When will Ron Howard Speak about Coin Grading ?
STEWARTBLAYNUMIS
Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
As the newly designated director of grading Ron Howard has not yet spoken.Instead David Hall is speaking and insulating Mr. Howard.To me there is a serious problem in the grading room.I believe there are many regrades that are not even looked at and instead just put back in a holder at the same grade.Many times there are TWO GRADE POINTS discrepancy between a coin submitted the same day at a show.I have reached a crossroad where I feel CHEATED when I get my grades.
I AM DEMANDING AN EXPLANATION.
Stewart Blay
0
Comments
I'm sorry that you are unhappy with the grading - really. I even suspect, you're not the only one.
I didn't see anything written in the rules, however, that said the "director of grading" was required to discuss grading with submitters.
I realize others want what you do, in that regard. But, having been on the other side of the grading fence, I can tell you that there is much to be said for graders' sticking to grading and not becoming P.R. people. If Ron Howard started answering questions, he probably wouldn't have much time left for grading coins.
I also feel that anonymity of the submitter is critical for achieving unbiased grading. The more graders speak to submitters, the more difficult that concept becomes.
As the standards slowly loosened in the mid to late 1990's, the explanation was that the services had seen more coins and were more comfortable using the entire spectrum of grades at hand for the uncirculated specimens (ie: MS60-70). This made sense - why have a range if you aren't going to use it? In addition, as it became clearer what coins in what grade were extremely rare, the spreads between grades became higher and higher. It became imperative to use the full range to accurately price a coin.
Now, it seems that PCGS is trying to put the genie back in the bottle. On classic coins, they appear to be grading to late 1980's standards. The explanation is that there is a standard, always has been a standard and they grade to it. Well, I have to ask - what happened to the previous explanation? What happened to the good results of using the entire spectrum of available grades? Do we really want 3 grades worth of high end classic coins (MS66, 67, 68) shoved into one grade? Does it really help the coin market to have $150,000 ride on the difference in one grade? What happened to the advantage of being exactly half a grade higher than NGC?
In addition, there's been a lot of turnover in the grading room. It seems that most of the graders have the majority of their grading experience coming from the late 1990's when, quite frankly, there was a slightly different interpretation of the grading scale. It seems to me that the divergence of experience and current grading interpretations leads to inconsistencies. These inconsistencies lead to threads like this!
Just my 20 cents worth.
I also feel that anonymity of the submitter is critical for achieving unbiased grading. The more graders speak to submitters, the more difficult that concept becomes."
Mark: I respectfully disagree. Are you telling me that Rick Montgomery was grading with "bias" for many years, because he addressed challenges head on? You know, as well as I do, that throughout the years it has been the NORM for the grading companies to discuss justified grievances regarding the grading of coins, or even entire series of coins.
BOTTOM LINE: IMHO, THE DIRECTOR OF GRADING FOR ANY GRADING COMPANY SHOULD DEVOTE A PORTION OF HIS DAY TO ADDRESS THE VALID ISSUES RAISED BY DEALERS AND COLLECTORS, EVEN IF IT IS AS LITTLE AS ONLY 1 HOUR/DAY. OTHERWISE, THE TITLE IS MEANINGLESS, OTHER THAN TO INFLAME THE DEALER AND COLLECTOR COMMUNITY AS A RESULT OF PERCEIVING THE DIRECTOR IS NOT DOING THE JOB HE SHOULD BE DOING. IF THE OFFICE OF "DIRECTOR OF GRADING" WAS MERELY INTENDED TO SHOW THE OTHER GRADERS IN THE ROOM WHO THE "DIRECTOR" IS, I SUGGEST DROP THE OFFICIAL TITLE AND SIMPLY HAVE THAT GUY WEAR AN APPROPRIATE HAT OR TEESHIRT IN THE GRADING ROOM, SO ALL CAN SEE.
As usual, my comments are directed to make PCGS even a better company than it it.
When I mailed my first batch to PCGS, I was convinced I had three winners. 1 was bodybagged, another two were graded one point below where I thought they should have been (Until I was able to look a little closer and compare) and one was graded about where I thought it should have been.
All of us would like our coins to come back MS69's or 70's (and everyone elses to come back as 63's)
That's a little extreme..but, loose grading puts us back where the hooby was 30 years ago.... with no standards. So, what we have is much better then before.
From having read some of your previous posts, I am not all surprised to hear that you disagree with me. But, I always appreciate the gentlemanly way in which you disagree.
Three quick points before I pack for the show I'm leaving for :
1) I feel very strongly that ANY grader who discusses a coin with a submitter should remove himself from the grading equation / team, if that coin is subsequently resubmitted.
2) I'm not exactly clear, and I don't know anyone else who is, what "director of grading" means. Perhaps that can be explained to us again, so that we understand?
3) I don't disagree that it would be good for someone at PCGS to address questions and complaints about grading. I don't know that it is necessarily fair, however, to insist that Ron Howard be that person.
TDN - I agree with much of your analysis. However, many people gripe (I wasn't allowed to use the word bitcch, less one "C" - my first sensor - how exciting!) about grading, from month to month and year to year, no matter how tight or loose it is. I don't really feel that things are very different now, in terms of consistency (or lack of it) compared to 6 months or a year ago.
Wondercoin
Thank god, I am not alone. So many posts over the last year that I have been complaining about how Lincoln's are graded and many replies "stop complaining, etc".
>>>Isn't it awfully difficult for the owner of a particular coin to look at that coin with a completely open mind when it comes to grading?
Not when you own 10's of thousands of them. I have more than 400 rolls from the 1930 and 40's and when I go through them I don't feel a special bond with any of them until they go into my collection. If you had a Morgan that your grandfather had then maybe.
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Just my opinion, but I hear everyone discussing other grading companies that seemingly give proprietory grades to large submitters and play favorites. I.E. they give the grades that submitters want!
I hope that Ron and his staff are fair. I think that is what we really all want.
I would take the position that Ron does not have to respond to questions regarding grading as long as David Hall is taking the time to respond. He is higher up on the corporate latter than the Director of Grading. Based on your anger about the situation, I would suggest contacting David Hall directly. You should consider setting up an appointment with him around the upcoming Long Beach show.
Your opinion on the grading of copper coins should receive serious consideration. Your reputation on copper coins is amongst the best based upon my conversations with other dealers.
To me there is a serious problem in the grading room
Too many coins for too few graders.
I believe there are many regrades that are not even looked at and instead just put back in a holder at the same grade.
I Seriously doubt it.
Many times there are TWO GRADE POINTS discrepancy between a coin submitted the same day at a show.
Definitely needs to be brought David Hall's attention if this is true.
<< <i>Stewart,
I'm sorry that you are unhappy with the grading - really. I even suspect, you're not the only one.
I didn't see anything written in the rules, however, that said the "director of grading" was required to discuss grading with submitters.
I realize others want what you do, in that regard. But, having been on the other side of the grading fence, I can tell you that there is much to be said for graders' sticking to grading and not becoming P.R. people. If Ron Howard started answering questions, he probably wouldn't have much time left for grading coins.
I also feel that anonymity of the submitter is critical for achieving unbiased grading. The more graders speak to submitters, the more difficult that concept becomes. >>
On the contrary Mark,I had Bill Conroy(I believe Thats his name) from across the street call me last month to go over a submission I had trouble with.
It left a much better taste in my mouth.