Answers to your questions - Part 1
homerunhall
Posts: 2,496 ✭✭✭
Hello everyone...Many of you have asked many questions about PCGS. I'll try to answer all of them. If I miss any, it's not on purpose, just ask again.
First, there are two questions that I'll need some serious space to reply to. I will answer the following two questions tomorrow...
1. The PCGS conflict of interest question. You may be very surprised at my answer.
2. Why won't PCGS register NGC coins in the PCGS Set Registry.
Here's what I can answer tonight...
dorkkarl asked: "what pricing guidelines are used to determine the market value of a coin" and he's refering to our buy-backs under our grading guarantee."
PCGS Answer: If the coin was purchased within 30 days of the resubmission, we take the purchase price into consideration. If not, it's pure current market value. We typically used the Coin Dealer Newsletter pricing guides in establishing market value, which we define as replacement value. The bottom line is we try to work it out with the customer. We sometimes ask for proof of purchase. You may find this hard to believe, but some coin dealers will lie to us, saying for example, that they paid $15,000 for a coin, when they really only paid $7,500. We just try to figure it out and work it out.
dorkkarl asked: "why then is the Guarantee not applicable to coins which ate later determined by PCGS to have originally been undergraded."
PCGS Answer: We've never had a buyer complain about purchasing an undergraded coin, thought most all submitters have a complaint or two about the coins they submitt for grading being undergraded...remember...ownership always adds a point. The grading guarantee was meant to protect the buyer of PCGS coins.
grmarguli asks(states): The grading inconsistencies are atrocious. Do the graders even look at the coins anymore?"
PCGS Answer (actually David Hall answer): The graders look carefully at every coin. Ron Howard and Miles Standish have been with for over 15 years each. Thad Olsen has graded for us for 7 years, with some time off to be head buyer for Spectrum. They all take a tremendous amount of pride in their work and the grading room discussions are always about the right grade. As far as the possible inconsistencies, a lot of you have mentioned this. I have been a little detached for the last three years so I can only give you a limited outlook. I prefer to say that I know we need to be as consistent as humanly possible and I assure you I will personally check it out and push for improvements if that proves to be necessary.
David Hall
First, there are two questions that I'll need some serious space to reply to. I will answer the following two questions tomorrow...
1. The PCGS conflict of interest question. You may be very surprised at my answer.
2. Why won't PCGS register NGC coins in the PCGS Set Registry.
Here's what I can answer tonight...
dorkkarl asked: "what pricing guidelines are used to determine the market value of a coin" and he's refering to our buy-backs under our grading guarantee."
PCGS Answer: If the coin was purchased within 30 days of the resubmission, we take the purchase price into consideration. If not, it's pure current market value. We typically used the Coin Dealer Newsletter pricing guides in establishing market value, which we define as replacement value. The bottom line is we try to work it out with the customer. We sometimes ask for proof of purchase. You may find this hard to believe, but some coin dealers will lie to us, saying for example, that they paid $15,000 for a coin, when they really only paid $7,500. We just try to figure it out and work it out.
dorkkarl asked: "why then is the Guarantee not applicable to coins which ate later determined by PCGS to have originally been undergraded."
PCGS Answer: We've never had a buyer complain about purchasing an undergraded coin, thought most all submitters have a complaint or two about the coins they submitt for grading being undergraded...remember...ownership always adds a point. The grading guarantee was meant to protect the buyer of PCGS coins.
grmarguli asks(states): The grading inconsistencies are atrocious. Do the graders even look at the coins anymore?"
PCGS Answer (actually David Hall answer): The graders look carefully at every coin. Ron Howard and Miles Standish have been with for over 15 years each. Thad Olsen has graded for us for 7 years, with some time off to be head buyer for Spectrum. They all take a tremendous amount of pride in their work and the grading room discussions are always about the right grade. As far as the possible inconsistencies, a lot of you have mentioned this. I have been a little detached for the last three years so I can only give you a limited outlook. I prefer to say that I know we need to be as consistent as humanly possible and I assure you I will personally check it out and push for improvements if that proves to be necessary.
David Hall
0
Comments
Thank you for taking the time to provide some answers. I have a followup question to the matter regarding grading consistency. How will you ``check it out'' and how will your plan apply to this matter as if it were an ongoing issue?
Regards,
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Will PCGS (please) immediately start attributing 1972 Ike types?
Rick actually agreed to do this on 8/9/02, I immediately sent him an "E-Z" attribution guide, supporting documentation from several published sources, and actual attributed examples of all three coins. We also discussed which variety was the most common in high-grade (the Type 3, by far) and thus should retain the existing coin number to avoid funny business.
More recently, Jim Barlow has done the same, also including examples of coins. I've followed up with numerous e-mails and phone calls to no avail. To the best of my knowledge, Jim never heard back either. The reason is now perhaps apparent.
In any event, this has been an ongoing request over several years by many Ike enthusiasts, dealers and collectors alike.
The types are well-recognized by serious collectors. The Type 3 is a major intentional die change. The Type 2 is relatively scarce, one of the few Ikes to bring a premium even in typical grades.
They are already recognized by the marketplace, and in fact just recently attained the "holy grail" of popular recognition by being listed in the 2003 Red Book.
Please put all those pesky issues regarding major staff upheaval on the back burner and do this immediately. For the children!
Or, at least send me my $3 back. Thanks.
1. These are major varieties, easily visible with the naked eye.
The Type 1 to Type 3 in particular was a huge intentional change by the mint, to start using the originally-intended high-relief design. The design was not able to be used in production until better die steel became available partway through the 1972 Philly mint production.
2. PCGS (via Rick) was well aware of the issues, and felt a responsibility to not create an artificial market for obscure varieties. In my experience, PCGS is extraordinarily conservative in what they will attribute. It took forever to get the 1979-P Wide Rim SBA attributed, for example. Even bearing all those things in mind, PCGS/Rick already agreed to do it.
3. Who's forcing you to buy anything? And since when did you become an Ike instigator, er, I mean, enthusiast?
<< <i>dorkkarl asked: "why then is the Guarantee not applicable to coins which ate later determined by PCGS to have originally been undergraded."
PCGS Answer: We've never had a buyer complain about purchasing an undergraded coin, thought most all submitters have a complaint or two about the coins they submitt for grading being undergraded...remember...ownership always adds a point. >>
Mr. Hall, such complaints about undergrading of coins appears regularly on this forum. i am surprised you have not noted them. the issue it not with buying an undergraded coin, but with selling an undergraded coin. if i sell a coin graded by pcgs as ms-62, & upon immediate resubmission by the new owner, regrades as ms-63, i stand to lose financially, as i sold the coin at the lower grade. this scenario has been explored on the forum several times, & i can look for specific incidents if it would be of help.
<< <i>The grading guarantee was meant to protect the buyer of PCGS coins. >>
am i to understand then that PCGS has no concern whatsoever for sellers of coins? its OK if that's the case, but i would appreciate an explicit answer.
thank you
K S
I'm a little confused on this point. It's my understanding that only a PCGS dealer or gold/plat club member can send coins in for review under the terms of your guarantee. Seems to me the majority of those people would be sellers, not buyers. The two coins that have come up here (keets-dragon Morgan and the Saint) both came from the same source. While I applaud PCGS stepping up to the plate, in all honesty, I have very little sympathy when a big shot dealer screws up; that's their business, they should know how to run it. It's the little guy that usually gets the screwing in this hobby/business and greater consideration should be given to them IMHO. PCGS covering the big boys' arses doesn't really impress me. How about sticking up for the little guy, for a change? If Joe Average collector buys a PR69 modern on eBay with haze and spots all over it, why make him jump through flamming hoops to get his $30 back? Why should he have to pay $99 for club membership, or have to go through the same con artist that sold him the coin in the first place? Almost seems easier to get 15K out of ya than a lousy $30!!
Everyone is asking questions, and you are doing a great job organizing the answers into parts. Should the Question and Answer forum be opened for questions? It would put all them in one spot for you to read and check. Carol has it blocked right now.
Cameron Kiefer
Loki, the 1972 Ike types include a complete, intentional, major master reverse hub change. That's about as big as change as you can make without changing the date. It is far more significant to the series than 99% of the Morgan VAM designations are to that series, and far more easily attributed. And PCGS, by the way, does attribute many (relatively) minor Morgan varieties.
The 1972 change is more comparable (though not as significant) as the 1976 Type 1 and Type 2 Ikes, where both the obverse and reverse hub changed. PCGS attributes those.
It is very comparable to the 1979 SBA Narrow/Wide Rim variety, where a master hub change was also made partway through 1979 at the Philly mint. which PCGS does attribute. PCGS attributes those.
They are also far more significant than the 1979 and 1981 proof mintmark types, the 1981 type in particular requires magnification for most people to identify. PCGS attributes those.
And of course now that the 1972 Ikes are in the Red Book... the possibility of misrepresentation of a raw coin (intentionally or not) as a more valuable Type 2 variety is very real. One of the important services that PCGS provides is authentication of major varieties. The 1981 mintmark types are a prime example of this problem (1981 Type 1 raw coins routinely sold as 1981 Type 2) and solution (PCGS attribution).
Finally, while I'm happy to defend the Ike types to anyone who cares to debate it... as mentioned, PCGS (through Rick) already agreed to do it 3 months ago. This after long-standing and repeated requests by many Ike enthusiasts (dealers and collectors alike), and most importantly -- demonstrated market acceptance of the varieties.
My request for David is to please follow through with it. I'd be happy to work with Miles on it. And the sooner the better, of course.
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
Welcome to your board!
Thanks for the answers and efforts.
I wish you the best of luck!
adrian
Dorkkarl- I fully agre with you that the PCGS guarantee should protect the buyer as well as the seller !!!
I for one am a collector first but as i upgrade numerically or laterally (change a coin in the same numerical grade)I must sell a coin or two.If I go to an auction to buy a 1914 D in a 65 red holder that everyone in the room thinks is at least one or two points better and I buy the coin.I am not satisfied unless the coin upgrades even though the ms 65 is better than my ms 66.There have been times when I submit a coin six times and then sell it thinking I made a mistake.Later on the next resubmission it upgrades for Mister x.The same has been true of late with crossovers to the point that many people believe there has been prejudice when trying to cross an NGC coin.
Having attended many auctions I must bid against coin doctors who are bidding on what the coin can become when it is graded after the doctoring.I would like to see grading in the future deter the work of doctors so their work becomes moot and more research be done to prevent coin doctoring for the purpose of fooling the grading company.I know this is VERY difficult.
Stewart
PCGS is guaranteeing their opinion, not yours. Just because you and possibly others THINK it should grade higher, does not put PCGS on the hook if you pay a value greater than the grade on the holder.
Also, there should not be a financial loss to a buyer of an "undergraded" coin because he should only pay the value of the grade on the holder. If you feel it is better and pay more for it you cannot hold PCGS responsible for that.
Again, the guarantee is to make the person whole, not to profit from a perceived value or woulda, coulda, shoulda value.
IMHO. Joe.
<< <i>I disagree. PCGS is guaranteeing their opinion, not yours. Just because you and possibly others THINK it should grade higher, does not put PCGS on the hook if you pay a value greater than the grade on the holder. >>
keep in mind joe that the point i'm trying to make is that pcgs DOES think it should grade higher, as proven by a later resubmission that comes back at a higher grade. bottom line is that it was graded incorrectly to begin with - according to pcgs's own standards.
<< <i>Also, there should not be a financial loss to a buyer of an "undergraded" coin because he should only pay the value of the grade on the holder. >>
i think your comment points out the source of confusion concerning this topic. that is not the problem at all. the problem is if joe sells a coin to karl-the-dealer, & karl-the-dealer, immediately gets it regraded to a higher grade, then joe lost out on $, because he could have gotten more $ at the correct grade. pcgs should be responsible for the financial loss to joe
PLEASE let me know if this is not making sense. i've tried to explain it before, but got it all muddled up. again, the problem is NOT when you pay more than what the coin's grade says it is worth, but when you sell the coin for too little, because the slabed grade was too low.
bottom line is: i doubt pcgs will ever be willing to provide a 100% guarantee, becuase they are not capable of being consistent enough of graders. but that being the case, i believe that they should not make statements like "we stand behind our grades", when what they really mean is "we stand behind our grades half the time"
K S
edited to clarify (???)
In reference to your second point, I see it as a circular argument because if the coin was "properly" graded in the first case, then I would have had to pay more for it.
As long as I buy and sell the coin as the same grade I am not hurt by PCGS's grading.
I hope this has also helped to clarify my point.
Joe.
i'm not claiming undergrading is rampant (
K S
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
What I have seen;
A raw MS65 you want to sell me looks MS63.
A raw MS65 that I just found in a mint set looks MS66.
A PCGS MS65 that you want to sell me looks MS64.
A PCGS MS65 that I am going to sell looks PQ MS65.
Does that sound familiar to anyone?