A question for everyone regarding grading.

Trinketts · February 28, 2006 1:26AM

Do you think the major TPGs(PCGS, NGC, ANACS).. Take a large price jump into consideration before assigning a grade to a certain coin.

An example would be a 1926-D Buffalo nickel... In MS63 the coin is around 400-450... in MS64 it jumps to 1700-1900...

Do you think TPGs should take price scale into consideration when grading a coin?

slipgate · February 28, 2006 1:32AM

well i'll give the obvious answer, but still true. They should grade what it is, without consideration to anything but an accurate grade.

Russ · February 28, 2006 1:33AM

I have no doubt that they do.

Russ, NCNE

Trinketts · February 28, 2006 1:38AM

<< well i'll give the obvious answer, but still true. They should grade what it is, without consideration to anything but an accurate grade.
>>

And also agree with Russ.

Burks · February 28, 2006 1:39AM

<< I have no doubt that they do.

Russ, NCNE >>

Sure seems that way.

Freak1c · February 28, 2006 1:42AM

Yes ! I believe they do.

Freak

topstuf · February 28, 2006 1:45AM

Hmmm.... a bit of wear on the high points. Oh looky, some field friction. Luster looks pretty good. Very original surfaces. Soooooo.....that makes it a...............would you pass the grey sheet, please?

DennisH · February 28, 2006 1:46AM

Do they take price into account? -- Yes.

Should they? -- No.

fc · February 28, 2006 1:49AM

do they take pricing into account due to their guarantee
on the coin? So basically they are limiting their risk?

MrBreeze · February 28, 2006 1:50AM

I don't think they factor price at all. I think they do realize the rarity of certain issues in certain grades. That would make them hesitant to assign a higher grade to a coin that very few MS6?s exist. That, in the end, affects pricing, due to scarcity of available coins in "MS6?" grade.

mgoodm3 · February 28, 2006 1:51AM

To assign a very expensive grade is a financial liability for them, so I would think that they will take more care when assigning such a lofty grade.

Trinketts · February 28, 2006 1:52AM

<< Hmmm.... a bit of wear on the high points. Oh looky, some field friction. Luster looks pretty good. Very original surfaces. Soooooo.....that makes it a...............would you pass the grey sheet, please?

>>

cladking · February 28, 2006 1:58AM

<< Do you think the major TPGs(PCGS, NGC, ANACS).. Take a large price jump into consideration before assigning a grade to a certain coin.

An example would be a 1926-D Buffalo nickel... In MS63 the coin is around 400-450... in MS64 it jumps to 1700-1900...

Do you think TPGs should take price scale into consideration when grading a coin? >>

Perhaps a little, but it's probably more true that the coin takes it into consideration; the price
jump exists largely because the coin is incrementally scarcer in the higher grade.

TwoSides2aCoin · February 28, 2006 1:59AM

I do agree with Russ, and I do think on some occasions, many of us "little people" are being denied a proper grade on coins we never let go of for 30 yrs because we didn't trust dealers, graders and big shots. I've had a few come back that I seriously wonder why it is MS 61 not 62....

Oh, one is 1909 D Indian
and one is 1916S Indian, and there are a few cents and Sacagaweas the same way, but, both of those five dollar gold pieces that take a large jump in value at 62 make me wonder.

a big part of the problem is that the very graders are also Numismatists and know the value of coins. This puts them in a rather precarious way. Or is my thinking incorrect ?

SamByrd · February 28, 2006 2:02AM

yes, to a small degree rightly so. In cases of condition rarity like one example an 81s morgan it really cant be looked at like a 95o morgan the 81s is common and it was a year of great strikes and nice coins are common. The 95o is not so common and is not as available well struck.

PerryHall · February 28, 2006 2:04AM

Of course they spend more time looking at an expensive coin versus a cheaper coin. There is a liability / guarantee issue involved.

RedTiger · February 28, 2006 2:23AM

They say they do not. However, it is human nature that they do. The graders know their series well, so have a good idea if they are "making" a high value coin or a common one. The coins that come back for review or grading guarantee tend to be high value coins.

Few people are going to take the time or expense to send in an 1881-S Morgan for guarantee, but plenty of people would send in an 1884-S. If it is a $200 mistake, the graders may not even know or get an email or some small mention at review time, or similar. If it is a $20,000 mistake, I'd bet the graders know about it right away, and may even get grilled on it. Enough of those expensive mistakes by the same grader, and he/she might be in danger of losing their job. Guess what happens when that next $20k coin comes down the pipe? Human nature takes over and the grader(s) are extra careful before "making" another high value coin.

KurtHorn · February 28, 2006 3:00AM

<< 

<< well i'll give the obvious answer, but still true. They should grade what it is, without consideration to anything but an accurate grade.
>>

And also agree with Russ. >>

Yes.

michael · February 28, 2006 3:02AM

Trinketts
Veteran

Posts: 661
Joined: Sep 2004
Tuesday February 28, 2006 11:26 AM (NEW!)

Do you think the major TPGs(PCGS, NGC, ANACS).. Take a large price jump into consideration before assigning a grade to a certain coin.

An example would be a 1926-D Buffalo nickel... In MS63 the coin is around 400-450... in MS64 it jumps to 1700-1900...

Do you think TPGs should take price scale into consideration when grading a coin?

AS PER THE ABOVE YOU SUM THINGS UP WELL INDIRECTLY

you already know what the colin grades you are noty sending in the coin for grading

YOU ARE SENDING ION THE COIN TO BE PRICED

the services do not grade coins they price your coins

if you wanted your coins graded you would leave them at hiome in airtights or your album as you already know what the coins grade

you just want your coins priced

which is not good or bad just the way it is

grip · February 28, 2006 3:14AM

<< 

<< 

<< well i'll give the obvious answer, but still true. They should grade what it is, without consideration to anything but an accurate grade.
>>

And also agree with Russ. >>

Yes. >>

morganbarber · February 28, 2006 3:42AM

I thought I remembered HRH admitting to this. The quote was something like "We are in the business of grading coins, we don't want to be in the business of creating wealth". If I remember correctly, he admitted that a morgan with a slight price increase from, say 65-66 is much more likely to get the 66 than a date where the 66 jumps tenfold. Maybe I'm making this up, but it really seems like I read it somewhere.

grip · February 28, 2006 4:06AM

I think your right.I think it was on the Q&A.
Al

Trinketts · February 28, 2006 4:12AM

<< I thought I remembered HRH admitting to this. The quote was something like "We are in the business of grading coins, we don't want to be in the business of creating wealth". If I remember correctly, he admitted that a morgan with a slight price increase from, say 65-66 is much more likely to get the 66 than a date where the 66 jumps tenfold. Maybe I'm making this up, but it really seems like I read it somewhere. >>

Doesn't anyone else find this completely unacceptable? A coin should grade based on the coin itself, not what the price brings in a certain condition.

morganbarber · February 28, 2006 11:23AM

I have been thinking about this. Obviously, in a perfect world, a coin would be graded based on its condition without any respect to the date and mint mark. However, PCGS has a guaranty backing their coins. If one coin were a borderline 65/66 and the 66 was only worth $100 more, they are not risking that much by grading it a 66. If a coin jumps in value from $450 in 65 to $12,500 in 66, it would take a lot more guts to put the 66 grade on it.

majorbigtime · February 28, 2006 11:27AM

<< 
Do you think TPGs should take price scale into consideration when grading a coin? >>

Yes, if the grading guaranty really means more than diddly squat (it doesn't).

Bochiman · February 28, 2006 11:31AM

<< 

<< 
Do you think TPGs should take price scale into consideration when grading a coin? >>

Yes, if the grading guaranty really means more than diddly squat (it doesn't). >>

You have said that, probably, over 100 times.....can you get off that schtick and find something else to carp about since you don't seem to be very helpful in threads but rather just posting the same old BS over and over?

CU/HRH/Carol should do everyone a favor and ban you for badmouthing them....or just plain stupidity and ignorance.

Myqqy · February 28, 2006 2:19PM

Doesn't anyone else find this completely unacceptable? A coin should grade based on the coin itself, not what the price brings in a certain condition.

Personally, I would like all graders and tpg's to grade based on the coin itself- but I agree with the sentiment that the tpg's are pricing coins, and shifting their pricing strategies as they go.....

A question for everyone regarding grading.

Comments

Leave a Comment