Home U.S. Coin Forum

PCGS Grading Standards - Today vs Long Ago.....

drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
Does anyone feel that since PCGS is grading SOOOO TIGHT these days that the coins being graded now in the newest inserts (the ones without the series # or Coin # on the insert) are somewhat equivalent to the grading standards of the old rattler holders?

Just curious what people's opinions are.

Comments

  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone?
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,427 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Sorry, since I don't "make" coins at PCGS any more, I can't really comment on your question.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    What do you mean by "make"?
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    I'll comment. Yes, I do feel like the grading is tight, and feel like it should be. I think tightening the screws just might keep collectors in the game. I'd much rather buy a true gem for today's 65 money. JMO
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • 500Bay500Bay Posts: 1,106 ✭✭✭
    Tight or loose - not important.

    CONSISTANT is what is important.

    Finem Respice
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    500Ebay.....I agree with your answer to a question the poster didn't ask. You're not in politics are you? image
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I agree, CONSISTENT is what's important, but I asked the original question becaue I have a few coins that crossed over from NGC slabs (at the same grade) and was wondering if these coins are considered PQ for the grade since PCGS is SOOO TIGHT lately.

  • ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,759 ✭✭✭✭

    Let's just say not all of us believe PCGS is "tighter than ever".

    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why do you say that Shamika?
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I've read some post not long ago that PCGS crosses coins (at the same grade) if they are in the top 10-15% for grade.

    Any truth to this or opinions?


  • << <i>I've read some post not long ago that PCGS crosses coins (at the same grade) if they are in the top 10-15% for grade. >>



    IMO no that statement is not true!
    steve

    myCCset
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 23,891 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think tightening the screws just might keep collectors in the game.

    Care to explain that one?
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would think collectors may "leave" the game if PCGS tightems up too much.

    Anyone else agree?
  • pcgs is more inconsistent than ever. It seems 1 out of 3 submissions just gets completely undergraded. Here's my most recent experience again...

    20 1981 Lincolns that were returned from a bulk order as being ms65 or lower. Resubmitted all 20 and got 16 ms66's and 4 ms67's. 100% changed grade, at least 20% by at least 2 grades.
  • dunerlawdunerlaw Posts: 387 ✭✭
    I believe pcgs is slightly more tight in at,qt,cleaning BB issues than in the last couple of years.
    I had about 100 coins graded in the last 6 months.
    Got some 67 mercs, but also got some "cleaning" BB on a previous ms63 and au58 pcgs holdered mercs.
    I believe they certainly had tighter standards 10-20 years ago.
    But also most of the older holdered (rattlers and OGH) coins left from that era are the "dogs of yesteryear".
    Most of the premium coins have already been cracked out.
    But finding a collection put together a few years back and .....image
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    Andy,

    Most collectors are buyers, and only occasionally sellers. As buyers, they win short-term when they buy undergrades from those who have to sell (many submitters/dealers). When the liners don't get the benefit of the doubt, the buyer just might.
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭
    There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that PCGS is currently grading tighter for 1950 through 1970 era coinage then they were a couple of years ago.

    Russ, NCNE
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    What about pre-1950 coinage?
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭


    << <i>What about pre-1950 coinage? >>



    Don't know. I submit very few minted before 1950.

    Russ, NCNE
  • capecape Posts: 1,621
    personally i think they are tight but have loosened up a bit since this years fun show.
    ed rodrigues
  • capecape Posts: 1,621
    ill add that i think the way they are grading today is consistent with the way they graded in late 80s and early 90s.
    ed rodrigues
  • drddmdrddm Posts: 5,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    <<i think the way they are grading today is consistent with the way they graded in late 80s and early 90s. >>

    Text

    I guess that means they are pretty conservative now, huh?
  • mozinmozin Posts: 8,755 ✭✭✭


    << <i>What about pre-1950 coinage? >>

    From what I see recently, I do not believe PCGS is currently as tight on Bust series as they were quite awhile ago. I think the standards were tighter up through PCGS holder style 4, and somewhat into the PCGS holder style 5 years, about ten years ago.

    About that time, NGC standards were already so low that PCGS might have decided to ease up on their standards also. NGC holder style 6 started around 1997. It was no longer the "fat" holder. I think NGC standards from the holder style 6 on to date have been very loose, and very inconsistent for the Bust series. JMHO
    I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
  • NicNic Posts: 3,340 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Always remember ... any older holder/grade can be put in a new holder for a couple of bucks. The newest or newer period holders will not bring a premium in and of themselves. I am one who loves old holders image . K
  • FatManFatMan Posts: 8,977


    << <i>Always remember ... any older holder/grade can be put in a new holder for a couple of bucks. The newest or newer period holders will not bring a premium in and of themselves. I am one who loves old holders image . K >>

    Good point. If these new slabs begin to sell for a premium you can expect a flood of reholders. For five bucks you have your loosely graded PCGS coin in the new tightly graded holder.
  • ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,759 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>20 1981 Lincolns that were returned from a bulk order as being ms65 or lower. Resubmitted all 20 and got 16 ms66's and 4 ms67's. 100% changed grade, at least 20% by at least 2 grades. >>



    Does this prove PCGS is undergrading coins or overgrading coins? Either way, sure looks sloppy to me. image



    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!
  • ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,759 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Any truth to the saying that PCGS crosses over (into same grade) only coins from other TPG's that are in the top 10-15% for the grade? >>


    This purely depends on which TPG you are referring to. NGC has a much better record than most any other TPG. Some TPG's probably couldn't get 1 in 1,000 to cross.
    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!
  • capecape Posts: 1,621
    i just had a 55 double die 1 cent in a ngc 62 brown and a 21s buffalo in a ngc 64 both cross at the same grade yesterday. 2 for 2.
    ed rodrigues
  • ColonialCoinUnionColonialCoinUnion Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭
    Colonials are tighter now than they were 5 years ago, but thats a good thing IMO.
  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,470 ✭✭✭✭
    Well, I think they are tight.

    Case in point:

    imageimageimage
    Older holder on the 65 and just this past month on the other two.
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • ...........alrighty then - we all agree- as usual in these kind of threads :

    they are looser as well as tighter
  • MyqqyMyqqy Posts: 9,777
    they are looser as well as tighter

    Looser on some, tighter on others, inconsistent on just about everything..... image
    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable !
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 43,794 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It isn't about tight or loose.... It's about WRONG and RIGHT.
    Lately they are wrong, therefore.... We are right !


    edit to add:

    Happy Easter everyone image
  • BigAlBigAl Posts: 1,134 ✭✭✭
    lose women....tight tails image
  • pragmaticgoatpragmaticgoat Posts: 827 ✭✭✭
    Just received grades on five $20 liberties, four out of five were downgraded from their previous pcgs grades. The coins were sent in raw this month.
    BST references:
    jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack;
    jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
  • DoogyDoogy Posts: 4,508
    In the newest Coinage or Coin world magazine (i forget which, i don't have it in front of me right now), they have an article on the AGE bullion coins. It shows the number of coins that have been slabbed by PCGS and NGC. It appears that PCGS was only grading something like 2% of these coins as PF70, while NGC was doing something like 20% or so. I think the latter is more realistic, as these are supposed to be as perfect as possible, as they are fresh coins sealed in capsules when they leave the mint. I would imagine at least 1 in 5 would be "perfect" and deserve the 70 rating. In this regard, I would say PCGS is being too conservative.


    Doug


  • << <i>lose women....tight tails image >>



    so why did you even bother to resubmit them and raw?
  • zennyzenny Posts: 1,549
    They are definitely grading trimes much looser right now.........





    just ask Coinguy1
  • ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,759 ✭✭✭✭

    image I don't think it's tight at all!

    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!
  • ziggy29ziggy29 Posts: 18,668 ✭✭✭
    The whole problem is that they seem to respond to "market forces" rather than keeping grades static. For a while they decide to tighten up, thinking that would put more "value" in the TPG's holder at any given grade and thus stimulate submissions and revenue.

    The problem is people got sick of the ridiculously tight grading in some areas and stopped submitting. So then they loosen again in order to get the submissions back.

    Rinse, lather, repeat.

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,470 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Well, I think they are tight.

    Case in point:

    imageimageimage
    Older holder on the 65 and just this past month on the other two. >>



    This is a very good example as to how grading of moderns has tightened.

    If I were buying moderns, I would avoid the blue tag holders with the coin and series numbers on them -- unless I could get them at a discount, and the coin truly "made the grade" (i.e. would holder at the same grade if re-submitted).


  • << <i>There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that PCGS is currently grading tighter for 1950 through 1970 era coinage then they were a couple of years ago.

    Russ, NCNE >>



    .........SO IT IS WRITTEN

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file