ANA to certify professional graders due to disparity among services

Cameo CC

In a resent Coin World article (4/7/03 page 1), The ANA suggest that professional coin graders be certified by the ANA (American Numismatic Association).

Here is the link: ANA to certify professional graders due to disparity among services

Cheap - the link only shows the first sentence - you have to subscribe. Sorry.

What do you think?

Todd

inneedof70s

I PUT UP A POLL FOR YOUR ANSWERING PLEASURE ABOVE.

kieferscoins

If it is as easy as the ANA correspondence course or one of the three day seminars, then most people would be able to be certified. If they do it, they need to have it be more focused and stricter. I don't think the ANA should do it.

Cameron Kiefer

nwcs

Maybe. If there was an industry standard means of grading enforced by the ANA then absolutely. Otherwise it serves no purpose. If a company uses a variant of the ANA standard, then they would never be certified. And it doesn't mean they are wrong.

Also, the ANA cannot enforce certification. It's not like a legal licensure. The best it can be is a seal of approval.

tradedollarnut

How could you enforce such a requirement? There is no way. Of course, the ANA could independently certify graders, but what's to prevent a good grader [who passed certification] from purposely grading badly? Nothing. I see the idea as unworkable in the real world.

Johnscoin

How about a seal of approval for professional grading companies? Afterall, if you're grading on another grading standard (like that other company), the customer may never know if you don't explain to them.
I'm not sure how you accredit the institutions or enforce the rules, but it would make sense I'd think...

MadMonk

you know, it might help, but there is no substitute for experience and talent. I manage people, and we have a 2 year tech school/ or experience clause. The ones from tech school suck for the most part. Can't do a damn thing, think they know it all, and are almost impossible to train (they know it all already) So, that's my perspective.

Russ

<< <i>How about a seal of approval for professional grading companies? >>



The ANA already did that. It's NGC.

Russ, NCNE

Cameo CC

I modified my first post here to give more information. Unfortunately, Coin World only shows the first sentence of the article. They want you to subscribe. Unfortunate.

Here is what Barry Stuppler said,

<< <i>The problem, Stuppler explained, is that anyone, regardless of knowledge and qualifications, can open a third party coin grading service and hold themselves out to be experts. He added, All grading services ar not equal, but the public doesn't know that >>



Todd

DeepCoin

There is already a situation that requires certification, accreditation and offers an opinion. They are called CPAs. Look at the trouble some of them have caused. As a theoretical solution it looks good, but practically it has too many flaws.

keithdagen

There is already a situation that requires certification, accreditation and offers an opinion. They are called CPAs. Look at the trouble some of them have caused.

As a certified public accountant, I strongly resent that remark.

nucklehead

<< <i>

<< <i>How about a seal of approval for professional grading companies? >>



The ANA already did that. It's NGC.

Russ, NCNE >>

Good point.

FrattLaw

I think it's a fine idea, it might not work as though it is intended, and some might not like the idea, but it is a step in the right direction. Furthermore it might create more graders to fill those open positions at numerous grading companies and we can then begin to see some consistency as well as faster turnround times.

Michael

MadMonk

Might help. I'm sure some of the "look out sucker" grading service people have take the ANA grading course. Accountability is really a major point here.

dorkkarl

yeah, i read the article. it's a laughable idea, & a forgettable article

it's somewhat akin to getting a driver's license. sure, you got 1, so your certified to drive, doesn't mean in want to be on the same road as you though

K S

DeepCoin

Keith,

My comments were not directed at individuals. However, Arthur Andesen is no longer in business due to problems with the certification of results. I am also an accountant who has moved into IT and am not working as one anymore. The point was that even with all the education, testing, certification and continuing education there are problems in this area. That has been the big issue in corporate america in the past couple of years. CPAs are typically very honest, but they have their version of ACG also. There was no intent to denigrate CPAs as individuals.

dorkkarl

thanks a lot, legend. now, only certified people are allowed to tell me what my opinion on something is. yeah bravo, that's progress

K S

Cameo CC

Here is gmarguli's reply (from the other side of the street):

No. The ANA is not the savior to the coin industry. This is the organization that took money from ACG and refused to address that. The best we got was "these things take time" and we never heard from them again.

I do NOT trust the ANA.

Besides, who says the ANA is knowledgeable enough to certify the grading standards of others?

What % off of the so-called accurate grade is acceptable? Perhaps I think that super monster toning should bump a coin 1.5 grades. If they grade on a technical basis, I've just overgraded the coin as much at 2 grade points.

- Greg

I miss his comments.

Todd

Barry

Uh oh. Todd, you may get the boot for proxy posting of someone booted

Back the the subject - I agree with several others who have already said that being certified as a grader doesn't necessarily mean that individual or company (s)he works for will necessarily folloow that standard when it comes to the final product. For example, I don't think I've ever seen anyone accuse AH of not being able to grade, just that his slabs are way overgraded.

ms71

I don't know how much this will help. If I'm running Whack-you-Grade and they put this into effect, I'd trot off and get myself certified, then use it as a badge of legitimacy. After all, it proves only that I know how to grade with reasonable accuracy, not that I will do so. Then, once I was certified, there would doubtless be protracted disputes over who is and who isn't adhering to whatever standard is established.

All in all, I think I'd rather see ANA certify the grading companies themselves (rather than the individual graders), based on their actual product. Review/recertification would be annually, maybe based on a review of the product including "blind" submissions. One problem the ANA would have with this, of course, is that they have already taken beaucoup dollars from NGC in return for designating them as the "official" grading company of the ANA. If ANA were to certify other companies as well as NGC, the value of this designation would seem to be greatly diminished.

Cameo CC

Good comment MS71.

They (ANA) could give an ISO number for the grading companies.

Todd

griffin6

I admire the emotion behind the motion, but I'm not sure there is a workable method of achieving the goal that will actually MEAN anything. Most of the known professional graders in this industry are more qualified than anyone currently working on the ANA staff, so who would "grade" them? The professionals in the industry only give the ANA a situational respect, and this isn't one of those areas.

The first question I can hear indignantly passed around the bourse and grading floors is, "Who are THEY (the ANA) to judge ME?" The second question will come from NGC... "Hey, we're your contracted official grading service. You're going to grandfather all our graders, aren't you?" Then it will be PCGS claiming to be thought the best grading service by more people and it will work its way down to ACG, who will threaten to sue if others are "given" certification and they're not.

I personally would encourage the ANA to take a proactive, harder line on Consumer Protection. First, by prominently featuring "Consumer Protection Issues" on its homepage linking to all the appropriate sub-files. First and foremost would be an article entitled "All Grading Services Are Not Created Equal" or "The Truth About Grading Services." This would reference the facts that not all grading services profess to grade to industry standards, that all grading services make mistakes, and that the only actual fiscal protection is limited to the sight unseen bids that may or may not exist for individual PCGS and NGC graded coins. It would also offer a link to the PNC/ICTA survey. Second, well, I guess I actually believe that the ANA does take a hard line on abuse when complaints are filed. In my experience on the Board, the tendency was to favor the consumer in the marginal cases, and the message to the seller, "Make good or face expulsion." Much has been made of the situation with Accugrade, but to date, no one has lodged a complaint against the principals (the ANA cannot consider a complaint against a firm, only individuals who are ANA members). That may change, however, as I heard several pieces of testimony during the Hager/Stuppler hearing that might potentially be seen as ethics violations by the Hagers. If someone grabs that ball and runs with, well, who knows...

I truly believe that the ANA cares about Consumer Protection, and that it is desperately trying to find ways and means to improve it in meaningful ways. Being the ANA, however, it may stumble and trip a few more times before it achieves that.

njcoincrank

Interesting responses to this thread.

While alot of questions will and have been raised, the point to remember is that there are people and organizations willing to step up and address the issues.

As a former professional grader, and current instructor for the ANA's advanced grading class, I believe that this is possible, but it will take some flack, have some setbacks, but ultimately will provide the collecting public with some sort of protection and/or piece of mind.

There are many people in this industry that believe something must be done to help the millions of new collectors entering our hobby. The ANA, along with some other organizations (some not yet up and running) have a HUGE task ahead of them. But it is NOT IMPOSSIBLE. Support from the collecting fraternity, along with the dealer community is needed. Positive support, even in the form of conflicting opinions, needs to be shown.

This is a way for the collector to stand side by side with the dealer and fight for what is right. PUT THE CON-ARTIST AND BACKYARD GRADING SERVICES WHERE THEY BELONG.

MrEureka

Coin Crank for President!!!

mdwoods

At least someone is finally making an effort to address the issue. The ANA may or may not be qualified, but people who have taken their grading seminars rave about them. Actually, it is only the real newbies that are at risk. More experienced collectors have already learned which services are the best. Smart begineers (I wasn't) take the advice of everyone they bother to ask and learn first.

anoldgoat

This might cause a few here discomfort as coin collectors usually disagree on the collectability/history/art aspect of sports cards. Thing is I saw a thread awhile back, somewhere, on the same subject. Anyways my take,


In sports card grading there are four area's where the grading is supposedly definitive: centering, surfaces, edges and corners. In coins; G, VG, F, VF... this is a totally different standard, mainly objectivity. Not suprisingly the grading company's ranking is more rigid than here as they they base their grading on a standard. Of course some are more rigid than others, photo quality seems to be absent on the slab, no objectivity.
And although the top qualifiers for coins are mostly different the grading of the different companies is supposedly based on these qualifiers;
Strike and Surface

If these were cards you might get a grading of; Strike: 9, Surface: 8.5, Toning: ? Too objective, DCAM???
I think grading by these standards removes some of the objectivity of different Co's and different graders. Not all of the objectivity but some as in any area of "art".

Me puts on helmet



By the way there was a lot of discussion about sports card grading companies awhile back when one respected grading co. dropped their standards for SAH using BCCS instead of the main brand BGS.

NumisEd

So let's say that the ANA certifies Willie Gradeabunch over at PCGS as a "professional grader". It's Friday morning. Last night Willie went out and had a few too many while celebrating the fact that he went a whole day without leaving fingerprints on someones coin. At 9:00 am sharp the grading conveyor belt starts up and it is running at 8 coins per minute. Willie is hung over. How do you think he will grade today? The point is that people are involved in grading and people have variable actions and results. The ANA should put their wigs back on and go kiss ACG's butt again.

Conder101

And if an ANA certified service puts out some badly graded coins what is the ANA's potential liablity? After all they did certify the company. While at first it sounds nice, I think they should drop the idea.

MrEureka

I think they should drop the idea

I'd reserve judgment until hearing the complete plan. I can envision ways in which this could work well. I'm skeptical, but there's certainly hope.