Hey, tell me what you think of this commentary on our current grade craze.....................

keets

The 2 major grading services are so wound up in discerning the ever so subtle minutia that separates a 66 from 67, a 67 from a 68, etc…that in my opinion, they often miss the BIG PICTURE. As recently as the mid 1980s, we all bought coins based mostly on our own personal perception of the aesthetic “eye appeal” of a given mint state or proof coin. We were willing to pay more for the nicer, more eye appealing examples...and such examples were assigned "higher grades" by words such as "gem proof" which was nicer than "choice proof", "superb gem proof" which was better than a "gem proof". Nobody…I mean nobody…was concerned about the tiniest hairline that only the very sharpest professional could find with his highly trained eagle eye. Today, the "registry folks" stomp on each other to buy a PCGS 69 coin at a truly ludicrous price…and not because the coin looks even the tiniest bit better than its 68 counterpart. Can they see the difference with their own eyes? 9 out of 10 registry collectors cannot see the difference!! They buy it ONLY because PCGS says its better on the grading tag!!!! And to add some real fuel to the fire, if you crack out 10 pre-1972 PCGS proof 69 coins and resubmit them to PCGS for grading, it is exceedingly likely that 5 or even more of them will get only a 68 on regrade!!!

Well, whaddaya think?? Crazy......................like a fox, 'eh!!??!!

Al H.

coinbuf

Well... YEP

Chris

airplanenut

I wrote Numismatist's guest editorial in August of 2003 on this issue.

Here it is

Jeremy

clw54

I've seen commemoratives where a 64 looked far nicer than a 67. The 67 had unattractive toning, and the 64 was attractive. Still the 67 had the higher number and that number will be the deciding factor for many people. Before this number grading, I think the 64 would have been considered the more desirable coin.

roadrunner

Nope. Even before PCGS in the 1980's I was scouring type coin proofs and MS coins for hairlines and minute marks. And I was years behind the first people that started doing this. While there was no definitive grading service then there were a number of people grading on a similar scale. Even in 1982 I was using the following scale and paying premiums for each gradation. I'm not saying how well I graded but that such a system existed and many used it. Others added in eye appeal factors such as A,B,C also.
Jay Miller and Chris Tracey used that system at NPI in the early to mid-1980's. While there were no grades as 61,62,64,66 yet, the "+" signs essentially did the same thing.

MS60
MS60+
MS60++
MS63
MS63+
MS63++
MS65
MS65+
MS65++
MS67

There wasn't really anything above MS67 as that was just superb.
If you felt it was better there couldn't be anything in the way of hairlines or marks. I'm sure a number of dealers and collectors were using similar systems well before 1982. The quest for superb coins at auctions seemed to catch fire around 1975 to 1976 with NERCG (Jim Halperin) promoting it. Double premiums were being paid for superb gem coins grading higher than MS65. I didn't get it in 1975-1978 but by 1980 I knew better.

Even if 9 out of 10 registry set owners cannot tell the difference between each point. There are enough others who can that make the coins worth the premium they fetch. And that includes the grading services themselves that are not as repeatable as they should be any more.

roadrunner

Russ

Looks like a great way to sell PCI graded coins.

Russ, NCNE

keets

maybe so, but taken as a whole, what's there to dispute in the pasted statement??

al h.

Russ

<< <i>maybe so, but taken as a whole, what's there to dispute in the pasted statement?? >>



Not much. It's just fascinating that when he was selling only PCGS and NGC that statement was conspicuous by it's absence. Now that he hawks PCI, he's suddenly found God.

Russ, NCNE

keets

what i find interesting is his pricing structure and the sprinkling of raw coins.he seems to price the PCI's at levels higher than what the correctly graded PCGS/NGC holdered coin would sell for, at least that's what i see when i look at his auctions. it's as though he knows he won't get a premium for a PQ properly graded PCGS/NGC coin so he goes the PCI route. but, back to the statement................

the forum has oftentimes engaged in the debate over the grading nuances from one point to the next, the price differences from one point to the next and the reluctance of the major services to assign what we submitters see as the "big jump" grade. let's not forget the crack/cross/regrade discussions, either. a summation of Jeff's rambling might be BuyTheCoinAndNotTheHolder.

i find that good advice.

al h.

ccr

<< <i>As recently as the mid 1980s, we all bought coins based mostly on our own personal perception of the aesthetic “eye appeal” of a given mint state or proof coin. >>



Ever since I came back to the hobby about 5 years ago ( I collected coins in the late 70`s and early 80`s then left ), I still really haven`t understood why anyone would think any differently then what you said there. Maybe for the people that are naturally competative they want that extra point to push them ahead. Maybe with the exception of a set of PR69DCAM Ikes for example since they are so common and affordable. Otherwise, I tend to go with my own " gut instinct " as I know what " look " I want. I made a few exceptions but, very not often.

I have a BU set of 59 - 98 Lincolns in a Whitman Folder that looks great to me and I`m happy with it. I geuss for them it`s about competition and aesthetics is secondary if it`s even considered. Just that it`s an approach that I perfer to avoid. Geuss I`m old fashion.

RR

Registry, Keets, Registry.
Competition.
So much of this is a function of how much money one has anyway.
Take the Registry away and think for a minute what all this would be like on here.

RR

keets

hey CCR

the original post came from this auction listing. while it might be a PCI overgraded coin and the seller might be a good photographer, it would be hard to argue with the statement's claim about buying eye-appealing coins and this being one.

al h.

100proof1957

Never bought anything from him,though he takes great photos.

The few PCI coins i have seen in hand are terribly overgraded vis a vis the big 2 or even 3.

Pcgs appears to be about 1 grade more strict than Ngc at this time and far more strict with the Cameo tag.

Perhaps the price of the platinum membership that allows access to the PCGS registry vs: the Free access to the NGC registry will narrow the price disparity smoewhat,i cant understand a PCGS coin being worth multiples of an NGC coin.

Proof

keets

i cant understand a PCGS coin being worth multiples of an NGC coin.

maybe not multiples, but evidentally collectors understand that Pcgs appears to be about 1 grade more strict than Ngc at this time and far more strict with the Cameo tag just like you suspect. i keep reading the words of CAM/DCAM specialists that NGC is getting tighter with things, but my personal experience hasn't proved that yet. actually, i don't view NGC as being loose, i see PCGS as being tight the same as you.

al h.

100proof1957

Al,

How bout this ?

Take me a couple minutes to complete this reply.

Link

Link

Now this is multiples !

Proof

tmot99

Looks to me like the guy who spent $100 on NGC coin will pay for at most a couple of submissions to PCGS and resell it for a nice profit. IN all honesty, one would have to see the coin in hand to state this, but I'd guess that it would cross at some point.

D

Airplanenut, I have to say thats one of the best articles I've read and I've got to commend you on writing a very nice piece . Great stuff, and a YN to boot. (I think? )

-Daniel

100proof1957

Tmot,

I guaranty that 100 dollar coin aint going to Pcgs !

Proof

100proof1957

Tmot,

And i will tell you why !

Because it's now a 200 dollar coin and i'm kicking myself in the butt for missing it @ a hunny and i refuse to let PCGS and the market to turn it in to a $50.00 dollar coin,which it is not !

But is the PCGS coin worth over triple money ?

Maybe to smoeone but not me.

Proof