Since PCGS has a grade guarantee, they guarantee that the coin is at least a MS66. That is why it shouldn't go down. If it does, they owe the submitter the difference in cash.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Was the coin cracked out of the holder? I haven't read this thread in it's entirety, since it is so long, but I assume that's the only way it can go down, or like you said, PCGS could pay the difference. But, if the coin was cracked out, PCGS should not be liable at all (obviously, someone could have wacked the coin a bit outside the holder).
Reading more, I guess the coin was cracked out, thereby voiding any kind of grading warranty on PCGS's part (and I would assume no other grader in the country would warranty a coin's grade after it was cracked out of the holder either).
JJacks
Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
baseball, how many coins do you submit monthly? You seem to be very up on what is going on at the services and how they grade coins that were already in one of their holders.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Thanks for taking the time to post your summary. The continuing effect of the Internet on the face-to-face coin market is something I am following with great interest...
JJacks, it was submitted for regrade. Since it was shown to Mr.Hall in a 66 holder, I would guess it wasn't submitted raw. Just the way I read it. I wasn't there.
Baseball said - Your example of a collector getting screwed on the selling price, as I originally stated, can be mitigated or eraticated by putting it up for auction. If the floor still gives a low price, then the buyer was obviously wrong in the first place or the market is dead.
Baseball, I get your point, but must take issue with your observation. If the coin is worth $500 in a 66 holder and $5000 in a 67 holder, do you really believe a PQ 66 will do $5000 at auction?
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I think we need Wondercoin to verify here if it was submitted raw, or in the holder. Also, if it was submitted in the holder, then did PCGS offer to pay the difference? Wondercoin's original statement never said that PCGS wouldn't either pay the difference, or put the coin back into an MS66 holder.
JJacks
Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
You said the last alternative for the seller of the "PQ" or undergraded coin is auction. It could also bring a too low price if the potential buyers collude on its price. This happens often enough. Rather than bidding each other up on a near-lock upgrade, 3 or 4 dealers split the coin and keep the bids as low as possible. I see this several times in each auction I attend.
I think the main point that I want to make here is this:
Why is it so wrong if a coin is submitted in an attempt for an upgrade that it gets downgraded, as long as PCGS either: 1. Offers to pay the difference. 2. Realizes they made a mistake and puts it back in the original grade holder. 3. Or, if the coin was raw at the time of submission, PCGS should not be responsible for it.
If the coin had been upgraded to MS67, certainly the submitter never would have complained about "PCGS inconsistancy", and instead would have likely sold to a collector who may have then paid many times what they would have had to pay to get a standard MS66 coin. Then, many years later, if that collector tried to sell, maybe a dealer would have told him it was only MS66, and he would have been very upset.
JJacks
Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
<< <i>d55, I don't submit coins but I fail to see how that has anything to do with it. I have examined thousands and thousands of PCGS and NGC coins coing back to inception. I was in my early teens when they first came out so I wasn't really all that knowledgeable then, but have felt comfortable ever since the early 90s. >>
Those that do submit coins have seen real changes in the way the grades have gone. They have examined hundreds of thousands of coins going back 10-20 years "before" PCGS existed. Perhaps you should submit coins so you can make educated comments.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Here is another question for anyone who feels bad for this submitter:
Would it be better if PCGS flat out refused in any way, shape or form to review coins that were in PCGS holders? Either crack it out or don't send it in. No review. No nothing. No grade guarantee. That way PCGS would never put themselves in the awkward position of admiting they may have grade a coin wrong by 1 point before. I don't think many dealers or ever collectors would necessarily care much for that. Personally, I think PCGS does a pretty noble job by admitting some mistakes, fixing the mistakes and paying the difference when appropriate.
JJacks
Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
Mitch said - On Saturday, it regraded MS65 (this, of course, isn't supposed to happen on regrade and the coin will likely get put back into the MS66 holder).
Baseball, I submit and collect and I'm not a dealer, so I have a question for you as a fellow collector, which price would you assign to that coin, the MS65 it just graded, the MS66 it was holdered, or the MS67 DH and WC thought it might be? I like both of their opinions very much, especially since neither owned the coin. A simple no upgrade would have been an indication of consistency. IMO
JJacks - in all candor, the coins I resubmit I have no fear cracking. If they aren't too nice for the holder, I leave them be. I would not be concerned if PCGS changed the review to resubmission in that regard.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I'm not trying to argue here, but I fail to see what the problem is then. If PCGS will put it back in the 66 holder, why all the crying about it (from WC and the submitter)? As I stated, why does everyone seem to think it would be OK if it had gone from a 66 to a 67, but can't seem to comprehend that it could fall?
JJacss
Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
Actually, you DO have to look at thousands of coins, as well as have the benefit of an experienced numismatist to offer advice and training. (Like most, I haven't had the privilege-and probably never will. And no one has expelled me from the hobby yet, so I guess it's OK.) Then, depending on your personal characteristics, and your natural abilities, you might qualify as an average, journeymen grader-though there is always someone better around the corner.
SO:
1) If the entire coin market were limited to such people, no grading service would ever be needed.
2) There would STILL be no national champion, and grade would STILL be argued constantly-as at the LB show, where those perfectly competent dealers were so "angry" at PCGS (You GO, PCGS!!!)
3) Even true rarities would be very cheap, if the market were limited to this talented grading elite. It was THEM, remember, who opened all those coin shops, and sell their wares to "investors" quite willingly.
So the market has been established, and will continue to grow and change. The services are there because they are needed, SPECIFICALLY because a coin can be a "lock", and the "lock" agreed to by some talented people-AND STILL NOT MAKE THE GRADE.
Thus, while there is grumbling-and anecdote after anecdote about re-submission scores and disappointments-changing the coin market to one where supply and demand are more reflected by PRICE-and less so by the differing opinions of people of varying talents-is a long-term positive for the market and the hobby...
Baseball, knowing how to grade seems to be irrelavant. All those dealers that have seen changes know how to grade. (many did it for the very grading services you are talking about). Unless you have taken coins in a PCGS (or NGC) holder and seen how they grade the "same" coin today, how can you talk about it. Your opinion of the grade does not make any difference.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
Some of classics are getting bombed from PCGS too.
Recently I purchased two Indian cents, an 1866 and 1868 from one of my local suppliers, both in PCGS MS-64. The 1866 was really a great coin. It was sharply struck on a wonderful planchet, which is unusual for that date because they can come weakly struck on mediocre copper. I bought the coin in a minute even though it was over “bid.” I liked it so much I didn’t even bother to note at what PCGS called the color. When I inventoried it, I shocked to see that they are called it “brown” despite the fact that it was clearly R&B. I sold the coin to a fussy collector who loved it for my usual mark-up.
The 1868 was not quite as nice, but it was a sure shot for an MS-65. When I tried to dicker a little on the price, my dealer friend told that I could buy it at his cost, but that would be higher. He had bought it at auction with the expectation that it would have made an MS-65, R&B. When it didn’t he sold it off rather than try again.
The point of this is that you can take conservative grading to extremes, but after a while the dealers and collectors who submit coins are going to say “enough!” Maybe PCGS is trying to fix its standing on the Blue Sheet, which has been falling of late, but they are doing it at our expense, which is not fair.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
"I imagine that would make it a POP 1 or close to it. How much experience does anyone, including PCGS, have grading a coin that may have never existed before?"
Good point. I doubt they ever expected recently-minted cameo proofs to arrive for grading. There's no precedent, and no record of experience. The coins were INTENTIONALLY struck in DMCAM, so why designate it? It seems the low quality examples would be the true rarities in this segment.
Personally, I look at the differences of opinion for modern proofs between 65, 66, 67, 68, as well as the incredible 69 and 70, with a very great deal of skepticism. A price differential of $500 versus $10000 is well beyond the bounds of reason...
JJacks, you're right about there being no harm done, but why a 65 is the issue I think. If it was a PQ maybe upgrade 66 submitted raw, then 65 simply robs the owner of a lot of money. If it were not a regrade, and were submitted raw, there would be no protection for the submitter (collector or dealer), and if 65 is wrong, guess who pays for the misgrade.
Baseball, I agree with your value assessment, and would do it the same way. If you never submit a coin, and only buy PQ coins in PCGS holders that might be undergrades, life is good. If on the other hand you simply expect PCGS to correctly grade your submissions for the fee you pay them, the stated example is troublesome. I like PCGS and PCGS grading standard, but I also find it worrisome that thousands of dollars of market value is gained or lost based on inconsistent opinion. I personally would prefer an environment in which there were no upgrades or downgrades, and the opinion was consistent. It'll never happen, but it sure would be useful.
Mitch, sorry to hijack your post with a PCGS grading thread.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Baseball, I full agree with the adage "Buy the coin, not the holder." That's how I run my business, but when the coin is in an MS-64 holder, the best you can do is get fat MS-64 money for it if there is a spread, even if it the coin is an MS-65.
You choices are sell it in the lower grade or crack it and send it our probably to NGC. Sometimes the difference in price and the chances of getting the same grade again do not justify the crack out. And less you say that getting the coin back in the same grade confirms that it is that grade, any dealer who has been in this business for more than a few months can point to numerous examples of inferior coins that made the next grade and sometimes even higher.
As for the color issue, the biggest problem I have in the inconsistency. I’ve seen PCGS coins that I thought were not original get R&B color designations. I’ve seen coins like this 1866 that were fully original and had a fair amount of red on them get called brown. Nothing has really changed in that regard. It’s just the right now PCGS seems to be hitting us on all sides, that makes it tough to run a business and do business with them.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
1. The coin in question that was downgraded to MS65 was submitted in the holder, so the submitter will get it back into the MS66 holder. And, while I personally thought the chances to achieve the MS67 grade were "long", grading it MS65 the following day only confirmed my observations that PCGS was grading perhaps a 1/2 point tighter than "normal" at this show on the pre-1965 coin series I know.
2. As we all know, many nice MS66+ coins are in MS67 holders and many nice MS65+ coins are in MS66 holders. The fact this particular coin may have only had a 10%-15% chance to MS67 does not mean it would be the worst MS67 in a holder, or even necessarily look terrible. It would simply not be solid for the grade (hey reminds me of my Law School days where "rank" in the class was important and the joke was "I am in that half of the class that makes the top half possible). I saw a slabbed MS68 Wash quarter in the Long Beach autions that I personally graded MS66 and one of the strongest graders in the biz graded MS65. The coin still sold for more than $12,000 (and got a good write up) when an MS66 is worth around $50. Believe me, a high end MS66 coin squeeking into an MS67 holder is not an uncommon occurence and this is why some coins with huge "spreads" are tried even if the chances are around the same as "throwing a hard 8" (which is done all the time as well at the Craps table to the cheers of the betters around the table).
3. I discussed some of the key issues to a dealer behind a table in this thread. Baseball's characterization as this being "whining about grades" is misplaced. TIGHT GRADING IS A KEY ISSUE TO MANY BEHIND THE TABLES, whether Baseball wants to hear about it or not.
4. One of the last two PCGS-MS68 Wash quarters PCGS graded LAST YEAR IMHO was nothing more than a LOW END MS67 coin. I totally rejected the coin outright (when I had previously bought nearly every MS68 ever graded - perhaps the only 2 I didn't buy were stolen from John Benbow before we could close a deal and the FBI may still be working the case). I discussed with R. Montgomery about the "line" for MS68 quarters. He was obviously fine with the coin, as was DHRC who proceeded to place the coin. Since then, I have seen coin after coin worthy of the MS68 grade and not get it. One coin at Long Beach for example was figured at nearly $20,000 raw, when the date is worth less than $500 in MS67. The coin was a "lock" to MS68 (a full point+ better than the last coin PCGS slabbed MS68), but it failed to get the MS68 grade. WHY NOT? Now, the coin may be tried at NGC for MS68* status. That is fine, but, a fabulous Wash quarter may have lost its chances to be housed in a PCGS holder permanently. I am not trying to dilute the Wash quarter MS68 pool with poor quality coins - far from it. I want CONSISTENT coins graded MS68. I want PCGS to spend a great deal of time closely scutinizing the coin worthy of an MS67 or MS68 grade, but, when it is - it should be slabbed as such. Of course, the same goes for MS67RD and MS68RD Lincoln cents, Jefferson nickels, etc. I AM A SERIOUS COLLECTOR OF SILVER WASH QUARTERS AND THE INCONSISENTCY DRIVES ME CRAZY. Many say, "shut up" and don't criticize a terribly overgraded coin, as that will simply "scare" them into grading even less "pop top" coins. I say, that is "BS". Nobody needs to grade "scared", just CONSISTENTLY. Sorry Baseball, if this offends you.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Mitch, your showdown idea is interesting to bad it will never happen, pcgs could not afford for something like that to occur, b/c they know who the winner would be Tim
LOOKING FOR 1931-s merc that is nice for the grade and fb
Comments
Since PCGS has a grade guarantee, they guarantee that the coin is at least a MS66. That is why it shouldn't go down. If it does, they owe the submitter the difference in cash.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Was the coin cracked out of the holder? I haven't read this thread in it's entirety, since it is so long, but I assume that's the only way it can go down, or like you said, PCGS could pay the difference. But, if the coin was cracked out, PCGS should not be liable at all (obviously, someone could have wacked the coin a bit outside the holder).
Reading more, I guess the coin was cracked out, thereby voiding any kind of grading warranty on PCGS's part (and I would assume no other grader in the country would warranty a coin's grade after it was cracked out of the holder either).
JJacks
Baseball said -
Your example of a collector getting screwed on the selling price, as I originally stated, can be mitigated or eraticated by putting it up for auction. If the floor still gives a low price, then the buyer was obviously wrong in the first place or the market is dead.
Baseball, I get your point, but must take issue with your observation. If the coin is worth $500 in a 66 holder and $5000 in a 67 holder, do you really believe a PQ 66 will do $5000 at auction?
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
to rumour, it decreases my chances of an upgrade, it protects me from a downgrade.
Just call me the cautious bear.
Camelot
I think we need Wondercoin to verify here if it was submitted raw, or in the holder. Also, if it was submitted in the holder, then did PCGS offer to pay the difference? Wondercoin's original statement never said that PCGS wouldn't either pay the difference, or put the coin back into an MS66 holder.
JJacks
You said the last alternative for the seller of the "PQ" or undergraded coin is auction. It could also bring a too low price if the potential buyers collude on its price. This happens often enough. Rather than bidding each other up on a near-lock upgrade, 3 or 4 dealers split the coin and keep the bids as low as possible. I see this several times in each auction I attend.
roadrunner
I think the main point that I want to make here is this:
Why is it so wrong if a coin is submitted in an attempt for an upgrade that it gets downgraded, as long as PCGS either:
1. Offers to pay the difference.
2. Realizes they made a mistake and puts it back in the original grade holder.
3. Or, if the coin was raw at the time of submission, PCGS should not be responsible for it.
If the coin had been upgraded to MS67, certainly the submitter never would have complained about "PCGS inconsistancy", and instead would have likely sold to a collector who may have then paid many times what they would have had to pay to get a standard MS66 coin. Then, many years later, if that collector tried to sell, maybe a dealer would have told him it was only MS66, and he would have been very upset.
JJacks
<< <i>d55, I don't submit coins but I fail to see how that has anything to do with it. I have examined thousands and thousands of PCGS and NGC coins coing back to inception. I was in my early teens when they first came out so I wasn't really all that knowledgeable then, but have felt comfortable ever since the early 90s. >>
Those that do submit coins have seen real changes in the way the grades have gone. They have examined hundreds of thousands of coins going back 10-20 years "before" PCGS existed. Perhaps you should submit coins so you can make educated comments.
Here is another question for anyone who feels bad for this submitter:
Would it be better if PCGS flat out refused in any way, shape or form to review coins that were in PCGS holders? Either crack it out or don't send it in. No review. No nothing. No grade guarantee. That way PCGS would never put themselves in the awkward position of admiting they may have grade a coin wrong by 1 point before. I don't think many dealers or ever collectors would necessarily care much for that. Personally, I think PCGS does a pretty noble job by admitting some mistakes, fixing the mistakes and paying the difference when appropriate.
JJacks
I have not received a single upgrade. All I have been able to get, were two crossovers in grade
from NGC to PCGS at the LB show. MY ability to grade has not changed ,so something has happened
at the grading service.
Camelot
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
Mitch said - On Saturday, it regraded MS65 (this, of course, isn't supposed to happen on regrade and the coin will likely get put back into the MS66 holder).
Baseball, I submit and collect and I'm not a dealer, so I have a question for you as a fellow collector, which price would you assign to that coin, the MS65 it just graded, the MS66 it was holdered, or the MS67 DH and WC thought it might be? I like both of their opinions very much, especially since neither owned the coin. A simple no upgrade would have been an indication of consistency. IMO
JJacks - in all candor, the coins I resubmit I have no fear cracking. If they aren't too nice for the holder, I leave them be. I would not be concerned if PCGS changed the review to resubmission in that regard.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
DHeath,
I'm not trying to argue here, but I fail to see what the problem is then. If PCGS will put it back in the 66 holder, why all the crying about it (from WC and the submitter)? As I stated, why does everyone seem to think it would be OK if it had gone from a 66 to a 67, but can't seem to comprehend that it could fall?
JJacss
SO:
1) If the entire coin market were limited to such people, no grading service would ever be needed.
2) There would STILL be no national champion, and grade would STILL be argued constantly-as at the LB show, where those perfectly competent dealers were so "angry" at PCGS (You GO, PCGS!!!)
3) Even true rarities would be very cheap, if the market were limited to this talented grading elite. It was THEM, remember, who opened all those coin shops, and sell their wares to "investors" quite willingly.
So the market has been established, and will continue to grow and change. The services are there because they are needed, SPECIFICALLY because a coin can be a "lock", and the "lock" agreed to by some talented people-AND STILL NOT MAKE THE GRADE.
Thus, while there is grumbling-and anecdote after anecdote about re-submission scores and disappointments-changing the coin market to one where supply and demand are more reflected by PRICE-and less so by the differing opinions of people of varying talents-is a long-term positive for the market and the hobby...
Some of classics are getting bombed from PCGS too.
Recently I purchased two Indian cents, an 1866 and 1868 from one of my local suppliers, both in PCGS MS-64. The 1866 was really a great coin. It was sharply struck on a wonderful planchet, which is unusual for that date because they can come weakly struck on mediocre copper. I bought the coin in a minute even though it was over “bid.” I liked it so much I didn’t even bother to note at what PCGS called the color. When I inventoried it, I shocked to see that they are called it “brown” despite the fact that it was clearly R&B. I sold the coin to a fussy collector who loved it for my usual mark-up.
The 1868 was not quite as nice, but it was a sure shot for an MS-65. When I tried to dicker a little on the price, my dealer friend told that I could buy it at his cost, but that would be higher. He had bought it at auction with the expectation that it would have made an MS-65, R&B. When it didn’t he sold it off rather than try again.
The point of this is that you can take conservative grading to extremes, but after a while the dealers and collectors who submit coins are going to say “enough!” Maybe PCGS is trying to fix its standing on the Blue Sheet, which has been falling of late, but they are doing it at our expense, which is not fair.
Good point. I doubt they ever expected recently-minted cameo proofs to arrive for grading. There's no precedent, and no record of experience. The coins were INTENTIONALLY struck in DMCAM, so why designate it? It seems the low quality examples would be the true rarities in this segment.
Personally, I look at the differences of opinion for modern proofs between 65, 66, 67, 68, as well as the incredible 69 and 70, with a very great deal of skepticism. A price differential of $500 versus $10000 is well beyond the bounds of reason...
Baseball, I agree with your value assessment, and would do it the same way. If you never submit a coin, and only buy PQ coins in PCGS holders that might be undergrades, life is good. If on the other hand you simply expect PCGS to correctly grade your submissions for the fee you pay them, the stated example is troublesome. I like PCGS and PCGS grading standard, but I also find it worrisome that thousands of dollars of market value is gained or lost based on inconsistent opinion. I personally would prefer an environment in which there were no upgrades or downgrades, and the opinion was consistent. It'll never happen, but it sure would be useful.
Mitch, sorry to hijack your post with a PCGS grading thread.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
You choices are sell it in the lower grade or crack it and send it our probably to NGC. Sometimes the difference in price and the chances of getting the same grade again do not justify the crack out. And less you say that getting the coin back in the same grade confirms that it is that grade, any dealer who has been in this business for more than a few months can point to numerous examples of inferior coins that made the next grade and sometimes even higher.
As for the color issue, the biggest problem I have in the inconsistency. I’ve seen PCGS coins that I thought were not original get R&B color designations. I’ve seen coins like this 1866 that were fully original and had a fair amount of red on them get called brown. Nothing has really changed in that regard. It’s just the right now PCGS seems to be hitting us on all sides, that makes it tough to run a business and do business with them.
1. The coin in question that was downgraded to MS65 was submitted in the holder, so the submitter will get it back into the MS66 holder. And, while I personally thought the chances to achieve the MS67 grade were "long", grading it MS65 the following day only confirmed my observations that PCGS was grading perhaps a 1/2 point tighter than "normal" at this show on the pre-1965 coin series I know.
2. As we all know, many nice MS66+ coins are in MS67 holders and many nice MS65+ coins are in MS66 holders. The fact this particular coin may have only had a 10%-15% chance to MS67 does not mean it would be the worst MS67 in a holder, or even necessarily look terrible. It would simply not be solid for the grade (hey reminds me of my Law School days where "rank" in the class was important and the joke was "I am in that half of the class that makes the top half possible). I saw a slabbed MS68 Wash quarter in the Long Beach autions that I personally graded MS66 and one of the strongest graders in the biz graded MS65. The coin still sold for more than $12,000 (and got a good write up) when an MS66 is worth around $50. Believe me, a high end MS66 coin squeeking into an MS67 holder is not an uncommon occurence and this is why some coins with huge "spreads" are tried even if the chances are around the same as "throwing a hard 8" (which is done all the time as well at the Craps table to the cheers of the betters around the table).
3. I discussed some of the key issues to a dealer behind a table in this thread. Baseball's characterization as this being "whining about grades" is misplaced. TIGHT GRADING IS A KEY ISSUE TO MANY BEHIND THE TABLES, whether Baseball wants to hear about it or not.
4. One of the last two PCGS-MS68 Wash quarters PCGS graded LAST YEAR IMHO was nothing more than a LOW END MS67 coin. I totally rejected the coin outright (when I had previously bought nearly every MS68 ever graded - perhaps the only 2 I didn't buy were stolen from John Benbow before we could close a deal and the FBI may still be working the case). I discussed with R. Montgomery about the "line" for MS68 quarters. He was obviously fine with the coin, as was DHRC who proceeded to place the coin. Since then, I have seen coin after coin worthy of the MS68 grade and not get it. One coin at Long Beach for example was figured at nearly $20,000 raw, when the date is worth less than $500 in MS67. The coin was a "lock" to MS68 (a full point+ better than the last coin PCGS slabbed MS68), but it failed to get the MS68 grade. WHY NOT? Now, the coin may be tried at NGC for MS68* status. That is fine, but, a fabulous Wash quarter may have lost its chances to be housed in a PCGS holder permanently. I am not trying to dilute the Wash quarter MS68 pool with poor quality coins - far from it. I want CONSISTENT coins graded MS68. I want PCGS to spend a great deal of time closely scutinizing the coin worthy of an MS67 or MS68 grade, but, when it is - it should be slabbed as such. Of course, the same goes for MS67RD and MS68RD Lincoln cents, Jefferson nickels, etc. I AM A SERIOUS COLLECTOR OF SILVER WASH QUARTERS AND THE INCONSISENTCY DRIVES ME CRAZY. Many say, "shut up" and don't criticize a terribly overgraded coin, as that will simply "scare" them into grading even less "pop top" coins. I say, that is "BS". Nobody needs to grade "scared", just CONSISTENTLY. Sorry Baseball, if this offends you.
your showdown idea is interesting
to bad it will never happen, pcgs could not afford
for something like that to occur, b/c they know who the winner
would be
Tim