The PCGS Grading Guarantee
homerunhall
Posts: 2,496 ✭✭✭
PCGS has a grading guarantee. We have had it since Day One. NGC also has a grading guarantee. The grading guarantee was one of the things that seperated PCGS from those who went before us (ANACS, NCI) when we launched in February, 1986. The guarantee is pretty simple, but quite powerful...if we make a mistake, we pay for the mistake, not you. So even if the coin is $15,000 and we only received a grading fee of $100, as was the case with the Legend Numismatics 1913-D $20, we pay the value of the coin, or the difference between mistake grade and real grade (coin buyer's option.)
The amount of coins we have bought back under the terms of our guarantee has been very steady for the last 15 years...most years it's between $100,000 and $150,000. This is an understandable and acceptable cost of business, since we grade approximately $500,000,000 worth of coins a year.
I want to stress that we are paying Laura the $15,000 because that's what we're supposed to do, not because she has been quite public about this coin and this PCGS grading mistake. It's what we always have done and what we will continue to do. We stand behind our product.
David Hall
The amount of coins we have bought back under the terms of our guarantee has been very steady for the last 15 years...most years it's between $100,000 and $150,000. This is an understandable and acceptable cost of business, since we grade approximately $500,000,000 worth of coins a year.
I want to stress that we are paying Laura the $15,000 because that's what we're supposed to do, not because she has been quite public about this coin and this PCGS grading mistake. It's what we always have done and what we will continue to do. We stand behind our product.
David Hall
0
Comments
David, I thought it was your/PCGS's option and not the coin buyer's option above?
David - WOW!!! That is no nonsense,slam dunk case closed
Give this man a High Five
Stewart
That has to come from Laura...not you knucklehead
Stewart
Regardless, a very good guarantee that should ease a lot of minds.
Joe,
<< <i>That has to come from Laura...not you knucklehead
Stewart >>
See the little winky? It was a joke.
PCGS: Coin was returned in original holder without explanation. Upon calling customer service, I was told by PCGS that they simply believed the coin met the grade. No further explanation was given. I was sternly told, "PCGS did not have to explain itself."
NGC: Prior to coin return, NGC grader called me and discussed why I believed the coin was overgraded (i.e., cleaned). He told me that 5 different graders looked at the coin and each decided that the coin was not cleaned. He discussed specific marks on the coin and lighting used to grade the coin. He also told me that he thought the coin was dipped long ago. Even though the coin was returned in its original holder, I was satisfied with NGC's explanation.
So, when it comes to the guarantee, my take is that NGC is more professional than PCGS. Also, I don't think PCGS really cares about the poor man (e.g., very impersonal and not willing to go the extra mile like NGC).
P.S. David: You were "supposed to" give me money for my PCGS graded coin but did not. Go figure.
So long as I'm venting, David, how many people has PCGS ripped off because of the ambigious instructions when submitting a coin for crossover (i.e., PCGS interprets a customer not specifying a "minimum crossover grade" as to crossover only at the grade on the present holder)? Give me a break.
Sound like what happened with Laura's coin when it was originally sent in for guarantee review.
It's great that PCGS is paying her but the whole thing about the coin being originally returned to her by pcgs as nothing is wrong with it makes you wonder who at pcgs examined it and how competent they are
Russ Negs the PCGS Grade Guarantee
Mark Feld- I thought you might find this of great interest.
If one is soooo dissatisfied with PCGS, why bother with PCGS. Oh, I get it. You don't bother with PCGS; it's just a "bandwagon" thing now. No, well amongst the couple pages of negativities, how many new posters are there.
And to purchase a coin merely to challenge the grade and possibly turn a profit; I would cause you to circumambulate first too.
No, I'm not a PCGS die-hard; I've had disappointments too. But, if I had as many complaints as some of you (not necessarily within this thread) I sure wouldn't be conducting business with them.
Now, please forgive me for not forcing myself to swallow much more of this, this venting, yeah that must be it.
BTW, I wonder how many of us are as guiltless and blamefree in those things which we perceive we are so astute at. Probably can find a few equally dissatisfied respondents, if we really try.
There, I'm done.
cough cough cough
<< <i>" want to stress that we are paying Laura the $15,000 because that's what we're supposed to do, not because she has been quite public " cough cough cough >>
I guess, either way, PCGS loses.
Don't pay: Lose.
Pay: Lose.
peacockcoins
Gilbert,
There exists the possibility that there's a portion of vocal forum members who've only had one or two really bad experiences with PCGS each. But, when they all voice together, it seems like it's a lot of problems per person.
Perhaps that's why some folks still give PCGS a chance. They haven't reached their threshold, but still want their grievances voiced and resolved. Nothing wrong or unusual about that, right?
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
I'm now dealing with PCGS only to get my money back. I will NEVER EVER send them another raw submission or a crossover. Right on, I wouldn't conduct business with them either. I decided long ago not to send in my free submissions. With the exception of my overgrade (and the litigation or arbitration that may follow), I'm through with PCGS.
Bandwagon? I submitted the coin months ago and, before today, I didn't even know who Laura was or what happened in her case. Also, I never purchase coins in PCGS holders just because their in PCGS holders. The coin that I have a complaint about was non-returnable.
Profit? I just want to be reimbursed for the purchase price of the coin. What profit? Heck, I'm actually out money (i.e., shipping charges from seller and to PCGS).
Sure I'm a new poster. So what? That doesn't mean I'm new to coin collecting. I've been collecting coins for over 20 years.
Finally, I can say, without a doubt, that I must be the only person in the world who is blameless and guiltless. Why? I've never sold (or traded) a coin in my life. I only purchase coins.
Braddick, you're right but why shouldn't they lose. They misgraded the coin and then they tried to get out of the guarantee. Sure, I guess there's nothing wrong with misgrading a coin and then trying to get out of the guarantee. Yeah right.
<< <i>
I guess, either way, PCGS loses.
Don't pay: Lose.
Pay: Lose. >>
Pay: Lose -- don't think that they would have been roasted if the coin had been bought the first time it was submitted for regrade, instead of returned with no answers.
CHANGE CU NAME TO "GRANDSLAM HALL"
***************
Today, David Hall took 15 minutes out of his busy day to personally discuss the "five figure" problem coin I have in at PCGS on behalf of a dedicated PCGS collector. It was a "no nonsense" approach to the situation - David basically told me he thought the coin was graded wrong and I would be hearing from him tomorrow with a resolution to the problem. WOW. I have frankly never seen Customer Service like this in all the years I have been dealing with PCGS! No doubt Laura must be impressed as well with the candor and straightfoward approach shown this week on her coin.
A++ grade this week. Keep up the great work!!! Wondercoin
It was not my intent that each issue I brought applied to you. The "bandwagon" comment is regarding the numerous previously unvoiced complaints. It is not exclusive to you. The "profit" comment relates to the linked thread suggesting the purchase of an overgraded coin, not because the person wanted the coin, but to reap a monetary benefit of a successful grade review. I don't recall that you were mentioned in that thread either. So you are a new poster; will any comment about a new poster be taken personally - sorry. Blameless and guiltless, huh? That comment wasn't exclusive to collecting. Did you notice "those things we PERCEIVE we are astute at?" Could be our job, parenting, relationships with others, etc. I only addressed that portion of your reply because I find it hard to believe any person would hold themself up as without fault. So, the bottom line geb209 is, I wasn't even talking about you specifically. I was addressing the numerous threads posted througout the top two or three pages. Lastly, this being our first and only communication, what convinced you that my every word was directed at you, whom I know nothing about?
IrishMike
I too want them to be better, and again, my comments were directed at no one individual, but at the tone and content of the several threads of complaints. I am, however, curious how many of those complaints were addressed via the channels agreed to with membership and submission privileges. (This comment is not directed at any one in particular either, but, it IS surprising how many people submit coins but don't know their obligation(s) as a submitter.)
EVP
There is nothing wrong or unusual about your comment, and I agree wholeheartedly.
Utilizing the grade guarantee to have an inaccurately graded coin removed from it's holder and placed in a proper holder is a noble exercise. Future owners of the coin pay an accurate price for the coin. Later, if they, or their heirs, go to sell the coin, they aren't disappointed to find that no one will pay even bid price for the coin.
If the Coin Universe price guide is to be an ACCURATE reflection of the marketplace, then I would ask you why it is not used in determining the value of the buyback? It seems virtually everyone is bewildered by the PCGS definition of the price to be refunded. Very few people enter into a grade guarantee with even the remotest of ideas of what they can expect in the form of reimbursement.
If PCGS were to change their definition for the grade guarantee reimbursement to the Coin Universe price guide, then everyone would know exactly what to expect. Most importantly, PCGS would have a VESTED interest in keeping those price guides UP-TO-DATE. However, the often inflated values in the Coin Universe price guide would prove very costly if you don't keep them accurate and current. This would be an excellent means of providing some clarity to the process. How about it?
Tony
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
I understand the effort that would be required. However, the ambiguity involved in the grade guarantee is absolutely ridiculous! The values offered by PCGS on Keet's 1883-CC Morgan DMPL were highly questionable. I never heard him mention being offered a choice of buyouts. The original offer they made was horribly low. They weren't even close! A customer shouldn't have to get into a pi$$ing match negotiation for the guarantee reimbursement/buyout. Personally, I think some method should be made available to determine that price, PRIOR to the decision.
I applaud your effort to try to apply some science to this buyback concept. But, I think it is unwise to try to get a specific number pinned down ahead of time because not all coins of the same slabbed grade are equal.
PQ specimens deserve to command more, and LQ specimens deserve to command less. Perhaps a median of values may be a reasonable starting point...
Just thinking out loud...
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
I hear what you are saying about PQ, etc. However, let's look at the Keet's/Dragon coin. It was purported to be a PQ MS66 DMPL. Yet, when submitted for the grade guarantee, it did downgrade to MS65 DMPL. Then, PCGS gave a lowball offer of only $1,300 for the downgrade of this "PQ MS66" coin. Even after proving he paid $1,999 for the coin, bringing the offer up to $1,650, that appears low. I have seen a number of MS66 DMPL Morgans sell in excess of $2,500. A lot of inexperienced collectors can get it put to 'em after the fact. By tying the grade guarantee buyback/reimbursement to some price guide, there would be very little wiggle room for the 3rd party grading service.
I hear what you're saying. I have nothing positive to say about any of this. I've also had folks suggest to me that I lay off the DH-bashing for a bit to give him a chance to try to make things better. As such, I will apply some restraint to my posts for a bit...
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
PS: No I don't own a ditigal camera so I can't post a picture.
Baseball, I think you've missed my point. PCGS can have its own opinion. What I don't like is the ole "middle finger" salute I received when I called to ask about the coin. NGC actually called me and discussed my concerns.
PCGS should consider a new method of charging for grading because of this apparently necessary new level, albeit not new, guarantees they are being faced with - this being a sliding scale. The more expensive coin to insure the higher the cost for grading should be charged. This would seem to be the most equitable situation for all submitters. For example, if a coin is valuated at $200 and another at 25K then maybe the 25K coin should have a grading fee of $250 or so since you are on the line for a much bigger hit than with the $200 coin. This is a simple concept in the insurance industry. The premium is higher for more insurance.
I cannot understand how PCGS can be blamed for the Legend coin. Laura is an expert as much as your graders. Evidently neither, or any one else for that matter, could recognize that a problem was going to develop with the coin. It seems to be more a matter of insuring the coin at a specific grade. Perhaps you should consider bringing an actuary on board.
Gilbert- I've never read of you call SuperCoin on the carpet for his successful attempts to utilize the grade guarantee on the PR-70 Ikes. I've never read of you criticizing WonderCoin for utilizing the grade guarantee. Why do you choose to do so above? Being a little selective?
I really hadn't intended to post to this thread for a third time, but, since you don't allow PMs, and we all know how you feel about them, I didn't want your question to go unanswered, lest it lend or is perceived to lend credence to the accusatory nature (that's how it SEEMS to me) of your post.
First, I would like to state I have no personal relationship with either of the Super or Wonder coins, and even if I did, THAT wouldn't preclude me from addressing an issue I may have with either. That said, I don't recall reading any post(s) where Supercoin indicated he purchased an overgraded coin and got paid for a succesful "downgrading." I don't USUALLY follow the Ike threads, so I may have missed it. Wondercoin has mostly relegated himself to the "Registry Forum," which I visit as little as possible. I do recall general discussions of removing overgraded coins, although I don't think it was exclusive to Wondercoin, yet, I do remember when he frequented this forum, he too participated, but:
This is the first time, that comes to mind, that anyone has mentioned "purchasing what they believed to be an overgraded coin FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of realizing payment of the difference between grades.
I agree that "removing an inaccurately graded coin from it's holder and placed in a proper holder is a noble exercise," if that is your purpose, but I don't see the scenario in the previous paragraph as being noble.
So, no I don't recall calling Supercoin or Wondercoin to the carpet, nor, did I call anyone else to the carpet; I expressed my views regarding a practice. I am not being selective; it's actually the first time I recall reading something like that.
Lastly, if anyone finds the tone of my response, shall we say, "pointed," I must admit that although you seem to be quite a knowledgeable poster with much to offer, it SEEMS TO ME, you also like to start $hit, or maybe, it's just that you appear NOT to make an effort at being cordial in your criticisms. My apologies if my perception is incorrect.
I have downgraded several coins, and have mentioned them on here. My experience with that has always been highly satisfactory.
Tough as many skeptics find it to believe, I think PCGS generally does "make it right". It's a major benefit of slabbing by a reputable service that's often overlooked. Consider how cheap that insurance turned out to be on the Legend coin!
If, as mentioned, someone is intentionally buying a dog coin cheap trying to cash in, I'm not too sympathetic. But I have certainly bought dogs in good faith sight-unseen, and PCGS has reimbursed me completely (both with purchase price and in one case with market value).
And all with remarkably little hassle -- a much more pleasant experience than what I've had with traditional insurance companies.
Hey, let's discuss the exact situation that came up last Friday. I bought the entire #2 PCGS Clad Quarter collection from its owner for a customer. The set was priced and mailed to me for pre-inspection. When the set arrived, I noticed that the 1965 quarter was in a PCGS-MS67 holder, but was actually the inexpensive SMS version. I asked the owner where he got the 1965 quarter from. He told me he recently purchased the coin from an auction for $600 (he told me the auction but no need to mention them here). I told him the coin was SMS and, hence, nearly worthless. I told the owner of the set to knock off $600 from the sales price of the collection, because the collector I was helping out could not pay $600 for a coin of inconsequential value in the erroneous holder. I told the seller if he closed the deal with my buyer without the 1965 quarter included in the deal, as a courtesy for him, I would present the coin to PCGS under the grade guarantee and seek to get him a $600 refund. I made it clear that it was entirely up to PCGS whether he received his $600 or not - simply my customer was not buying it. The set seller agreed and I promptly presented his coin to Rick Montgomery on this past Friday morning (and I really appreciate Rick meeting with me on Friday morning, which was his last day working at PCGS - that showed me Rick's integrity in being interested in addresssing a PCGS problem coin even though he knew (literally) his hours were numbered working at PCGS). Rick told me the coin was SMS and to write the owner a $600 check (which I did that day). I made -0- commission or profit on the coin. My collector/buyer made -0- profit on the coin. The seller of the set made -0- profit on the coin. And, if Rick would have determined that the original submitter intentionally sold a problem coin, I have no doubt he would have also made -0- profit on the coin.
I am working on another coin for a collector today involving a "five figure coin", which I expect David will resolve today. Same situation with -0- profits for all.
I recently assisted a collector in the purchase of an important collection where one of the coins was corroded. I completed the 33 coin sale for a sizeable amount of money believing that PCGS would do the right thing on a $5,000 problem coin. They made that right as well. Again, no one profited one cent and a large collelction was able to sell because of the faith in the guarantee, that proved to be justified.
Unless PCGS tells me to stop assisting collectors with these coins that cross my path, I will continue to present them to PCGS whenever it is warranted. And, as I have said time and time again on this board, PCGS has always acted honorably with respect to the guarantee in the cases I have presented them coins. Wondercoin
I guess you didnt but the #2 collection afterall. Without the 1965 quarter in the collection, it is actually incomplete and could not be the #2 collection. Obviously, this is a technical issue as an MS66 is readily available. But I guess you took that into account by calling it the #2 set as opposed to being tied for #1.
I am still interested to fill some upgrades when you are ready.
As for the guarantee review on my 1983-P (posted on another thread), it was sent in this week and I expect to hear soon. I know its not a big $ coin, but I am curious to see how it is handled. Keep you posted!!
WWQ
That's the best idea in this whole thread. Stop making submitters of moderns subsidize Legend's mistakes. They should pay their own insurance premium. Worse yet, they (big shot PCGS dealers) often buy moderns on the open market for less than the slabbing fee. Personally, I don't like the idea of PAYING to work for DHRC. Conflict of interest or not, I ain't paying for it no mo'. Legal boolsheet and appearances be damned.