<< <i>I am so confused by the whole grading process, I mean hell in the latest PCGS priceguide online the First Strike MS Yellowstones and Yosemite's are worth less then the non First Strikes. >>
That is an error in the Priceguide. Look at completed auction listings for the market value.
I'm not as confused about the grading as I was a month ago. Yes, the grading of these giant bullion coins has experienced a learning curve. We were part of that curve. If you currently own a raw bullion puck, the odds of it getting into a PCGS MS69DMPL slab are slim indeed. That's likely how it should have been from the outset; but there was a period of time where 69PL and 69DMPL grades relatively common. They shouldn't be common - at all . >>
I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Totally agree.....If anything, the grading companies reputation should be based on their consistency. Without that they are just a crap shoot not worthy of spending the money.
I like the usual statements I hear about other companies saying that such and such consistently grades 2 grades above PCGS....at least THEY are consistent....but may be approaching equality.
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Thoughts? >>
All water under the bridge, way down the Mississippi and it's out in the gulf of Mexico regarding ATB BULLION coin grading.
APs will get the high grades + the special labels to market and sell the coins because they cherry pick the bulk bullion coins purchased prior to selling publically.
Private individuals submitting pucks will get lesser grades (because the coins are cherry picked by the APs) and a nondescript label (unless you want to pop $18 per coin for the first Strike American flag, blah).
The APs will pay a bulk grading rate, the private individual will pay an exorbitant amount relative to the cost of the coin to get it graded.
Statistical anomalies will exist, a few private submitters will be rewarded, most private submitters will be smacked down and money taken.
In the meantime, the APs will do very well.
The song remains the same.
So what else is new? Oh yeah, the puck video. I'm impressed. Good QC work. Nice manufacturing process. You got to be kidding me. Holy Moly + Cow.
And in the video subtitles, Mint TV spells it loop.
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Thoughts? >>
All water under the bridge, way down the Mississippi and it's out in the gulf of Mexico regarding ATB BULLION coin grading.
APs will get the high grades + the special labels to market and sell the coins because they cherry pick the bulk bullion coins purchased prior to selling publically.
Private individuals submitting pucks will get lesser grades (because the coins are cherry picked by the APs) and a nondescript label (unless you want to pop $18 per coin for the first Strike American flag, blah).
The APs will pay a bulk grading rate, the private individual will pay an exorbitant amount relative to the cost of the coin to get it graded.
Statistical anomalies will exist, a few private submitters will be rewarded, most private submitters will be smacked down and money taken.
In the meantime, the APs will do very well.
The song remains the same.
So what else is new? Oh yeah, the puck video. I'm impressed. Good QC work. Nice manufacturing process. You got to be kidding me. Holy Moly + Cow.
And in the video subtitles, Mint TV spells it loop.
Loupe. >>
epcjimi1, Please do not misunderstand my complaint.
While this is true that AP's may cherry pick the coins but that is a different dimension of the problem.
This Complaint is with the grading company (host of this forum).
When two equally good coins are submitted, one coin by an AP or big business and one coin by 'us' both coins should be assigned the same grade.
My Yosemite had a UPS shipping label created on 6/14/11. It still is not showing up as received or shipped by UPS. Normally I get a package within 2 days after the Mint e-mail?
My son got a Mint e-mail the same day I did and got his coin the next day.
$3651 tonight for a PCGS MS69DMPL five coin set. Another just a bit higher. Will they get closer to $3/set next week? Sorry I missed these. I didn't expect them to go so low. Where will the MS69DMPL sets bottom???
I believe the MS69DMPL sets will bottom under $3K this summer. They likely will rise in the long run though with $3651 being a good price for a long term hold.
I went and looked and can only find two true and complete ms69 dmpl sets for sale at this time. I really think all the apmex incomplete sets have eroded the market and confused the sophisticated ebay buyers
<< <i>Anyone having shipping problems with these coins?
My Yosemite had a UPS shipping label created on 6/14/11. It still is not showing up as received or shipped by UPS. Normally I get a package within 2 days after the Mint e-mail?
My son got a Mint e-mail the same day I did and got his coin the next day.
Anyone else having this problem?
GrandAm >>
One of mine had an invaild tracking number until the morning it was put on the truck for delivery....I bet yours is live now...
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario.
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario. >>
So, just say, the Mint decides to go all out and REALLY tries to put out only the best coins they can for an issue. This results in a very high percentage of perfect coins which deserve a 70 grade.
You are saying that the TPG will look at the number of 70's previously graded and change the number of future 70's given to bring the POP down??
A perfect coin is a 70.....if 10 perfect coins are submitted 4 should not be given a 69 grade "just because 10/10 is too many"
The TPG should not pay attention to the percentages of 70's...the Mint is who can put out 70's and ALL should be graded as such
"Adjusting" their grading standards makes ZERO sense to me when dealing with a perfect coin..... If it's perfect on a Tuesday it should still be perfect on a Friday
I'm pretty sure that I heard the reporter say, and the screen read that they are stamped .999% silver on the edge. That's only 1% silver, if I remember my math correctly.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>I'm pretty sure that I heard the reporter say, and the screen read that they are stamped .999% silver on the edge. That's only 1% silver, if I remember my math correctly. >>
Man I'm selling all I got right now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario. >>
So, just say, the Mint decides to go all out and REALLY tries to put out only the best coins they can for an issue. This results in a very high percentage of perfect coins which deserve a 70 grade.
You are saying that the TPG will look at the number of 70's previously graded and change the number of future 70's given to bring the POP down??
A perfect coin is a 70.....if 10 perfect coins are submitted 4 should not be given a 69 grade "just because 10/10 is too many"
The TPG should not pay attention to the percentages of 70's...the Mint is who can put out 70's and ALL should be graded as such
"Adjusting" their grading standards makes ZERO sense to me when dealing with a perfect coin..... If it's perfect on a Tuesday it should still be perfect on a Friday
Ok...that's my rant for today >>
I guess I believe that has been the case with other coin issues. 2010 ASE proofs grade at PF 70 at a very high percentage. It just seems the pucks have been a moving target. They are larger than other US issues but certainly not the first 5oz, 10 oz coins they have graded. Lunars, Kooks etc.
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on?
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no integrity in my mind - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Well it has been a roller coaster: in the beginning I don't think anyone got DM or PL grades, then it seemed like everyone got them, and now it seems like the grades are just overall lower.
I am not placing any blame but I for one feel like a fool for spending so much time, money, and energy on bullion, I guess I should have just bought solely for the silver content value. >>
Suppose the Morgan dollar had never exited and then one day someone finds 5 of the 1,000 coin bags in a mint vault somewhere. Do you think that PCGS or NGC would be grading them the same way as they are now? It seems that grading these maybe has a learning curve for PCGS and if so they should possibly be offering some kind of discounted grade review.
No fingerprints from there as they all are wearing gloves. >>
I'm pretty sure I saw a couple of coins being held with bare hands. I'm sure it was for the video, but I bet those coins ended up in someone's hands "so to speak" >>
There were several instances and all were held on the edge as they properly should be; the rest had the handlers wearing gloves.
No fingerprints from there as they all are wearing gloves. >>
Since they all came out of the press in the same orientation, 1/4 of the pucks [the first coin out] should have a flat spot at the same point on the edge and 1/4 [the second coin out] should have a flat spot opposite that.
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on? >>
My first submission included some coins from the early fidelitrades that were beat up pretty bad. I should have sold them without grading and just described the damage. I chose to have them graded so there was no questions when I sold them. They came back 3-10-11 with grades of 66DM, 64pl, 67, 67DM, 68PL. In line with what I expected them to be.
I then cherry picked 12 coins out of 20. They came back 6-2-11 as 69DM, 64PL, 69PL, 65PL, 69 PL, 68DM, 64PL 64PL, 65DM, 66PL, 64PL. Not at all what I expected.
Learning curve? For one I believe in the beginning die polish lines were not graded down heavily. Now they seem to be. Overall it is just a lot tougher to get the grades and this same story comes from a lot of people on this board not just me. I'm not a proffesional grader but trying to learn as much as fast as I can. Truth be told I'm a PM guy. My only motivation in the pucks is one they are silver at decent premiums to spot for the bullion version and two I see an opportunity.
In the end I ended up with four 68 dmpl sets for keepers. I'll sell off the rest when I feel the price is right.
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on? >>
I'm no grading pro, but I can put an early PCGS MS69 Yosemite (back when no DMPL designations) next to a MS65DMPL and I see very little difference. My latest submissions were from noncherry picked sources like Fidlitrade. Pretty safe to say if I cracked out that 69 and sent back to PCGS I'd guarantee it came back less then a 69 - not that I'm going to do that :>
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here.
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
Not having any beliefs is just plain sad.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
<< <i>I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
I do not believe there was any favoritism toward any dealer or bulk submitter. There will always be conspiracy theories and there is nothing you or I can do about that.
I do believe the grading standards "tightened up" as time went by this year. There was a learning curve and, I believe, the current standards are closer to where they need to be and perhaps even a bit too tough right now.
MS69PL and MS69DMPL grades were far too common last spring. I know because I've handled pieces graded last spring that were 67 at best (today) and in 69 holders.
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
<< <i>I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
I do not believe there was any favoritism toward any dealer or bulk submitter. There will always be conspiracy theories and there is nothing you or I can do about that.
I do believe the grading standards "tightened up" as time went by this year. There was a learning curve and, I believe, the current standards are closer to where they need to be and perhaps even a bit too tough right now.
MS69PL and MS69DMPL grades were far too common last spring. I know because I've handled pieces graded last spring that were 67 at best (today) and in 69 holders. >>
I think it is probably a situation where PCGS just hadn't seen enough examples to ascertain what their standards should be. When the first grader saw the very first one, he had no reference point which would allow him to intelligently assign a grade hence his grade might well have been a best guess. It might behoove PCGS [if they intend to grade new or unusual mint issues] to send an advance team to the mint while the coins are being struck in order to get a better feel for what the mint is actually producing or at least what variation in quality to expect. The right thing would be to regrade the first 5,000 or so, but that aint gonna happen.
^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale.
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press.
So how are the new 2011 releases Like Gettysburg, Glacier et al grading out now? I'm seeing lots of MS69 and 68s out there, same old racket it seems. Anyway received ultra low grades on those yet? I'm not buying it took PCGS awhile to figure out how to grade them - they want to keep those 2010 high grade pop counts down at this point.
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press. >>
I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. If they allowed one in, they would have to allow every Tom Dick and Harry grader in or face litigation.
Successful trades/buys/sells with gdavis70, adriana, wondercoin, Weiss, nibanny, IrishMike, commoncents05, pf70collector, kyleknap, barefootjuan, coindeuce, WhiteTornado, Nefprollc, ajw, JamesM, PCcoins, slinc, coindudeonebay,beernuts, and many more
<< <i>So how are the new 2011 releases Like Gettysburg, Glacier et al grading out now? I'm seeing lots of MS69 and 68s out there, same old racket it seems. Anyway received ultra low grades on those yet? I'm not buying it took PCGS awhile to figure out how to grade them - they want to keep those 2010 high grade pop counts down at this point. >>
I said earlier today AM that my tube of 10 Gettys from Provident yielded 5 69 DMPLs and 5 68 DMPLs. I will say they did look great and graded appropriately
<< <i>I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. >>
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press. >>
I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. If they allowed one in, they would have to allow every Tom Dick and Harry grader in or face litigation. >>
PCGS would only grade them, the mint would sell the graded coins!!
<< <i>So how are the new 2011 releases Like Gettysburg, Glacier et al grading out now? I'm seeing lots of MS69 and 68s out there, same old racket it seems. Anyway received ultra low grades on those yet? I'm not buying it took PCGS awhile to figure out how to grade them - they want to keep those 2010 high grade pop counts down at this point. >>
I said earlier today AM that my tube of 10 Gettys from Provident yielded 5 69 DMPLs and 5 68 DMPLs. I will say they did look great and graded appropriately >>
Any comment about how NGC's grading has been up to this point?
Any cherry picking going on with APMEX with the 2011s? Probably too early to tell but makes no difference as I, like many others here won't be ordering from them again!
Successful trades/buys/sells with gdavis70, adriana, wondercoin, Weiss, nibanny, IrishMike, commoncents05, pf70collector, kyleknap, barefootjuan, coindeuce, WhiteTornado, Nefprollc, ajw, JamesM, PCcoins, slinc, coindudeonebay,beernuts, and many more
<< <i>Any cherry picking going on with APMEX with the 2011s? Probably too early to tell but makes no difference as I, like many others here won't be ordering from them again! >>
Bullion puck cherry picking by the APs, submission for grades by private party and APs, and grade results controversy ain't going to stop with out a change in the system.
I propose the US Mint change the method of sale for bullion and allow the public to buy bullion direct from the mint.
The distribution system is already in place courtesy of the US Mint
A 50 - 50 total mintage % split between the public and the APs for bullion sales per year.
Want to take your chances and buy raw and submit for grading? Buy straight from the mint
-or-
buy your MS69DM from an AP.
I don't understand why everyone on this forum isn't outraged by the AP bullion distribution system. It's absolutely nuts + crazy.
I don't even see any Olympic PCGS FS MS 69 DPMLs out there. Too early?
I decided to collect these only in this grade. I want the guarantee and protection if these spot. Raws will not provide that for me. I might give up on getting graded P versions for now. With the $285 price from the mint, the bullion graded 69 DPMLs are a better deal since these are averaging around $450 for graded 2011 PCGS DPML 69s. I will pay the $170 premium over the mint issue P versions for these grades. However, I think collectors are waiting for the DPMLs to drop in price. If these drop there might not be enough profit in submitting the DMPLs if demand is not out there.
Do bulk dealers have to submit an entire unopened box of the 2011 pucks if they decide to get the First Strike label after the cut off date? I would think that would be cost prohibitive since you would only make a profit on the 69 DPMLs. I don't know. The 69s non DMPLs will have a premium just a little over spot.
The 2010 MS 69 Bullions are falling in the $300 range.
Comments
1 1 20530067 505105 2010-P 25C Hot Springs NP - 5 oz Silver US SP68
2 1 20530068 505106 2010-P 25C Yellowstone NP - 5 oz Silver US SP68
3 1 20530069 506575 2010 25C Grand Canyon NP - 5 oz Silver US MS69DM
4 1 20530070 506590 2010 25C Yosemite NP - 5 oz Silver US MS63PL
Ouch. I though at least a 69s for the SPs....
I will have to rethink my stategy of trying make 70s myself.
Happy about the Crand Canyon DM anyway. This was a raw coin from MTB.
Shared Order Page with Trueviews
Box of 20
<< <i>
<< <i>I am so confused by the whole grading process, I mean hell in the latest PCGS priceguide online the First Strike MS Yellowstones and Yosemite's are worth less then the non First Strikes. >>
That is an error in the Priceguide. Look at completed auction listings for the market value.
I'm not as confused about the grading as I was a month ago.
I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Thoughts?
I like the usual statements I hear about other companies saying that such and such consistently grades 2 grades above PCGS....at least THEY are consistent....but may be approaching equality.
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Thoughts? >>
All water under the bridge, way down the Mississippi and it's out in the gulf of Mexico regarding ATB BULLION coin grading.
APs will get the high grades + the special labels to market and sell the coins because they cherry pick the bulk bullion coins purchased prior to selling publically.
Private individuals submitting pucks will get lesser grades (because the coins are cherry picked by the APs) and a nondescript label (unless you want to pop $18 per coin for the first Strike American flag, blah).
The APs will pay a bulk grading rate, the private individual will pay an exorbitant amount relative to the cost of the coin to get it graded.
Statistical anomalies will exist, a few private submitters will be rewarded, most private submitters will be smacked down and money taken.
In the meantime, the APs will do very well.
The song remains the same.
So what else is new? Oh yeah, the puck video. I'm impressed. Good QC work. Nice manufacturing process. You got to be kidding me. Holy Moly + Cow.
And in the video subtitles, Mint TV spells it loop.
Loupe.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ???
If Coin grading about managing the pop count , we do not need graders but only a few managers working at the grading company. Those managers can assign grades based on the identity of submitters....
If Coin grading is about accessing quality of coins, then we need graders who can consistently assign sames grades to similar Coins (this year, next year and the year after that). Then there will be a standard.
Thoughts? >>
All water under the bridge, way down the Mississippi and it's out in the gulf of Mexico regarding ATB BULLION coin grading.
APs will get the high grades + the special labels to market and sell the coins because they cherry pick the bulk bullion coins purchased prior to selling publically.
Private individuals submitting pucks will get lesser grades (because the coins are cherry picked by the APs) and a nondescript label (unless you want to pop $18 per coin for the first Strike American flag, blah).
The APs will pay a bulk grading rate, the private individual will pay an exorbitant amount relative to the cost of the coin to get it graded.
Statistical anomalies will exist, a few private submitters will be rewarded, most private submitters will be smacked down and money taken.
In the meantime, the APs will do very well.
The song remains the same.
So what else is new? Oh yeah, the puck video. I'm impressed. Good QC work. Nice manufacturing process. You got to be kidding me. Holy Moly + Cow.
And in the video subtitles, Mint TV spells it loop.
Loupe.
epcjimi1, Please do not misunderstand my complaint.
While this is true that AP's may cherry pick the coins but that is a different dimension of the problem.
This Complaint is with the grading company (host of this forum).
When two equally good coins are submitted, one coin by an AP or big business and one coin by 'us' both coins should be assigned the same grade.
My Yosemite had a UPS shipping label created on 6/14/11. It still is not showing up as received or shipped by UPS. Normally I get a package within 2 days after the Mint e-mail?
My son got a Mint e-mail the same day I did and got his coin the next day.
Anyone else having this problem?
GrandAm
<< <i>Where will the MS69DMPL sets bottom??? >>
I believe the MS69DMPL sets will bottom under $3K this summer. They likely will rise in the long run though with $3651 being a good price for a long term hold.
I've stopped selling my 2010 bullion pucks. I think that in the long term they'll all go up.
<< <i>Anyone having shipping problems with these coins?
My Yosemite had a UPS shipping label created on 6/14/11. It still is not showing up as received or shipped by UPS. Normally I get a package within 2 days after the Mint e-mail?
My son got a Mint e-mail the same day I did and got his coin the next day.
Anyone else having this problem?
GrandAm
One of mine had an invaild tracking number until the morning it was put on the truck for delivery....I bet yours is live now...
<< <i>I submitted some of the bullion and P versions last week to PCGS.
1 1 20530067 505105 2010-P 25C Hot Springs NP - 5 oz Silver US SP68
2 1 20530068 505106 2010-P 25C Yellowstone NP - 5 oz Silver US SP68
3 1 20530069 506575 2010 25C Grand Canyon NP - 5 oz Silver US MS69DM
4 1 20530070 506590 2010 25C Yosemite NP - 5 oz Silver US MS63PL
Ouch. I though at least a 69s for the SPs....
I will have to rethink my stategy of trying make 70s myself.
Happy about the Crand Canyon DM anyway. This was a raw coin from MTB.
Shared Order Page with Trueviews >>
Well done on the CG!!!
Did you cherry pick the p pucks? How did they look? I tried to carefully cherry pick the p pucks that I submitted. I am concerned seeing your grades.
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario. >>
So, just say, the Mint decides to go all out and REALLY tries to put out only the best coins they can for an issue. This results in a very high percentage of perfect coins which deserve a 70 grade.
You are saying that the TPG will look at the number of 70's previously graded and change the number of future 70's given to bring the POP down??
A perfect coin is a 70.....if 10 perfect coins are submitted 4 should not be given a 69 grade "just because 10/10 is too many"
The TPG should not pay attention to the percentages of 70's...the Mint is who can put out 70's and ALL should be graded as such
"Adjusting" their grading standards makes ZERO sense to me when dealing with a perfect coin..... If it's perfect on a Tuesday it should still be perfect on a Friday
Ok...that's my rant for today
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I'm pretty sure that I heard the reporter say, and the screen read that they are stamped .999% silver on the edge. That's only 1% silver, if I remember my math correctly.
Man I'm selling all I got right now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Roll: 5- MS69 DMPL
.........5- MS68 DMPL
P HS's both MS69SP ...thought those two were perfect. Satisfied with the Gettys....
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I think you just raised a very interesting point........ but then Is Coin grading about managing the POP Count ??? >>
In general, I don't agree with this statement, as I don't think it is the case.
However, I do think that if a TPG looks at their POPS of a particular coin/issue and there tends to be a unusual amount of 70's vs 69/68's (example); they will look at their grading standard and adjust accordingly. This appears to many as "managing" the POP's, because the early submissions tend to do better than the latter in this scenario. >>
So, just say, the Mint decides to go all out and REALLY tries to put out only the best coins they can for an issue. This results in a very high percentage of perfect coins which deserve a 70 grade.
You are saying that the TPG will look at the number of 70's previously graded and change the number of future 70's given to bring the POP down??
A perfect coin is a 70.....if 10 perfect coins are submitted 4 should not be given a 69 grade "just because 10/10 is too many"
The TPG should not pay attention to the percentages of 70's...the Mint is who can put out 70's and ALL should be graded as such
"Adjusting" their grading standards makes ZERO sense to me when dealing with a perfect coin..... If it's perfect on a Tuesday it should still be perfect on a Friday
Ok...that's my rant for today >>
I guess I believe that has been the case with other coin issues. 2010 ASE proofs grade at PF 70 at a very high percentage. It just seems the pucks have been a moving target. They are larger than other US issues but certainly not the first 5oz, 10 oz coins they have graded. Lunars, Kooks etc.
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on?
<< <i>
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no integrity in my mind - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Well it has been a roller coaster: in the beginning I don't think anyone got DM or PL grades, then it seemed like everyone got them, and now it seems like the grades are just overall lower.
I am not placing any blame but I for one feel like a fool for spending so much time, money, and energy on bullion, I guess I should have just bought solely for the silver content value. >>
Suppose the Morgan dollar had never exited and then one day someone finds 5 of the 1,000 coin bags in a mint vault somewhere. Do you think that PCGS or NGC would be grading them the same way as they are now? It seems that grading these maybe has a learning curve for PCGS and if so they should possibly be offering some kind of discounted grade review.
<< <i>Well, this link explains all the rim nicks and finger prints on many of the ATB Silver coins.
LINKY >>
I guess I missed the part where they add the prints and run them through the "nicking" press!!
I wonder if a lot of that isn't done at the distribution facility.
<< <i>
<< <i>The top coin of the 4 would be the best.
No fingerprints from there as they all are wearing gloves. >>
I'm pretty sure I saw a couple of coins being held with bare hands. I'm sure it was for the video, but I bet those coins ended up in someone's hands "so to speak" >>
There were several instances and all were held on the edge as they properly should be; the rest had the handlers wearing gloves.
<< <i>The top coin of the 4 would be the best.
No fingerprints from there as they all are wearing gloves. >>
Since they all came out of the press in the same orientation, 1/4 of the pucks [the first coin out] should have a flat spot at the same point on the edge and 1/4 [the second coin out] should have a flat spot opposite that.
<< <i>http://cgi.ebay.com/2011-AMERICA-BEAUTIFUL-5OZ-SILVER-PL-GETTYSBURG-BU-/110703518054?_trksid=p4712.m263&_trkparms=algo=SIC%2BSI&itu=UCI%2BIA%2BUA%2BFICS%2BUFI%2BDDSIC&otn=8&pmod=330576907107%2B360371859465&po=LVI&ps=63&clkid=734729930033580708
Could someone please post this as a link.
This seller is 2011 Gettysburg MS70 PL. Check out his slab. >>
Does anyone know if NGC uses teflon in their holders?
<< <i>
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on? >>
My first submission included some coins from the early fidelitrades that were beat up pretty bad. I should have sold them without grading and just described the damage. I chose to have them graded so there was no questions when I sold them. They came back 3-10-11 with grades of 66DM, 64pl, 67, 67DM, 68PL. In line with what I expected them to be.
I then cherry picked 12 coins out of 20. They came back 6-2-11 as 69DM, 64PL, 69PL, 65PL, 69 PL, 68DM, 64PL 64PL, 65DM, 66PL, 64PL. Not at all what I expected.
Learning curve? For one I believe in the beginning die polish lines were not graded down heavily. Now they seem to be. Overall it is just a lot tougher to get the grades and this same story comes from a lot of people on this board not just me. I'm not a proffesional grader but trying to learn as much as fast as I can. Truth be told I'm a PM guy. My only motivation in the pucks is one they are silver at decent premiums to spot for the bullion version and two I see an opportunity.
In the end I ended up with four 68 dmpl sets for keepers. I'll sell off the rest when I feel the price is right.
<< <i>
<< <i>My whole take on the grading hijinks. Dealers by this point have submitted the bulk of their coins, this grading company answers to them, thats their bread and butter not us random donks sending in 5 coins. Dealers want the ms69 pop counts down, so now all the grades are suddenly coming back crap. I'll take my business elsewhere from now on, this company has no credibility in my mind with the arbitrary grading standards - it will be their undoing in the end. >>
Can you agree in your own mind that the coins graded ms69 are accurately graded? Have you done a side by side comparison to assure yourself that the ones "suddenly coming back crap" are or are not 69s? Just askin.
If the APs actually did cherry pick their allotment, wouldn't it make sense that the lion's share of the 69 were made early on? >>
I'm no grading pro, but I can put an early PCGS MS69 Yosemite (back when no DMPL designations) next to a MS65DMPL and I see very little difference. My latest submissions were from noncherry picked sources like Fidlitrade. Pretty safe to say if I cracked out that 69 and sent back to PCGS I'd guarantee it came back less then a 69 - not that I'm going to do that :>
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will.
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here.
<< <i>
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
Not having any beliefs is just plain sad.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
<< <i>I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
I do not believe there was any favoritism toward any dealer or bulk submitter. There will always be conspiracy theories and there is nothing you or I can do about that.
I do believe the grading standards "tightened up" as time went by this year. There was a learning curve and, I believe, the current standards are closer to where they need to be and perhaps even a bit too tough right now.
MS69PL and MS69DMPL grades were far too common last spring. I know because I've handled pieces graded last spring that were 67 at best (today) and in 69 holders.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>whatever you want to believe - more power to you - i guess everyone has an opinion
i've just seen and heard of many "early" bulk submissions (and regular submissions) of moderns, not cherry picked, with very high percentages of 70's
vs. later submissions in bulk (and regular), not cherry picked, where percentages of 70's tail off quite a bit
kind of like a spicket being shut off. no real diff in quality of submissions.
take it as you will. >>
I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
Not having any beliefs is just plain sad. >>
Beliefs about the pucks and grading, DUH!!
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't have any beliefs one way or tuther. If people here have some sort of proof that PCGS or other TPGs show favoritism to one submitter over another or grade coins on a quota system then perhaps they should man up and take it to a courtroom instead of always insinuating here. >>
I do not believe there was any favoritism toward any dealer or bulk submitter. There will always be conspiracy theories and there is nothing you or I can do about that.
I do believe the grading standards "tightened up" as time went by this year. There was a learning curve and, I believe, the current standards are closer to where they need to be and perhaps even a bit too tough right now.
MS69PL and MS69DMPL grades were far too common last spring. I know because I've handled pieces graded last spring that were 67 at best (today) and in 69 holders. >>
I think it is probably a situation where PCGS just hadn't seen enough examples to ascertain what their standards should be. When the first grader saw the very first one, he had no reference point which would allow him to intelligently assign a grade hence his grade might well have been a best guess. It might behoove PCGS [if they intend to grade new or unusual mint issues] to send an advance team to the mint while the coins are being struck in order to get a better feel for what the mint is actually producing or at least what variation in quality to expect. The right thing would be to regrade the first 5,000 or so, but that aint gonna happen.
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press.
<< <i>
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press. >>
I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. If they allowed one in, they would have to allow every Tom Dick and Harry grader in or face litigation.
<< <i>So how are the new 2011 releases Like Gettysburg, Glacier et al grading out now? I'm seeing lots of MS69 and 68s out there, same old racket it seems. Anyway received ultra low grades on those yet? I'm not buying it took PCGS awhile to figure out how to grade them - they want to keep those 2010 high grade pop counts down at this point. >>
I said earlier today AM that my tube of 10 Gettys from Provident yielded 5 69 DMPLs and 5 68 DMPLs. I will say they did look great and graded appropriately
<< <i>I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. >>
You mean like they do with the APs?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>^ A puck should have the same standard evaluation criteria applied by the TPGs as any other modern US Mint bullion coin. I don't agree with the "graders hadn't seen enough examples to base judgment on" rationale. >>
It is quite a bit different esp. in size from anything the mint has produced before. What might be negligible or unnoticeable on a quarter might stick out like a sore thumb on a big puck. If I was at the mint, I'd give serious thought to having the TPGs set up and grade stuff right from the press. >>
I doubt the United States Mint, a government agency can or would do something like that...go to bed with a private company(or companies) to allow them access to run a profit making business. If they allowed one in, they would have to allow every Tom Dick and Harry grader in or face litigation. >>
PCGS would only grade them, the mint would sell the graded coins!!
<< <i>
<< <i>So how are the new 2011 releases Like Gettysburg, Glacier et al grading out now? I'm seeing lots of MS69 and 68s out there, same old racket it seems. Anyway received ultra low grades on those yet? I'm not buying it took PCGS awhile to figure out how to grade them - they want to keep those 2010 high grade pop counts down at this point. >>
I said earlier today AM that my tube of 10 Gettys from Provident yielded 5 69 DMPLs and 5 68 DMPLs. I will say they did look great and graded appropriately >>
Any comment about how NGC's grading has been up to this point?
Are they still grading?
I received the apmex advertisement for it 6 hours before the Alret Me i set up lol
Probably too early to tell but makes no difference as I, like many others here won't be ordering from them again!
<< <i>Any cherry picking going on with APMEX with the 2011s?
Probably too early to tell but makes no difference as I, like many others here won't be ordering from them again! >>
I know I won't
I propose the US Mint change the method of sale for bullion and allow the public to buy bullion direct from the mint.
The distribution system is already in place courtesy of the US Mint
A 50 - 50 total mintage % split between the public and the APs for bullion sales per year.
Want to take your chances and buy raw and submit for grading? Buy straight from the mint
-or-
buy your MS69DM from an AP.
I don't understand why everyone on this forum isn't outraged by the AP bullion distribution system. It's absolutely nuts + crazy.
<< <i>
I don't understand why everyone on this forum isn't outraged by the AP bullion distribution system. It's absolutely nuts + crazy. >>
At least they don't charge 279.95 plus shipping. I'm more outraged at the price for the crappier looking coin.
I decided to collect these only in this grade. I want the guarantee and protection if these spot. Raws will not provide that for me. I might give up on getting graded P versions for now. With the $285 price from the mint, the bullion graded 69 DPMLs are a better deal since these are averaging around $450 for graded 2011 PCGS DPML 69s. I will pay the $170 premium over the mint issue P versions for these grades. However, I think collectors are waiting for the DPMLs to drop in price. If these drop there might not be enough profit in submitting the DMPLs if demand is not out there.
Do bulk dealers have to submit an entire unopened box of the 2011 pucks if they decide to get the First Strike label after the cut off date? I would think that would be cost prohibitive since you would only make a profit on the 69 DPMLs. I don't know. The 69s non DMPLs will have a premium just a little over spot.
The 2010 MS 69 Bullions are falling in the $300 range.
Box of 20