Home U.S. Coin Forum

I got a letter from PCGS today ...

GilbertGilbert Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭
... that appears to be a bit different, or is it, than the one mentioned before.

Yes, it contains notice of a price increase for Economy ($16), Modern ($12) and both having minimum submissions of 10 coins, but there is other information too.

The letter is titled "New and Expanded Services from PCGS," and goes on to state PCGS will look closer at crossing coins and for those that do not, a PCGS grade will be provided. Reasons will be provided for No Grades in order to help cut down on rejections. The number of graders will/is being increased and 5 graders will look at walt-thrus AND reviewed by HRH and a finalizer. Three to 4 graders and a finalizer will look at Express Special Service coins. The Presidential Review and of course the "Full Torch" designation are described. Other changes, increase in max value for the various tiers and a few other modifications in tiers.

Don't know what impact it may have on everyone individually, but, it felt like I got half a story.

Oh, and I don't drink kool-aid. image
Gilbert

Comments

  • RussRuss Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
    Gilbert,

    I was also going to point this out, but the other information that was in the letter was posted by HRH last week so perhaps those that posted about the price increase, leaving out the rest, just assumed everyone already knew about the service enhancements.

    Russ, NCNE


  • << <i>Reasons will be provided for No Grades in order to help cut down on rejections. >>



    Could you explain what the above statement means? More specifically, to what is the word "rejections" referring? If it is referring to customers who complain after receiving a no grade, I have no problem with the sentence. If it is referring to the actual number of No Grades, then how does providing a reason for the no grade cut down on the number of no grades? The setence is very ambigious.
  • Schmitz7Schmitz7 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭
    I also received the letter and was concerned with the statement "..We will be looking more closely at crossovers.."

    Isn't this what WE have been paying for all along??? When I pay for a crossover review I would EXPECT that it would get the same attention as a raw coin, but obviously it DID NOT in the pastimage
  • RNCHSNRNCHSN Posts: 2,609 ✭✭✭
    I drink Kool-Aid! image
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    The past is no longer of interest, its what PCGS does in the future to correct problems

    that is of importance. Apparantly a positive revaluation of proceedures is underway

    and that seems a very good developement. In fact, its what a number of Forum members

    have beenasking for. I commend PCGS for the changes made and for the changes yet to come.
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • Dog97Dog97 Posts: 7,874 ✭✭✭
    I let my paid membership expire some time back so I don't get the CC newsletter so I didn't know about the expanded services.
    I thought raising the price was the only enhancement.
    Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file