A solution to the NGC "problem"
RYK
Posts: 35,797 ✭✭✭✭✭
Last night, in the Q&A with Homerunhall, I proposed a possible solution to the issue of allowing "NGC coins" into PCGS holders and the Registry, that I thought was a fair compromise. Perhaps, HRH did not get the part about the NGC coins having their grades discounted by a half a grade (or some other amount). Please read my proposal and comment, tweak, or tell me that I am wasting my time.
Thanks,
Robert
Thanks,
Robert
0
Comments
I personally would be very satisfied to be able to add NGC coins to my PCGS Registry Set in some type of reciprocal arrangement as NGC currently allows PCGS coins in their Registry Sets.
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
PCGS is the leader. No doubt in my mind or the market's mind. PCGS coins command a higher price for this very reason.
To allow an inferior product, even stating that it is inferior, only dilutes the pool and a waste of PCGS's time.
No way.
IMO. Joe.
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
The plastic must be changed. Is it really worth it though ?
Ken
09/07/2006
As long as PCGS is perceived to be the market leader where the registry is concerned, they don't need to be in any kind of position to be accommodating toward anyone else's slabs and people are going to push to get PCGS plastic around their coins regardless of whether or not PCGS's grading is or is not more conservative or "respected by the market" for that particular coin series.
From a business standpoint, PCGS would be insane (IMO) to open up their registry to other coins as long as they mostly call the shots in the registry business. From the standpoint of the best interests of numismatics, IMO, it's another story. But since when do the best interests of numismatics trump the bottom line?
Nothing wrong with that, but important to keep in mind when deciding to list a registry set. If you have a fundamental problem with this, you probably shouldn't worry about your coins being in a registry. If you just want to show them off to the world, make a web page.
This is why I agree with the other posts above that for PCGS to allow any other TPG slabs into its registry would be a bad move.
If you have the dominant brand in a market, why would you incorcorporate products from your main competitor?
What I think would be a good move for PCGS to do would be to offer a discount rate on cross-overs from NGC only, as a way to entice people to get their registry-quality coins into PCGS slabs. That gives them more business, more exposure, and gets more high-profile coins into their registry.
<< <i>Money. Nothing more than money is your answer. Why would PCGS allow NGC coins in the PCGS registry when PCGS would loose money on people submitting coins to PCGS for crossovers? >>
Exactly, IMHO. All the talk of inferior products, not fair, etc is probably valid to one extent or another but I think you have stated the most important reason why it won't happen. They are a business and the status quo is almost certainly best for the bottom line.
CoinPeople.com || CoinWiki.com || NumisLinks.com
a REAL registry set that's fair to everyone would be run be a company not affiliated w/ any of the plastic co's. it would have to be an independent 3d party that would allow ANY coin in the registry, regardless of slab, & they would have to offer yet another unbiased opinion as to how accurate the slabed grades are.
as long as the entity grading the coins is the entitiy controlling the registry, it cannot by definition be fair.
oh, & hrh's answer to your question is pure, regurgitated & refried BALONEY. we've heard it all before.
K S
<< <i>NGC standards are a little looser than PCG's >>
This guy is just living on a different planet if he truly believes this across the board. What a waste of a well thought out question. What a shame that he couldn't provide a more responsive question than his usual drivel.
It just amazes me that people still buy into his BS -- we are tighter, we can't find graders, we can't get turnaround times down, we can't give reasons why your coin DNC.
While I don't care for your proposal, at least you came up with a "workable" theory. I really don't care if PCGS lets NGC coins into their Registry, now or if ever. As for PCGS being the market leader -- that's changing. As Robert accurately noticed as I'm sure most of us have, there are far more coins in NCG holders than PCGS holders at shows now. And as long as PCGS holds coins for ransom that trend will continue. It's a shame that PCGS can't operate and conduct business as well as NGC and get coins back to the submittors in a reasonable time frame. If this continues I forsee that NGC will continue to surpass PCGS is just about everyway. They already grade more coins per month and still meet or exceed estimated turnaround times while providing a much high level of customer service.
Michael
<< <i> Personally I'd love to see a respected third-party (fourth party?) independent registry that accepted both PCGS and NGC coins, and optionally had subcategories for "pure" collections (all in the same TPG's slabs). >>
I like this idea though I'm not sure it would ever happen.
It is a PCGS registry. Where is it written that it has to be "fair" (different meanings to different people) or anything else for that matter.
All things being equal, I would rather have my coins in PCGS slabs than any other slabs. I dare to write that I believe most everyone would agree with that.
I like the fact that many dealers have a problem with PCGS for not crossing coins. It gives my the appearance that PCGS is trying to maintain its status without bending to (major) dealer pressure. The reason why dealers are upset is because they want their coins in PCGS slabs. End of story. If not and if NGC was equivalent (or better) than PCGS there would not be all this controversy about crossovers.
IMO. Joe.
I am trying to come up with a solution that avoids the "PCGS is better than NGC" or "NGC is better than PCGS" arguments and also a system that would allow PCGS to get more business with crossovers.
At the same time, I will work on NGC to try to get them to use clear plastic inserts for their holders and to expand their registry into directions that I would more likely use.
I have (as posted elsewhere) noticed more available inventory in NGC holders than PCGS holders, especially rare date and classic coins where I have recently looked: auctions (Richmond and Jim Gray come to mind), shows, and dealer online inventory. Heck, a year ago you would almost never see an NGC coin in the Legend inventory. Now, they are plentiful. Some series tend to remain solid PCGS territory wherever you look (ie. better-date, better-grade Saints).
Finally, in my opinion, the best way to make changes in such matters is with thoughtful proposals, thinking outside of the box, and compromising. Blasting David Hall for this, that or the other thing is no way to get him to agree with your position.
<< <i>I don't understand some of the replies. It is a PCGS registry. >>
you need to read again. the issue proposed by ryk involves making a "fair compromise". the the nature of pcgs registry is a tertiary fact.
K S
<< <i>I knew that Dorkkarl would think I am wasting my time, and perhaps I am. >>
bear in mind, i don't think a "registry" is a stupid idea, i think a "registry run by a plastic co." is a stupid idea. eac-ers & bhnc-ers have for decades enjoyed the challenge of building condition-census sets, but there is no governing body that both ASSIGNS the grades AND RANKS the sets.
it's basically a conflict of interest to have the co. that promotes the "registry set" to also be the exclusive provider of grades for the "registry".... but sure does lend itself well to marketing, doesn't it?
K S
What I have seen since then for sure has changed my mind about recently graded coins that get into NGC slabs. The two services are on equal terms atleast within the series I collect. Still this does not warrant the inclusion of NGC slabbed coins into the PCGS registry. Its not a question of what is going on now but a question of what has happened in the past.
Ken
<< <i>Blasting David Hall for this, that or the other thing is no way to get him to agree with your position. >>
I assume this sentence is directed towards my response. However, as I said I don't care if PCGS lets NGC coins into their registry and secondly, you have a better chance of driving a nail through a brick wall using your forehead as a hammer than you do in convincing Hall to let NGC coins into their registry. I'm not trying to be difficult, I just think that as others have pointed out -- the registry isn't about collectors -- it's about business, marketing and money.
I agree that a fair and unbiased registry that allows PCGS and NGC coins into it would be the best solution --- oh wait, we already have that -- it's called the NGC Registry.
Michael
Did anyone ever think that maybe a non-coin grading organization should start a registry? Maybe like the ANA?
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
you need to read again. the issue proposed by ryk involves making a "fair compromise". the the nature of pcgs registry is a tertiary fact.
Read what? "Fair compromise" for whom? I think you should start to collect plastic but whether you do or not is up to you.
PCGS set-up their registry and they can administer it any way they want to. Of course PCGS will also have to endure any gain or loss of business due to the way they conduct business.
I don't expect anyone to compromise when they purchase coins and I would not ask PCGS to compromise either.
Joe.
Ken
<< <i>What about those Star Coins ? Its almost unbias >>
Well you got me there. But if you factor into how many more PCGS 70s there are floating around out there, then it kinda takes the importance out of the * at least in regards to the modern Registry Sets.
Michael
<< <i>If a mixed PCGS/NGC registry was worth the effort I'm sure PCGS woulda done it long ago. >>
If it was worth the effort to PCGS's bottom line.
I don't blame PCGS for their position on this -- as it currently makes good business sense for them -- but I'd like to see them at least be honest and say on the record that their reasons are more about their bottom line than about numismatics or what's best for collectors.
<< <i>First off if you can have both labels in your sets across the street so WHY do you need them here? >>
That's a good point. Just out of curiosity, does anyone have an exclusive PCGS set registered across the street?
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Ken
<< <i>What I have seen since then for sure has changed my mind about recently graded coins that get into NGC slabs. >>
In my area of interest there's been a very real tightening at NGC. Right now the two companies seem to be trying to "out tough" each other.
Russ, NCNE
So even though they have the SAME grade, they are no longer over graded. I love reading comments by some.
One of the problems I see with this is that when it comes time to sell a coin, the buyer's going to want to pay for the lower grade, and the seller's going to want to sell at the higher grade.
Another solution is for PCGS to keep a data base for DNC coins to show what the coins would have crossed at. The NGC cert labels could then be entered into the registry at what PCGS would have crossed them (no grade guarantee.)
Another proposal has called for PCGS to maintain two registries, one for the Pure PCGS collections, and another for the mixed PCGS/NGC. I doubt this one would ever fly.
Right now, I just dont see NGC coins being allowed into the PCGS registry. NGC allow's both in their registry. That's a good place to participate if you want to include both PCGS and NGC coins in a registry set.
David
There are a lot of registry sets that PCGS offers that NGC does not...including the ones that interest me.
I assume this sentence is directed towards my response.
Not specifically as he (and PCGS) take a lot of heat here. Much of this, if properly worded and delivered, might be more effective rather than just putting him on the defensive. And I am telling this to a lawyer?
bear in mind, i don't think a "registry" is a stupid idea, i think a "registry run by a plastic co." is a stupid idea. eac-ers & bhnc-ers have for decades enjoyed the challenge of building condition-census sets, but there is no governing body that both ASSIGNS the grades AND RANKS the sets.
I like the idea of an impartial third party to do the registry. I think it would be expensive and might hinder the growth of the registry concept. But I like the idea a lot.
I also like the idea of a putting your collection in your own personal website "registry." Then, you could decide what gets in, what does not, etc.
<< <i>That's a good point. Just out of curiosity, does anyone have an exclusive PCGS set registered across the street? >>
YUP!!
Putting NGC coins in the PCGS registry graded at a half point less would be like a public slap in the face don't you think?
That request should be made of NGC.
Joe.
<< <i>Did anyone ever think that maybe a non-coin grading organization should start a registry? Maybe like the ANA? >>
yes, see my prev. post.
<< <i>"Fair compromise" for whom? >>
for people who collect COINS, not plastic. even if your a plastic collector, again, it makes sense to have an impartial entitiy run the registry set, NOT the very supplier of the grades! think about it.
the issue is usually mistaken as "ngc allows pcgs coins in their registry, but pcgs doesn't allow ngc coins". it's really not the issue at all!!! the REAL issue is, why isn't the "registry" run by an impartial 3d party that would allow ANY legitimately graded coin in without partiality to ANY business???. this is why i claim it as a teritiary issue, that pcgs doesn't allow ngc coins in, because that doesn't really solve anything if they do. it's still open to conflict of interest.
<< <i>PCGS set-up their registry and they can administer it any way they want to >>
yes, but then why not be honest about it? why not state up front that it ranks only BIASED collections by excluding any grades not controlled by pcgs? ie. the implication that a set in the pcgs registry is the "finest of all time" is automatically a false statement, since it's ranks is purely determined by pcgs, & not in an unbiased fashion.
if there were a truly UNBIASED registry system, i'd be thrilled by it. but neither pcgs nor ngc has an unbiased registry system at this time. i mean, are NCS coins allowed in the registry???
K S
It's PCGS's ball and they can play with it any way they want.
Joe.
<< <i>
<< <i>NGC standards are a little looser than PCG's >>
This guy is just living on a different planet if he truly believes this across the board. What a waste of a well thought out question. What a shame that he couldn't provide a more responsive question than his usual drivel.
It just amazes me that people still buy into his BS -- we are tighter, we can't find graders, we can't get turnaround times down, we can't give reasons why your coin DNC.
While I don't care for your proposal, at least you came up with a "workable" theory. I really don't care if PCGS lets NGC coins into their Registry, now or if ever. As for PCGS being the market leader -- that's changing. As Robert accurately noticed as I'm sure most of us have, there are far more coins in NCG holders than PCGS holders at shows now. And as long as PCGS holds coins for ransom that trend will continue. It's a shame that PCGS can't operate and conduct business as well as NGC and get coins back to the submittors in a reasonable time frame. If this continues I forsee that NGC will continue to surpass PCGS is just about everyway. They already grade more coins per month and still meet or exceed estimated turnaround times while providing a much high level of customer service.
Michael >>
Mike (Frattlaw), I am going to reply to your post as a long time dealer and an even longer time collector.
In 1986, when PCGS started the business of grading and encapsulating cosins, they were, except for ANACS, essentially the only credible game in town. NGC started up shop about a year later, and until the early 1990s, NGC was the equal or even superior in strictness to PCGS.
Then, things started changing. PCGS became stricter, NGC a bit more accommodating. Now, in 2004, it is clear to me than PCGS is stricter than NGC in almost all series. This has been covered here ad nauseum, so I apologize to those of you who have read this all before.
Now this is my opinion, but T think it's valid, not a knee-jerk one, and those who have dealt with me before know I have some credibilty in these matters. I would say that NGC is about a HALF POINT more liberal in grading MS or PROOF coins. That is to say, if one has a very high-end NGC slabbed coin, the chances are pretty good that it will cross at the same grade into a PCGS holder. Conversely, if one has a very high end PCGS slabbed coin, the chances are quite good that NGC might cross it one point higher!
This is why many dealers, when acquiring a collection of raw coins, will submit the lot to NGC for grading, especially if the coins are destined for auction! Why? Because a MS-66 NGC slabbed coin will bring a higher $$ in auction than a MS-65 PCGS slabbed coin! Most collector-bidders are not fully aware of the slight variance in grading parameters betwen the two companies, and that's too bad. I have seen some customers buried price-wise on a MS-67 NGC slabbed coin that simply would not yield more than MS-66 by PCGS standards. In earlier coins, the price differential can be astronomic. Yet, the coin is what it is. I can't expect all grading companies to grade by the same degree of strictness, and I'm not in any way castigating NGC for the parameters they use.
If a cusomer wants to sell a big $$ NGC slabbed coin, I usually tell them to consign the coin to an auction from the company from which they originally acquired it and take their lumps, if indeed, any are to be had. No point in trying to cross into PCGS unless it's a very high end piece. Of course, to accept a point lower for the coin from PCGS will likely cost them serious money.
For that reason, I've gravitated to mostly selling PCGS slabbed coins and an occasional high-end or early graded NGC coin. I am aware that the dealers and collectors who read this post my not agree with my stance, but it IS my position, and I'm sticking by it.
I've had well-known and respected dealers tell me that by slabbing their inventory into NGC slabs that they can significantly increase their profit margins, which is not a bad thing from a dealer's standpoint.
That's why one sees so many NGC slabbed coins in dealer's inventories. Others, like me, tend to stick with PCGS as they garding compant of choice. Of course, if it a very rare coin of which only a handful or less are known, (1913 Liberty 5c comes to mind), I don't think it matters much whether PCGS or NGC has slabbed it.
This many seem heresy to some dealers who read this, but I'm prepared to take the flames. After all, I'm one of the few remaining ACG Accugrade defendents, so I'm used to singing of eyebrows on occasion. I just call 'em as I see 'em.
Ira
Then there's such areas as the early Seated Dollar proofs where there's almost no high grade examples in PCGS holders. The only reason for this is that the standards are at least one full grade, if not more, apart between the two companies. The coins gravitate toward the higher grade.
One could not expect PCGS to simply deduct a half a point from every coin and allow them onto the PCGS Registry. I've seen plenty that I know would not cross even a point lower. Were PCGS so inclined, the sticker idea is the only one that would work fairly and consistently. But it's not going to happen, so let's just accept the rules of the game the way they are and go for it.
<< <i>remain in NGC holders after being tried for crossover a few times are on average a half a point lower. There's a significant difference between the two statements if you think about it >>
bingo. get it through your pointy heads!
K S
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>NGC standards are a little looser than PCG's >>
This guy is just living on a different planet if he truly believes this across the board. What a waste of a well thought out question. What a shame that he couldn't provide a more responsive question than his usual drivel.
It just amazes me that people still buy into his BS -- we are tighter, we can't find graders, we can't get turnaround times down, we can't give reasons why your coin DNC.
While I don't care for your proposal, at least you came up with a "workable" theory. I really don't care if PCGS lets NGC coins into their Registry, now or if ever. As for PCGS being the market leader -- that's changing. As Robert accurately noticed as I'm sure most of us have, there are far more coins in NCG holders than PCGS holders at shows now. And as long as PCGS holds coins for ransom that trend will continue. It's a shame that PCGS can't operate and conduct business as well as NGC and get coins back to the submittors in a reasonable time frame. If this continues I forsee that NGC will continue to surpass PCGS is just about everyway. They already grade more coins per month and still meet or exceed estimated turnaround times while providing a much high level of customer service.
Michael >>
Mike (Frattlaw), I am going to reply to your post as a long time dealer and an even longer time collector.
In 1986, when PCGS started the business of grading and encapsulating cosins, they were, except for ANACS, essentially the only credible game in town. NGC started up shop about a year later, and until the early 1990s, NGC was the equal or even superior in strictness to PCGS.
Then, things started changing. PCGS became stricter, NGC a bit more accommodating. Now, in 2004, it is clear to me than PCGS is stricter than NGC in almost all series. This has been covered here ad nauseum, so I apologize to those of you who have read this all before.
Now this is my opinion, but T think it's valid, not a knee-jerk one, and those who have dealt with me before know I have some credibilty in these matters. I would say that NGC is about a HALF POINT more liberal in grading MS or PROOF coins. That is to say, if one has a very high-end NGC slabbed coin, the chances are pretty good that it will cross at the same grade into a PCGS holder. Conversely, if one has a very high end PCGS slabbed coin, the chances are quite good that NGC might cross it one point higher!
This is why many dealers, when acquiring a collection of raw coins, will submit the lot to NGC for grading, especially if the coins are destined for auction! Why? Because a MS-66 NGC slabbed coin will bring a higher $$ in auction than a MS-65 PCGS slabbed coin! Most collector-bidders are not fully aware of the slight variance in grading parameters betwen the two companies, and that's too bad. I have seen some customers buried price-wise on a MS-67 NGC slabbed coin that simply would not yield more than MS-66 by PCGS standards. In earlier coins, the price differential can be astronomic. Yet, the coin is what it is. I can't expect all grading companies to grade by the same degree of strictness, and I'm not in any way castigating NGC for the parameters they use.
If a cusomer wants to sell a big $$ NGC slabbed coin, I usually tell them to consign the coin to an auction from the company from which they originally acquired it and take their lumps, if indeed, any are to be had. No point in trying to cross into PCGS unless it's a very high end piece. Of course, to accept a point lower for the coin from PCGS will likely cost them serious money.
For that reason, I've gravitated to mostly selling PCGS slabbed coins and an occasional high-end or early graded NGC coin. I am aware that the dealers and collectors who read this post my not agree with my stance, but it IS my position, and I'm sticking by it.
I've had well-known and respected dealers tell me that by slabbing their inventory into NGC slabs that they can significantly increase their profit margins, which is not a bad thing from a dealer's standpoint.
That's why one sees so many NGC slabbed coins in dealer's inventories. Others, like me, tend to stick with PCGS as they garding compant of choice. Of course, if it a very rare coin of which only a handful or less are known, (1913 Liberty 5c comes to mind), I don't think it matters much whether PCGS or NGC has slabbed it.
This many seem heresy to some dealers who read this, but I'm prepared to take the flames. After all, I'm one of the few remaining ACG Accugrade defendents, so I'm used to singing of eyebrows on occasion. I just call 'em as I see 'em.
Ira >>
Iras4..... I have no idea who you are, but I couldn't have stated it better than you have above..... I have been collecting for approximately 40 years and when PCGS started up I started collecting slabbed coins at that time, because like most collectors I was tired of unethical dealers trying to rip me off for over graded "raw"coins....
Since PCGS was the first third party grading service, (other than ANACS), naturally it was PCGS coins that I started buying slabbed.... Then when NGC came out with there slabbs I looked at some of their coins that I collected in the series that I collected, which at the time was Buffalos, and S.L.Q.'s, and like you found them to be for the most part equal in grading...... This is not true today, and hasn't been for at least the last 8 years in my opinion, and because of this I only buy PCGS graded coins.....
I'm not saying that NGC doesn't get the grades wrong everytime compared to PCGS, but they do at least 80% of the time compared to PCGS coins of the same grade, at least in the present series I collect which is Walkers....
Anyway kudo's to you for telling it like it is!
I mainly collect PCGS coins myself. I'll buy NGC only if it's a great price for the quality or if the coin is significantly nicer than any PCGS graded example I'm likely to be able to acquire in a reasonable period of time. BUT ... I feel your statement is in error. Why? Because you don't get to see the coins NGC graded to the same grade as PCGS - they are submitted for crossover long before they ever come onto the market for you to buy them.
If you really think there's an 80% chance of NGC grading every WLH a grade higher, then you should buy and crack out every PCGS coin you can get your hands on and resubmit them to NGC. You'll be rich!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>NGC standards are a little looser than PCG's >>
This guy is just living on a different planet if he truly believes this across the board. What a waste of a well thought out question. What a shame that he couldn't provide a more responsive question than his usual drivel.
It just amazes me that people still buy into his BS -- we are tighter, we can't find graders, we can't get turnaround times down, we can't give reasons why your coin DNC.
While I don't care for your proposal, at least you came up with a "workable" theory. I really don't care if PCGS lets NGC coins into their Registry, now or if ever. As for PCGS being the market leader -- that's changing. As Robert accurately noticed as I'm sure most of us have, there are far more coins in NCG holders than PCGS holders at shows now. And as long as PCGS holds coins for ransom that trend will continue. It's a shame that PCGS can't operate and conduct business as well as NGC and get coins back to the submittors in a reasonable time frame. If this continues I forsee that NGC will continue to surpass PCGS is just about everyway. They already grade more coins per month and still meet or exceed estimated turnaround times while providing a much high level of customer service.
Michael >>
Mike (Frattlaw), I am going to reply to your post as a long time dealer and an even longer time collector.
In 1986, when PCGS started the business of grading and encapsulating cosins, they were, except for ANACS, essentially the only credible game in town. NGC started up shop about a year later, and until the early 1990s, NGC was the equal or even superior in strictness to PCGS.
Then, things started changing. PCGS became stricter, NGC a bit more accommodating. Now, in 2004, it is clear to me than PCGS is stricter than NGC in almost all series. This has been covered here ad nauseum, so I apologize to those of you who have read this all before.
Now this is my opinion, but T think it's valid, not a knee-jerk one, and those who have dealt with me before know I have some credibilty in these matters. I would say that NGC is about a HALF POINT more liberal in grading MS or PROOF coins. That is to say, if one has a very high-end NGC slabbed coin, the chances are pretty good that it will cross at the same grade into a PCGS holder. Conversely, if one has a very high end PCGS slabbed coin, the chances are quite good that NGC might cross it one point higher!
This is why many dealers, when acquiring a collection of raw coins, will submit the lot to NGC for grading, especially if the coins are destined for auction! Why? Because a MS-66 NGC slabbed coin will bring a higher $$ in auction than a MS-65 PCGS slabbed coin! Most collector-bidders are not fully aware of the slight variance in grading parameters betwen the two companies, and that's too bad. I have seen some customers buried price-wise on a MS-67 NGC slabbed coin that simply would not yield more than MS-66 by PCGS standards. In earlier coins, the price differential can be astronomic. Yet, the coin is what it is. I can't expect all grading companies to grade by the same degree of strictness, and I'm not in any way castigating NGC for the parameters they use.
If a cusomer wants to sell a big $$ NGC slabbed coin, I usually tell them to consign the coin to an auction from the company from which they originally acquired it and take their lumps, if indeed, any are to be had. No point in trying to cross into PCGS unless it's a very high end piece. Of course, to accept a point lower for the coin from PCGS will likely cost them serious money.
For that reason, I've gravitated to mostly selling PCGS slabbed coins and an occasional high-end or early graded NGC coin. I am aware that the dealers and collectors who read this post my not agree with my stance, but it IS my position, and I'm sticking by it.
I've had well-known and respected dealers tell me that by slabbing their inventory into NGC slabs that they can significantly increase their profit margins, which is not a bad thing from a dealer's standpoint.
That's why one sees so many NGC slabbed coins in dealer's inventories. Others, like me, tend to stick with PCGS as they garding compant of choice. Of course, if it a very rare coin of which only a handful or less are known, (1913 Liberty 5c comes to mind), I don't think it matters much whether PCGS or NGC has slabbed it.
This many seem heresy to some dealers who read this, but I'm prepared to take the flames. After all, I'm one of the few remaining ACG Accugrade defendents, so I'm used to singing of eyebrows on occasion. I just call 'em as I see 'em.
Ira >>
Iras4..... I have no idea who you are, but I couldn't have stated it better than you have above..... I have been collecting for approximately 40 years and when PCGS started up I started collecting slabbed coins at that time, because like most collectors I was tired of unethical dealers trying to rip me off for over graded "raw"coins....
Since PCGS was the first third party grading service, (other than ANACS), naturally it was PCGS coins that I started buying slabbed.... Then when NGC came out with there slabbs I looked at some of their coins that I collected in the series that I collected, which at the time was Buffalos, and S.L.Q.'s, and like you found them to be for the most part equal in grading...... This is not true today, and hasn't been for at least the last 8 years in my opinion, and because of this I only buy PCGS graded coins.....
I'm not saying that NGC doesn't get the grades wrong everytime compared to PCGS, but they do at least 80% of the time compared to PCGS coins of the same grade, at least in the present series I collect which is Walkers....
Anyway kudo's to you for telling it like it is!
Well, thank you Puff. My name is Ira Stein..not trying to keep it a secret. Not on this Forum too often, so many may not know me from this group, but I know many dealers and serious collectors know me.
But to know me is not necessarily to agree with me. I'm glad you do.
Ira
Bruce..... Perhaps you misunderstood what I said, or maybe I should have stated my point better..... I haven't been to a coin show for about 6 or 7 years because of my disability..... When I was going to the shows, and was able to view "both" PCGS, and NGC coins of the same date, and grade, for the majority of the coins I looked at back in the late 90's, the PCGS coins were in my opinion by far better quality for the grade in most "all" respects.... Keep in mind I'm talking about MS coins in MS65 up, in Buffalo's, and with Walkers it's MS66 up..... Those are the coins that I am talking about, which were, and or the series I collect...... How NGC grades other series, or type coins could be different, I don't know because I don't collect them.... At least not at present.
>>If you really think there's an 80% chance of NGC grading every WLH a grade higher, then you should buy and crack out every PCGS coin you can get your hands on and resubmit them to NGC. You'll be rich!<<
If you had my PCGS Walkers you might do this as a dealer, and if I were a dealer I can assure you I would give serious consideration to cracking about 75% of my Walkers and sending them to NGC, because that is about the percentage of Walkers that I have that I consider, (along with a couple of very reputable dealers), that would grade a point higher at NGC...... But since I am not a dealer, and only a collector, my coins will remain in PCGS holders as long as I own them..... Trust me I am probably the pickiest collector that you would ever want to deal with, that's why I only deal with a few reputable dealers that know exactly what I'm looking for in Walkers, thus alot less hassle with returning coins of inferior quality.
<< <i>you are wasting your freakin' time! frankly, the "registry set" concept as it currently exists at EITHER PLASTIC co. is a bunch of bulls**t. it's purely a marketing scheme.
a REAL registry set that's fair to everyone would be run be a company not affiliated w/ any of the plastic co's. it would have to be an independent 3d party that would allow ANY coin in the registry, regardless of slab, & they would have to offer yet another unbiased opinion as to how accurate the slabed grades are.
as long as the entity grading the coins is the entitiy controlling the registry, it cannot by definition be fair.
oh, & hrh's answer to your question is pure, regurgitated & refried BALONEY. we've heard it all before.
K S >>
So, dorkkarl, let me get this straight, the only pure and true registry system that would satisfy you requires an unkown third party grader to arrive on the scene, review all the coins to be registered, and assign its own grades, and do it all for free, and do it in such a way as to command respect for the assigned grades. Yea, that has a chance in hell of becoming a reality. Good one. Are you a politican?
You're welcome Ira.
<< <i>For you guys who don't know Ira, he has been a well respected poster over on RCC for several years, and specializes in early US type, small cents, and occasionally Morgan and Peace Dollars. Ira is the seller who sold me this coin, which will never be for sale until I assume room temperature:
<< <i>
Nice Morgan K6AZ
I don't disagree with that. But remember that before the dealer puts the coin out for sale in an NGC holder, he tries it for crossover at least once, maybe many times. He might also wholesale it to someone who tries it a few more times. The end result is that the nicest coins cross and the least nice end up for sale. You see all the dogs in the white holder and the nice coins in the clear holder. This gives the illusion that NGC 'grades it wrong 80% of the time'. They don't - nowhere near that % of the time.
In order to get a clear picture of their respective abilities, you would have to see fresh returns from the services over a period of time - not just rely on a snapshot of the bourse floor or the auction lots at the major shows.
<< <i>When I was going to the shows, and was able to view "both" PCGS, and NGC coins of the same date, and grade, for the majority of the coins I looked at back in the late 90's, the PCGS coins were in my opinion by far better quality for the grade in most "all" respects
I don't disagree with that. But remember that before the dealer puts the coin out for sale in an NGC holder, he tries it for crossover at least once, maybe many times. He might also wholesale it to someone who tries it a few more times. The end result is that the nicest coins cross and the least nice end up for sale. You see all the dogs in the white holder and the nice coins in the clear holder. This gives the illusion that NGC 'grades it wrong 80% of the time'. They don't - nowhere near that % of the time.
In order to get a clear picture of their respective abilities, you would have to see fresh returns from the services over a period of time - not just rely on a snapshot of the bourse floor or the auction lots at the major shows. >>
Bruce..... I hope my PM reply may clear a few things up here..... The 80% is/was probably somewhat of a stretch.
Thank you all for an interesting and enlightening (and flame-free) discussion.