Why no NGC coins in the PCGS Registry
homerunhall
Posts: 2,496 ✭✭✭
Several of you have asked why PCGS does not allow NGC coins in the PCGS Registry. Here goes...
The Registry was launched to give serious collectors of high end coins a place to have fun with their collections, keep track of their sets, and compare and compete with other collectors. The compare and compete part of the process makes in essential that only PCGS coins be registered. Coins graded by other services are not necessarily graded by the same standards so the compare and compete part doesn't work between services.
Let's take NGC...They have slightly looser grading standards than PCGS. Here's some cold hard evidence of that fact. If you compare Population Report figures, you'll find some clear indications of the differences. I've used the figures from the October, 2002 PCGS Population Report. The most recent NGC Census I have is April, 2002, though figures from the latest are undoubtedly very similar (maybe someone can supply those.) And by the way, I'm sitting here with a hand held calculator and I'm pretty beat, so if there's any mistakes, please don't skewer me too bad. I did check all the numbers twice.
Let's look at some very high submission gold coins.
$10 Libs (with motto) PCGS has graded 111,799 $10 Libs of which 1060 or 0.9% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 112,893 $10 Libs of which 1681 or 1.5% are MS 65 or better. NGC is 1.67 times as likely to grade a $10 Lib MS65 or better than PCGS, i.e. NGC is 67% looser, i.e you get 67% more MS65 or better $10 Libs from NGC as you do from PCGS.
$10 Indians - PCGS has graded 75,071 $10 Indians of which 1501 or 2.0% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 57,445 $10 indians of which 2266 or 3.9% are MS65 or better. NGC is 95% looser than PCGS on $10 Indians.
$20 Libs (Type 3) PCGS has graded 241,087 $20 Libs of which 1993 or 0.8% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 313,534 $20 Libs of which 4692 or 1.5% are MS65 or better. NGC is 87% looser on $20 Libs than PCGS.
$20 Saints (with motto) PCGS has graded 376,881 with motto Saints of which 24,012 or 6.3% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 445,000 Saints of which 48,150 or 10.8% are MS65 or better. NGC is 71% looser than PCGS on with motto Saints. If you add the no mottos the numbers are closer, though NGC is clearly looser. The numbers are closer because of all the fabulous 1908 no mottos that both services graded when the big hoard came out in 1998.
Here's one Bruce might find interesting. Trade dollars!
PCGS has graded 4811 circulation strike Trade dollars of which 701 or 14.6% are MS64 or better and 137 or 2.8% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 2887 of which 638 or 22.1% are MS64 or better and 156 or 5.4% are MS65 or better. NGC is clearly looser. And remember the PCGS numbers on the MS65 or betters are skewed a little to the high side because of all of Bruce's great coins.
For Proof Trade dollars PCGS has graded 3449 coins of which 1392 or 40.4% are PR64 or better and 495 or 14.4% are PR65 or better. NGC has graded 2602 proof Trade dollars of which 1668 or 64.1% are PR64 or better and 707 or 27.2% are PR65 or better. NGC is clearly looser on proof Trade dollars.
For modern coins the comparisons of the 69 and 70 grades is even more dramatic. The most extreme example is the 2000 $5 gold eagle. If I read the NGC Census Report right, they have graded 5299 MS69 and 6941 MS70, i.e they have graded more MS70s than MS69s!!!!!!!!!! For that coin, PCGS has graded only 9 examples MS70.
There are lots of other examples of this difference between PCGS and NGC MS69s and MS70s.
You can also look at the now hotly collected 20th Century Registry sets. Compare the Pops...there's a big difference in the standards.
If NGC coins were allowed in the PCGS Set Registry it would not be fair to those participants who only had PCGS coins in their sets as their sets would be compared to other sets that had coins in them that were graded by the looser NGC standards. And it wouldn't be fair financially either. For modern coins, as an example, you can usually buy NGC 70s for a lot less than PCGS 70s.
All of the above is the major reason why only PCGS coins are allowed in the PCGS Set Registry. While we admittedly also have some strong competitive reasons for have an exclusive PCGS Set Registry (and NGC has a strong competitive need to allow PCGS coins in its Registry), the most important reason of all for the exclusivity is the fairness to the participants.
David Hall
PCGS has graded
The Registry was launched to give serious collectors of high end coins a place to have fun with their collections, keep track of their sets, and compare and compete with other collectors. The compare and compete part of the process makes in essential that only PCGS coins be registered. Coins graded by other services are not necessarily graded by the same standards so the compare and compete part doesn't work between services.
Let's take NGC...They have slightly looser grading standards than PCGS. Here's some cold hard evidence of that fact. If you compare Population Report figures, you'll find some clear indications of the differences. I've used the figures from the October, 2002 PCGS Population Report. The most recent NGC Census I have is April, 2002, though figures from the latest are undoubtedly very similar (maybe someone can supply those.) And by the way, I'm sitting here with a hand held calculator and I'm pretty beat, so if there's any mistakes, please don't skewer me too bad. I did check all the numbers twice.
Let's look at some very high submission gold coins.
$10 Libs (with motto) PCGS has graded 111,799 $10 Libs of which 1060 or 0.9% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 112,893 $10 Libs of which 1681 or 1.5% are MS 65 or better. NGC is 1.67 times as likely to grade a $10 Lib MS65 or better than PCGS, i.e. NGC is 67% looser, i.e you get 67% more MS65 or better $10 Libs from NGC as you do from PCGS.
$10 Indians - PCGS has graded 75,071 $10 Indians of which 1501 or 2.0% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 57,445 $10 indians of which 2266 or 3.9% are MS65 or better. NGC is 95% looser than PCGS on $10 Indians.
$20 Libs (Type 3) PCGS has graded 241,087 $20 Libs of which 1993 or 0.8% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 313,534 $20 Libs of which 4692 or 1.5% are MS65 or better. NGC is 87% looser on $20 Libs than PCGS.
$20 Saints (with motto) PCGS has graded 376,881 with motto Saints of which 24,012 or 6.3% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 445,000 Saints of which 48,150 or 10.8% are MS65 or better. NGC is 71% looser than PCGS on with motto Saints. If you add the no mottos the numbers are closer, though NGC is clearly looser. The numbers are closer because of all the fabulous 1908 no mottos that both services graded when the big hoard came out in 1998.
Here's one Bruce might find interesting. Trade dollars!
PCGS has graded 4811 circulation strike Trade dollars of which 701 or 14.6% are MS64 or better and 137 or 2.8% are MS65 or better. NGC has graded 2887 of which 638 or 22.1% are MS64 or better and 156 or 5.4% are MS65 or better. NGC is clearly looser. And remember the PCGS numbers on the MS65 or betters are skewed a little to the high side because of all of Bruce's great coins.
For Proof Trade dollars PCGS has graded 3449 coins of which 1392 or 40.4% are PR64 or better and 495 or 14.4% are PR65 or better. NGC has graded 2602 proof Trade dollars of which 1668 or 64.1% are PR64 or better and 707 or 27.2% are PR65 or better. NGC is clearly looser on proof Trade dollars.
For modern coins the comparisons of the 69 and 70 grades is even more dramatic. The most extreme example is the 2000 $5 gold eagle. If I read the NGC Census Report right, they have graded 5299 MS69 and 6941 MS70, i.e they have graded more MS70s than MS69s!!!!!!!!!! For that coin, PCGS has graded only 9 examples MS70.
There are lots of other examples of this difference between PCGS and NGC MS69s and MS70s.
You can also look at the now hotly collected 20th Century Registry sets. Compare the Pops...there's a big difference in the standards.
If NGC coins were allowed in the PCGS Set Registry it would not be fair to those participants who only had PCGS coins in their sets as their sets would be compared to other sets that had coins in them that were graded by the looser NGC standards. And it wouldn't be fair financially either. For modern coins, as an example, you can usually buy NGC 70s for a lot less than PCGS 70s.
All of the above is the major reason why only PCGS coins are allowed in the PCGS Set Registry. While we admittedly also have some strong competitive reasons for have an exclusive PCGS Set Registry (and NGC has a strong competitive need to allow PCGS coins in its Registry), the most important reason of all for the exclusivity is the fairness to the participants.
David Hall
PCGS has graded
0
Comments
Am I missing anything?
peacockcoins
Thanks for the answer and the analysis, but yesterday, you stated that you felt that 50% (estimated) of all NGC coins should be able to cross to PCGS.
If that is the case, NGC can't be as loose as you statistically suggest.
Wow, PCGS has a pretty high opinion of themselves!
peacockcoins
While I feel there are great coins in both holders - coins that Registry participants would be proud to own - there is no doubt in my mind that series by series one or the other grading company is tighter or looser (depending especially upon when the coin was graded).
I don't doubt there are bad coins in either holder or great coins in either holder. Quality varies within a grade in the same holder, even if they were graded in the same era (as illustrated by the recent showdown). PCGS's goal, as evidenced by the 25-50% crossover goal, is to maintain a standard slightly above NGC's. In that respect, on average, they have mostly been successful. On a coin by coin basis, however, anything can occur. That's where the statistics break down.
I also think that it's important to realize that we're talking about at most a half a grade. I agree with a statement made last night that one reason the services are seemingly inconsistent is the 11 point grading scale. If the grades were 60, 63, 65, 67 and 70 then there'd be almost no difference between the top services.
Staking out the high position in each grade is an inherent advantage to one service, allowing multiple holders in its Registry is the tradeoff advantage for the other service. Isn't it great to have choices as a collector?!
Who has proven otherwise David? To say their census is skewed is hearsay, unless you have proof otherwise. Would you not agree?
I await your proof to back up your statements.
Edited to say:
This was not meant to sound, or be threatening. I would like to see the proof before I took the work of someone who is so closely involved.
and to all the people who do not like long worded answers then do not bother to read it...........lol
and to all those who want to really learn something then by all means read it.............lol
do you know waht lol means.............lol
sincerely michael
I used the old copy and paste method to post in both places.
So which forum is best? US or Registry? Which provides the best information?
Kinda like the PCGS/NGC argument, isn't it?
in their registry under the following scenario:
For every 1% of coins contained within a registry that had NGC coins deduct 1/5 of 1% from the net grade of the NGC coins within the set. This would be a stated "penalty" which can be modest but will grow as more and more NGC coins are added to a set.
For example,
if 5% of the registry set were NGC coins deduct 1% from the net grade of all the NGC coins in the registry set.
If 10% of the registry set were NGC deduct 2% from the net grade of all the NGC coins in the registry set.
If 40% of the registry set were NGC deduct 8% from the net grade of all the NGC coins in the registry set.
As you can see from the above examples, they allow for more than 10% non {CGS coins but also exacts a growing but rational "penalty" or "service charge" for using non proprietary products in a system paid for by the proprietary company (PCGS).
If someone wanted to put a 100% NGC product right here for the thrill of it they would have a net rating of 80% of the raw grade but so what? We PCGS users get to look at another collectors set and enjoy it for what it is.
If a collection were rated all MS-67 with 1% NGC coins such set would be net graded 67 - (0.2% x 67) = 66.86
If a collection were rated all MS-67 with 5% NGC coins such set would be net graded 67 - (1% x 67) = 66.33
If a collection were rated all MS-67 with 10% NGC coins such set would be net graded 67 - (2% x 67) = 65.66.
If a collection were rated all MS-67 with 20% NGC coins such set would be net graded 67 - (4% x 67) =
64.34.
This allows for more flexibility than even the current NGC plan but with an appropriate "service charge."
I like this idea enough that I believe NGC should use this same model.
This would provide a very simple formula to calculate a modest or more severe penalty depending on how many NGC coins are included in the set.
The reason why this may work is many collector may want to use NGC slabs as fillers on certain coins or coins that are simply unavailable in PCGS but would give them an incentive to display what they have under a formula that all can understand yet protect the preference for having PCGS coins with a registry set.
What do you gals and guys think?
P.S. Like I said there are exceptions, here is one. It crossed over from NGC 67 to PCGS 67, and was nicer than the PCGS 67 that I had.
The picture is in black and white. It shows the detail and luster better for this coin.
Type 1 Buffalo
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
09/07/2006
Tell the major league that don't call "World Series." Name it as "US Series."
If you think the PCGS "on average" is the best, then it is "All Time Finest Sets."
I guess this is the US culture.
<< <i>> These sets should be called the "Finest PCGS Graded Sets" not "All Time Finest Sets".
Tell the major league that don't call "World Series." Name it as "US Series."
If you think the PCGS "on average" is the best, then it is "All Time Finest Sets."
I guess this is the US culture.
This would be fine except many of the finest sets are not registered. Should be called the "Finest Registered PCGS Graded Sets", which is all it is.
On an unrelated note could you PLEASE ADD ALL THE RECOGNIZED VARIETIES TO THE LINCOLN VARIETY SET ASAP. There is NO reason in my mind to delay doing this. The variety set is useless as it stands and if you grade it, it should be there. Weighting should go to the rarest of the varieties - as this is supposed to be "the finest " sets anywhere.
REGARDS,
LincolnSence
If we can all agree on these points, then why not expect PCGS to admit ANACS coins?
How bout' ICG coins? Why should they single out NGC? Am I missing something, or what?
I think many of the objectors are complaining about DH's reasons. Please read the same thread in the Coin Forum. There are more posts there.
Regards,
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Mr. Hall,
Thanks for answering this topic. I agree with you 100%. I don't think you even used some of the more obvious examples, such as MS65 Franklins, where NGC has graded a bunch more of certain dates (percentage wise). I would hate to have to complete against NGC coins in my Peace $ set, as I often see MS65 key-date Peace $s in NGC holders offered for half the price of PCGS ones.
Thanks again for making it clear.
JJacks
I know of someone that as an ostrich farm in Florida if you're interested I can ship you one when I go there for the holidays I'm in the pet industry so finding you a decent hatchling wont be a problem..
I also have a friend that has 2 of them as watch dogs! Yes they do make great watch dogs,ever been attacked by and Ostrich? (chuckles)
I'm only interested in the ostrich from the LA area.
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
I support Mr. Hall in excluding NGC or any other service's coins in the Registry. You want to collect NGC or ICG or NTC be my guest.. Just dont expect them to compete with PCGS coins because PCGS hasnt graded or looked at them.. If you want them to compete..cross them over.
If PCGS is consistent in their grading and you have become an "expert " in the series you collect, you should be able to pick out the candidates.
As for the crossover rate.. its more like 15% - 20% not 50%. Because of this low ratio, if I never submitted a coin for cross over since I have an 80% - 85% chance of NOT making it at the same grade. And I didnt use a calculator. I hope PCGS doesnt lower their standards to accommodate for 50% crossover. Just what would that do to the market? I dont know, but it wouldnt be good, I'm sure!!
WWQ
I disagree, at least for the stuff that I collect. BTW, I don't collect any 20th century stuff in slabs, except for 4 Ike proofs. And, I don't collect coppers or gold.
So, I still disagree, but that doesn't mean that you can't be partially correct.
Also, you should realize that you're saying that NGC *currently* grades looser than PCGS. Please keep in mind that there have been periods where this situation, or market perception, have flip-flopped. What about those coins?
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
If any of us actually can reasonably compare our collections to Eliasberg's, then I think we would not really care much about the registry. It'd be like Michael Jordan stuffing baskets on a bunch of sandlot youths...
This is not intended as an insult to you; rather, Eliasberg put together one heck of a collection!!!
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com