Any thoughts gang?
Kim
Posts: 104
This was posted across the street. I wpuld be interested to hear some insight from board members.
In response to Mark Salzberg's recent post regarding NGC Stats
04/21/03 11:41 AM
Recently, Mark Salzberg, Chairman and CEO of NGC responded to an inquiry, which was posted on "ASK NGC." I seldom visit this part of NGC's web site, but recently did; and I would like to respectfully comment and hopefully contribute. My particular status with NGC is a professional one and I am a professional purveyor of top quality, NGC certified rare coins. My background is legal/professional and I have enjoyed a lifetime love affair with coins going back to 1963. I've been at my profession since 1986 and have served on the Board of Directors of ICTA and I'm also one of the former Commissioners of the Coin & Bullion Dealers Accreditation Program. In addition I'm a lifetime ANA member and a regular PNG member. There's more, but this is not really about me; it's about NGC and the NGC program and hopefully, once again, some very serious issues, implied or otherwise, can
be dealt with.
The first matter concerns what I call, "The Problem With PCGS." A long time ago, I had to make a decision...did I want to affiliate with NGC? PCGS? Or both? After due and considered inquiry, I chose NGC and NGC exclusively. Why? Well, one of the blessings of a legal education is the study of ethics, something that a lot more of us should be focused on and understand. Actually, there are ethics in every relationship, personal and professional and "standards of ethics" are what most of us either judge or are judged by from any vantage. I have always been bothered by the fact that PCGS executive management and others at the ownership level had concurrently operating rare coin businesses. Coins sold by these individuals were all, not unexpected, graded, {certified is my preference}, by PCGS. What's wrong with this picture? Anything? Indeed, everything is wrong. In fact, it's more than wrong; it's outright unethical.
Certification services are entrusted with a staggering responsibility, whenever rare coin is submitted to them for evaluation. This responsibility directly breeds the moral and ethical obligation, to perform a single function and that function is to objectively evaluate and determine the numismatic grade of all coins submitted to it that meet the service's grading standards. In short, it is manifestly unacceptable for any certification service to undertake this task if there is present, {or was in the past}, any conflict of interest. Conflict of interest arises whenever one undertakes a task in which he or they have an interest in the outcome of the task, {grading/certification}, to be performed. John Albanese, the founder of NGC knew this and possibly witnessed matters that didn't agree with him; hence NGC was subsequently founded in August of 1987 after PCGS's February, 1986 debut.
PCGS does not survive the "Arm's Length" conflict of interest test. In fact, they fail it badly. While I'm accusing no one of anything, the PCGS grading operation falls under "the aura and shroud of potential wrongdoing." Human nature being what it is, who's to say that coins were given the grades that they should have, but instead got a higher grade because the coins being evaluated belonged to a PCGS owner? I don't know, but the opportunity, certainly a very tempting one, was present in 1986 and it's present today. Overall, we can't afford to have a fox or foxes guarding a hen-house; the result can be a disaster; and even if absolutely nothing improper was done by PCGS owners, there is the unquestioned conflict of interest still present as is the potential for wrongdoing. As a longtime investor/collector, the decision to go with NGC...for me, personally, and the several hundred of my clients, was an easy one. There's nothing too much worse than an MS-65 sitting in an MS-66 or higher grade holder, which has been much more likely at PCGS. I don't want to take that chance and it would seem that no one else would either. Mistakes can occur, true, but I'm not talking about mistakes...deliberate acts are not mistakes and we need go no farther. PCGS can either continue on as they are or do the right thing, which NGC has always done.
PCGS has seemingly always dealt in "numbers" campaigns and their rumored efforts to block NGC coins from the Certified Coin Exchange, years back, can't go unnoticed. Why? What does this say for management at PCGS? Not much in my view. Afraid of the competition? I think so and over the last 15+ years, I've watched NGC not only overtake PCGS, but slowly and surely institute some innovative programs that give them the unqualified "heads up" ranking over them, {PCGS}. PHOTO PROOF was one of those programs and we have Mark Salzberg to thank for that. NCS, {Numismatic Conservation Service}, is another and all long, NGC, slowly but surely, gained market share. They deserve it.
Recently, Rick Montgomery, who was formerly the president of PCGS, joined NGC, adding to a very highly commendable grading staff. I would guess that Rick's future was secure at PCGS, but his departure speaks volumes. Personally, I always wondered why Rick was where he was; I had heard nothing but good things about him.
Overall, I look for perspective and positive contributions made by the certification services, but when I reflect on this topic, only one legitimately makes the grade...NGC and NGC alone. And, if I could go back in time and be confronted with the same situation that I found myself back in 1988, I would do it all over again, associate myself with NGC.
For anyone out there thinking that some consideration was given to me or would be given to me for my remarks, {which obviously favor NGC}, think no further...not one cent, not one special privilege and absolutely no consideration or discussion of any kind period. I am my own person and what you see here are my experiences and beliefs. My firm won't make NGC wealthy and I'm hardly any kind of a "big gun," but my sixth decade and fourth with rare coins have taught me a lot. I indeed appreciate NGC for their forbearance, exactitude and ethical edication to the true task at hand. They did it well "back then" and are now justifiably reaping the rewards for the best certification service with the best stewardship record in the industry. Discernment is an elusive butterfly, but their success is a
classic response to the adversity that others would have and perhaps attempted to heap upon them.
Anthony M. Scirpo, President
Farmington Valley Rare Coin & Investment Company
New Hartford, CT
In response to Mark Salzberg's recent post regarding NGC Stats
04/21/03 11:41 AM
Recently, Mark Salzberg, Chairman and CEO of NGC responded to an inquiry, which was posted on "ASK NGC." I seldom visit this part of NGC's web site, but recently did; and I would like to respectfully comment and hopefully contribute. My particular status with NGC is a professional one and I am a professional purveyor of top quality, NGC certified rare coins. My background is legal/professional and I have enjoyed a lifetime love affair with coins going back to 1963. I've been at my profession since 1986 and have served on the Board of Directors of ICTA and I'm also one of the former Commissioners of the Coin & Bullion Dealers Accreditation Program. In addition I'm a lifetime ANA member and a regular PNG member. There's more, but this is not really about me; it's about NGC and the NGC program and hopefully, once again, some very serious issues, implied or otherwise, can
be dealt with.
The first matter concerns what I call, "The Problem With PCGS." A long time ago, I had to make a decision...did I want to affiliate with NGC? PCGS? Or both? After due and considered inquiry, I chose NGC and NGC exclusively. Why? Well, one of the blessings of a legal education is the study of ethics, something that a lot more of us should be focused on and understand. Actually, there are ethics in every relationship, personal and professional and "standards of ethics" are what most of us either judge or are judged by from any vantage. I have always been bothered by the fact that PCGS executive management and others at the ownership level had concurrently operating rare coin businesses. Coins sold by these individuals were all, not unexpected, graded, {certified is my preference}, by PCGS. What's wrong with this picture? Anything? Indeed, everything is wrong. In fact, it's more than wrong; it's outright unethical.
Certification services are entrusted with a staggering responsibility, whenever rare coin is submitted to them for evaluation. This responsibility directly breeds the moral and ethical obligation, to perform a single function and that function is to objectively evaluate and determine the numismatic grade of all coins submitted to it that meet the service's grading standards. In short, it is manifestly unacceptable for any certification service to undertake this task if there is present, {or was in the past}, any conflict of interest. Conflict of interest arises whenever one undertakes a task in which he or they have an interest in the outcome of the task, {grading/certification}, to be performed. John Albanese, the founder of NGC knew this and possibly witnessed matters that didn't agree with him; hence NGC was subsequently founded in August of 1987 after PCGS's February, 1986 debut.
PCGS does not survive the "Arm's Length" conflict of interest test. In fact, they fail it badly. While I'm accusing no one of anything, the PCGS grading operation falls under "the aura and shroud of potential wrongdoing." Human nature being what it is, who's to say that coins were given the grades that they should have, but instead got a higher grade because the coins being evaluated belonged to a PCGS owner? I don't know, but the opportunity, certainly a very tempting one, was present in 1986 and it's present today. Overall, we can't afford to have a fox or foxes guarding a hen-house; the result can be a disaster; and even if absolutely nothing improper was done by PCGS owners, there is the unquestioned conflict of interest still present as is the potential for wrongdoing. As a longtime investor/collector, the decision to go with NGC...for me, personally, and the several hundred of my clients, was an easy one. There's nothing too much worse than an MS-65 sitting in an MS-66 or higher grade holder, which has been much more likely at PCGS. I don't want to take that chance and it would seem that no one else would either. Mistakes can occur, true, but I'm not talking about mistakes...deliberate acts are not mistakes and we need go no farther. PCGS can either continue on as they are or do the right thing, which NGC has always done.
PCGS has seemingly always dealt in "numbers" campaigns and their rumored efforts to block NGC coins from the Certified Coin Exchange, years back, can't go unnoticed. Why? What does this say for management at PCGS? Not much in my view. Afraid of the competition? I think so and over the last 15+ years, I've watched NGC not only overtake PCGS, but slowly and surely institute some innovative programs that give them the unqualified "heads up" ranking over them, {PCGS}. PHOTO PROOF was one of those programs and we have Mark Salzberg to thank for that. NCS, {Numismatic Conservation Service}, is another and all long, NGC, slowly but surely, gained market share. They deserve it.
Recently, Rick Montgomery, who was formerly the president of PCGS, joined NGC, adding to a very highly commendable grading staff. I would guess that Rick's future was secure at PCGS, but his departure speaks volumes. Personally, I always wondered why Rick was where he was; I had heard nothing but good things about him.
Overall, I look for perspective and positive contributions made by the certification services, but when I reflect on this topic, only one legitimately makes the grade...NGC and NGC alone. And, if I could go back in time and be confronted with the same situation that I found myself back in 1988, I would do it all over again, associate myself with NGC.
For anyone out there thinking that some consideration was given to me or would be given to me for my remarks, {which obviously favor NGC}, think no further...not one cent, not one special privilege and absolutely no consideration or discussion of any kind period. I am my own person and what you see here are my experiences and beliefs. My firm won't make NGC wealthy and I'm hardly any kind of a "big gun," but my sixth decade and fourth with rare coins have taught me a lot. I indeed appreciate NGC for their forbearance, exactitude and ethical edication to the true task at hand. They did it well "back then" and are now justifiably reaping the rewards for the best certification service with the best stewardship record in the industry. Discernment is an elusive butterfly, but their success is a
classic response to the adversity that others would have and perhaps attempted to heap upon them.
Anthony M. Scirpo, President
Farmington Valley Rare Coin & Investment Company
New Hartford, CT
K
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the
moments that take our breath away.
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the
moments that take our breath away.
0
Comments
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the
moments that take our breath away.
Cameron Kiefer
Russ, NCNE
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
Camelot
PCGS coins CONSISTENTLY bring more money grade for grade than NGC coins across the board, and PCGS is the most widely accepted and 'tradable' commodity at any major coin show or bourse floor, that is a fact of numismatic life, and I really don't give a dam about how many coins NGC grades per month, or how great their customer service is, or blah blah blah.......when it comes time to sell your coins, PCGS coins are the easiest to sell and will nearly always bring more money than their NGC counterparts.
In 15+ years, I have NEVER EVER heard a dealer tell me......."well, I'd pay more for that coin if it was in an NGC holder rather then PCGS"
dragon
So long, farewell..............
Edited for spelin.