********not good!!!!!!!!!!!
monsterman
Posts: 797
there is an article coming in forbes next week and its not good....personally i think a retraction is in order before it hits the stands....so some of you lawyers out there might share you thoughts
monsterman
ps...keep in mind i have always thought grading was really ranking coins where as the coins gravitate higher until the best apear in the highest grades..this is done because thats where demand and pricing meet and the fact that coins have a fixed supply...on the other hand diamonds for example are graded too but their supply increases daily with mining...thus diamond`s grading standards need to be etched in stone and NEVER change
thus comparing coin grading ( which i call ranking ) to other types of assets ( which have etched in stone perameters ) is like comparing apples to oranges.....but when you read this article the writer doesnt have a clue and leads the reader in thinking that our hobby is a "dark" place
keep in mind understanding grading as a ranking system is the hardest thing newbies have to do....but to me ... as i see it..it is the way it is and easily understood
monsterman
ps...keep in mind i have always thought grading was really ranking coins where as the coins gravitate higher until the best apear in the highest grades..this is done because thats where demand and pricing meet and the fact that coins have a fixed supply...on the other hand diamonds for example are graded too but their supply increases daily with mining...thus diamond`s grading standards need to be etched in stone and NEVER change
thus comparing coin grading ( which i call ranking ) to other types of assets ( which have etched in stone perameters ) is like comparing apples to oranges.....but when you read this article the writer doesnt have a clue and leads the reader in thinking that our hobby is a "dark" place
keep in mind understanding grading as a ranking system is the hardest thing newbies have to do....but to me ... as i see it..it is the way it is and easily understood
my goal is to find the monsters and i go where they are but i sometimes miss some.... so if you have any and want to sell IM THE BUYER FOR THEM!!!
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
0
Comments
However, "ranking" doesn't work for grades below the cream. Wouldn't you agree that a grade of AU50 should be static, and not involved in the ranking system? Wouldn't that be like the diamond system?
This issue comes up in other areas as well. Try Grade A lumber. I can assure you that Grade A lumber today is not the same as Grade A lumber 20 years ago, and probably not even 10 years ago. Today Grade A lumber only indicates the best lumber on the market. It doesn't give the buyer any assurance that the lumber meets a certain critera.
So above are three ways of looking at it:
1. Goods with a fixed supply (top coins) (in which you are assuming the finite supply of top pops has risen to the surface and all can be compared)
2. "common coins" which implies that while the supply is fixed, the supply is still so large that the bottom of the supply base has not been tapped (Anybody know how many 1881-S Morgans are out there in AU50???)
3. consumable goods (lumber and trees).
I think you are looking only from your perspective, and you certainly have it pegged from there. However, when you look at the market as a whole, there is a whole lot of number 2 (read as the one above and as poo poo) out there hanging around waiting to fleece America. Obviously I haven't read the article in Forbes, and I would be interested to see what it says.
I spent several years looking at 32-d and 32-s quarters for a good value nice coin.
There are 70-80 32-s's graded 65 and only one 66. I probably looked at 30-40 in the last three years (good prices have brought them to the market). This past January at FUN I finally saw the 32-s I thought was the best I had seen, so I bought it. If any of the 30-40 I looked at could make 66, this one is it.
Same thing with the 32-D. There are about 350 graded in 64, and I have looked at a huge number of them over the last 5 years. I bought the best one I had seen, and it is surely a candidate for 65.
So, by "ranking" I figure I have one of the best, if not the best coin in the undergrade. For the 32-D bought at the FUN show, I probably paid the most on record for an MS64. However, I think it is a very good value for the coin I have.
PS: Thanks for posting this topic. I'm sure it will be another MM Classic!
Good to see ya here Gman....
Mike
Harlan J. Berk, Ltd.
https://hjbltd.com/#!/department/us-coins
link to lengthy discussion on the US Coin Forum, initiated on Dec.11
Forbes article 12/27/04
Very interesting reading...and at an interesting time for me, personally, as I've gotten skunked on grading by PCGS 3 out of the last 4 times.
One would be naive to think that placing a tough date coin in a holder with it's proper grade doesn't have its implications for a grading company. A perfect example just happened today to me -- and I'm not happy.
But, I guess that's the game and that's why certain coins will always be elusive and demand a premium. Only a select few submitters will ever receive a tough coin's proper grade, let alone have a 15% ratio on successful resubmittals, and don't be shocked when those select few submitters happen to be submitters within a certain sphere of influence.
Looking at my own collection of Mercury dimes (I have a registry set with FB), I can "rank" (as you state) the coins -- lining up over a dozen 67FB's and and interlace them with 6 tough 66FB's (covering up all their slabbed grades) and I would bet that ANY grader would grade those 66FB's as 67FB's (that is -- if they were clueless and didn't know which dates were tough/key). The same holds true for very tough 64's, 5's and 6's. That's called objectivity, which will never exist in this hobby. The graders have proven to consistently be subjected to the rarity of coin in context of his or her grading, and the grader will know the consequences of grading a -- for instance -- a 1945 Micro "s" 10C an MS67FB when only 10 have been graded to date!
OK -- I vented a bit -- and now I feel better
Back to the article -- interesting reading
Mercurydimeguy, that's the same article I linked. Please, don't scare me like that!
Sorry, I think I had the post window open for a while and might not have noticed, or something
From the sound of the post, I thought it was a different article. Still a good topic though.
So, by "ranking" I figure I have one of the best, if not the best coin in the undergrade>>>>
i call it the under-monster
i think we are on the same page.....and by being an astute collector and spending time in the market...your "eye" and knowledge will be vilified with a higher grade in time
your 32-d and 32-s example is an example akin to all series...in commems i`ll bet if you collected the best ten 36-s rhode islands in 66 you could find over a 5 year period....chances are you own over half of the best s mint rhode islands there are ..and in time that strategy would be vilified too....both grade wise and dollar wise
mercdime
>>>and I would bet that ANY grader would grade those 66FB's as 67FB's (that is -- if they were clueless and didn't know which dates were tough/key).
The graders have proven to consistently be subjected to the rarity of coin in context of his or her grading>>>
i 100% agree with you...and i 100% understand the "game "so here is my take on it
...there is no way a grading service is going to "pass out" ( give ) 20,000 to 100,000 upgrades for a 100 bucs even though the coin well deserves it....and that is a shame...they know exactly what they are doing with each coin....i can hear them now....put it in a 66 fb holder so we can grade it again....and again....and again.....and again...and again...and again..and again....and again thats a shame but i totally understand to a point....i dont think you need to send in a coin 50 times ( and yes i have seen that done ) to get the right grade on it....what pisses me off is ...its carteled...where as the biggest submitters have the edge....THATS WHAT PISSES ME OFF...by being carteled the "biggies" ( and you dont get to be a biggie without a great eye either ) send in 2 million a year in grading fees and get 3 million in upgrades....its almost down to a science now with mathimatical predictability....thats what pisses me off...but what REALLY PISSES ME OFF is when in "passing out " the upgrades to a cartel member..... coins of lesser ilk than your under-monster 1945 Micro "s" 10C in 66 fb go right by your coin to a higher holder...and its so damm obviuos....thus you have statements like
" mine is much better than that"
" what in the world were they thinking"
" can i use your 67fb for a set up for mine "
both services do it...but one service is much worse than the other
thats why i have always said ngc grades `em right....pcgs undergrades.....if you want the correct grade on a coin send it to ngc...which in turn makes this statement true " coins IN GENERAL are worth more in pcgs hoders than ngc...and thats because pcgs coins are more frequently undergraded....FOR THE REASONS ABOVE...but think with me now...when a coin is undergraded..who has the advantage....the pros or the collectors???duh....the advanced collector with all the brains,eye and knowledge or the cartel member???duh....what kills me is the collectors are the ones driving the demand for pcgs coins and they are the very same ( as per above ) with one hand tied behind their backs...
most of my commems are in ngc holders ( 200 of 250 ) because they are so monster that it doesnt make any difference which holder they are in..so why arent all of them????well the fact is the 50 pcgs coins cant go into ngc holders....thats right...they cant go into ngc holders!!!
because if they did they might not make it back again.....of the 200 ngc coins ...they are so monster it doesnt make any difference...but those 50...im going to have to sell them and replace them with ngc coins....sell them for more money and get a better coin and put some money in my pocket
however i noticed the bid for some pcgs saints just went below ngc bid....due to over carteling?? ( not a word but a thought )....the market does have a way to tell a service..." hey ...youve gone too far"...i know...i know... its the end of the year and stock options are tied to company profit
the fact of the matter is..." i feel your pain "....who said that!!
monsterman
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
PCGS, they sure are funny. Here's 2 examples where their standards all of a sudden became stricter than they were in 1988!
roadrunner
MM, another great post with two great new words -- undermonster & overcartelling!!!!
I have a "virtual" collection of the top graded coins in the series I collect, so I can compare them with ones that come on the market. It's not perfect, but it is helpful. Heritage's pictures are not the greatest, but they are fairly consistent and there are tons of coins in the archives. Superior's pics have got to be the worst for comparing.
With the new CAM designation for early Lincoln Proofs, I used this to get the "undermonster" for 1937. I bought the pop 1 67CAM, and both pop 2 66CAMs and laid them out side by side. I wound up selling the 67CAM because it was not the best. One of the 66CAMs stood out above the rest. I think this proves out your statements. Now someone (I think a copper cartel member) has made another 67CAM. hmmm.... I owned a super 66red I couldn't get upgraded, but the next owner of the coin did . . hmmm . . .
DMWJR
and there in lies the problem....if you are a cartel member you will get 150% of your submission money returned to you.....thus if you send in 200,000 this month you will get back 300,000 in upgrades.....but to do this you must be a great grader as they wont just arbitraily upgrade coins.....also there is another phenomena which is timing...it wouldnt be smart for a cartel to flood a market because it would kill the goose with the golden egg...thus timing is very important.....if a member sent in 200,000 worth fees for coins that couldnt be digested in the market place it would not be good either thus a cartel member must be a great grader and know the timing too....and that is hard for us outside the cartel to know because it is a function of inventories....if the cartel members inventories are swolen then they know not to submit until it is worked off.....thus we on the outside could have the greatest coins in the world and they arent going anywhere...so to me thats the hard part...i have the coins that will upgrade on a level playing field but dont know the size of cartel members inventories ....i try to solve that problem by sending in a test ballon where as i send in great coins in lots of 5 but i always send in a cheaper hit on the fifth coin so at least the grading gods can give me back my fees by throwing me a bone on the 5th coin .....if the market is "under-feed" then some of my bigger hits in the submission will work
roadrunner
>>cracked out of old PCGS holders>>>
beep beep
you said a mouth full there...to crack or not to crack....the pros crack `em ( most of the time...) and make `em grade `em.....last week in dallas i sent in to ngc 15 of the most monster coins i have...and they got every single grade exactly as what they were sent in as...all i got was 3 stars ( heck 10 of them already had stars )....my conclusion!!! i errrrred....i should of cracked `em as they are no brainers
i have a very good indcator of exactly what the grading conditions are at shows....at 5 pm when all the rooms are cleaned at the hotel at shows jump in the dumpster and weight the trash bags of empty slabs in the trash....its a great indicator....however its lagging indicator and the train has already left the station :-)....i thought youd get a smile out of that one
monsterman
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
<< <i>
you said a mouth full there...to crack or not to crack....the pros crack `em ( most of the time...) and make `em grade `em.....last week in dallas i sent in to ngc 15 of the most monster coins i have...and they got every single grade exactly as what they were sent in as...all i got was 3 stars ( heck 10 of them already had stars )....my conclusion!!! i errrrred....i should of cracked `em as they are no brainers >>
I thought things had changed a little, so I sent 5 coins in for regrade in the holders. All 5 came back the same grade. Waited a month, broke them out, 4 came back a point higher, and one remained at the same grade. So needless to say I'm going back to my old ways of cracking them all out.
My take on all this goes in many directions. For example:
1. As a dedicated LONG TERM collector of a particular series and assuming super tightly graded coins over a (an extended?) period of time - it is a perfect opportunity to sell off some "marginal" coins from the collection and replace them with superb quality "one-grade under" coins. Just as you mentioned. Result - adding better coins to ones collection and pocketing some cash in the process. I am not sure there is any disadvantage to the dedicated long term collector, especially one who is not chasing registry points.
2. In connection with #1 above, another major positive for the dedicated long term collector is prices tend to move up, sometimes WAY UP, on the tightly graded series. Just look at MS Lincoln prices today. Result - even more cash in the door when selling off the "marginal" coins and trying to replace them with "one grade under" coins which one feels are of equal (or even better quality).
3. From the (typical) retail dealer perspective - perhaps not a major impact of tightening - they simply have to pay more for coins and sell them for more? Indeed, a 10% - 15% markup results in more money for the coins, as it is still 10%-15% of a higher priced coin.
4. From the (typical) upgrader/dealer perspective, just the opposite result for MOST dealers. Upgrades bought at auction stop working. Cash flows get destroyed. The "upgrade game" essentially gets dessimated. A longer term effect is some auction prices no long reach the sky, as many upgraders simply will not "stretch" as they have before. This might tend to contribute to longer term price corrections of the wild pricing achieved at auction for some "PQ" coins (again, not certain if this is a negative for the dedicated long-term collector or not?)
As I analyze the affect of "tight" grading to the masses of submittors, it does not jump out at me that it is a major negative to the long-term collector, even assuming some "gift" coins get slabbed in the process and are chased by short-term collectors, speculators, investors, etc. Frustrating at times - yes - but, equally, an opportunity to work hard and buy up superb undergrade coins in the process.
Wondercoin
It would indeed be much better if grading standards were "etched in stone" and could not change over time. Unfortunately, grading is both subjective and market-driven, and everything will always be manipulated so as to produce the highest profits.
TDN, the "great equalizer" that you speak of, review of complete high-end Registry sets, is only available to folks like you. Most average collectors don't ever complete high-ranking Registry sets.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
That is true ... but so is the fact that most average collectors don't need to be concerned with the 'cartel'.
Yup. And this is also the same principle with paper currency of which modern society is based on. The same wealth tranference that occurs in coins by upgrades that does nothing useful (from collector to dealer), also occurs in fiat currency (from consumer to banker) and stocks (consumer to broker). The same general principles of greed are at work.
roadrunner
http://safehaven.com/article-2371.htm
i dont know who this writer is but he is full of bs
>>>Social Security was originally designed to be a safety net for the truly needy.>>>
this is false...social security began in 1934 and was begun with the idea of " retiring dad" and giving his job to his son....thus the income of the family would double in theory and we could spend our way out of the depression....keep in mind more banks failed in 1934 than the five previous years combined so we were in bad shape....the ss program coupled with the wpa did the trick and the rest is history...now i wil tell you the ss system was supposed to stop but with fdr dying in office and the war ending it never happened....sidebar...you want to fix the ss system....get your congress and senate to subscibe to it ...and it will be fixed tomorrow
as far as a flat tax....horrible idea....a sliding scale is the only way to go where as you tax the rich...right up to the point where "they will sit down ( not produce )...the rich are the rich because they are smarter then the rest...jp morgan said ...take al the $$ away from thr rich and evenly distribute it amoung everyone...and it will be right back where it started in 2 years...AND HE WAS RIGHT...the rich are smarter...and they produce more in a 24 hour period than the others...so tax them...tax them hard...right up to the point where they quit....BUT DONT MAKE THEM QUIT....BECAUSE IF THEY DO...EVERYONE ELSE WILL BE EATING PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICHES...FOR LIFE...AS THE REST CANT DO IT WITHOUT THE RICH...FOR THEY ARE THE LEADERS WITH BRAINS
btw ...to stimulate an economy you have to have the ability to get the rich to spend....this is done by not having a flat tax and giving incentives ( aka tax breakes ) to the rich to buy equipment and the like so the rest can have a job and make the equipment.....its just like an anitbiotic...you dont need them often but when you do....you do....and you dont noramlly have to stimulate an economy...but when you do...you have to have the ability....thus a weapon ...a flat tax takes away
monsterman
phd economics uhk 1986
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
I was remarking that the link in the roadrunners signature line
further down said that gold coins
were a better investment than gold stocks, etc.
If so...
Monsterman has been picking the "best of the best" investments
all along.
Way to go, Monsterman!