Options
When deciding whether to try a coin for a regrade upgrade, do you pay more attention to the coin or
coinguy1
Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭
Often, I get the feeling that potential submitters get partially blinded by the dollar signs they see in the price spreads, and don't see the coins very well. 
What say you ?
What say you ? 0
Comments
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>Here's a novel approach...I do not bother. >>
I agree with the good doctor.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>
<< <i>Here's a novel approach...I do not bother. >>
I agree with the good doctor. >>
Ditto.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Here's a novel approach...I do not bother. >>
I agree with the good doctor. >>
Ditto. >>
Yep
BTW I think I would pay attention to the coin instead of just sending something in that just might throw the submission money away.
Ken
<< <i>Why do I get the feeling that the replies are skewed? Perhaps I've been imagining the go-for-the-upgrade obsession for all of these years.
Maybe you should query the folks at Dealers Universe. You might have a more cooperative audience.
<< <i>The worst offenders are those high risk upgrade guys. >>
I don't consider myself as one of thse guys, but do resubmit coins now-and-then when I disagree with the grade PCGS assigned. You can't tell me you've never disagreed with a grade before! I've tried both; crack-out and resubmit method or leave in holder for regrade method. I've been successful and unsuccessful both ways. There is no doctoring involved, just asking for (or paying for) another shot at a better grade. My collection is important to me and desire to own the nicest examples possible, within my budget. When a 1959 Jefferson Nickel in MS65FS is valued at less than $100 and an MS66FS hits over $1,000 and your coin is nicer than several currently graded MS66FSs, you try for an upgrade a few times. Why go buy an upgrade, when you already have a great coin that is not in the correct holder.
Just my opinion, and don't consider myself 'one of those guys'.
Dowgie
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>The worst offenders are those high risk upgrade guys. >>
I don't consider myself as one of thse guys, but do resubmit coins now-and-then when I disagree with the grade PCGS assigned. You can't tell me you've never disagreed with a grade before! I've tried both; crack-out and resubmit method or leave in holder for regrade method. I've been successful and unsuccessful both ways. There is no doctoring involved, just asking for (or paying for) another shot at a better grade. My collection is important to me and desire to own the nicest examples possible, within my budget. When a 1959 Jefferson Nickel in MS65FS is valued at less than $100 and an MS66FS hits over $1,000 and your coin is nicer than several currently graded MS66FSs, you try for an upgrade a few times. Why go buy an upgrade, when you already have a great coin that is not in the correct holder.
Just my opinion, and don't consider myself 'one of those guys'.
Dowgie >>
Here's a hypothetical example of how one of those high risk upgrade guys work. This happens at every reasonable sized show...
A coin is worth $1000 in 63, $5000 in 64 and $15000 in 65. Upgrade guy buys a nice 64 for $11000 thinking the coin will go 65. If it does he makes a few thousand. If it goes down to 63 (which happens quite a bit) not only does he lose the $4000 difference between the 63 and 64 price, but he also loses the $6000 premium he paid to aquire that coin.
Scenarios like that happen at almost every show with those high risk guys.
Using your scenario, if a 65FS is worth $100 and a 66FS is worth $1000 while a 64FS is, let's say $50, then that coin would be an ideal "shot" coin because there isn't much financial downside while the upside is immense.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Lance.
<< <i>I always try to decide on the coin first. I dont even want to know the price until I decide if I want the coin or not. >>
My apologies - I see that my question was ambiguous. I was trying to ask about upgrades, as in regrades of coins that people already own and think or hope are under-graded.
<< <i>< I always try to decide on the coin first. I dont even want to know the price until I decide if I want the coin or not. >>
My apologies - I see that my question was ambiguous. I was trying to ask about upgrades, as in regrades of coins that people already own and think or hope are under-graded. >>
Sorry - not ambigous I just skimmed it the first time - went over my head I guess. My answer would be I dont know then. I have never resubmitted one. But if I did it would depend upon my intentions. If was getting ready to sell then the price spread. If I was keeping it then the coin itself.
<< <i>
<< <i>< I always try to decide on the coin first. I dont even want to know the price until I decide if I want the coin or not. >>
My apologies - I see that my question was ambiguous. I was trying to ask about upgrades, as in regrades of coins that people already own and think or hope are under-graded. >>
Sorry - not ambigous I just skimmed it the first time - went over my head I guess. My answer would be I dont know then. I have never resubmitted one. But if I did it would depend upon my intentions. If was getting ready to sell then the price spread. If I was keeping it then the coin itself. >>
I edited the thread title after I saw your post. Before I did so, it was ambiguous, so so please don't apologize.
are you implying there are people who buy a coin and resubmit it for a higher grade without looking at the coin?
For me, I just buy the coins that I think look really good in the holder they are already in. I have a few that I think are upgrade candidates (which I'm sure most of us think about our own coins), but I'm happying knowing I have a PQ MS65 and not really motivated to play the crackout game and try for an slide up to MS66, even though it would make me several thousand on paper. Bottom line is i'm not selling anytime soon. Now if I had plans to sell soon, or when the time comes to sell, I'll likely consult with an expert to help me determine which coins should be looked at for a regrade. I've heard that Heritage does this with big consignments as they are definitely interested in maximizing the sales prices, not sure that's a bad thing at all if the coin deserves it.
But to finally answer Mark's question, I doubt I would ever worry about an undergraded coin that I thought was a lock upgrade if the price jump were less than maybe 5-10% of it's current grade value. I'd rather let the next guy get a great coin just a bit cheaper than they should be. so yes, the spread matters.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>I guess I don't understand the question
are you implying there are people who buy a coin and resubmit it for a higher grade without looking at the coin? >>
I am saying that I believe a good number of people get dollar signs in their eyes when they see how much more their coins would be worth if upgraded. And as a result, make their decisions to try for upgrades based on that, rather than on an objective assessment of the coins' actual merits.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game.
If it's all about the coin, then it really shouldn't matter what grade the holder says, the coin is what it is... however, in the real world it's about more than just the coin.
Let me turn the question around, do you think when there is a large increase in price to the next grade up, (lets say for example an 1838 ND seated quarter submitted as a 64 hoping for a 65) that the TPG's take this into consideration when the coin is submitted for a grade review? I have my own opinion on this but am curious as to what others think...
John
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant.
Even if the coin has a shot, and a potential large increase in value, it is still the coin, not the spread that makes me want to try for the regrade/upgrade.( at PCGS)
The 64 that 65's( or the AU 58 that 60's) is likely going to be a liner coin, or in other words, low end for grade in the upgraded slab. It will be a harder sell, like having another TPG that is somewhat easier on grades.
I am now looking at all my coins for the new PCGS Secure Plus submission. Those that are mid-grade coins( even with big spreads between grades) are going to stay where they are. Only the ones with amazing surfaces, eye appeal, and possible next grade are going for the regrade/upgrade.
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant. >>
Are the graders aware when there is a big a price spread and does this influence them when they grade a coin? In other words, do they grade more conservatively when there is a big price spread?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant. >>
Are the graders aware when there is a big a price spread and does this influence them when they grade a coin? In other words, do they grade more conservatively when there is a big price spread? >>
In many, if not most cases, graders would generally be aware of large price spreads between two grades. I wont try to speak for others, but when I was a grader, I tried to grade the coins objectively, without regard to the price spread. That said, I think it would be impossible to be completely objective under such circumstances.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant. >>
Are the graders aware when there is a big a price spread and does this influence them when they grade a coin? In other words, do they grade more conservatively when there is a big price spread? >>
In many, if not most cases, graders would generally be aware of large price spreads between two grades. I wont try to speak for others, but when I was a grader, I tried to grade the coins objectively, without regard to the price spread. That said, I think it would be impossible to be completely objective under such circumstances. >>
Good response. This is what I thought---it's impossible to remove the human element from the grading process.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant. >>
Mark - Grading is not an exact science and you don't know it's not going to happen. Stranger things have happened!
In your example, can you tell me with certainty that there's less than a 0.55% chance the coin will upgrade? If not, it's worth resubmitting multiple times.
I recall talking with (I think) Andy Lustig at a Balto show a few years ago about a coin he resubmitted 40 times and finally got his upgrade.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I don't play the game.
However, for those that do, it makes perfect sense to use the price spread as the primary determinant. It's no different than pot odds in a poker game. >>
Barry, the price spread is one major determinant, but the calculated odds of achieving it is, or should be, the other. If, for example, a given coin's value is $1000 in 65 and $10000 in 66, that really doesn't matter if the coin has no realistic chance at a 66. Sure, you can justify resubmissions by saying "It only costs $50 to re-submit it, but if it upgrades I make $9000", but, if it's not going to happen, the potential upside is irrelevant. >>
Mark - Grading is not an exact science and you don't know it's not going to happen. Stranger things have happened!
In your example, can you tell me with certainty that there's less than a 0.55% chance the coin will upgrade? If not, it's worth resubmitting multiple times.
I recall talking with (I think) Andy Lustig at a Balto show a few years ago about a coin he resubmitted 40 times and finally got his upgrade. >>
Barry, you're right, of course - stranger things have happened and I can't tell you with certainty. Some submitters defy the odds, but many more fail to do so.