Today's Tight Grading Standards?

Dennisl

There seems to be so many complaints concerning grading at PCGS and how they have tightened their grading standards. Members complain that they submit coins only to find they come back graded lower than they anticipated. I guess it depends on which time frame you are talking about. I learned to grade coins in the 1970's. I think that grading was tighter and more consistent back then. I have many coins that I submitted to PCGS when they first started grading and I agreed with their grade on ever submission that I sent in. In the past year and went to upgrade some of my coins that were in these 1st generation holders. As I went looking for higher graded coins I took my old 1st generation coins with me to compare any new possible upgrades with my existing 1st generation holdered coins. I have to say that there was no comparison. Today's standards are much more liberal. Here are a couple of examples of old standards vs. new standards in grading. Both of these coins were originally submitted by me to PCGS and were in 1st generation holders. After shopping for upgrades and thinking that my 1st generation holdered coins were much better than any new holdered coins I decided to crack a few out and resubmit them to PCGS for grading.

1799 Draped Bust Dollar 7x6 Obverse Stars 1st Generation Holder PCGS XF-45 Regraded by New Standards PCGS AU-55
Certificate # 08017546 Certificate # 02444519

1795 Flowing Hair Dollar 1st Generation Holder PCGS VF-30 Regraded by New Standards PCGS XF-40
Certificate # 02444518

So far, every one of my 1st generation holdered coins that has been cracked out and resubmitted has come back graded higher. These were all coins that I originally purchased raw and submitted to PCGS in their infancy. There is quite a difference in price between these old grades and new grades. IMHO today's standards are more liberal and lack the consistency of grading in the past. I would like to hear comments from members who were collecting back when PCGS started. Do you feel that PCGS is too tough on grading today?

DRG

The key fact here is that YOU had these coins graded and have held onto them all this time. I may be wrong but if you thought they were overgraded initially, you may well have sold them and bought new raw coins. Since you probably felt they were worth more than they would sell for in their current holders, you held onto them and finally cracked them out for resubmission. Would you have done that if you thought they were overgraded? Most people would not!

That is why your experience can not be translated to all 1st generation PCGS slabs. In fact I would say just the opposite. If you are looking at a coin that has been bought and sold several times still in it’s old slab, then it is probably overgraded. The coins like yours that were ever owned by experienced dealers were cracked out long ago.

What I believe you are seeing is the “Peter Principal” applied to coins. For those of you that do not know this old rule, it basically states that in business an employee will rise to the level of incompetence. That is to say, if you are good at a job, you get promoted. If you are good at the next job, you get promoted again. However, when you get promoted into a job that you do not do well……You are left there!!

Isn’t that exactly what we are seeing with these coins? If you had sold these coins after you had them graded they would have been cracked out long ago and resubmitted. If and when they ended up in holders that no one believed they could be cracked out of to be graded higher….They would stay in that holder.

I am not really commenting on whether or not PCGS has tightened their grading standards (although I do not really believe that they have).

What I actually believe is that PCGS does the best they can and the market does the rest. It may take many years for a given coin to end up in the “right” holder, but in the mean time it is up to us to “buy the coin not the plastic”.

RegistryCoin

<< <i>What I believe you are seeing is the “Peter Principal” applied to coins >>


DRG. I am so glad that we, as a group of collectors, are starting to clearly see this concept!
I firmly believe that it is an extremely accurate application of this principal.

Bear

DRG, you have given us a first class definition

of the phenomina of grading and human nature.

Fairlaneman

Just to check out what is going on at PCGS I sent as 10 coin submission in 2 days ago. Like you my grading standard has not changed. I have 2 coins in the submission that I think might body bag. The grade or no grade could be interesting.

Ken

fcloud

Ken, Now you did it. You alerted them to the coins, now they may BB everything you sent!

morgannut2

Grade inflation has occured for earler 19th Century coins over a period of years. Yes it probably went too far. BUT, the recent irrational crackdown on grades is impacting the newer more common issues much more. Suddenly new-made modern proofs in 67 Cameo look much nicer, than last years 68 deep cameos right next to them. Or, in popularlar series like Lincolns, for all practical purposes, there are no new mint marked 20's-30's high-end coins but tons of quality submissions; or in Morgans you can take deep mirror prooflike coins out of old PCGS holders and get back just prooflikes with a few "questionable toning" thrown in for fun. IMO you shouldn't be changing grading standards every year when the standards only became clear in 1986, or much later, when the newer coins were minted. BTW-do you really think standards were remotely clear in the 1960's-1970's between dealers and collectors????

Steve

<< <i>Or, in popularlar series like Lincolns, for all practical purposes, there are no new mint marked 20's-30's high-end coins but tons of quality submissions; >>



Morgannut2,
How can you say that there are tons of quality submissions of 20's and 30's mint marked Lincoln cents? Don't you think that after 20 years of grading these coins that almost all the quality coins would have already been submitted and graded?

Or maybe it's just the crackout game where certain people keep resubmitting to attempt to hit the jackpot. If standards were looser before and tighter now, why in the world would someone keep playing the game? I know. It's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY! Too bad about the coin. Steve

coinkat

Interesting comments and the bottom line is that grading has a subjective component that will not change

morgannut2

Steve- A really major concern I have is I just don't like the rules changing arbitrarily. It's that simple. For Morgans I have hundreds raw that have never been graded (many from the early 60's) and question why someone has to buy an inferior PCGS graded coin just to rank higher or join in the Registry. As Q.D. Bowers has pointed out, it's known that as low as 5% of the 1880-5 CC Morgans released by GSA have been graded (see Morgan Dollars, Bowers, 2004). As for Lincolns I have but one mint marked in MS67-- and that's for only my birthday mint set--I was refering to the survey results of Stewart Blay who I believe stated he buys around 1/2 his coins raw.

I believe it's true that anyone with top Lincolns should hold their coins and should do well-- a good number of large sophisicated promoters/dealers are moving into Lincolns and out of silver coins based on recent auctions.

Bear

Personnally, I find Morgan Dollars today

being graded more liberally then the early years.

Todays 65 and 66 grades would have graded two point lower

back then. Same for the DMPL, the overall marks allowed today

would have graded at least one point lower in the past. I am glad

to note that the reflectivity for PCGS DC is back up to 8inches or more

from the previous 6 inches.

Bear

"Stewart buys half his coins raw"?

Does he wear clothes when he buys the

other half?