Options
Questions concerning NCS
jjroll
Posts: 69
I have a few questions concerning NCS (Numismatic Conservation Services) and was wondering if anyone who has used them could shed some light.
Has anyone submitted a NCS “conserved” coin to PCGS for grading? If so what was the result?
Would you recommend using this service or staying away from them?
jjroll
Has anyone submitted a NCS “conserved” coin to PCGS for grading? If so what was the result?
Would you recommend using this service or staying away from them?
jjroll
0
Comments
<< <i>Has anyone submitted a NCS “conserved” coin to PCGS for grading? >>
At least a couple dozen.
<< <i>If so what was the result? >>
All graded.
<< <i>Would you recommend using this service or staying away from them? >>
I would recommend them without hesitation for the right coins.
Russ, NCNE
My results:
NGC MS65 trade dollar conserved to remove dip residue under the appearance review process: sold privately @ a loss of 41%
PCGS MS64 trade dollar lightened in hopes of upgrade - put back into NGC MS64 holder under grade guarantee but practically unsaleable. Dipped it to improve appearance, got it graded MS63 at PCGS and gave it away as a gift. 75% loss.
PCGS PF64 seated half. Lightened and got upgrade to NGC PF65. Sold privately for 33% loss.
IMHO, the grade guarantee process associated with NCS is the biggest mistake that NGC is making right now. I feel it puts bad coins into their holder and affects their reputation.
Were any of the coins you submitted graded prior to submission to NCS? If so did your grades improve, stay the same or get lowered once they were regraded?
jjroll
The vast majority of what I've sent to NCS have been raw coins. Four that had been previously graded, all four went up in grade (one was a Barber Half). However, you have to bear in mind that I generally focus on a very narrow spectrum of coins, specifically 1964 Proof Kennedys and 1965 to 1967 SMS Kennedys. I also only send coins to NCS that I can't take care of myself, and that I think they can actually improve.
Russ, NCNE
I think everybody figures you probably didn't miss any meals.
Russ, NCNE
While your losses are similar to ones I've taken over the years, they are not out of the norm. I haven't used NCS and hope I never need to. With all the games going on today it is so much simpler to stick with nice coins in the proper holders. Unfortunately, we all get "big eyes" at times, and just cannot pass on something that looks too inviting.
roadrunner
What do you want us to say? I don't mean this with any malice, but when you play the game, sometimes you lose. I'm sure you've had your share of success stories as well with upgrades and crackouts.
The real problem is that you didn't blame it on PCGS. Edit your post and add PCGS SUCKS! to get the ball rolling here.
Russ, NCNE
Carol is trying to give some help. This all started as I started to upload AOL 9.0 and have been kicked out on every attempt to load it.
roadrunner
I feel your pain. Honest. Did that help
I submitted an ANACS AU53 seated quarter to NCS with light PVC, they cleaned it up really nice and put it into an NGC AU55 holder. I was quite pleased. Whether PCGS would slab it or not, I don't really care, it is a condition consensus coin and will remain so regardless of what holder it is in or what number is on it.
Russ - sometimes, I truly believe that to be the case.
No, the loss doesn't significantly impact me, but the precautions need to be heeded and explained to those considering utilizing NCS. That certainly warrants a discussion.
I agree that we should certainly discuss the benefit / consequence of conservation. I am an advocate of NCS, yet I find your first paragraph warning discretion accurate and reasonable. I like and use NCS. Having said that, I'd like to explain the rationale behind my proclaimation.
Submitting coins for conservation is a calculated risk. Some coins benefit, and some don't. What I trust NCS to do is strip all oxidation, dirt, PVC, oils, etc. from the coin's surface. Hazy modern proofs, spotted or blemished coins, or coins with dark unattractive toning are coins I submit. I trust they will do a better job of neutralizing / stabilizing the coin than I, or other amateurs can.
With the exception of the modern proofs, my hope has been to return the coins to collectibility. The modern proofs I always hope to cosmetically improve. I've had mixed results, but in every case, the coins I've had poor results with have been problem coins. Sometimes stripping away the surface obstructions reveals a less than stellar surface. Russ mentioned SMS coins, and I have noticed an interesting phenomenon with those coins. Sometimes when the patina is removed from a SMS coin, field frost becomes more evident, reducing the cameo effect. There are occasions when owning a MS66 coin that looks like it is a dip away from 67 is preferable to owning a weak MS67 that looks like it has no further potential. Sometimes, what emerges is a pristine near perfect coin that was previously diminished by haze and discoloration. Sometimes, what emerges is a rather sterile looking average coin.
I mention this because I think it important to say conservation is no panacea. NCS is fully capable of removing everything but the coin, but it is still our responsibility to decide whether that process will benefit the piece we're contemplating submitting. Moderns look pretty natural to me untoned. Gold also looks pretty natural to me untoned, although I prefer the green,orange or pink natural tones. Problem pieces, or pieces that are at risk of further damage can certainly benefit from their services. That's my take.
BTW - I'm sorry for your loss. It is disappointing, but I'm sure your post is properly cautionary to those hoping to bump the grade of an attractive piece.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
The losses really don't matter to me ... much. Other than the one coin that turned in the holder, it was my choice to change the look of the coins and I accept the responsibility for the results. The whole point of my concern is cautionary. Someone may think that it's worth conserving a PQ coin to try and get the upgrade and believe that the grade guaranty insulates them from losing money. That simply isn't true. A washed out, limp looking coin is going to bring pretty much what it's worth no matter what the grade on the holder says.
<< <i>Does NCS work with NGC? >>
Yes I believe they work primarily with NGC, if not exclusively with them.
jjroll
<< <i>I've been wondering if you can send a coin to NCS and then they can send it right to NGC for grading.. >>
I think you can, but haven't tried it yet. Give me a month and should know by then.
jjroll
NCS is a sister company of NGC. You can submit to NCS and ask them to return the coins raw to you, or ask them to forward the coin to NGC for grading. NCS also slabs problem coins either net graded or ungraded. Here is the link.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>Wow - not even a nibble of a discussion on my hefty losses? If this was a Hibernia, it would generate 100 responses!
I was wondering how a gift could be considered a 75% loss? Sounds like it was a 100% + NCS fees loss.
Live Long and Prospect.
Sure, I paid for the grade guaranty - but it turns out that a significant portion of money was still at risk. As a result, I don't think much of that guaranty. And there was no way I was going to keep the two bad coins after I got them back. The look was horrible and they had no place in my collection - nor really any place in the NGC holders they were in. That's why I say that the grade guaranty leads to bad coins being in NGC holders which in turn harms their reputation. IMO, if they are going to continue down the path of messing with coins, they are making a mistake by not taking coins such as those two immediately off the market.
<<<Someone may think that it's worth conserving a PQ coin to try and get the upgrade and believe that the grade guaranty insulates them from losing money. That simply isn't true. A washed out, limp looking coin is going to bring pretty much what it's worth no matter what the grade on the holder says.>>>
That's exactly correct and a point a lot of people overlook IMO.
I too have sent a few pieces to NCS with results similar to TDN's and was very unhappy with the results regardless of the grade on the NGC holder. I think I just had unrealistic expectations of what NCS can and cannot do, and I would never send in a deeply toned classic coin to them again.
dragon
My results:
NGC MS65 trade dollar conserved to remove dip residue under the appearance review process: sold privately @ a loss of 41%
PCGS MS64 trade dollar lightened in hopes of upgrade - put back into NGC MS64 holder under grade guarantee but practically unsaleable. Dipped it to improve appearance, got it graded MS63 at PCGS and gave it away as a gift. 75% loss.
PCGS PF64 seated half. Lightened and got upgrade to NGC PF65. Sold privately for 33% loss.
IMHO, the grade guarantee process associated with NCS is the biggest mistake that NGC is making right now. I feel it puts bad coins into their holder and affects their reputation.
AS PER THE ABOvE TRADE DOLLAR NUT SUMS THIS UP VERY WELL WITH NCS
trade is right on
for me
many coins that are currently almost unsaleable in their present position the greed factor sets in and then the coins are sent to ncs conserved they are improved but...........do look? better ?? to some buyers!! yes but in reality........... no!!
and now get sold as such as now they are more saleable then before sent into conservation and are quickly unloaded by their cureent owners after conservation
i have seen many of thsee improved coins in person sight seen and on the web and they are still problem ugly crappy coins with their problems somewhat masked by conservation but they are still crrappy coins also many have huge expectations as such and are disappointed because you cant ever make a silk purse out of a sows ear! no matter how hard you try!
]
also with the grade guarantee coins are being conserved and put into holders that might be the same grade or higher but just do not have giood eye appeal and i think ngc is doing a disservice to the communbity by offering this grade guarantee which then lends itself to having to holder these conserved coins that might??? technically grade the same or higher but are basically ugly looking coins
sometime in the future there will be hell to pay and many will be out large sums of $$ who this will hurt??? well i guess that is begging the question
now of course there are a few coins that turn out better but this is more the excpetion rather than the rule
therre are some coins that are very well received for conservation or an ever so light dip and neutralization a coin that is special and with outstanding surfaces and technical grade that might just be lightly toned and if conserved it looks like the coin was just struck yesterday and alreasy was really extraordinary extra special to begin with well those coins work well at ncs but in reality are very few in nature and in that regard ncs does a great job with them but these are more the exception rather than the rule
michael
tradedollarnut
Master Collector
Posts: 6527
Joined: Oct 2001
Friday October 17, 2003 8:57 AM
I estimated a 75% loss because I paid almost $8k for the coin and I estimated a market value of at most $2k in the NGC MS64 holder after the conservation. The look of the coin was such that, IMO, 75% of the value had disappeared.
Sure, I paid for the grade guaranty - but it turns out that a significant portion of money was still at risk. As a result, I don't think much of that guaranty. And there was no way I was going to keep the two bad coins after I got them back. The look was horrible and they had no place in my collection - nor really any place in the NGC holders they were in. That's why I say that the grade guaranty leads to bad coins being in NGC holders which in turn harms their reputation. IMO, if they are going to continue down the path of messing with coins, they are making a mistake by not taking coins such as those two immediately off the market.
GREAT THREAD
I think that in many cases, conservation can be a good thing.
Sadly and disturbingly, however, I also think that conservation is being widely over-used and even abused, causing many perfectly fine/nice coins to be ruined (forever).
Finally, in my opinion, many of the "conserved" coins are either being graded higher than they deserve to be, or are being assigned grades, when they should be receiving "no-grades".
In a multitude of cases, unnatural looking "conserved" coins are being rewarded, rather than penalized in grade - I think that is backwards, not to mention wrong.
I know many other dealers who feel the same way, but for various reasons, some of them are hesitant or afraid to speak out publicly on this subject. That is their right, but I sure wish more of them would stick their necks out alongside mine.
In case it wasn't already obvious, I'm well beyond "uneasy" on this subject.
Sadly and disturbingly, however, I also think that conservation is being widely over-used and even abused, causing many perfectly fine/nice coins to be ruined (forever).
Finally, in my opinion, many of the "conserved" coins are either being graded higher than they deserve to be, or are being assigned grades, when they should be receiving "no-grades".
In a multitude of cases, unnatural looking "conserved" coins are being rewarded, rather than penalized in grade - I think that is backwards, not to mention wrong.
I know many other dealers who feel the same way, but for various reasons, some of them are hesitant or afraid to speak out publicly on this subject. That is their right, but I sure wish more of them would stick their necks out alongside mine.
In case it wasn't already obvious, I'm well beyond "uneasy" on this subject.
While I take full responsibility for my actions, the fact is that I felt a certain pressure to submit the latter two coins to NCS in order to receive an upgrade. Since NCS takes a percentage of the value of the coin, submission to them rather than NGC has the effect of creating much more revenue than simple grading fees. I feel that the pursuit of this revenue causes them to be overly aggressive in trying to get people to utilize NCS. The net overall effect is funny looking coins in similar or higher grade holders, which I feel is not of benefit to the market, although in the short term it certainly benefits the repeat submittors and NCS.