That's IT!! for crossing ICCS coins with PCGS....

canadacolornut

Let's hear no more about how tight ICCS grading standards are. Granted they were at one time,
but the evidence is compelling and this is my 3rd go 'round with miserable results.

I sent in 6 ICCS MS and PL coins to PCGS to cross for PCGS holders.

5 out of 6 DIDN'T make it and I'm through trying.

If anybody has had better results I'd like to hear about it. But in the absence of some pretty
compelling evidence, from now on I cut them out of the ICCS holder, which seems to be
tantamount to waving a red flag in front of the PCGS bull and sending them for a raw
grade where I've had much better results. Not glorious results, but about 50/50-
which beats the kind of cost and waste of time I just experienced.

Anybody want to buy some super ICCS coins, in original holder, that are at least one point
lower on the PCGS grading scale?

Pleeease.......??

lordmarcovan

Sorry to hear of your woes.

Got any dated 1901?

coinkat

I was just one of many others that thought ICCS needs to put coins in slabs... they had the chance to do that and for whatever reason they have chosen not to go down that path. That was and has been the decision of ICCS- and collectors have decisions too. As collectors, our decision must be based on the coin and NOTHING LESS!

It doesn't make any difference which TPG company graded the coin... collectors need to look at the coin and know what the characteristics are for the series as to how and why a coin may have been graded and how it should be graded.

JCMhouston

I'm not sure that is evidence against ICCS.

canadacolornut

Whatever.

I've only been "looking at" and grading Canadian coins for about 30 years now. I started before PCGS and ICCS-know Brian Cornwell
well.

The coins I sent in were solid under ICCS standards; DID NOT MEET PCGS STANDARDS--at least the current ones.

That is all.....

JCMhouston

I'm on your side here Canada, I think cutting them out will also lead to much better results when submitted to our hosts. I don't know why, but it seems to happen with others I know a lot.

ASUtodd

Could just prove that PCGS doesn't know how to grade Canadian coins... I think ICCS coins are graded very well. I've always liked the ones I have seen. For world coins though, I send 'em to NGC... Jsut me though. For the US stuff I like PCGS.

coinkat

I am not taking sides or trying to be difficult... if the coins are solid- then that is all that matters. Plastic can be replaced and coins can not.

wybrit

So what is better, "cracking out" coins from second/third tier holders or crossing over?

WWW

I have had excellent results sending in the "right" ICCS graded coins to PCGS.
And I cut every one of them out to avoid holder bias.

1960NYGiants

CCN - I feel your pain. Now I crack out or cut out every coin I send for crossover. Actually this makes the crossover service mute. Most come back same grade and I've more go up than down for ICCS coins. Note: I have not tried QE II coins.

DoubleEagle59

Over the past 10 years, I've submitted countless amounts of coins to ICCS.

Over that same time, I have viewed just as many PCGS graded Canadian coins (hours spent at every auction viewing coins).

Three HUGE differences between PCGS's and ICCS's philosophies of grading are at the root of the 'who's the better grading company' debate.

These three differences are:

One: PCGS added a point or two for eye appeal and ICCS NEVER did. This led to toned Canadian coins being given one to two grades higher in a PCGS holder than in an ICCS holder.

Two: PCGS placed a higher emphasis on luster than ICCS. ICCS would give a high grade (say ms65) on a coin with muted luster as long as technically, the fields and high points were without flaws. Whereas PCGS would give the ms65 with a coin with numerous small hit marks but the coin had booming luster.

and Three: Because of US coins having a higher relief than Canadian coins, PCGS's looks for hit marks on the high points rather than the fields, while ICCS places more importance on the fields and will forgive a few marks on the high points.

canadacolornut

Thanks for the comments and some good grading information.

I didn't mean to get surly about it; just frustrated at this point.

One way to go about it would be to buy ICCS MS 66 I suppose and put a cross at minimum grade of MS 65.

Really too danged expensive that way though.

Maybe I'll just go into origami.

I asked a quality Canadian seller, Ingrid Smith, in Toronto back in the 80's
how she could possibly let some of the great coins she had go.

Her reply was: " John I'm in this for business. If I want a hobby I'll do origami"

coinkat

So going from pushing paper for a living to folding paper for a hobby.... that works

canadacolornut

I just got confirmation from a dealer that sends a substantial number of coins to ICCS, NGC and PCGS and says there is nearly always "holder bias". Unless the
coin is really expensive he takes it out of the holder before submission and has considerably better results.

I think two things work against crossing.

One is that it's more difficult to get a good view of the coin in a holder and to differentiate any scratches, imperfections on the holder from what might or
might not be on the coin. The other is a certain "pride of standards" by the grader and a bias toward preserving them which tilts against the coin by
a point or so.

Anybody agree?

Thanks

DoubleEagle59

<< <i>I just got confirmation from a dealer that sends a substantial number of coins to ICCS, NGC and PCGS and says there is nearly always "holder bias". Unless the
coin is really expensive he takes it out of the holder before submission and has considerably better results.

I think two things work against crossing.

One is that it's more difficult to get a good view of the coin in a holder and to differentiate any scratches, imperfections on the holder from what might or
might not be on the coin. The other is a certain "pride of standards" by the grader and a bias toward preserving them which tilts against the coin by
a point or so.

Anybody agree?

Thanks >>



I know for certain that there is 'holder bias' when ICCS gets in a toned PCGS coin.

ICCS always is extremely strict on these toned PCGS coins. In the past, they had very good reason as PCGS would often bump up the grade for eye appeal or 'tone appeal' while overlooking minor hit marks in the field and relief, something ICCS doesn't do.

My best example would be, I purchased a PCGS ms65 rare date Canadian dime (it was toned) and I told ICCS to put it in an ICCS holder even if it only graded an ms64. Well, ICCS graded it an AU58!!! Needless to say I returned the coin. Personally, I feel if I had taken the coin out of the PCGS holder and submitted the coin to ICCS raw, it was a 'lock' ms63 and most likely it was an ms64. I have purchased and collected tons of these Canadian dimes and I know exactly how ICCS grades them.

canadacolornut

Thanks,that's very helpful.

And it begs the thought that if you can locate a nicely toned ICCS coin you may well be able
to bump it up a grade with PCGS-assuming that eye appeal is still a consideration in their
grading standards.....

ColinCMR

Is Ingrid Smith still in the business?