the "inconsistancy"/standard of pcgs ngc and cac grading...
joebb21
Posts: 4,732 ✭✭✭✭✭
This topic comes after reading a similar post
so we are told, a coin goes to pcgs or ngc and has 1 person look at it and assign a grade. then the coin goes to the next grader and he assigns a grade. lastly-it goes to a third grader to give the final grade.
maybe the most popular grade is chosen (probably) but I must ask... if at either grading company, 2 people say a morgan is a 64 and the third says it's a 65- would it not make sense that something is wrong with that companies "standard"?? (or grading policy-whichever...point is everyone in that company SHOULD be grading 100% the SAME ALL THE TIME!!!)
regardless of what their standard is, all the graders should all be giving the same grade ALL the time. that would be called the company "STANDARD"!!!
... but I continue... how can a company grade a coin one time it is sent in a 64, then when resubmitted grade it a 63 or 65???
if the company "standards" state its a 64- then its a 64!!! eye appeal is a wonderful thing to have, and Im all for it, but it should not play in to grading.
give it the grade it deserves and let CAC (sorry- just wanted to throw them in) decide (since we cant) what has nice eye appeal or solid for the grade.
(ive also seen MANY ups and downs in the AU-MS62 range...company rules should always stay the same. if au58 then au58 always and forever (at that place)..
I like what cac supposedly does. If its solid for the grade, they give it a "green booger". if its really nice and might get an upgrade (in THEIR "standards") they give it an old dried out "gold booger". (in honest truth and sadly though, Ive read stories here where members have submitted say a bulk of 75 and got around 40 "boogers" and then they would resubmit the 35 not "boogerd" and get at least a couple more "boogers", so even cac isnt perfect...
would love to hear what you think...
so we are told, a coin goes to pcgs or ngc and has 1 person look at it and assign a grade. then the coin goes to the next grader and he assigns a grade. lastly-it goes to a third grader to give the final grade.
maybe the most popular grade is chosen (probably) but I must ask... if at either grading company, 2 people say a morgan is a 64 and the third says it's a 65- would it not make sense that something is wrong with that companies "standard"?? (or grading policy-whichever...point is everyone in that company SHOULD be grading 100% the SAME ALL THE TIME!!!)
regardless of what their standard is, all the graders should all be giving the same grade ALL the time. that would be called the company "STANDARD"!!!
... but I continue... how can a company grade a coin one time it is sent in a 64, then when resubmitted grade it a 63 or 65???
if the company "standards" state its a 64- then its a 64!!! eye appeal is a wonderful thing to have, and Im all for it, but it should not play in to grading.
give it the grade it deserves and let CAC (sorry- just wanted to throw them in) decide (since we cant) what has nice eye appeal or solid for the grade.
(ive also seen MANY ups and downs in the AU-MS62 range...company rules should always stay the same. if au58 then au58 always and forever (at that place)..
I like what cac supposedly does. If its solid for the grade, they give it a "green booger". if its really nice and might get an upgrade (in THEIR "standards") they give it an old dried out "gold booger". (in honest truth and sadly though, Ive read stories here where members have submitted say a bulk of 75 and got around 40 "boogers" and then they would resubmit the 35 not "boogerd" and get at least a couple more "boogers", so even cac isnt perfect...
would love to hear what you think...
may the fonz be with you...always...
0
Comments
Grading is an art and not a science and as such what you are asking for is impossible.
Ive read stories here where members have submitted say a bulk of 75 and got around 40 "boogers" and then they would resubmit the 35 not "boogerd" and get at least a couple more "boogers"
Really? I must have missed that 'story'. I did read the story where CAC won't allow such a thing because they track the cert numbers, tho. Perhaps Don Willis was right when he said we just shouldn't believe the stories we read on the internet.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>would love to hear what you think... >>
I think you have unrealistic expectations.
I think you want to apply a scientific standard to something that is much more of an art.
I think you are disregarding the human factor that is involved.
I think you should buy a coin you are happy with and try not to concern yourself so much with the grade.
"Because I can"
myurl The Franklin All Old Green Holder Set
<< <i>
<< <i>would love to hear what you think... >>
I think you have unrealistic expectations.
I think you want to apply a scientific standard to something that is much more of an art.
I think you are disregarding the human factor that is involved.
I think you should buy a coin you are happy with and try not to concern yourself so much with the grade. >>
Basically true assuming we give each of the 3 graders an average of 5 to 15 seconds to grade a coin. But give me 3 other professional dealers who can spend 30-60 seconds grading that coin and I think the accuracy and repeatability would improve. Profitablity and viability of the business model dictates that 30-60 seconds can't be allowed with the current fee structure. The quantity of high grade moderns seen today is huge compared to what the TPG's were seeing intially in the 1986-1990 era. This has changed the dynamics significantly. Those graders of yesteryear needed to be top notch on pre-1930 coinage because that's pretty much all they saw. I'd be the first to wager that their accuracy on post 1940/1950 cionage wasn't so good. But the situation is flipped around today with the bulk of all submissions being post 1930 coinage.
There are ways to get the 95% accuracy you seek, but you wouldn't want to pay the freight to get it.
roadrunner
Grading is simply a "consensus" opinion. How the TPGs determine a consensus is totally up to them. It could 2, 3 or 4 graders plus a finalizer.
Having said that, I sometimes wonder how some of the goofy stuff ever gets by the finalizer.
As for CAC, CAC will suffer from the same pitfalls that the top TPG's have tripped over in that, since grading IS an opinion, not everybody will agree with CAC's decision to sticker or not sticker a particular coin. Thats just the way it is and if anybody decides to play the slab game, they simply need to understand that.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Your definition of a working standard excludes nearly anything that deals with human observation. Additionally, it is my understanding that CAC records the cert numbers of those coins that fail to gain a CAC sticker, which would mean that the folks writing the "story" would have to crack out all of their coins and have them regraded simply in the chase for the sticker. I doubt that has happened much. >>
Can anyone verify that CAC records the PCGS/NGC certification numbers of all submitted coins that do NOT receive the CAC sticker? I sure would hesitate to submit a coin to CAC, if I had any thought that the coin might not get a sticker. Seems like anyone could refer to the CAC failure records and determine my coin flunked with CAC.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>TDN, who is part owner and financial backer of CAC, has written directly or indirectly that CAC records the cert numbers of those coins that do not obtain a CAC sticker. However, there is no database available to the public, to the best of my knowledge, where one can find that information about a particular coin. In my opinion, such a database open to public access would be an invitation for a lawsuit. >>
Ah yes, but such a database would also provide information to potential submitters thereby avoiding unnecessary postage and submittal fees.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>TDN, who is part owner and financial backer of CAC, has written directly or indirectly that CAC records the cert numbers of those coins that do not obtain a CAC sticker. However, there is no database available to the public, to the best of my knowledge, where one can find that information about a particular coin. In my opinion, such a database open to public access would be an invitation for a lawsuit. >>
Ah yes, but such a database would also provide information to potential submitters thereby avoiding unnecessary postage and submittal fees. >>
I hear you and this is analogous to PCGS and NGC putting up a public, online database for certified coins that they have rejected for crossover or that they have already graded more than one time in an attempt for an upgrade.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>point is everyone in that company SHOULD be grading 100% the SAME ALL THE TIME!!
Grading is an art and not a science and as such what you are asking for is impossible.
Ive read stories here where members have submitted say a bulk of 75 and got around 40 "boogers" and then they would resubmit the 35 not "boogerd" and get at least a couple more "boogers"
Really? I must have missed that 'story'. I did read the story where CAC won't allow such a thing because they track the cert numbers, tho. Perhaps Don Willis was right when he said we just shouldn't believe the stories we read on the internet. >>
And herein lies the problem with CAC, IMHO. The original poster expects graders to be completely consistent, and the responses all recognize that it is "impossible" for humans to be 100% consistent in something that is "an art and not a science." I would assume that the graders at CAC also qualify as human, so one would expect them to have some occassional inconsistencies as well. CAC even subtly admits to this, in that they claim to stand behind their product if a stickered coin turns out to be bad (that is, in a case where a coin that should NOT have received a sticker, actually DID get a sticker). What about the human inconsistency of CAC failing to award a sticker to a coin that actually does deserve it? Stickers are supposed to be for coins "solid for the grade" or better, so "liner" coins could possibly go either way, depending on the day. Certainly that would be the case at PCGS or NGC, and you would think that should be the case at CAC. But NO, CAC records the cert numbers of the coins that fail, so that they can be blackballed henceforth and never stickered. That way, CAC is protected from ever facing a situation where they sticker a coin they had previously rejected and have to admit they were wrong.
as well as competitive reasons could cause slight variations
in the tightness of the grading standards. With the assurances
of the top graders to stand behind the coin in their holders, the
cost of buybacks would tend to make anyone more cautious in
grading those coins most sensitive to changes in a holder, as well
as the extraordinary expensive grades and series.
Camelot
to think for themselves. Others do not have the
skills to grade for themselves and do not desire
to spend the time and effort to gain that skill.
Perhaps only 15% of collectors have a reasonable
ability to tell quality and grade of coins they collect.
Camelot
<< <i>I believe that PCGS has more than just three graders and I also believe it is totally possible that a coin could be submitted 2, 3, or even 4 times without ever being seen by the same folks twice.
Grading is simply a "consensus" opinion. How the TPGs determine a consensus is totally up to them. It could 2, 3 or 4 graders plus a finalizer.
Having said that, I sometimes wonder how some of the goofy stuff ever gets by the finalizer.
>>
Maybe its not even seen by a finalizer. If you send in 5 rolls of average unc [say 62-64] 1884-O Morgans I'd bet they are only seen by one grader and no finalizer.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>
<< <i>Your definition of a working standard excludes nearly anything that deals with human observation. Additionally, it is my understanding that CAC records the cert numbers of those coins that fail to gain a CAC sticker, which would mean that the folks writing the "story" would have to crack out all of their coins and have them regraded simply in the chase for the sticker. I doubt that has happened much. >>
Can anyone verify that CAC records the PCGS/NGC certification numbers of all submitted coins that do NOT receive the CAC sticker? I sure would hesitate to submit a coin to CAC, if I had any thought that the coin might not get a sticker. Seems like anyone could refer to the CAC failure records and determine my coin flunked with CAC. >>
Yes JA said himself that coins submitted a second time are given a second look, but I do not know if they are compared against the database before or after they are looked at. My guess would be before.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
I don't think that PCGS was created with hobbyists in mind. It doesn't make sense to me when coins worth only a few hundred dollars are slabbed.
<< <i>The problem is that many people do not wish
to think for themselves. Others do not have the
skills to grade for themselves and do not desire
to spend the time and effort to gain that skill.
Perhaps only 15% of collectors have a reasonable
ability to tell quality and grade of coins they collect. >>
I pity the other 85%. IMO, anyone investing funds in something they do not understand will
almost always lose. Unfortunately, CAC is not set up to really protect those people. It could
be, but it wouldn't be as profitable. Capitalism ueber alles!
<< <i>Unfortunately, CAC is not set up to really protect those people. It could
be, but it wouldn't be as profitable. Capitalism ueber alles! >>
It's easy to criticize other people for not running their businesses so that they benefit the people you want them to, isn't it?
<< <i>
<< <i>Unfortunately, CAC is not set up to really protect those people. It could
be, but it wouldn't be as profitable. Capitalism ueber alles! >>
It's easy to criticize other people for not running their businesses so that they benefit the people you want them to, isn't it? >>
Hey, did I EVER start a thread criticizing CAC? Hint: NO.
I like to play Devil's Advocate since CAC gets a lot of free marketing on this board. And much of
what gets written is about how CAC is out to improve the hobby and protect collectors. If you
believe that's the main reason it was founded, then you are pretty naive, Dude.
<< <i>Hey, did I EVER start a thread criticizing CAC? Hint: NO. >>
Hey, did I EVER say you started a thread criticizing CAC? Hint: NO.
<< <i>If you believe that's the main reason it was founded, then you are pretty naive, Dude. >>
Hey, did I EVER say that the main reason CAC was founded was to improve the hobby and protect collectors? Hint: NO.
edited to add...
<< <i>And much of what gets written is about how CAC is out to improve the hobby and protect collectors. If you believe that's the main reason it was founded, then you are pretty naive, Dude. >>
As far as why CAC was actually founded, I sure couldn't say. One thing I can say though- there's no logical inconsistency at all with the idea that CAC was founded to improve the hobby and protect collectors without that being the main reason. Or maybe it really is- who knows? Do you?
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he,
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
MORAL.
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
And also for the record, the discussions regarding the formation of CAC that I was privy to did indeed center around what was best for the hobby in regards to halting grade inflation and coin doctors.
<< <i>
<< <i>Hey, did I EVER start a thread criticizing CAC? Hint: NO. >>
Hey, did I EVER say you started a thread criticizing CAC? Hint: NO.
<< <i>If you believe that's the main reason it was founded, then you are pretty naive, Dude. >>
Hey, did I EVER say that the main reason CAC was founded was to improve the hobby and protect collectors? Hint: NO.
edited to add...
<< <i>And much of what gets written is about how CAC is out to improve the hobby and protect collectors. If you believe that's the main reason it was founded, then you are pretty naive, Dude. >>
As far as why CAC was actually founded, I sure couldn't say. One thing I can say though- there's no logical inconsistency at all with the idea that CAC was founded to improve the hobby and protect collectors without that being the main reason. Or maybe it really is- who knows? Do you? >>
Well, if you follow the logic, you actually DID say that. I said CAC was not set up primarily to protect
[the average non-expert collector]. I further stated that many people have either posted or
implied that that indeed was CAC's mission. They were originally called COLLECTOR'S Acceptance
Corp. At some point and with zero fanfare, they became CERTIFIED Acceptance Corp. So, yes, when
you imply that I have no actual basis for my statements, that is tantamount to asserting that they
were in fact set up for that purpose. I wasn't making a value judgment (as you implied); they have
positioned themselves as a consumer advocate, and I have the right to question that.
to protect themselves.
Reliable dealers
Top tier TPGs
CAC
Information Forums like this one
Standard Coin Reference Books
Camelot
<< <i>Collectors use what is available to help them
to protect themselves.
Reliable dealers
Top tier TPGs
CAC
Information Forums like this one
Standard Coin Reference Books >>
True, but how do collectors know that any of the above are not in fact taking advantage of them unless they actually
synthesize knowledge from their own experiences? CAC tried to motivate its foundation by saying that the top tier
TPGs had become unreliable. Top tier TPGs justified their existence by claiming that "reliable dealer" was an anomaly.
Etc.
<< <i>
<< <i>Collectors use what is available to help them
to protect themselves.
Reliable dealers
Top tier TPGs
CAC
Information Forums like this one
Standard Coin Reference Books >>
True, but how do collectors know that any of the above are not in fact taking advantage of them unless they actually
synthesize knowledge from their own experiences? CAC tried to motivate its foundation by saying that the top tier
TPGs had become unreliable. Top tier TPGs justified their existence by claiming that "reliable dealer" was an anomaly.
Etc. >>
Synthesize knowledge yourself but there's nothing wrong with getting a second, or third, hand expert opinion
<< <i>Synthesize knowledge yourself but there's nothing wrong with getting a second, or third, hand expert opinion >>
Unless you know WHY CAC approved or disapproved of your coin, do you really learn all that much?
Most of what has been posted lately has been about increasing resale value.
<< <i>
<< <i>Synthesize knowledge yourself but there's nothing wrong with getting a second, or third, hand expert opinion >>
Unless you know WHY CAC approved or disapproved of your coin, do you really learn all that much? >>
Over time, hopefully you would start to figure out how CAC, and the TPGs, grade, accepting that there will be fluctuations.
<< <i>Most of what has been posted lately has been about increasing resale value. >>
There's nothing wrong with legitimately attempting to increase resale value is there?
<< <i>Bear is dead on correct.
I don't think that PCGS was created with hobbyists in mind. It doesn't make sense to me when coins worth only a few hundred dollars are slabbed. >>
Correct.......... kinda.......... in that PCGS was created for Dealers and not collectors. Collectors were added only within the past 9 years or so. Maybe a little longer.
As for slabbing a coin only worth a "few hundred" dollars, I would in a heartbeat. Its those coins that are only worth $10 that I have an issue with. Of course, when I submitted them, they were supposedly worth a hundred or more in my mind but thats just the way it goes...............Sometimes you win and sometimes you just burn your money up!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Synthesize knowledge yourself but there's nothing wrong with getting a second, or third, hand expert opinion >>
Unless you know WHY CAC approved or disapproved of your coin, do you really learn all that much? >>
Over time, hopefully you would start to figure out how CAC, and the TPGs, grade, accepting that there will be fluctuations.
<< <i>Most of what has been posted lately has been about increasing resale value. >>
There's nothing wrong with legitimately attempting to increase resale value is there? >>
Fluctuations in the CAC????????? Say it ain't so!!!!!!!
No, there's nothing wrong with trying to increase resale value. That was one of the benefits of TPG certification.......
until gradeflation took hold. When half the Morgan dollars eventually have CAC stickers, do you think that's really
going to be a big selling point? Use your heads, people!!!!!!
<< <i>Fluctuations in the CAC????????? Say it ain't so!!!!!!! >>
It's bound to happen, but perhaps at a much lower frequency.
<< <i>No, there's nothing wrong with trying to increase resale value. That was one of the benefits of TPG certification.......
until gradeflation took hold. When half the Morgan dollars eventually have CAC stickers, do you think that's really
going to be a big selling point? Use your heads, people!!!!!! >>
Hopefully, you'll have made lots of money by then
<< <i>Hopefully, you'll have made lots of money by then >>
The one thing we can be sure of is that CAC will have made lots of money by then...
(none of it mine, by the way)
Wow, I'm suprised that any reasonably experienced collector could legitimately advance this suggestion/argument. It's quite naive IMO. 'Grading' is subjective. 'Grading' is an art. Just because you can put subjective standards on paper doesn't mean each individual is going to apply those standards the same way. TPG is a form of consensus grading and for the most part they do a pretty decent job. I'm hardly shocked or offended that there could be differences of opinion along the way.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
Another thought, at what point do they decide whether to market grade a coin or give it a technical grade?
Good luck with that one!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>
<< <i>Hopefully, you'll have made lots of money by then >>
The one thing we can be sure of is that CAC will have made lots of money by then...
(none of it mine, by the way) >>
JA said that CAC actually loses money by grading at $10 per coin.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>
<< <i>Synthesize knowledge yourself but there's nothing wrong with getting a second, or third, hand expert opinion >>
Unless you know WHY CAC approved or disapproved of your coin, do you really learn all that much?
Most of what has been posted lately has been about increasing resale value. >>
JA will be happy to discuss the coin with you if you call him.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
The standard is not "on paper". Instead, there's a grading set that includes coins that are deemed to be representative of the grade, as well as others deemed to be the best and worst possible examples of the grade. Then, it's up to the grader to come up with a subjective opinion as to where the coin being graded fits into the continuum of the grading set. And since every coin is unique, comparisons are difficult, and there is often no obvious "best grade".
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>JA said that CAC actually loses money by grading at $10 per coin. >>
Of course they do.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Of course they do.
Not that it really matters but it's probably true. Remember, CAC's primary purpose is to buy and sell the coins it stickers. So losing a bit on the grading side is almost meaningless to them. Just a cost of doing business.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Total coins seen: 144,000
Total greenies awarded: 68,000
Total goldies: 296
I wish we could see a breakdown by TPG. As in "What percentage of NGC coins stickered vs. PCGS?"
That would be of great interest to nearly everyone, I would guess.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
you're kidding, right?? i accept that given enough oppurtunities even the best at grading coins among us would eventually not agree with themselves.