I like the idea of the gennie holders,

stinkinlincoln

But why does PCGS not put a net grade on the label?

It just seems like it wouldnt take anymore time, or barely anymore effort than they are already putting into it. Wouldnt a net grade be just smarter?

anablep

A written explanation why the coin is in a genuine holder rather than numeric code would be more useful IMHO.

dizzyfoxx

<< <i>A written explanation why the coin is in a genuine holder rather than numeric code would be more useful IMHO. >>

stinkinlincoln

I fully agree with you guys there. But, when selling the coin, or buying, the label net grade might be better than that, at least it seems like it would be. I do think for the money we are putting into this plastic, we should be getting the reasons why the slabbed as gennie in the first place.

pheh

Because it would deflate the value of their non-genuine line. By simply calling the coin 'Genuine' and giving a numerical code of the problem they run far less risk of the PCGS name being associated to 'problem coins'. Both ANACS and NGC suffer from this. Conversely DGS seems to be building a business off of it.

notwilight

Are there generally accepted standards for net grading or does everyone do it the way they feel like?

ambro51

How about linking the Cert number to a link on the PCGS site where you watch a video and see and hear the grader who just looked over the coin give a clear concise fifteen second opinion on the coin, grade, defects, his thoughts on the coin.

wouldnt you just love that???????? Lets have them do it for every coin, hahaha

BillJones

<< <i>Are there generally accepted standards for net grading or does everyone do it the way they feel like? >>



There is no generally accepted standard for net grading because each problem is often unique in one way or another. But the most widely accepted approach is down grade the coin by one grade level if the problem is just severe enough to prevent the coin from making the sharpness grade. Therefore a coin with EF sharpness but a moderate rim bump or scratch that would keep it from getting into a graded slab could be called “EF sharpness, moderate scratch at …, net grade VF.

If a coin is badly corroded or has bigger issue because of an injury, it be dropped two grading levels. The trouble is there no set hard and fast rule for what is “bad” and what is “really bad.”

Here’s an example for you. What if a large cent has EF sharpness and light brown surfaces, BUT it’s got a huge dig on the right field? The coin in question was 1798 Sheldon NC-1 that cropped up on a Boston bid wall in 1990. The next better piece in the condition census is a VG-10. What was this piece graded. It’s listed as the finest known and the net grade assigned was VF-20.

notwilight

<< <i>

<< <i>Are there generally accepted standards for net grading or does everyone do it the way they feel like? >>



There is no generally accepted standard for net grading because each problem is often unique in one way or another. But the most widely accepted approach is down grade the coin by one grade level if the problem is just severe enough to prevent the coin from making the sharpness grade. Therefore a coin with EF sharpness but a moderate rim bump or scratch that would keep it from getting into a graded slab could be called “EF sharpness, moderate scratch at …, net grade VF.

If a coin is badly corroded or has bigger issue because of an injury, it be dropped two grading levels. The trouble is there no set hard and fast rule for what is “bad” and what is “really bad.”

Here’s an example for you. What if a large cent has EF sharpness and light brown surfaces, BUT it’s got a huge dig on the right field? The coin in question was 1798 Sheldon NC-1 that cropped up on a Boston bid wall in 1990. The next better piece in the condition census is a VG-10. What was this piece graded. It’s listed as the finest known and the net grade assigned was VF-20. >>



Bill,
Good summary. Any organization who net grades should define their standards just as you have here, and maybe in more detail if they are going to make a business of it and offer a grade guarantee. The problem is, no matter how much detail you go into, there will always be coins crop up that aren't clearly address. Perhaps it should be simple: one grade downgrade for simple problems, 2 for significant problems, and 3 for yccch. --Jerry

Bcsican

Yes , Yes, Yes, a better idea to do this....makes perfect sense...

TomB

Net grading of problem coins is a more slippery slope than straight grading of problem-free coins.

PerryHall

<< <i>But why does PCGS not put a net grade on the label?

It just seems like it wouldnt take anymore time, or barely anymore effort than they are already putting into it. Wouldnt a net grade be just smarter? >>



Heck......I'd be happy if they would just state what the problem is on the label.

PerryHall

<< <i>Because it would deflate the value of their non-genuine line. >>



They now slab non-genuine coins? When did they start doing this?

BECOKA

I like it just the way it is especially if that genuine holder is in my collection. I don't need constant reminders of the issues, many times the coins look great and anything on the label is just a distraction.

golfer72

Why cant they just grade the coin and put say EF-45 cleaned or AU-50 questionable color? Same for MS grades. Damage to the coin ie scratches rim bumps are accounted for in the MS-60 grade if severe enough. I think the whole Genuine concept is BS.

Dropdaflag

ANACS tried the net grade thing and abandoned it. Too many people think of defects in different ways. A scratch may be fine to you at -1 grade level, but its a -4 grade level to others. A details grade would help distinguish between the different states of "Genuine" coins. Especially in online auctions with poor pictures.

PerryHall

<< <i>Why cant they just grade the coin and put say EF-45 cleaned or AU-50 questionable color? Same for MS grades. Damage to the coin ie scratches rim bumps are accounted for in the MS-60 grade if severe enough. I think the whole Genuine concept is BS. >>



Their dealer customers don't want the problem spelled out on the label because it makes it too difficult to sell a problem coin to a new collector at problem free coin prices.