Options
100 Point Grading Scale Makes Sense
mintluster
Posts: 926
in Q & A Forum
Dave,
When I heard you were considering a new innovative 100 point grading scale versus the current 70 point scale, I thought of one thing: IT'S ABOUT TIME!! All it takes is one TPG to do this to influence change throughout the coin world. The fact that it could be PCGS - THE leading TPG makes this even sweeter, and more of a reason I believe this will happen.
I have wanted this for years because I think it makes sense and is easier for people to understand, especially new collectors when you try and explain the grading system and Sheldon/Large Cents.
In my local coin club I created 5 years ago, we have a lot of new collectors who also collect sports cards and/or comics, and they often ask why the coin world does not adopt a similiar scale. "It's not up to me" I often say, or "I agree but it will take someone very influential and respected in the coin world to make this happen."
I anticipate it will be a challenge because some people just don't like change at all. Their mind set will be that the current scale works fine, therefore it should not be changed. Well, I disagree with them and I hope to see you succeed with this very important issue. I have recently sent a letter to the editor of Coin World supporting PCGS and commending you for considering this issue. I know it will spark discussion & debate, and that is exactly why I did it.
With the current health of this collector-driven market, now is the time for this change. It is long overdue. This is the message I have been giving to my club and we will continue to support your efforts and promote them within the coin collecting community.
I think the scale can be easily modified to understand and use. MS 90-100 could replace MS 60-70 and MS 80-89 versus MS 50-59, and further down from 0-30 it could possibly be 5 point increments, or something similiar.
I am very interested in knowing your thoughts on this subject. Can you discuss this?
When I heard you were considering a new innovative 100 point grading scale versus the current 70 point scale, I thought of one thing: IT'S ABOUT TIME!! All it takes is one TPG to do this to influence change throughout the coin world. The fact that it could be PCGS - THE leading TPG makes this even sweeter, and more of a reason I believe this will happen.
I have wanted this for years because I think it makes sense and is easier for people to understand, especially new collectors when you try and explain the grading system and Sheldon/Large Cents.
In my local coin club I created 5 years ago, we have a lot of new collectors who also collect sports cards and/or comics, and they often ask why the coin world does not adopt a similiar scale. "It's not up to me" I often say, or "I agree but it will take someone very influential and respected in the coin world to make this happen."
I anticipate it will be a challenge because some people just don't like change at all. Their mind set will be that the current scale works fine, therefore it should not be changed. Well, I disagree with them and I hope to see you succeed with this very important issue. I have recently sent a letter to the editor of Coin World supporting PCGS and commending you for considering this issue. I know it will spark discussion & debate, and that is exactly why I did it.
With the current health of this collector-driven market, now is the time for this change. It is long overdue. This is the message I have been giving to my club and we will continue to support your efforts and promote them within the coin collecting community.
I think the scale can be easily modified to understand and use. MS 90-100 could replace MS 60-70 and MS 80-89 versus MS 50-59, and further down from 0-30 it could possibly be 5 point increments, or something similiar.
I am very interested in knowing your thoughts on this subject. Can you discuss this?
0
Comments
I believe a 100 point scale is worth talking about, but I'm not sure the benefit of the change would outweigh the anxiety and confusion it would cause short term.
More later...
David