Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Was coin grading broken?

STONESTONE Posts: 15,275 ✭
in U.S. Coin Forum
"Don't fix what isn't broken"

I feel that this announcement will have a negative effect on the mainstream of coin collectors, and maybe PCGS. PCGS is a respected name in professional coin grading and encapsulation, but they should not be changing a long standing and well-adjusted grading system. Collectors will always have the final say as to their opinion of a coin, and PCGS has really just re-affirmed themselves as a company of opinions.

I feel that the average collector does not submit coins, and grades his/her own coins on 2x2's or similar method. This new "+" may catch on to the these collectors, but I feel it will be abused. But in the end, I don't think the average collector will like this change. Experienced collectors know what a coin grades, and whether it is strong or weak for a grade. By having PCGS give an extra 'grade' opinion on a coin, this is most likely to backfire more than add to their credibility (JMHO)


Thoughts, opinions?


(Edited for clarity)

Comments

  • LindeDadLindeDad Posts: 18,766 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Have too agree to me it is a big pancake.
    My Current project....https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/mysetregistry/album/160794
  • morgandollar1878morgandollar1878 Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The grading system is just being improved. Besides the grading system change is just a small part of the "big one". The new holders have better security features, and under the services listed the coin is being imaged to deter "coin doctoring" and counterfeiting. And just to clarify they are not going to put a negative sign next to the grade if it is lower end for the grade given. As always grading is subjective and just as in the past collectors and dealers alike will put PQ designations on their 2x2's.
    Instagram: nomad_numismatics
  • ziggy29ziggy29 Posts: 18,668 ✭✭✭
    I'm not in a believer of "change for change's sake" -- nor am I a believer in "we've always done it this way."
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 35,860 ✭✭✭✭✭
    dunno...

    but my PQ can beat up your PQ...


    hasn't PCGS always been "of opinions?"

    and isn't PCGS supposed to be "Experienced" a la "Experienced collectors know what a coin grades, and whether it is strong or weak for a grade" ?

    and even the grading system can be abused, not just PQ.

    I wonder if the average collector who does not submit coins will care that much... other than knowing they now need to find PQ coins and to put PQ in the auctions. However, I'd think the average collector also already looks for stuff they think "looks good" for the grade... perhaps now (or not) they learn a bit better about what looks good for the grade.
    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • RYKRYK Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Things are better now. We have 12 new grades:

    47.5
    51.5
    54.5
    56.5
    59
    62.5
    63.5
    64.5
    65.5
    66.5
    67.5
    68.5

    This will make guess the grade threads more exciting. image
    My Box of 20: https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/box-20/ryks-gold-box-20/17132
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 14,011 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I believe that the new grades we have are:
    45.5
    50.5
    53.5
    55.5
    58.5

    62.5
    63.5
    64.5
    65.5
    66.5
    67.5
    68.5
    69.5
    When in doubt, don't.
  • RYKRYK Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I believe that the new grades we have are:
    45.5
    50.5
    53.5
    55.5
    58.5

    62.5
    63.5
    64.5
    65.5
    66.5
    67.5
    68.5
    69.5 >>



    69s are not eligible. If the MS + grades are half steps, why are the circ grade half steps not so?image
    My Box of 20: https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/box-20/ryks-gold-box-20/17132
  • TrimeTrime Posts: 1,863 ✭✭✭
    If I understand , only 15% will qualify for + so it is 65
    and 65.85
    Trime
  • cone10cone10 Posts: 1,021
    This was a reaction to CAC, plain and simple. PCGS could not stand by and allow another party to evaluate their expertise, rate it and make money to boot, it weakens the brand. By the end of the year more people will be submitting coins to PCGS than CAC hoping for plus signs and this will make the host very happy and the stock holders even happier.

    Personally it has no effect on my collecting of mid grade circulated Walkers and Half Cents. If you're holding a lot of common looking 65's you might get hit but this market was tanking before the big one. Coin grading wasn't broken it was CrACked and PCGS did some fixing.
    A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore.
    Yogi Berra

  • IGWTIGWT Posts: 4,975 ✭
    Yes, it was broken. Now, it is fixed. Don't underestimate The Power of the Plus™. image
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 35,860 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>If the MS + grades are half steps, why are the circ grade half steps not so?image >>




    true true


    much more scientific...


    but as I type this I can't help but Longacre.... Since, there is no AU59 nor a AU58.5, wouldn't a "+" mean simply a high quality AU58?
    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • capecape Posts: 1,621 ✭
    This truly will fix going forward- But- ITS EVERY SINGLE DOCTORED COIN UP TILL THIS POINT THAT IS STILL BROKEN !image
    ed rodrigues
  • magikbillymagikbilly Posts: 6,780 ✭
    If nobody resubmitted anything would this work?

    Best,
    Eric
  • droopyddroopyd Posts: 5,381 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I feel that the average collector does not submit coins, and grades his/her own coins on 2x2's or similar method. This new "+" may catch on to the these collectors, but I feel it will be abused. >>



    It's already pretty well abused - go to any show and see "+" marks all over most of the 2x2s,
    Me at the Springfield coin show:
    image
    60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • RYKRYK Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I agree with Stone.
    This doesn't help me in any way shape or form, nor is it what I needed. I don't know of any colelctor who even asked let alone demanded this product. To me this plus is a negative, a negative mark on the hobby. >>



    Just because you did not ask for it and do not feel that you need it, it does not follow that it is not good for others or for the hobby.

    BTW, many of the folks here said the same about the CAC at its inception and are now among its biggest supporters.
    My Box of 20: https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/box-20/ryks-gold-box-20/17132
  • Aegis3Aegis3 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭
    To answer the thread topic: yes, it was broken. Now, only moreso.
    --

    Ed. S.

    (EJS)
  • HoledandCreativeHoledandCreative Posts: 2,830 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Grading is broken and until the subjectivity is taken out of it, it will remain so. I don't know if that is possible. Someone might come up with a way someday, who knows. And maybe that will ruin the hobby. A hundred years ago, more or less - F XF Unc and Proof were about it for grades. I am sure collectors and dealers were picking up strong Fs and XFs, wouldn't you? Then the different adjectives started being used. Now, the human precision required to be able to get an uncirculated grade above 64 just baffles me. I still use nice and really nice. There is too much money involved to be able to check numeric accuracy by removing from slabs and resubmitting. I looked at a couple of lowball sets and found the accuracy with AG3 and FR2 to be erratic at best. A toss up. To add a + seems wrong as it just adds to the subjectivity. Imo.
  • illini420illini420 Posts: 11,467 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I believe that the new grades we have are:
    45.5
    50.5
    53.5
    55.5
    58.5

    62.5
    63.5
    64.5
    65.5
    66.5
    67.5
    68.5
    69.5 >>



    69s are not eligible. If the MS + grades are half steps, why are the circ grade half steps not so?image >>




    oh no!!! and just when I thought I was done with my 1908-S IHC Grading Set!!!!!!!! image

    Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448

  • cmerlo1cmerlo1 Posts: 7,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    No....now it's broken.
    You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
    They have a plus...why not a minus?
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • RYKRYK Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>I agree with Stone.
    This doesn't help me in any way shape or form, nor is it what I needed. I don't know of any colelctor who even asked let alone demanded this product. To me this plus is a negative, a negative mark on the hobby. >>



    Just because you did not ask for it and do not feel that you need it, it does not follow that it is not good for others or for the hobby.

    BTW, many of the folks here said the same about the CAC at its inception and are now among its biggest supporters. >>



    I only remember a few that thought the cac wasn't needed. I thought the CAC service was needed and was asked for as opposed to the subject at hand. I consider the two completely different even though it seems similar. >>



    OMG, you have a very short memory. The outcry against the CAC was of Tea Party proportions.
    My Box of 20: https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/box-20/ryks-gold-box-20/17132
  • ColonialCoinUnionColonialCoinUnion Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭


    << <i>"Don't fix what isn't broken" >>



    So you think rampant gradeflation and coin doctoring weren't a problem?
    Coin Rarities Online
  • Cam40Cam40 Posts: 8,146 ✭
    how bout a > and a < sign to add also.
    MS 65 + / < MS 66

    MS70 - 4 X(1)

    E=MS+1


    image
  • STONESTONE Posts: 15,275 ✭


    << <i>

    << <i>"Don't fix what isn't broken" >>



    So you think rampant gradeflation and coin doctoring weren't a problem? >>


    Ahh, touche'. Yes, they were and are a problem, but not one that needed to be corrected by creating a new grading system.
    Just a system that needed more consistency. I like the idea of identifying previously submitted coins, but there's still problems with it, problems that still can't be completely solved
  • ChrisRxChrisRx Posts: 5,619 ✭✭✭✭
    With coin grading subjective as it already is how can anyone think that a grader can get it to a 0.5% ??

    We will see how many koolaid drinkers there are with how well (or not) pcgs does with this money-making scheme.
    image
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,609 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Coin grading is a science based on money...not it's condition, but it's potential.

    ``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5

  • ecichlidecichlid Posts: 1,212 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>"Don't fix what isn't broken" >>


    So you think rampant gradeflation and coin doctoring weren't a problem? >>


    So you think does much to solve it?
    There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    Let me sum up this thread,..Grumpy, Grouchy, Grumbly, Grippy and Kvetchy.

    I do believe that will do it up nicely. image
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • coincollector2007coincollector2007 Posts: 109
    Coin grading was not broken. It us just badly abused by the people who run grading services.

    I think its kind of cool that after 20 years of screwing around, PCGS has come up with a new way to mess around.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...