PCGS PR70, PR70, PR70 and more PR70s

Gerry

Here are some interesting and disconcerting changes in the PCGS on-line pop report this week: the number of state quarters in PR70 increased from 29 to 53! Yes, an increase of 24 in that grade. Yes, an 83% increase in one week! A chance phenomena? Or did standards change? Hmmmmm!!!!!

Not to be outdone, there were two new Lincoln memorial proofs in PR70 that found their way into the pop report this week as well. Both are 2002s. If my memory serves me, those are the first Lincoln PR70s in about two years. Another chance phenomenon? Or did standards change here too? Hmmmmmm!!!

wondercoin

Interesting. I just wrote David Hall an email less than an hour ago. On a batch of 500 proofs I submitted (Lincolns, Jeffs, Roosies, Kennedys and Sacs), I just went 0/500 this week on PR70's. Your comments only make me more "PO'ed". By the way, these were the first proofs from proof sets PCGS got from me in years.

BTW, that was 24 Pr70s and how many PR69's were graded in that week as well?

Wondercoin

Dimetime

Gerry, you beat me to it. What is going on? 70's are flowing like water. I like 70's, but what is this doing to those of us that have early ones, to their value?

Gerry

According to my analysis, 1658 State Quarter proofs were graded in the past week (or at least that number was added to the pop report), so the 24 new PR70s represent a little under 1.5% of that total.

Since my post, I've been told privately that PCGS has changed their policy and standards, and that they will be grading a certain percentage of proofs as PR70s. I wonder if this has anything to do with Rick leaving?

As to what it does to values of current PR70s, at least in these series, I think that is painfully obvious.

gmarguli

so the 24 new PR70s represent a little under 1.5%

I've been told privately that PCGS has changed their policy and standards, and that they will be grading a certain percentage of proofs as PR70s.

Nothing private about it. When I asked David Hall in the US Coin Forum about the lack of PR70s, he stated that he'd look into it and he felt somewhere between .5%-2% of the 1986-present coins should grade PR70.

Looks like he kept his word. THANK YOU DAVID HALL!!


As to what it does to values of current PR70s, at least in these series, I think that is painfully obvious.

Sorry for you personally if you own any, but it will crush the value of them. No more stupid prices for plastic. Now that market will be able to put a fair price on them knowing that the supply hasn't beer artificially limited.

gmarguli

Here is the info:

gmarguli asks (states): "PR70s? What happened to them. The grading scale is 1-70, not 1-69."

PCGS Answer: I agree with your grading scale comment. Certainly the 1985 to date coins we recieve are fabulous quality and I don't understand the virtual lack of any 70s at all. It seems to me that .5% to 2% of these coins should be PR70. Now I have not looked at these coins, so I can't say for sure. however, I will encourage the graders to use the whole scale and give out the PR70 grade were appropriate.


The Thread

dbldie55

There are 2 PR70 2002 coins listed on Ebay, being advertised on this board right now. What does this new change do to the "real" value of these coins? They are both listed with huge premiums over the 69's.

supercoin

I've made my feelings pretty well-known about artificially scarce PR70s here in the past.

But as always I don't like to make price predictions (cough, cough).

gmarguli

Supercoin, maybe you should have picked a chart of WorldCom.

I notice there are now (3) 2002-S PR70 Sacagaweas.

I wonder if someone (WayneH?) would like to do a "one month snapshot" of the modern coins?

Typetone

Looks like 70s are finally getting made. Thank you David Hall. I have a handful of 70s, and their price might drop, but I might be able to buy lot of these in a year, at a fraction of today's price. And that's OK. Maybe I can even get a few of my 69s upgraded (fat chance).

Greg

supercoin

Hey now, PR70s are always worth at least face value.

I think in the long run it's a good thing they're loosening up a bit.

Frankly I'm surprised they haven't done it earlier as a way to get increased submissions as well as to lower their liability on the dogs that exist out there with multi-thousand dollar prices.

I'm afraid it may be a painful adjustment for existing collectors though. But I'll hasten to add my standard disclaimer: I have a terrible track record of predicting prices. As do most dealers who are honest about it.

dpoole

If I may venture a totally uninformed but obvious-on-the-surface-of-it observation that this represents a policy change at PCGS resulting from Riock's departure and David H.'s ascension, in response to everybody's complaints that PCGS 'just doesn't give out 70s anymore."

Evidently, PCGS now is applying a standard for PR70 and MS70, that allows for a certain percentage of modern coinsto get the grade.

This means:

1) that a certain percentage of 69s out there that have been graded, are really 70s (we've sure heard some among our number say as much); and

2) that the going 70 prices for many issues are WAY inflated, and that if you buy now, you are going to be sorry! We are going to have to wait and see which issues are actually condition rarities for 70.

wondercoin

Gerry, et. al.: The 1600+ state quarters graded this week is absolutely staggering. PCGS had graded around 10,000 clad and silver 2002 state quarter proofs in all 11+ months this year!! This supports the following IMHO:

1. David Hall has once again kept his word that things would change now that he stepped in.

2. The departure of Rick M. directly ties into the new policy at PCGS on PR70's.

3. The 1.5% is in line with what I would also expect for "perfect" coins. This % is still way, way under any other grading company % I am awre of. These PR70 coins are still "expensive" to make at PCGS. There are nearly 99 PR69 coins that need to be disposed of for each PR70 made (unless you submit under my number in which case there are 500 coins to dispose of and 0 PR70's).

4. Submission levels will likely skyrocket at PCGS (at least in the shortrun) with Rick's deparature. As was mentioned in the past, Rick's departure appears to be "win-win" for both companies.

Wondercoin

Russ

<< <i>Sorry for you personally if you own any, but it will crush the value of them. No more stupid prices for plastic. >>



Thank God for small favors. Now maybe I can actually consider a 70 or two for my Kennedy set. The change is great for those of us who refused to pay the 20 to 30 multiples for a one point bump, but I feel sorry for all the people that were grabbing them up.

Russ, NCNE

gmarguli

The change is great for those of us who refused to pay the 20 to 30 multiples for a one point bump, but I feel sorry for all the people that were grabbing them up

The people buying these PR70s knew that at any time PCGS could open the floodgates and their pop 1 coin could become pop 50. That's a chance they took. It sucks for them, but...

IrishMike

It amazes me sometimes how people can look at a situation and come up with completely different thoughts. Mitch, you certainly are on the David Hall bandwagon lately. I have never spoken to or met Mr. Hall or Mr. Montgomery, so I am totally speculating here and I readily admit it. But you seem to buy Hall's story which as it has played out in his responses, amounts to the he really didn't know and still doesn't know what went on at PCGS.That to me is pretty incredible and if true, casts doubts in my mind about his leadership and management abilities. Do you all really believe that Rick Montgomery was the one tightening PCGS standards and not Hall. Hall is the one who had the gall to state that they cream the NGC crossovers.

It's not a coincidence if they loosed the 70 standard with Rick's departure. But let's look at another possibility. Maybe Rick's departure woke the real powers to be in CLCT. Maybe Rick left because he didn't agree with some of the grading standards. None of us really know the reason he left. Hall is the coin seller of PCGS69 coins, he was the one benefitting from the absence of 70's. Maybe, just maybe Hall has woke up the realization that he made a bad business decision by tightening standards. Either that or we have to accept the his word that he really didn't know what was going on at PCGS, to paraphrase him.

Anyway it's all speculation on my part, but this is how I have read and interpreted what has happened.

Typetone

Sorry, post in error.

fcloud

Wow! Are the 70s coming because of the changes in management, or has management openned their eyes consumer demands? I hope it is neither. If there was a change due to either scenario, it is not a good change for all the people whom submitted 70 coins only to receive 69s. I have a hard time with changing the standards. I do not own any 70 coins (out of my price range), but if a coin has a minor flaw that made it a 69, how can a flaw now be allowed. Maybe we'll have "70 Special Heavy Industrial Tier" coins. It knocks the value down, and I feel in the long run it hurts the industry. If you want your plastic to have a 70 for the sake of a 70, send them in to that lesser company. I think CLCT will have a short term gain, and it may even help their stock price, but I think it will hurt in the long run. A companies first responcibility is to the stock holders, and I think this helps the stock holders more than it helps the coin and collectible industry.

Tony

gmarguli

fcloud, the problem is that even if the coins deserved the 70 grade, they weren't getting them. It's not that now PCGS will give so-so 69s the 70 grade, it is that now they will give 70s the 70 grade instead of the 69 grade.

fcloud

Greg,

Do you really feel that there are that many coins that should be 70s in 69 holders? This could be a boom for PCGS if people start sending the undergraded coins in for evaluation. But there will be a point where they all come in and then things will go flat for their business again.

I understand that the 70 coins will now go down in value because there will be more top grade coins. But, doesn't the downward spiral start with the 69, 68, and so on? What will they do in three or four years, loosen the standards again, because they are not putting out enough 70s? Then do we start to get 69.1, 69.2, 69.3...69.9? Can we somehow get above 70? In my opinion, I still wish they would leave it alone.

Tony

CarlWohlforth

I am pleased I looked closely at my 9 Jeffs and returned 5 of them. Rick M. agreed and I was made whole. I sold 1. The 3 that remained appeared perfect to me using my 10x loupe.

I don't doubt that many of the original 70s had eye visible flaws.

It seems easier to detect changing standards with the outliers. Is there any indication that other grades or, perhaps, designations have changed standard?

gmarguli

fcloud, yes I think there are a lot of PR70s in PR69 slabs right now. PCGS made a policy to stop giving the PR70 grade unless the coin met some insane and practically unobtainable standard. This standard was not in line with what had been happening in the past and what was published. When a coin came in that would have graded PR70 a few years ago, they had to give that coin a PR69 grade since their policy basically stated no PR70s.

Now that it appears that PCGS is going back to its previous and published standard and the politics have stopped, we will see a lot more PR70s. I think it is only logical that there are many coins out there in PR69 slabs that would grade PR70 today. That number might be small, maybe 1%, but they are out there.

I assume that the price of PR69s will go down as more will be made since people will submit more trying for the PR70 grade. However, for most coins, even in PR69 it is not worth the money to submit them.

MoneyLA

Some of you will remember that I have been a "defender" of proof 70 coinsand my registry set of washingtons once had a date run of pr70's for 1960 through 1964. I think that over a span of a couple of years, I personally owned or handled about one quarter of all the proof 70 silver washingtons that had been slabbed.

With that said, let me add that only one of those coins was not in my opinion a true PR70 and I sent it back to PCGS for a "review." thats the coin that was stolen and led to the arrest of the postal worker in Newport Beach -- but that's another story.

Let me just say this: as a believer that proof 70 coins CAN exist, the issue is NOT the number of new proofs, but whether or not the new pr70 coins are in fact PR70 coins?? Its up to the owners of those coins to let us know if in fact these coins are worthy of the designation. That is the issue. If they are not truly PR70 then there is a problem. A big problem.

If they are in fact true PR70s then yes, the market will have to make some price adjustments.

Frankly, Im hoping that there are some price adjustments (down) so I can pick up some more deals.

Most of the PR70 silver Washingtons that I owned I paid NO MORE than $120 for. I'd like that chance again !!!

cheers, alan mendelson

DeepCoin

I believe that PCGS is now grading 70s is a sign that they are in touch with the manufacturing process for modern proofs. If you are going to have a grade of 70, then it should be used. For whatever reason David Hall seems to have put the 70 back in play.

I really believe the statements concerning 1 or 2 percent of modern proofs submitted (submitted is the key here) should grade a 70. The quality of the modern proof is really high and if you get one of the first struck you should have a very good shot at a 70.

Of course the downside to this is that the existing 70s will be devalued where a number of new ones are made. This is one of the risks of collecting moderns (or changing standards for any series). This is not a bash at moderns, but rather a reflection of the state of the market for them.

As a final thought, I believe the current policy is the correction, but that is just MHO.

keithdagen

A lot of people are mentioning values, but it wasn't that long ago, maybe three years, when Collectors Universe used to run weekly auctions. At that time, you could get almost ANY MS-70 or PR-70 coin for $150 or less, with only the gold commems being slightly higher.

supercoin

fcloud, the flip side of the problem is that there are many coins in the old PR70 holders that do not deserve the grade. The vast majority of PR70s got in their holders during a "loose" period.

For Ikes in particular, 30 of the 32 that were at one time available (a couple since downgraded) were all from ONE bulk submission. And many of them ain't pretty.

The bottom line is the standard has already changed a couple times. Maybe the third time's the charm.