Home U.S. Coin Forum

Just for fun and maybe to help, what could rectify the PCGS turnaround delays??

keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
Without knowing anything about the problems PCGS is having, I assume slow turnaround times on submissions are a result of the Holiday season, show schedule and volume of submissions at the present time. The Holidays can't be helped and shouldn't really be viewed as a problem, which leaves the other two as root causes. Short of PCGS not attending shows and submitters not sending in coins, how would you suggest PCGS speed up their turnaround times?? Would hiring more graders alleviate the problem----where would they put them?? Would having the present graders work longer hours during the week or on weekends solve the problem?? Would you, as a submitter, feel you were getting the same quality if things sped up with regard to how fast your coins were graded/finalized/sealed??

As I see it, PCGS is currently suffering from their own success and may have been outstripped of their ability to meet their customers needs simply by the volume of requests for their service. I once worked at an aluminum foundry where we had a 37 week backlog!! Think about that----someone placing an order knew that it would be delivered after almost 9 months of waiting. And we were contracted by some major Fortune 500 companies. They went where they could get the quality and the service that they had deemed necessary.

Any well thought out solutions amongst the membership? Surely there are some sound, business oriented minds on the forum. What works for your company or employer?? Maybe PCGS just has a poor model to work from. Care to help or are you content to gripe??

al h.image

Comments

  • It is simple. Hire more graders.
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It is simple. Hire more graders.

    that's the obvious answer, but i doubt it's simple. where do you put them?? where do you find them?? short term hire's of top quality graders would be a tough sell.

    al h.image
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,240 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, if they used fewer graders per coin, and rounded all consensus grades down just to play it safe, they could probably grade 50% more coins with the same staff. Just trying to answer your question. Doesn't mean I'd want them to do that.
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,990 ✭✭✭✭✭
    David Hall has said the big run-up in gold prices has swampd them with gold submissions, so I guess a collapse in gold prices might stop a lot of that.

    However, isn't PCGS still flooded with Modern proofs by folks (cable TV coin shows?) chasing the PR70 gold mine? Short of everyone in America waking up coin smart one morning, I can't think of anything that will slow that one down.
    When in doubt, don't.


  • << <i>It is simple. Hire more graders. >>



    image
    A dealer once asked me if I noticed any three-legged buffalos on the bourse,to which I replied,"...no,but I saw alot of two-legged jackasses..."
  • At the current time, if the waiting period is constant(Consistently X-number of days plus or minus 2), then the solution would not to be hire more graders. If the time is lag time is not increasing, the influx of new coins to be graded and the outflow of graded coins are the same. The only problem lies in the number of coins currently in line at PCGS. If one knew how many coins that is, and how many coins an hour they grade, one could determine how many hours of overtime or missed coin shows would be necessary to reduce the number of coins currently waiting in line so that the line would only be say five days.

    However, if the turn around time has slowly and continually creeped up over a few months, then the in flow of coins is greater than the outflow and either the grading system needs to be stream-lined, the grading day longer with fewer breaks or more graders hired.

    I am sure that PCGS expects some variation in grading demand during the year and have built this into their business model. If the turn-around times change to longer or shorter for too long, the business model needs to be reexamined. Patrons who have already sent payment should come before shows and travel, even though travel is much more fun, and the $100 show fees more than male up for the travel, lodging and carrying of supplies. Also, I am sure that the coins are more interesting than a crate of SAE's in January.
  • nwcsnwcs Posts: 13,386 ✭✭✭
    Streamlining, of course. Good software programming can always aid in efficiency issues. And it affects everything: from the process of receiving coins to the prioritization of grading to the sealing/grading. Not to cast aspersion upon who they have by any means, but I'm sure that additional programming help would help.
  • clw54clw54 Posts: 3,815 ✭✭✭
    Stop submitting coins over and over again hoping for an upgrade. Just live with the number on the slab.
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    Al, it's all about perception. PCGS's public relations problem could be easily solved, and the solution would work to their advantage by proving how popular and in demand their service is. Are you ready?

    For all economy and modern submissions, post a number on the website representing the current submission being graded. Post another number representing the most current number assigned. When your order arrives, it is given a number and put in line. When you check your online submission, it tells you your order# is 4,362, and we are currently grading 1,763. Forgo the estimated # of days, and the guaranty. Post a calendar at the first of each month showing which days graders will be in office grading orders. Assign a specific number of graders to modern and economy. Reserve an adequate # of graders to work through the faster tiers, and as they catch up, allow them to assist with economy/modern.

    Today's submissions to be graded begin with order # 1,763
    The next available order# is #5,212
    We are currently processing 522 economy/modern orders per day.

    Here's my take. I don't think anyone objects to a wait they understand. I also believe there would be far fewer complaints if everyone understood their coins were processed in the order they were received. If you look at the que and decide it's simply too long, hold your submission, or choose another tier.

    JMO
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,990 ✭✭✭✭✭
    DHeath:

    Good comments! image
    When in doubt, don't.
  • LucyBopLucyBop Posts: 14,001 ✭✭✭
    quit grading Russels Hairy Head Coins!
    imageBe Bop A Lula!!
    "Senorita HepKitty"
    "I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
  • nwcsnwcs Posts: 13,386 ✭✭✭
    Don, I've had an idea similar to that but with a number of contingency factors. Essentially, every invoice coming in would get an initial priority evel based upon paid service. Over time the priority would slowly rise. The increments between service levels would be such to allow for a certain amount of aging. As new items come in, they are assigned the standard priority. Then each day the graders come in they are presented with a list of items that are at the top priority level. This works better than what they do now which is a combination queue/stack. And it allows an invoice which has aged for long enough a term to gain a priority level higher than another invoice which comes in with a higher initial priority level.

    Designing, developing, and testing a system like this should take a good 6-8 weeks or so with all the requisite additions and work. Might take another 4-8 weeks for a really robust admin side. It'd help with efficiency and consumer issues. Also, such a system could give periodic email reminders of the priority level relative to the population of existing invoices. Man, there are a lot of cool features that could be plugged right into this system. I've thought of quite a few already.

    Neil
  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
    How many of you would be disappointed if they never went to shows?

    I would suggest they quit grading bulk submissions like green monster boxes of ASE's or put them at the end of the line or have the receptionist grade them or subcontact them out to board members. Why waste resources grading 500 coins for $5 apiece when you could grade 100 coins for $25 each and take in the same $2500 in revenue.
    theknowitalltroll;
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    Neil, that's clever. It might make more sense.

    PCGS, here's my take from the cheap seats. If you involve the submitters in the process, provide them good information about your existing workload and speed of process, and make them understand the process is fair and consistent (not arbitrary or random), and post upfront the days graders won't be available, you will make the responsibility for choosing to wait theirs and not yours. Submitters may still b.tch about how long it takes, but it will only be because so many other collectors are trying to use the same resource. Sounds like good marketing to me.

    Don
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    hey Don and Neil

    the single addition of knowing where a submission stands in line to be graded would be a significant improvement. i figure the recent changes that have been made regarding economy slipping from 40 days to wherever it is now and the general slowdown along with all the alterations on the service level page are unavoidable. all things remain the same except submissions---which go up---and grading time available, resulting from Holidays and shows.

    i'm the rare bird who really stands unaffected by all this. i submit when i do and wait till my coins are done. all that being what it is, a system can still be improved.

    al h.image
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭


    << <i>and rounded all consensus grades down just to play it safe >>



    Andy,

    Some might argue that would not be a change of procedure. image

    Russ, NCNE
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    image
  • I got a feeling that this is going to be short lived. I have a feeling during the holidays some of the graders took some extra vacation days off causing it to jump so quickly. Now they are playing catch up and with it posting the long submission time submissions should go down. I forsee in the next the month grading time decreasing back down to 45 days.
  • Now, one says "Simple, higher more graders" but it's not that simple. Mr. Hall has already said that qualified graders are hard to find. Would you like average Joe Schmoe Grader grading your coins? In his words, he said he would not compromise the quality by having an "apprentice" grade your coins... anyways, Don and Neil have some great ideas, and could really streamline their system, without having to hire more graders... Has anyone posted a thread on the Q&A Forums, asking about some of these ideas? I think they're good ideas, and with some tweaking, could work very well...
    -George
    42/92
  • There have been some good ideas offered up in this thread. Additionaly, I think Neil had a good point regarding IT efficiency. Why did it take 6 days to get a submission entered into the PCGS system, when the submission was made at the FUN show? That kind of work should be able to be done, on site, daily, not in hand operated batch fashion after everything is back in CA. in a huge pile. This is an indication that things could be accelerated, improve grading times.
    Gary
    image
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    hey Gary

    that's something i wondered about after i returned home and noticed that i beat my submission!! i wrongly assumed that things were sent back daily from the national shows. i made my submission at about 10:30 A.M. on Thursday January 8th, certainly one of the publics first submissions, and it gets posted on the 14th with everyone else that submitted at the show. i learned my lesson!!image

    al h.image
  • IrishMikeIrishMike Posts: 7,737 ✭✭✭
    Couple of thoughts, do what I have done quit submitting to them. Last coin I submitted was at FUN 03. I bet a large chunk of coins are sent in that will never justify the fee. I used to be amazed at posting of look at my grade threads. The majority of those coins weren't worth the submission fee. I am no longer amazed because now its the norm. I guess the rush to be a member requires that you use up those grading coupons. Its obvious that most of us don't know much about grading.

    Finally drawn upon what I said above quit sending coins in for crossover. Most of what I have seen, its obvious it won't cross so either don't purchase the coin or quit submitting them hoping against hope for an upgrade or cross. Think I am being to harsh, look at all the coins that sell on Ebay for less than what it cost to submit them for grading.
  • Raise prices.

    BC
    Dip Happens...image
  • PlacidPlacid Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭
    Only accept coins that are at least one year old.
    So in 2004 only accept coins dated 2003 or earlier.
  • Hire part-time graders who have the ability to only grade a specific series and pay them considerably less than full-time grade any coin any time staff. Lower turnaround times, lower burnout rate, lower overhead, less dependancy on current staff, increased work area and staff.
  • RegistryCoinRegistryCoin Posts: 5,117 ✭✭✭✭
    great thread.... shock full of sincere, realistic, money-making concepts..... I just wonder.... image
  • hire more graders - there's GOT To be some applicants that are experienced enough, and possibly let the expert Lincoln graders grade the Lincolns - the expert Morgan graders grade the Morgans, etc. Start the workday 30 minutes earlier, take 15 minutes less for lunch, and end the workday 30 minutes later. Pay incentives to employees who don't miss workdays, and pay more for those who are willing to work on holidays and weekends.

    Start a completely new dept. for the state quarters - and another dept. for other moderns instead of mixing in with the older coins. A completely different list for those.
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    One of my favorite breakfasts when I'm in the Quarter is a place on Tchoupitoules called Mothers. They have a little plaque on the wall that explains their customer service person is Helen Waite. If you've got a complaint, go to Helen Waite. image
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • dorkkarldorkkarl Posts: 12,691 ✭✭✭
    demand is a simple function, 1 aspect is price. raise price, lower demand, reduce turnaround.

    simple.

    K S


  • << <i>demand is a simple function, 1 aspect is price. raise price, lower demand, reduce turnaround. >>


    BINGO!

    Question: What are we trying to accomplish?
    Answer: Reduce turnaround time.

    Question: Where is the bottleneck in the system that controls turnaround?
    The operations can broadly be defined as Receiving and Data Entry, Grading, Holdering, and Shipping. If shipping was the holdup I'm sure PCGS would have added more people long ago to correct that problem, it isn't a high or specialized skill area and staffing could easily be increased, although the employees may have to meet bonding requirements.

    Likewise holdering would be a fairly easy area to speed up by increasing equipment and staff, although there may be more incidents of fingerprints during the training period until the slabbers can be made to understand that they CAN"T touch the coins.

    Receiving and Data Entry might be improvable by better IT that allows the coins to be entered into the system faster, but is that really the problem area? Do we think that the graders are sitting around saying "I wish they would get done entering that next box so I'd have something to do"? If so then once again hiring additional staff or better IT would help. But the real bottleneck is most likely the grading process itself.

    Now no matter how much you try to push them I seriously doubt if the graders can sustain any more than a three coin per minute rate of speed. That is twenty second to remove the coin from the box, scan it into the computer, remove it from the flip, look at the obverse, reverse, decide on a grade or a reason to bag it, put it back into the flip, key in the grade/reason into the computer, and put it in the outgoing box. (Yes there will be periods when the grader will do it faster, but as the day goes on and he becomes fatigued he will slow down. Three per minute is a good average. And if you try to push faster than that error rates will start increasing.) So that puts an upper limit of 1,350 coins per grader per day. (Assuming 8 hr day, with 1/2 hr lunch.) So in order to increse the number of coins graded per day you can either make your graders work longer hours or hire more graders.

    Making them work longer hours may work briefly but this is already a stressfull mind numbing job and they have a fairly high burnout rate already from what I understand. Forcing them to work more hours will in the long run results in more errors and grading staff leaving. That would decrease throughput not increase it. So what about increasing grading staff?

    As the top firm PCGS already employs most of the top graders in the world now. Those that it doesn't either work for a competitor or themselves. To entice them to come to work for PCGS may be possible with higher wages, but the competitors would then be in the same boat and they would up their wages and so on. The problem is everyone is fishing in the same small labor pool and there aren't enough to go around. So if you want more graders you have to hire less qualified staff and that is not a good idea either. Not when you are guaranteeing the quality of their work. How far down on the skill ladder are you willing to risk your companies money and reputation?

    So if the bottle neck can't be broken then something must be done to reduce the pressure behind it. This means raising fees to the point where submissions drop off to match the system capacity. the beauty of this is that although submission drop revenue can possibly be maintained or even increased because of the higher fees, while reducing backlog.

    The downside is a lot of grumbling collectors who now have to face the higher fee schedule. Although it probably will not result in them paying more money out of pocket though since the number of coins submitted will decline
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    IMO, it isn't about the wait. It's about the anticipation and disappointment. If PCGS does a better job of managing expectations, when orders flood in, everyone will know to expect delays, and when PCGS hires graders and speeds up the process, that will be apparent. I think a variation of the old butchers take a number system would accomplish this with great simplicity. It wouldn't take much effort, and would likely be very well received by submitters.


    Don
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    Well, while checking a show submission today, I keyed in the wrong invoice#. The other submitter used the same service level I did, and both coins were one coin invoices.

    Their invoice #9019109 was received 1/15/04 and posted 1/26/04.
    My invoice....#9019091 was received 1/14/04 and has not graded. (it actually was submitted at FUN, and entered on 1/14.

    My invoice isn't important (it isn't an expensive coin). A system would be useful though.
    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 sure how the current system works, but what I would do is create distinct areas of specialization. I might have the "Morgan team", the "Nickel team" and form the teams based on the number of submissions received in an average year. That way, over time the graders would be able to identify grades even more quickly because they would be limited to a distinct group of coins and wouldn't need to "switch gears" for each new coin.

    Hiring more graders would definitely help, but the main problem seems to be trying to find qualified people. I would probably try to develop a teaching methodology within each specialty so that I could train people, rather than going out and looking for those who are already trained. If you currently have 3 graders look at each coin - add a 4th "apprentice" grader until they are up to speed.

    If the specialty is limited enough they would probably get good in fairly short order.

    I think the problem is that they are looking for people who are already trained and experienced. Those who are trained and experienced are already making a good living dealing coins. Instead they should focus on developing a training methodology.

    Of course, I could be totally wrong. What the heck do I know?
  • 1....one grading tier
    2....one submission price
    3....first in, first out
    4....stop grading at shows until caught up at home

Leave a Comment

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