<< <i>I've had a PCGS half dime go from AU58 to MS63 on a crackout. Either it has wear or not. I certainly felt it was worthy of an upgrade, but didn't expect that big of a jump. My complaint with PCGS is not they are too tight or too loose. They are just inconsistent. >>
My thoughts exactly. I submitted a circulated Morgan a couple of months ago in the AU (IMO) range. It was one of the rarer 1878 8TF Vams. Paid for express grading...no Vam attribution. Coin comes back in a BB saying "cleaned". I thought it was bogus but who am I to argue with the "experts". Submitted the coin to ANACS....it came back AU50 (no net grade as expected as the coin looked like every other AU Morgan I have seen). RE-SUBMITTED the coin to PCGS as a crossover (this is all within a month as i paid for Express grading at both services) and low and behold the coin now is NOT cleaned (it crossed). PCGS deducted a half a grade (AU50 to XF45). Saying a coin has been cleaned is, IMO, even less subjective than grading. Either the coin meets the definition or it doesn't. Two submissions, two completely different results and it cost me nearly $200 to get the coin into a holder where it should have gone first time around. Conspiracy, NO. Inconsistency, YES.
I don't know quite how to verbalize this thought, so I hope this is a good starting point:
If grading was as consistent as most claim it to be, say in the 8 out of 10 range as claimed by some, then 8 out of 10 coins brought to market would be in-play for buy/sell/trade . However, that is certainly NOT the case (you either know/agree with this statement or I'll have to expound on this in another post). Having been to a number of major coin shows recently I notice the same material -- for the most part -- being offered by the same sellers. Only a VERY select portion of this material actually trades hands. Online venues are somewhat similar.
So the question is --
Are the undergraded coins (for a given grade) the only ones that trade actively, or are they actually properly graded and it's not that 8 out of 10 coins are graded properly but the exact opposite -- 2 out of 10. Hence, these 2 out of 10 coins are really the ones that trade actively while the other 8 out of 10 just sit there.
Here's an example -- perhaps a bit extreme but an example none the less.
I've seen HRH look through boxes of coins at coins shows. Without question HRH has a fantastic eye for coins, which I greatly respect! Yet for his inventory he doesn't purchase all 1886 PCGS MS66 Morgans (a common date, for example purposes) but he has one (Link to coin for example only). Why doesn't he buy the 100's of other MS66 1886 Morgans that he looked at (all in PCGS holders, for example)? An assumption -- and an assumption only -- could be made that like any other astute collector/dealer he would deem them as "not that nice". So what does that mean, or what does that tell us? The President of a TPG passess on the very coins his TPG grades as "not that nice" and only selects certain samples.
So here's a thought/question/observation, or whatever you want to call it:
Are the ones he buys actually MS66 and the all the others (8 to 9 out of 10) overgraded, or are the ones he buys really MS67's and all the other ones are properly graded at MS66? I know there is a band of acceptability for any specific grade and one can say they're PQ 66's, but that argument made in a BROAD sense (e.g nearly every coin) is just simply denying reality, so please let's not go there.
Sorry if this post is all over the place...perhaps I can refine my thoughts as others respond.
BTW -- it's not just HRH. The above can be said about a number of other "experienced/talented" numismatists.
Every last coin that is a candidate for submission is put thru a rigorous examination. It is examined with the naked eye, a 5x and then a loupe, both outdoors in natural sunlight and right here under Reveal lighting. The coin is then photographed and then subjected to the unforgiving scanner, from which NOTHING, not even the slightest rub, can hide.
I then take each coin of the very same year and mint mark and compare it side by side with the known PCGS graded coin that I own. At this point, after all this, a conscious decision is made to submit my coin as I now should have a coin that should grade no less than "x".
If and when the coin comes back graded lower than expected, I immediately take the coin to which it had been compared out to look for something I may have missed, as though looking at it for the first time, in an effort to see what the graders saw. It is at this point that I note many inconsistancies. Either the new coin is undergraded or the older one is overgraded.
I submitted 8 of the coins for presidential review in this process and none upgraded. There was a Lincoln mentioned and it obviously did not upgrade (Not mine). The rub on the 1923 (a coin I submitted for a YN I work with) had extremely minor rub so minor it takes a 20X loop for me to see it but I suppose you would have to say it is rub albeit at 20 X not 10X in my opinion. The 1937 merc MS67 FB is a 67.9 and there is no check stratch that I can see (light toning break from the roll since it was an end coin), (I will make the coin available to any serious collector who would like to look at the coin). Hall did mention in the response to my write ups that a 1936 Washintoin MS65 (lovely toned) was a border line and is very close.
I had three coins that were crack outs Washington 1939-S now MS65 which was in a MS66 holder to mention on that dropped a point (as he mentioned I needed to clean up an minor spot on the coin with accepted PCGS methods, no new issues were discovered), and two that dropped two pts that I submitted and grades were agreed in review.
I am merely posting this not to challenge this process just to lay out why I submitted the eight coins for review.
PS in reading about another poster who has upgraded a coin in a different presidential review. I did the same with a 1957 Proof MS69 which did not have a Cameo designation. It was an obvious cameo (a coin I had bought sight unseen on ebay). It was upgraded to MS69 Cameo. The process works in my opinion. I think the advice to try to upgrade on a regrade in orginal holder is a much better idea which I have done on a number of occasions. I am no longer cracking coins out. I only submit for crossing and regrades along with orginal raws.
One last PS, I think presidential reviews should be done like grading where the original PCGS coin is taken out of the holder and then brought to Mr Hall. This would allow for him to agree or disagree with the grade without the bias of seeing the coin in the holder. Just a suggestion.
"HitAndRunHall"??? Interesting post ....... should have hung around for a few to answer questions. Think he will visit this thread? So, out of 100 coins, he gave comment on TWO? No data to tell us how many did or did not upgrade? Pretty crappy results.
<< <i>To assume that there's no grade tightening by offering a presidential review and declaring victory after none is found is weak at best.
Do you really think that HRH would ever admit to it if it were ocurring? Call me cynical, but I do not trust that HRH is truly an impartial judge.
The true test would be a blind test. Pass that test and I would change my mind. Until then, I don't give any weight whatsoever to this self-proclaimed declaration of innocence...Mike
p.s. all this being said, I still think PCGS is the best in the business. >>
I agree with the *blind test* thing. I believe the arguement that started all of this was that it appeared that the grading standards had changed and not about Presidential Reviews to what could be today's standards. It would be costly to test that theory, but it would possibly lay some of the arguements to rest.
<< <i>what does ownership adds a point or two realy mean?????? >>
It means that we owners of coins NATURALLY believe our coins are worth MORE than if we were considering buying those same coins. The "worth more" is translated into grade points in the comment. Very factual and makes lots of sense to me. Steve
<< <i>One last PS, I think presidential reviews should be done like grading where the original PCGS coin is taken out of the holder and then brought to Mr Hall. This would allow for him to agree or disagree with the grade without the bias of seeing the coin in the holder. Just a suggestion. >>
Darn good suggestion!
"Wars are really ugly! They're dirty and they're cold. I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole." Mary
<< <i>It is always easier to grade a coin if you have no financial interest in the coin. The hardest coin to grade is the one you own. >>
If a TPG offers a guarantee on their services, and a coin is $200 in MS-64 and $2000 in MS-65, you'd better believe the TPGs have a financial interest in the results.
<< <i>Sunnywood...I feel that dealers (not all, but many) crack coins out and don't use the regrade service so that they can play with the coins at least a little and sometimes a lot. If I submitted coins to PCGS (and I don't for obvious reasons), I would never crack coins out. I would always use the regrade service where the coin is guaranteed not to go down. I see coins go up in grade in the regrade service every day. Take a tip for the person who knows how it really works...use the regrade service if you think you have a cointhat could go up in grade.
Stewart...a coin on the cusp of 67 that is better than any other 66 is probably still a 66.
Understand this people...over half of the Presidential Reviews I do are not even close to the higher grade. Don't waste your money...look at the coins first...really look at them. If you are not having a lot of success submitting coins...submitt less.
And most of all...have fun and enjoy your coins.
David >>
Where do you submit your coins to then David? NGC?
<<If a TPG offers a guarantee on their services, and a coin is $200 in MS-64 and $2000 in MS-65, you'd better believe the TPGs have a financial interest in the results.>>
Which makes paying for a slab almostpointless.
Why not grade the coin what its real grade is and cut the BS...
Interesting old thread. Sad that data was collected on 100 coins and no formal presentation of results was made.
100 coins is not such a large number that a little statistical analysis would have been an onerous task. Other than a couple of ridiculous examples being put forth (scratched/ obviously circulated), no real non-emotionally biased and concrete results were reported.
Institutional laziness, or did the actual results belie the verbiage put forth?
Comments
<< <i>I've had a PCGS half dime go from AU58 to MS63 on a crackout. Either it has wear or not. I certainly felt it was worthy of an upgrade, but didn't expect that big of a jump. My complaint with PCGS is not they are too tight or too loose. They are just inconsistent. >>
My thoughts exactly. I submitted a circulated Morgan a couple of months ago in the AU (IMO) range. It was one of the rarer 1878 8TF Vams. Paid for express grading...no Vam attribution. Coin comes back in a BB saying "cleaned". I thought it was bogus but who am I to argue with the "experts". Submitted the coin to ANACS....it came back AU50 (no net grade as expected as the coin looked like every other AU Morgan I have seen). RE-SUBMITTED the coin to PCGS as a crossover (this is all within a month as i paid for Express grading at both services) and low and behold the coin now is NOT cleaned (it crossed). PCGS deducted a half a grade (AU50 to XF45). Saying a coin has been cleaned is, IMO, even less subjective than grading. Either the coin meets the definition or it doesn't. Two submissions, two completely different results and it cost me nearly $200 to get the coin into a holder where it should have gone first time around. Conspiracy, NO. Inconsistency, YES.
I don't know quite how to verbalize this thought, so I hope this is a good starting point:
If grading was as consistent as most claim it to be, say in the 8 out of 10 range as claimed by some, then 8 out of 10 coins brought to market would be in-play for buy/sell/trade . However, that is certainly NOT the case (you either know/agree with this statement or I'll have to expound on this in another post). Having been to a number of major coin shows recently I notice the same material -- for the most part -- being offered by the same sellers. Only a VERY select portion of this material actually trades hands. Online venues are somewhat similar.
So the question is --
Are the undergraded coins (for a given grade) the only ones that trade actively, or are they actually properly graded and it's not that 8 out of 10 coins are graded properly but the exact opposite -- 2 out of 10. Hence, these 2 out of 10 coins are really the ones that trade actively while the other 8 out of 10 just sit there.
Here's an example -- perhaps a bit extreme but an example none the less.
I've seen HRH look through boxes of coins at coins shows. Without question HRH has a fantastic eye for coins, which I greatly respect! Yet for his inventory he doesn't purchase all 1886 PCGS MS66 Morgans (a common date, for example purposes) but he has one (Link to coin for example only). Why doesn't he buy the 100's of other MS66 1886 Morgans that he looked at (all in PCGS holders, for example)? An assumption -- and an assumption only -- could be made that like any other astute collector/dealer he would deem them as "not that nice". So what does that mean, or what does that tell us? The President of a TPG passess on the very coins his TPG grades as "not that nice" and only selects certain samples.
So here's a thought/question/observation, or whatever you want to call it:
Are the ones he buys actually MS66 and the all the others (8 to 9 out of 10) overgraded, or are the ones he buys really MS67's and all the other ones are properly graded at MS66? I know there is a band of acceptability for any specific grade and one can say they're PQ 66's, but that argument made in a BROAD sense (e.g nearly every coin) is just simply denying reality, so please let's not go there.
Sorry if this post is all over the place...perhaps I can refine my thoughts as others respond.
BTW -- it's not just HRH. The above can be said about a number of other "experienced/talented" numismatists.
Input/thoughts??
Thanks in advance
I then take each coin of the very same year and mint mark and compare it side by side with the known PCGS graded coin that I own. At this point, after all this, a conscious decision is made to submit my coin as I now should have a coin that should grade no less than "x".
If and when the coin comes back graded lower than expected, I immediately take the coin to which it had been compared out to look for something I may have missed, as though looking at it for the first time, in an effort to see what the graders saw. It is at this point that I note many inconsistancies. Either the new coin is undergraded or the older one is overgraded.
That's just the way it is with this Chucklehead.
I had three coins that were crack outs Washington 1939-S now MS65 which was in a MS66 holder to mention on that dropped a point (as he mentioned I needed to clean up an minor spot on the coin with accepted PCGS methods, no new issues were discovered), and two that dropped two pts that I submitted and grades were agreed in review.
I am merely posting this not to challenge this process just to lay out why I submitted the eight coins for review.
So, out of 100 coins, he gave comment on TWO? No data to tell us how many did or did not upgrade?
Pretty crappy results.
<< <i>To assume that there's no grade tightening by offering a presidential review and declaring victory after none is found is weak at best.
Do you really think that HRH would ever admit to it if it were ocurring? Call me cynical, but I do not trust that HRH is truly an impartial judge.
The true test would be a blind test. Pass that test and I would change my mind. Until then, I don't give any weight whatsoever to this self-proclaimed declaration of innocence...Mike
p.s. all this being said, I still think PCGS is the best in the business. >>
I agree with the *blind test* thing. I believe the arguement that started all of this was that it appeared that the grading standards had changed and not about Presidential Reviews to what could be today's standards. It would be costly to test that theory, but it would possibly lay some of the arguements to rest.
<< <i>what does ownership adds a point or two realy mean?????? >>
It means that we owners of coins NATURALLY believe our coins are worth MORE than if we were considering buying those same coins. The "worth more" is translated into grade points in the comment. Very factual and makes lots of sense to me. Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Like VOC Numismatics on facebook
FrederickCoinClub
<< <i>One last PS, I think presidential reviews should be done like grading where the original PCGS coin is taken out of the holder and then brought to Mr Hall. This would allow for him to agree or disagree with the grade without the bias of seeing the coin in the holder. Just a suggestion. >>
Darn good suggestion!
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
<< <i>It is always easier to grade a coin if you have no financial interest in the coin. The hardest coin to grade is the one you own. >>
If a TPG offers a guarantee on their services, and a coin is $200 in MS-64 and $2000 in MS-65, you'd better believe the TPGs have a financial interest in the results.
<< <i>Sunnywood...I feel that dealers (not all, but many) crack coins out and don't use the regrade service so that they can play with the coins at least a little and sometimes a lot. If I submitted coins to PCGS (and I don't for obvious reasons), I would never crack coins out. I would always use the regrade service where the coin is guaranteed not to go down. I see coins go up in grade in the regrade service every day. Take a tip for the person who knows how it really works...use the regrade service if you think you have a cointhat could go up in grade.
Stewart...a coin on the cusp of 67 that is better than any other 66 is probably still a 66.
Understand this people...over half of the Presidential Reviews I do are not even close to the higher grade. Don't waste your money...look at the coins first...really look at them. If you are not having a lot of success submitting coins...submitt less.
And most of all...have fun and enjoy your coins.
David >>
Where do you submit your coins to then David? NGC?
Thanks,
BigBen
<< <i>Whats really funny is that the 1937 Mercury that HRH listed in here is now in a 67FB holder after I resubmitted it. >>
US and British coin collector, and creator of The Ultimate Chuck E. Cheese's and Showbiz Pizza Place Token & Ticket Guide
Which makes paying for a slab almostpointless.
Why not grade the coin what its real grade is and cut the BS...
100 coins is not such a large number that a little statistical analysis would have been an onerous task. Other than a couple of ridiculous examples being put forth (scratched/ obviously circulated), no real non-emotionally biased and concrete results were reported.
Institutional laziness, or did the actual results belie the verbiage put forth?
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Thanks for the honest input!!!!
Perception is often based on observation.
Denial, rather then a defense, is just a
river in Egypt.
Camelot