead of assumptions, hearsay & biases.
K S
That takes courage.
peacockcoins