Please review my "Rating the Grading Services" article.

Aethelred

This is just a rough draft, but I wanted to see if I could get some feedback from the very knowledgable folks here before I go any further. Have you had a good or bad experience with one of the services listed here? Is there anything that I have left out or any additional info you would like to see?

RATING THE GRADING SERVICES

Many thanks!

Placid

MrEureka

Every effort has been made to assure that the information here is accurate, however we are not responsible for changes or errors.

Why aren't you responsible? Just because you say so?

mrearlygold

Looks pretty right on.

FYI The west coast coins link on your website is a nightmare. pop ups which made me have to go to cntl, alt delete.

Rgrds
TP

ER

Where is THE other leading service, ACG?

mrearlygold

<< <i>Where is THE other leading service, ACG? >>




In court? Out on bail?



TP

ER

<< <i>

<< <i>Where is THE other leading service, ACG? >>




In court? Out on bail?



TP >>


Consider yourself served, mister. I'll see you in court.
Signed,
Alan

mrearlygold

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>Where is THE other leading service, ACG? >>




In court? Out on bail?



TP >>


Consider yourself served, mister. I'll see you in court.
Signed,
Alan >>



No problema alan. I'm right here in Charlotte County Florida.

Y'all will be real surprised.



TP

ealandg

I think you were a little hard on ANACS in terms of consistency. I think they are just as consistent as PCGS and NGC. However, I do loathe their little holders.

mrearlygold

Aethelred

<< <i>Every effort has been made to assure that the information here is accurate, however we are not responsible for changes or errors.

Why aren't you responsible? Just because you say so? >>



I'll fix that. What I was thinking is that I disclaim all financial liability for any typos, changes et cetera.

braddick

Great site with an honest opinion. I'd personally change some of your "poors" to 'fair'. Your pricing structure is off on PCI and noted turnaround time with NGC isn't 12 days, but rather about 30.

Easy to read and navigate. Thanks for sharing.

JJacks

Aethelred,

Overall I think you correctly labeled the grading services. I will mention one item:

PCGS - "coins graded by them command a small premium over those of other services.". Sometimes that is true, but there are also many instances, and I do think it is quite a significant number where PCGS coins command LARGE premiums over NGC and any others - notably many moderns, and certain coins where prices go up dramatically with a few point grading difference. The reason I would note this is that based on your reviews, someone may think that sending coins to NGC has no real downside from sending to PCGS other then a "small premium" difference. In some cases, the difference can be huge. You do mention in the NGC section that they are somewhat more liberal (in your quote "(perhaps one-quarter to half point).". Of course, this can lead to a "small" premium for PCGS coins sometimes, or a huge one!

JJacks

Goldfinger

I think it's a helpful summary of the grading services. It might be good to add that NGC will grade coins in their original mint holders, which I consider to be a worthy service.

puff

<< <i>

<< <i>Aethelred,

Overall I think you correctly labeled the grading services. I will mention one item:

PCGS - "coins graded by them command a small premium over those of other services.". Sometimes that is true, but there are also many instances, and I do think it is quite a significant number where PCGS coins command LARGE premiums over NGC and any others - notably many moderns, and certain coins where prices go up dramatically with a few point grading difference. The reason I would note this is that based on your reviews, someone may think that sending coins to NGC has no real downside from sending to PCGS other then a "small premium" difference. In some cases, the difference can be huge. You do mention in the NGC section that they are somewhat more liberal (in your quote "(perhaps one-quarter to half point).". Of course, this can lead to a "small" premium for PCGS coins sometimes, or a huge one!

JJacks >>




I agree >>



Me to..... Big time!

Casey

Looks like a typo in the turnaround times for NGC. The economy time is faster than the regular service.

Rampage

1) Your "overall rating" section does not balance out with the given ratings on a couple of companies.

2) If would be helpful for you to give the structure of your rating, i.e. good, then average, then very good, then whatever.

3) I think your opinion of ANACS coins selling for 75% of PCGS coins is dead wrong. If you will sell me all your ANACS coins for 75% of PCGS coins, then I will be all over that deal. This, of course, is just my opinion.

Of course, I cannot change your opinions, but I do think you need to add what exactly your rating scale is as mentioned in number 2 and I also think you need to reevaluate your overall ratings of the companies.

ScarsdaleCoin

curious why you feel ICG grading skills accuracy as "poor" ?

I would not agree with that...also I ditto if you want to sell me ANACS coins at 75%

pmh1nic

I think there is a fundamental flaw in the structure of your rating system. How can a service be AVERAGE in consistence and be excellent in accuracy. I would think you'd have to be excellent in consistence in order to be excellent in accuracy.

gemtone65

Your criteria are not defined, and you provide no insight regarding how you derived the assessments except based on your own personal opinion. As such, there are millions of such subjective opinions out there, so your own personal evaluations have the import of a Forum thread, not a scholarly article.

By the way, your comment on the PCI holder seems to be overstated. I don't know why you think they look and "feel" cheap. Maybe it's the square edges that is the "feel" you refer to. In fact, it is the ANACS small holders that are generally dispised by collectors. Also, the ICG holder seems to be made of softer plastic, and hence is more opaque and is prone to unsightly nicks. Once nicked, the damaged area on the holder reflects a black shadow, which shows up as an off-color portion of the coin in scans and pictures. This attribute adversely affects the ability to re-sell ICG coins via the internet.

certifiedsilverdollar

I fully agree marketwise, with PCGS and NGC leading the front. I personally would purchase an ICG coin long before Anacs, but that is just me. But as long as people keep their prices in line with their negative opinions of ICG, I will be happy. It allows me to buy up cheaper coins. Too many people bash ICG, yet when I see their website, their prices don't reflect that opinion. Nothing worse than a biggot. Other's opinions: camacs http://rg.ancients.info http://www.theeccentriccollector.com/

mrpaseo

Interesting, helpfull, and clearly stated that it is your opinion, no reason to get upset, other opinions are different. Personally I like it.

Great job on the rest of the site as well.

I do keep getting an error with the Ebay site though. Might be my comp.

CarlWohlforth

Great start. There is good feedback here which will help make it better.

Some services are better than others at some things. My personal experience with ANACS is that they are indeed inconsistent. ICG seems to overgrade modern proof coins, I'm not sure if they are more accurate on earlier stuff.

JJacks

Aethelred,

It looks like you're going to have a tough time getting a concensus here!

As far as the comments go about ANACS coins and 75%, I think this is another example where people want to claim that other coins go just as high as PCGS coins (or almost), but when the coins come up for sale, noone is willing to put the money where their mouth is. I have been watching 1934-S Peace dollars in all grades on ebay.

Here are what ANACS are bringing:

34-S in AU50 went for $217

34-S in XF40 went for $66!

Honestly, you can see why they didn't go much higher. Both coins appear from the scans to be very weak for their assigned grades. I know it is hard to grade from scans, but here is my point - PCGS 40s have been bringing 100+++, and AU50's certainly bring at least close to $500. A PCGS AU53 recently sold for $500.

In fact here are a few:
PCGS XF40 went for $120

PCGS AU53 went for $500

I think clearly some ANACS coins have a hard time getting 50% of the PCGS prices and if someone is willing to sell me PCGS graded 1934-S Peace $s for the price those ANACS coins went for, please pm me!

JJacks

Aethelred

Great feedback from everyone, I'll tweak things just a bit and see where we end up.

Thank you all very much!

DennisH

PCGS World coin grading fee is $30, not $16

coinkat

Aethelred:

This is a tough subject to undertake... I wouldn't touch this subject for many reasons. I think it is impossible to quantify some of the differences in a meaningful way as evidenced by the example liked to this thread. I looked at the pictures of the 1934-s Peace Dollars that were linked by one of the previous posts. The two ANACs coins are not very attracive (I would not consider either one) and the PCGS ef40 looks as if it was dipped to the point that I would have given it a BB. I liked the 1934-S that was graded AU53 by PCGS. It is much nicer than the ANACS AU50 and worthy of more $$$. And for the record, an AU 53 1934-s Peace Dollar would fetch more than a 50 under most circumstances. This leads me to my point... look at the coin and buy the coin you like regardless of the holder.

As much a I advocate TPG, it is not a substitute for doing your homework and learning to grade. In addition, some coins deserve to be judged by their actual appearance and not the plastic that they currently reside in. That's my advice and for this subject, it probably is not too helpful.

Graphs and charts with statistics can be twisted to say just about anything but the actual look of the coin should remain constant...that is unless some someone chooses to enhance it which has been the subject of other threads.

flaminio

You say ICG is the only service to grade ancients; actually, ANACS grades ancients as well.

Also, read up on the difference between "it's" and "its".

Otherwise, good page, if a little PCGS biased (which is to be expected, I guess).

flaminio

<< <i>I think there is a fundamental flaw in the structure of your rating system. How can a service be AVERAGE in consistence and be excellent in accuracy. I would think you'd have to be excellent in consistence in order to be excellent in accuracy. >>



Actually, he's correct here -- consistency and accuracy are two entirely different concepts. Let's say XYZ grading company starts assigning every new coin as an MS70. Clearly, they are being very consistent, yet not at all accurate.

The converse is difficult to show, I agree. It would be hard to be accurate without also being consistent.

Aethelred

<< <i>You say ICG is the only service to grade ancients; actually, ANACS grades ancients as well. >>



They did for a brief time, but not anymore.



<< <i>Also, read up on the difference between "it's" and "its". >>



I'll fix the "it's" when I revise the page.

GoldCoinLover

I'm pretty disappointed everyone hates ANACS and that I found out here that they're so horrible ..

I just sent my gold soverign to ANACS and I thought it was a good grading service, and now I here it's even worse than ICG and has only "Average"(Not good) in holder quality, yet other ones like SEGS have better holder quality (at "Good")

Aethelred

<< <i>I'm pretty disappointed everyone hates ANACS and that I found out here that they're so horrible ..

I just sent my gold soverign to ANACS and I thought it was a good grading service, and now I here it's even worse than ICG and has only "Average"(Not good) in holder quality, yet other ones like SEGS have better holder quality (at "Good") >>



I doubt anyone here "hates" ANACS. In my opinion they are the #3 grading service after PCGS and NGC. Because your Sovereign was damaged PCGS and NGC would not have graded it for you and you would not want a SEGS or PCI slab, so ANACS was really your only choice.

GoldCoinLover

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm pretty disappointed everyone hates ANACS and that I found out here that they're so horrible ..

I just sent my gold soverign to ANACS and I thought it was a good grading service, and now I here it's even worse than ICG and has only "Average"(Not good) in holder quality, yet other ones like SEGS have better holder quality (at "Good") >>



I doubt anyone here "hates" ANACS. In my opinion they are the #3 grading service after PCGS and NGC. Because your Sovereign was damaged PCGS and NGC would not have graded it for you and you would not want a SEGS or PCI slab, so ANACS was really your only choice. >>



Here's the ANACS:
COST (regular/economy/world)
$20/12/12

TURNAROUND TIME
5/90/90

CUSTOMER SERVICE
VERY GOOD

PROBLEM COIN POLICY
ASSIGNS "NET" GRADE

HOLDER QUALITY
AVERAGE

CONSISTENCY
AVERAGE

ACCURACY
VERY GOOD

OVERALL RATING
GOOD

LINK TO WEBSITE
ANACS

COST (regular/economy/world)
$15/na/17

TURNAROUND TIME
5/na/5

CUSTOMER SERVICE
POOR

PROBLEM COIN POLICY
PROBLEM NOTED ON LABEL

HOLDER QUALITY
GOOD

CONSISTENCY
POOR

ACCURACY
DREADFUL

OVERALL RATING
VERY POOR

LINK TO WEBSITE
ACG


ACG has the is the worse one on your site. Yet they have better than ANACS holder quality. And SEGS has very good holder quality, and seems to be better than ANACS on your website.

Edited: Please understand I think your website is very accurate. I'm just pretty upset that ANACS is alot worse than I thought compared to the worse grading services. And bringing only 75% of PCGS and NGC's slabs..

charley

I am not sure how etensive the information you want to share is going to be in its final form,but I wonder if some mention of the expertise of the persons doing the grading at the various services shouldn't be included. As an example,CLCT-parent co. of PCGS-graded 110,653 coins in Jan. I rest assured that the Principals of the grading services didn't sit down and grade these pieces. They have employees that do so. While I am "new"to this forum, Inote and acknowledge the undeniable level of knowledge of the various members. I would be most comfortable with a condition census opinion of my non-encapsulated pieces by these board members. We have surrendered our ability to grade pieces to the services,yet we don't really know who does the grading, or if there is any reason other than profit for the grading service involved. We then get caught in the investment trap, and abandon our own expertise. I would propose a non-profit grading service established by board members,fee based,and performed by members within their type expertise(a group of three per type) would be just as effective, if not more so. Membership to be a yearly substantial cost to limit "market" influence. Afer all, equipment needed to encapsulate is available at under $15,000. In closing, CLCT early last year traded at $2-$2.60 and in Dec. was $11.40, and is now in the $8-$9 range.It is obvious that collecting has been taken out of the hands of collectors. Why not correct the problem ? I could go on forever on this subject, but will shut up for now. My point-when did we stop trusting ourselves, and the "value " of our pieces, when in the end ,we are the "value"?

pmh1nic

"The converse is difficult to show, I agree. It would be hard to be accurate without also being consistent."

It's more than difficult to show, it's impossible to show. You're either accurate and consistent or consistently inaccurate.

Aethelred

GCL - Please keep in mind that all of the info you are taking as "gospel truth" were written by me in about 15 min. late at night and after a couple of beers! There is a lot of revision that I need to do there, this is only a rough draft and I may change things quite a bit. In short, PLEASE DON'T make any financial decisions what you are reading on that page, it is not finished and I am thinking about a serious overhaul of the rating system based on the reviews here.

ealandg

Yes. I like ANACS. The only thing I don't like about them is their holders. The reason I don't like the holders is because they don't fit in my boxes and they don't fit in my slab album either, so they create a storage issue for me.

I do think ANACS is fair and consistent in their grading and I have often bought their slabs. In fact, (I'm sure I'll be bashed for this), I feel I can trust them more with certain issues. I have seen a lot of dipped coins in NGC and PCGS holders. If the coin is overly dipped in an ANACS holder, it usually says it has been cleaned - not always, but usually.

I am of the opinion that PCGS regularly and consistently undergrades most things, so of course their coins are going to sell for a premium.

LucyBop

I SEE NO MENTION OF PGS!

PUSHKIN' GRADING SEVERICES!

Aethelred

<< <i>I SEE NO MENTION OF PGS!

PUSHKIN' GRADING SEVERICES! >>



An obvious oversight on my part, and I am less of a numismatist because of it!

oreville

Aethelred: Several comments:

Your article is hard to read in terms of being able to compare your ratings from one service to another. I suggest that you put all of the grading services in different columns going across and to use the same rows since they apply to all the grading services. Of colurse, you will need to make each column a little bit narrower or possibly even abbreviate.

Secondly, if accuracy of ICG is poor as you state, how can you then possibly explain an overall rating of good? Every other category was "good" except for customer service very good and if you were to mathematically average these categories I would come up with a rating closer to "average"?

Thirdly, you need more biographical infor about each grading service. You did not state when ICG, PCI and SEGS were formed or started.

Fourthly, you state that PCGS has graded over 9 million coins as fact but do not state the source of information. Yet, you state how many slabs NGC has done and you state the source and you express it in the form of a "claim."

Fifthly, you state ANACS economy service can take a long time (90 days) yet you failed to mention that PCGS is also a "long time."

There are other examples of inconsistency in your presentation of historical background of each grading service and I would suggest that you follow a template of:

Actual date the grading service was formed
Where was the grading services located when first formed and where are they located now
How many slabs have they done and state the source of info. If not known say so. But I would contact each service for that info.
For each service what famous coins/collections reside in their holders
Any other pertinent description about the services

AFTER your box chart you should then state your opinions but would organize then along the lines of comparing slab construction, grading standards, and turnaround time for all services.

oreville

Charley: Not that it detracts from your posting but CLCT stock is now $12.25 per share not $8-$9.

Also we tried the non-profit route. The ANACS was once owned by the ANA and it could not compete successfully.

roadrunner

Even though I have openly bashed NGC's grading at times (and still own about 80% NGC coins) there's no way they are 1/4 to 1/2 pt more liberal than PCGS in grading. In moderns like Washington MS?
Sure! On Trade Dollars in MS66? No way. As a rule I'd say the 1/4 to 1/2 pt range is way too harsh for classics and maybe even too small for many moderns. On classic type I'd place NGC at .1 to .25 pts easier than PCGS with most coins falling around .15-.20. Worst case on any submission? NGC and PCGS can have a grade range of + or - 1 point. If NGC were as liberal as you said their coins would bring 50-70% of similarly graded PCGS coins across the board. And that's not the case. To honestly compare the two you would have to compare each and every coin type in each and every grade and make a separate listing. Very time consuming but the only way to do it fairly.

NGC is not more consistent than PCGS. At least not in classic type.
NGC is far more variable imo. IF very good is 50-60% consistentcy, then NGC is certainly "Very Good" in the consistency dept on classic type coins. My own feeling is that a grading service shouldn't be rendering an opinion if they cannot maintain 80-90% consistency in all areas.

roadrunner

charley

Oreville, source-Rosen-Mar.04. This is EXACTLY my point. In 30 days, a $3.50 swing.My suggestion would never work I know. But the competing" route is exactly what defeated it. Note I said a substantial membership fee to deter market forces-I would add a no sell or trade clause in the by-laws, to keep it in hands of collectors.Wishfull thinking anyway. I still will trust my fellow expert collectors.

tradedollarnut

As a rule I'd say the 1/4 to 1/2 pt range is way too harsh for classics and maybe even too small for many moderns. On classic type I'd place NGC at .1 to .25 pts easier than PCGS with most coins falling around .15-.20.

I'm not sure it can be translated to points. It's too variable. While the two services are more alike than they are different, that slight difference can jump up and bite you heavily!


Worst case on any submission? NGC and PCGS can have a grade range of + or - 1 point.

I disagree. I've seen NGC MS64 seated dollars that I don't think would even 63 at PCGS. And certainly there are plenty of AU63's in holders that might AU58 on the next submission.

Pushkin

I think you are a little too tough on IGC (they do an excellent job on Flying Eagle and Indian Head cents) in some areas, and perhaps you should mention that older "GREEN" label PCI coins may be accurately graded. I would change your very poor ratings and poor ratings of AGC to "abysmal".

In my area (Flying Eagle and Indian Head cents) ANACS tends to undergrade, and I have cherrypicked many coins that have gone 1-3 points up in both PCGS and NGC.

Wolf359

Well...I rate NGC and ANACS the same, although the market doesn't. They grade identically; PCGS undergrades. ANACS holders suck
wind, yet they will identify every variety known, while NGC is limited to Top 100 and Hot 50 morgans. Also, for 5 coins the Express is $15
per coin with ANACS. So take 4 coins, add a penny from your pocket and save $5 (80 versus 75 dollars). They offer FREE opinions at coin shows,
and don't mind if you ask their opinion on 50 coins for 30 minutes and then submit to PCGS instead. For the variety collector,
ANACS wins against all grading services.

SEGS holders are the best in the market, PCGS number two, and NGC third. Try to crack a SEGS holder, easily the hardest.

In summary what is your perspective? Market prices? PCGS is #1, NGC #2 and ANACS third. Varieties? ANACS, hands down.

Aethelred

Good post Wolf, thanks!

I am thinking of posting a link to this on the NGC boards just to see how they respond, any thoughts?

roadrunner

TDN, my own experience with PCGS and NGC in the past 12 months with both gold and silver type proved that PCGS could grade up to 1 pt easier or harsher than NGC. While the former doesn't happen as often as the latter both cases do occur often enough. I've cracked out PQ PCGS $20 Libs and Saints only to have them get down graded at NGC. This speaks more to NGC's inconsistency than their conservatism. But in the end, it doesn't matter why your coin got downgraded...only that it did.

The .1-.2 difference I list is merely a swag at an average. If you took tens of thousands of coins that's probably what the average would run. The number is meaningless to any specific coin since either service can grade at + or - 1 point to the true grade. And true grade = the grade that the majority of 10-20 expert graders in that area would assign to a coin with unlimited time to view it. That too is a fictional thing but that's what it would take to get the real market grade.


roadrunner