ANACS grading of circ. Morgans -- 2 pieces of evidence
DennisH
Posts: 13,990 ✭✭✭✭✭
Just got grade results back from PCGS on two of the three coins I sent in as a personal mini research experiment.
All three coins were 1878-CC Morgans. One was XF45, one was AU50 and one was AU55. I bought them at random in a Heritage auction, mainly because they represented a variety of grades that I have repeatedly seen not cross at PCGS, and the difference in price between Fine and AU is only about ten bucks. All had apparently been graded as part of the same submission batch at ANACS, because the serial numbers were very close together.
I've posted several times on these boards that ANACS grading of circulated Morgans is NOT to be trusted, and wanted to show some new actual examples. Here are the results (the AU55 is still in process on another submission):
The former ANACS-45 is now a PCGS-40.
The former ANACS-50 is now a PCGS-40.
Pretty neat, huh? (Caution: Past research results are not necessarily indicative of future downgrades. Your experience may differ. Children: Do not try attempt this without adult supervision!)
I'll post pictures when I pick them up in a day or two.
All three coins were 1878-CC Morgans. One was XF45, one was AU50 and one was AU55. I bought them at random in a Heritage auction, mainly because they represented a variety of grades that I have repeatedly seen not cross at PCGS, and the difference in price between Fine and AU is only about ten bucks. All had apparently been graded as part of the same submission batch at ANACS, because the serial numbers were very close together.
I've posted several times on these boards that ANACS grading of circulated Morgans is NOT to be trusted, and wanted to show some new actual examples. Here are the results (the AU55 is still in process on another submission):
The former ANACS-45 is now a PCGS-40.
The former ANACS-50 is now a PCGS-40.
Pretty neat, huh? (Caution: Past research results are not necessarily indicative of future downgrades. Your experience may differ. Children: Do not try attempt this without adult supervision!)
I'll post pictures when I pick them up in a day or two.
When in doubt, don't.
0
Comments
Jim
And yes, the grading cost was a waste of money... except I prefer to look at it as an educational tuition fee.
<< <i>My point is, don't buy ANACS circ. Morgans thinking they're going to measure up to coins of the same grade in PCGS holders.
And yes, the grading cost was a waste of money... except I prefer to look at it as an educational tuition fee. >>
So your saying ANACS grades coins horribly compared to PCGS?
I thought ANACS was up there in grading with PCGS and NGC. Heck..
I actually really like the looks of the 65 PL but the fields are not deeply mirrored. The devices have super cameo frost though. But I doubt it would ever get into a PCGS DMPL holder. However it is my Morgan with the most eye appeal.
I don't buy ANACS circ. morgans, I buy United States of America Morgans whatever plastic they reside in it is MY decision whether or not the grade of the coin is commensurate with the grade on the incert.
I don't understand why you are wasting your time and money doing this as:
1.) You should be able to find overgraded circulated Morgans in any plastic just as you can find undergraded coins in any plastic, and
2.) When someone is looking to prove the point that you are trying to prove wouldn't it be advantagious for that person to conciously or unconciously seek overgraded ANACS coins knowing that PCGS would grade them differently?
Besides, most of the circulated Morgans I buy are from the neighborhood pawn shop, and they must have eye appeal for me to buy them.
Now, go out and buy some circulated Morgans in ANACS slabs that look like they are undergraded according to your expertise, and send them in to PCGS, then report back here when they upgrade or cross (they are out there).
Jim
Why did you only quote the first half of what I said? Are you intentionally trying to distort what I said to serve a personal agenda?
What I said was, "don't buy ANACS circ. Morgans thinking they're going to measure up to coins of the same grade in PCGS holders."
And as I pointed out in my first post, I bought them at random in a Heritage auction. I didn't see them beforehand.
If I had it my way, stupidity would be painful!
<< <i>The AU55 is still in process as part of a different submission. >>
So I thought ANACS was one of the top three major grading services?
I heard they were accurate, I even went far enough to get my coin submitted by them. Do you think there's a good chance the grade on my coin could be innacurate DennisH?
cracked out 93-s anacs vg10 came back pcgs vg10
cracked out a 93-s anacs f12 came back pcgs vg10
The best way to avoid having to pay off on the grade guarantee for a coin which turns out to be overgraded is to somewhat undergrade the coin.
ANACS is a fine company.
Some history for you though, and others may want to chime in if I am wrong.
From what I understand, a few years ago, ANACS was known for slightly overgrading coins. However, in the last couple of years, they have tightened up to try to improve their image. I have found that the coins in the gold holograms (newer ones) are correctly graded, circulated and uncirculated. I have found that coins in the red holograms (older ones, more than 2 years old) are slightly overgraded.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I love ANACS and will continue to have coins slabbed by them.
Every grading company has a bad day. The coins Dennis submitted to PCGS, he said, were close in serial numbers and possibly from the same submission. If that is the case, then what I said about every company having a bad day, this may have been one for ANACS.
The real test would be to take three circulated Morgans: One in the old, old, old holders, one in the red hologram holders, and one in the newer gold hologram holder. Send those to PCGS and see how they come back.
After that test has been done, crack them out of the PCGS holder and send them in raw to PCGS and see how they come back. Will they be the same? Lower? Higher? Remember, some people think that PCGS holder holder bias. Maybe that was the case with this submission?
This reply is just my opinion. So, please do not flame me anyone.
Cheers. Richard.
Interesting results. What were the ANACS coin numbers?
Free Trial
The ANACS coin numbers were:
2575119 (XF45)
2575106 (AU50)
2755101 (AU55)
<< <i>Jack:
The ANACS coin numbers were:
2575119 (XF45)
2575106 (AU50)
2755101 (AU55) >>
Dennis, from the serial numbers, I can tell you that the first two coins are from the same submission and the third is from a different submission. Did you send the AU55 in also? I am interested to know what results you got.
The ANACS coin numbers were:
2575119 (XF45)
2575106 (AU50)
2755101 (AU55)
Recent. December/January would be my guess. Were these crackouts or "Cross at any grade" crossovers with the holder
bias?
Free Trial
I agree, and wouldn't just limit the analysis to circ. morgans either--I think the same can be said of anacs uncs.
someone mentioned ngc, I have much more confidence in ngc than anacs when it comes to morgans. anacs is 4th on the ladder when it comes to morgans in my opinion--i'd take an icg graded morgan sight unseen over an anacs slab sight unseen.
<< <i>If the've improved lately, I woudn't know, since I haven't slabbed with them for about 4 years. Based on the previous 10 years that I DID slab with them, I found they usually overgraded circulated coins, and many of their low end MS stuff was, in fact, AU50-AU58. They COULD, however, be pretty tough with MS65 and better as they did not routinely hand out MS66 or MS67 grades for much of anything. Their customer service was not the best. >>
So ANACS has bad customer service? And they overgrade coins? Pretty upsetting knowning I just had a problem coin graded by them
<< <i>
<< <i>If the've improved lately, I woudn't know, since I haven't slabbed with them for about 4 years. Based on the previous 10 years that I DID slab with them, I found they usually overgraded circulated coins, and many of their low end MS stuff was, in fact, AU50-AU58. They COULD, however, be pretty tough with MS65 and better as they did not routinely hand out MS66 or MS67 grades for much of anything. Their customer service was not the best. >>
So ANACS has bad customer service? And they overgrade coins? Pretty upsetting knowning I just had a problem coin graded by them
Your other option for problem coins is NCS. They have a holder service where they will give a details grade only and no net grading. NCS is a branch of NGC.
ANACS' customer service is not that bad. I don't know why people pick on them. It is like the old saying goes. Buy the coin, not the holder.
<< <i>My point is, don't buy ANACS circ. Morgans thinking they're going to measure up to coins of the same grade in PCGS holders. >>
Equally valid conclusion from the evidence given would be "Don't send circulated coins to PCGS because they undergrade them."
My experience with ANACS vs. PCGS is that the mint state coins are graded to very similar standards. However, for circulated coins, there is a looser standard at ANACS.
I am building a set of ANACS Barber quarters in EF/AU , and have removed 12-15 coins from PCGS holders and sent to ANACS. About 80% of the time, ANACS bumps them up one notch:
PCGS EF 40's become ANACS 45's
" AU 50's become " 53 or 55
AU 55's become 58's
and a couple PCGS 58's are now ANACS MS61.
btw- I have had some very less satisfying results trying to cross NGC barbers to ANACS (via crackout):
several NGC coins were net graded by ANACS and "scratch" was noted on the holder. Also sent an NGC 1896-S VF30 for crossover at same grade--it did not cross.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
I'd say yes.
I'd prefer to see a bigger scan of the obverse, and a reverse scan is absolutely necessary, but it appears to me that the rim/denticle area under 95 in the date and extending under at least the first star to the right are worn away and are not clear and distinct. I expect PCGS would call this a Good-6.
I once had an 1890-CC Tailbar that was a beautiful VG (maybe even a VG10) except for one tiny area on the obverse where the rim/denticles were rubbed away. The area was about 1/4th as big as the area on your coin. PCGS graded it Good-6.
By the way, congratulations on having a nice example of the tough VAM 3.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
in 2004. My last two submissions to them included several PCGS cracked coins. I expected one grade higher....and
got the same PCGS grade back.
Also, two coins cracked from NGC holders were graded lower as well. Finally, my last crossover from ANACS to PCGS crossed
at the same grade. An 1899-O Micro O in AU50. I had written cross at XF45 on the form, expecting a downgrade.
Don't know what's going on but the results surprised me. Bears watching.
Free Trial