If the hobby "adopted" a new decimal grading standard, or 100 pt scale, would you resubmit

Longacre

If the hobby "adopted" a decimal grading scale (such as MS 65.5, etc.), or a 100 point grading scale....

(1) Would you resubmit all of your coins to be re-graded?
(2) If there was some sort of "converter" for the new 100 point scale to the current 70 point scale, would you resubmit your coins to be regraded? In other words, some sort of chart that says the old MS 65 is approximately the new MS 88, etc.
(3) What would need to be done for the hobby to "adopt" any new system? I always wondered if the grading companies could just change the scales, or if there would need to be some sort of vote among ANA members, or can the large dealers strong arm the right people into supporting a new scale? What would it take?

Russ

No.

Russ, NCNE

7summits

"(1) Would you resubmit all of your coins to be re-graded? (2) If there was some sort of "converter" for the new 100 point scale to the current 70 point scale, would you resubmit your coins to be regraded? In other words, some sort of chart that says the old MS 65 is approximately the new MS 88, etc. (3) What would need to be done for the hobby to "adopt" any new system? I always wondered if the grading companies could just change the scales, or if there would need to be some sort of vote among ANA members, or can the large dealers strong arm the right people into supporting a new scale? What would it take?

(1) no
(2) no
(3) be willing to lose half or more of the collectors / investors

And if this ever did happen, I'd be one of the first to sell out.

dwssws

agree with the NO votes

haletj

I've always said a new (finer) scale would be good for the hobby. The price differences between grades would be less... and crackouts would be less... ie why bother cracking out your ms88 just to get an ms89. Of course someday grading companies are going to run out of coins to grade or room to gradeinflate, so of course they will adopt a new scale so submissions will keep rolling in. (Look! NGC already adopted the *).

Longacre

If I can answer my own question, adopting a new decimal grading standard or a 100 point scale would be a train wreck for the coin market. I think we need LESS grading steps. It would be a lot easier to tell the difference if the grades went as follows: MS60, MS63, MS65, MS67 and MS70. Or even better, I would like to see MS60, MS63, MS67, MS70. There would be more of a focus on how the coin looks, rather than the numerical grade. Of course, it might kill the sight unseen market, but that market generally favors the wholesalers, in my opinion.

Darkmane

i think that the 70 point system is excellent (meaning grading is viewed as subjective now, where substantial differences *should* be seen) and so widely accepted, that it would take a GOOD GOOD reason to change it.

haletj

If it were back to ms63/65/67/70 it wouldn't be easier to tell because you'd still have those really high end ms63's that just miss ms65. And on a lot of coins an ms63 might be worth $100 and an ms65 would be worth $100,000. That would be really ridiculous. At least now we have the $10K ms64. I think it would be better if we also had an ms64.5 or even ms64.3, ms64.7 worth resp amounts to their rarity.

Conder101

<< <i>I've always said a new (finer) scale would be good for the hobby. The price differences between grades would be less... and crackouts would be less... ie why bother cracking out your ms88 just to get an ms89. >>


The history of the MS scale argues against that theory. Originally there were only three MS grades 60, 65, and 70 (But no one actually used the 70). But the price difference between 60 and 65 grew very large and there were coins that were felt to be better than 65 but they weren't the perfect 70's. So 63 and 67 were added and "crackouts" began. The price difference between 63 and 65 became large and collector began clammering for the addition of another inbetween grade, MS-64. Instead the adopted the full 60 - 70 scale we have today and crackouts increased as people tried to get that one point upgrade. Especially as values between grades has continued to grow again. After all if we have collectors trying to get that one point upgrade from 66 to 67, why wouldn't they try to go fro MS88 to MS89? Especially if the difference in value becomes significant. The whole history of our grading scales has been to adopt finer and finer divisions of grading as values rise. I see no reason this will not continue. In fact it has as the services have added color designations, PQ, *, and collectors and dealers constantly discuss whether a coin is low end, solid, or high end for the grade. I firmly believe it is only a matter of time until the "low, solid, high end" are officially adopted and we see 30 MS grades. Possibly by the addition of - and + to the grades on the slabs.

ARCO

If the grading were free to convert to the new system, YES. If not, HELL no!

Tyler

Baley

I don't submit 'em now. So what would change if "they" change the scale?

GTS

The decimal added would help, a 63.8 or a 63.2 or a 63.5 etc.You know the 63.8 is a much better coin then the 63.2 The * is good too, for coins with impressive eye appeal.Pricing would be more precise.Desciptions less about fancy words and more about facts.I think it is already needed.The way it is now is too vague,which leaves us way too vulnable to typical sales BS. For the money we spend, we deserve accurate grading and less smoke and mirrors.
GTS

RYK

The decimal added would help, a 63.8 or a 63.2 or a 63.5 etc.You know the 63.8 is a much better coin then the 63.2

If you think the grading services are inconsistent now, imagine such a decimal system. It virtually guarantees that every time a coin is submitted it will get a different grade.

tmot99

I kind of agree that a 100 point system would be good. The only way that I can see it happening is if a new grading company enters the picture with this new grading system and proves themselves right upfront. I'm not sure how that would happen, but I'm not starting a company so I haven't had to think about it.

The only way we can get some consistant grading is if they started at "perfect" whether it be 70 or 100, and deduct for problems, i.e. hits, dings, etc. They would actually have to count them. I'm not saying this is feasable, but it would certainly make grading more consistant. I also think that "eye appeal" and "technical grade" need to be seperated in the grading. The grade as we know it should be the technical grade and no bump for great eye appeal. Eye appeal is in the eye of the beholder. We all differ on what eye appeal is. As there is BN, RB, and RD for copper coins, there could be BW (bright white), UT (untoned), then for toned coins a percentage of toning, T (toned), and MT (multi-colored toning).

For example a coin with rainbow toning in an arc might get a MS65 30% MT which could indicate that there were X number if deductions from perfect and is 30% multi-colored toning.

I think it would be a better system but next to impossible to execute.

solid

I believe that at some point, one of the top grading services will indeed adopt a 100-point system. Their
business model is fueled on submissions and resubmissions and, if they can successfully pull it off, this
would mean A LOT of business for them.

Would I personally resubmit all of my coins for regrading? No. At least not anytime soon.

I've posted this before, but one way it could be done is:

Leave the current 01-58 scale for circulated coins.

If a coin is deemed uncirculated, it starts as a 60, and then receives further points for each of the following.

Strike 1-10 points
Luster/Mirrors 1-10 points
Marks/hits 1-10 points
Eye appeal 1-10 points

Each uncirculated coin would have a cumulative grade total, but could also be shown as 8-9-5-7 to
further clarify how the grade was arrived at.

Of course, grading would still be subjective, but I believe a finer scale would help to more accurately
value coins and something along these lines would also serve to clarify why a coin was assigned a
particular grade.

Call me crazy!

Ken