Options
The ever changing standard
AnkurJ
Posts: 11,375 ✭✭✭✭
How often does the grading standard change with the top TPG's and why? It seems to me that a good percentage early coinage that found its way into slabs over the last 20-30 years, would not slab today. Why such a drastic change? Is it because younger graders come in, or do TPG's keep tightening standards trying to stay competetive, even though it might mean rejecting hundreds or thousands of coins that were considered market acceptable in the past?
Looking through Heritage auction records of early dollars & halves, I look at the coin images and think to myself that there is no way PCGS or NGC would grade these today, yet full price is being paid for these coins because they are in their holders. Is this a false sense of comfort that the coin I am buying must be without issues? I recently returned a carson city gold eagle that was slabbed problem free by PCGS, but looked like it had been scrubed with a brillo pad in hand. So is this comfort of buying a coin in PCGS/NGC holders a false sense of security? Because even though its slabbed, doesn't mean its problem free or that it would slab today. Many early coins have been dipped or cleaned, as it may have been acceptable. There are and should be price differences between a cleaned up looking coin, and a dark and crusty coin in the same grade holder. I think there should be a disclaimer on the back of slabs that the grade is not guaranteed in the future. If you cracked out 10 classic coins in older holders, I can bet a good percentage would not slab today. How do these type of coins fit into today's market? Are they priced lower or the same? If you discover upon close inspection that a coin you've had for years would not be problem free today, do you try to replace it?
In regards to toners, I personally think the standard is very out of whack. How American Eagles that have been clearly artificially toned can be slabbed, yet classic coinage with natural patina is called AT. Kool-aid drinkers feel free to comment. I personally don't have loyalty to any one TPG. My personal thoughts are if you didn't slab it 10 years ago, dont slab it today. But if you felt it was acceptable 10 years ago, why is it no longer acceptable today?
Just my two cents.
AJ
Looking through Heritage auction records of early dollars & halves, I look at the coin images and think to myself that there is no way PCGS or NGC would grade these today, yet full price is being paid for these coins because they are in their holders. Is this a false sense of comfort that the coin I am buying must be without issues? I recently returned a carson city gold eagle that was slabbed problem free by PCGS, but looked like it had been scrubed with a brillo pad in hand. So is this comfort of buying a coin in PCGS/NGC holders a false sense of security? Because even though its slabbed, doesn't mean its problem free or that it would slab today. Many early coins have been dipped or cleaned, as it may have been acceptable. There are and should be price differences between a cleaned up looking coin, and a dark and crusty coin in the same grade holder. I think there should be a disclaimer on the back of slabs that the grade is not guaranteed in the future. If you cracked out 10 classic coins in older holders, I can bet a good percentage would not slab today. How do these type of coins fit into today's market? Are they priced lower or the same? If you discover upon close inspection that a coin you've had for years would not be problem free today, do you try to replace it?
In regards to toners, I personally think the standard is very out of whack. How American Eagles that have been clearly artificially toned can be slabbed, yet classic coinage with natural patina is called AT. Kool-aid drinkers feel free to comment. I personally don't have loyalty to any one TPG. My personal thoughts are if you didn't slab it 10 years ago, dont slab it today. But if you felt it was acceptable 10 years ago, why is it no longer acceptable today?
Just my two cents.
AJ
All coins kept in bank vaults.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
0
Comments
I agree that "a good percentage early coinage that found its way into slabs over the last 20-30 years, would not slab today". I believe a combination of things contributed to this change, for example: competition, grading guarantee, coin doctoring, CAC, and new graders. As grading standards tighten it means "rejecting hundreds or thousands of coins that were considered market acceptable in the past". People who are unable to grade for themselves are forced to rely on some else and or the holder for accurate grading. Although PCGS/NGC holders do help significantly, they are certainly not perfect. Many certified coins that would do not meet today's strict grading standards are selling for discounted prices. In addition, coins that do meet today's strict grading standards are selling for premium prices. Good examples are coins that have received CAC approval or a plus designation.
Most serious collectors that I know upgrade when possible and seek to maintain the highest level of quality possible throughout their collections. I always remember that the grade on the slab can change, but the coin remains the same.
"There are NO grading standards, only opinions formed by guidelines and experience with those guidelines. As such, they drift, are malleable and may be questioned, debated, argued and otherwise challenged".
He makes a good point, I think the term "grading guidelines" is more accurate than "grading standards".
<< <i>I have said it before, and will state it here again. There are no standards, only guidelines. A standard is something repeatable, non-debatable and documented... such as an 'inch', a 'centimeter', a 'minute' etc etc etc. There are NO grading standards, only opinions formed by guidelines and experience with those guidelines. As such, they drift, are malleable and may be questioned, debated, argued and otherwise challenged. Cheers, RickO >>
Very well said.
And, IMHO, this is exactly as it should be.
learning from past mistakes, striving to become more consistent.....
and living with the fact that the grades they have given on millions of coins will always be staring them right back in the face .
Put yourself in their shoes , grade 999 coins right on the button ; but God help you on that 1000 th one you messed up on .....
<< <i>I have said it before, and will state it here again. There are no standards, only guidelines. A standard is something repeatable, non-debatable and documented... such as an 'inch', a 'centimeter', a 'minute' etc etc etc. There are NO grading standards, only opinions formed by guidelines and experience with those guidelines. As such, they drift, are malleable and may be questioned, debated, argued and otherwise challenged. Cheers, RickO >>
Well stated, Ricko.
<< <i>I have said it before, and will state it here again. There are no standards, only guidelines. A standard is something repeatable, non-debatable and documented... such as an 'inch', a 'centimeter', a 'minute' etc etc etc. There are NO grading standards, only opinions formed by guidelines and experience with those guidelines. As such, they drift, are malleable and may be questioned, debated, argued and otherwise challenged. Cheers, RickO >>
Thats fine, but there should be a disclaimer put on the slab stating something like this. This is what WE as a grading company think, but that could change at any time for any reason. Or we may in the future determine this coin not gradable.
By putting a number on something, that kind of does make a standard because its a numerical value. Unforunately, that numerical value can change from year to year and from grader to grader. Such as no contact marks = 70, 1 contact mark = 69 etc etc
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
For higher consistency, the human element, and subjective element would have to be adjusted out of the process. This is not the way now, and is unlikely to be the way in the near future.
Finally, as others have shared, the TPGs are always learning. They are always fighting the docs. When evidence surfaces that a doc has gotten some coins through, of course, the TPGs have to reevaluate and take a closer look at coins with a similar appearance. This might be learned through the rumor mill, or harder evidence might be present. As I have said many times on the mostly pointless AT/NT threads, the chemical processes are for the most part the same, it is the time element, the accelerants that differs. A pro level doctored coin is often going to look a lot like an old time coin. If it doesn't the doc isn't that good. When a doc brags first hand or second hand, about the hundreds or thousands of coins they have gotten through, and the TPGs hear about it, wouldn't folks want the companies to adjust? Yea or Nay? Isn't the answer obvious? Unfortunately, that adjustment means much closer scrutiny for all the coins with a similar look, and sometimes mistakes are made.
<< <i>The short answer is yes they have changed. Should they change? No. Thats why you have to buy the coin, not the holder. All this Registry nonsense where people just want a certain number on the label regardless of what the coin looks like baffles me too. >>
The registry is like fantasy football. I used to only care about my team each week and maybe the division rivals or playoff battles. Then fantasy football came around and suddenly I care very much about Buccaneers vs Browns or Bengals vs Houston all of the sudden.
There is a lot of dreck out there. They liked it enough to put it in their holders. If now presented to them, they'll buy it back off the market if it's egregious. Usually. Some peoples' defintion of egregious is not the same as others'. I'm too lazy to examine our host's balance sheet to see how much they spend on buy-backs. My opinion is that the contingent liability is orders of magnitude higher than their market cap.
As long as the consensual reality can be maintained, no one need worry about another Bear, Stearns or Lehman Bros.
Keep learning to train and educate your "eye". Best consumer protection there is. Market risk? Past performance is no guarantee....
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
Yes (but don't say it too loud or too often).
<< <i>The short answer is yes they have changed. Should they change? No. Thats why you have to buy the coin, not the holder. All this Registry nonsense where people just want a certain number on the label regardless of what the coin looks like baffles me too. >>
That's not the short answer. Or, if it is the short answer, I've got the shorter one: markets change. The appraisal standards at the TPGs change because the TPGs are market appraising, i.e., appraising for the whims of the market.
Oh, and you thought they were grading...
That was in 1988 or so ; I heard him say it at a convention where he was answering questions from the audience - in fact it was Bushmaster that asked him that very question ..........
.......that was all we needed to hear , started buying PCGS slabs like there was no tomorrow - and been buying then every since
Hoard the keys.
i.e. MS64 details, but net grade is XF40 due to doctoring, cleaning, etc.
gates because the business was making good money.. and loosening up back then
was a way to get more and more submissions.
now.. with the way things are.. it is a good time to be tight because things have
slowed down? Bringing back a tight reputation does not hurt the bottom line as
much because the people who are submitting now days will submit no matter what.
i am not quite sure i would want to be a long term stock holder in a tpg because
the amount of old coins is finite. there are only so many gimmicks one can come
up with to get coins resubmitted. To me.. it will be a slow decline and even worse
if the mint ever stops producing so much stuff. So loosening up will be coming again
to a theater near you!!
<< <i>Looking through Heritage auction records of early dollars & halves, I look at the coin images and think to myself that there is no way PCGS or NGC would grade these today >>
I don't doubt that some coins currently in holders would not grade if resubmitted today, I do however doubt (with all due respect) your ability to make definitive determinations of same by looking at images online (including lots of old scans on the HA site).
<< <i>I think they should slab every coin sent in for grading. Then net grade it on the insert if there are problems.
i.e. MS64 details, but net grade is XF40 due to doctoring, cleaning, etc. >>
ANACS tried that and was found to be the only entity take can NET grade was the market via prices paid.
Only buy items that you like and make sense to you. Don't take my word or anyone else's for that matter. It is your money. Get what you like.
There are more coins than anyone person has money.
Patience is the key ingredient to a satisfying collection.
We all disagree with one another on different coins. Big deal. Buy what meets your personal qualifications.
If you are unable to purchase anything satisfactory, get professional numismatic counsel that you trust.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
<< <i>Crypto, maybe so. But I still find it hard to beleive what slabbed before are things they wont slab today. >>
So what would you like the TPGs to do after they learn that a coin doc has gotten 100s of coins with a certain look into their holders? Just continue passing them through into holders? The company might learn this first hand, second hand, or may only have strong suspicions. Is your answer is to keep rewarding the docs, keep passing through likely doctored coins? Really? Again, it is an ongoing game between docs, counterfeiters and the TPGs. It is not static. One side learns something and adjusts, and then the other side either has to adjust or be played. It seems unrealistic to me to think that after about 30 years for things to be anything near static. Even in five years, there are often big jumps on each side of the race.
Many might disagree with your premise. What slabbed last week, might not make it this week. Time is a factor, but the opinion factor is a stronger one. The TPGs have always put it out front that they are offering an opinion on the grade, though one backed by their guarantee. Where did people ever think it was more than opinion? Who told folks that?
Nothing like precision and exactitude.
Camelot
If 999 were graded right on the button, missing #1000 would be irrelevant. Flip that 999 over and that's much closer to how many are graded right on the button first time around.
ColonelJessup's second paragraph sums up the current situation pretty well.
roadrunner
<< <i>How often does the grading standard change with the top TPG's and why? It seems to me that a good percentage early coinage that found its way into slabs over the last 20-30 years, would not slab today. Why such a drastic change? Is it because younger graders come in, or do TPG's keep tightening standards trying to stay competetive, even though it might mean rejecting hundreds or thousands of coins that were considered market acceptable in the past?
Looking through Heritage auction records of early dollars & halves, I look at the coin images and think to myself that there is no way PCGS or NGC would grade these today, yet full price is being paid for these coins because they are in their holders. Is this a false sense of comfort that the coin I am buying must be without issues? I recently returned a carson city gold eagle that was slabbed problem free by PCGS, but looked like it had been scrubed with a brillo pad in hand. So is this comfort of buying a coin in PCGS/NGC holders a false sense of security? Because even though its slabbed, doesn't mean its problem free or that it would slab today. Many early coins have been dipped or cleaned, as it may have been acceptable. There are and should be price differences between a cleaned up looking coin, and a dark and crusty coin in the same grade holder. I think there should be a disclaimer on the back of slabs that the grade is not guaranteed in the future. If you cracked out 10 classic coins in older holders, I can bet a good percentage would not slab today. How do these type of coins fit into today's market? Are they priced lower or the same? If you discover upon close inspection that a coin you've had for years would not be problem free today, do you try to replace it?
In regards to toners, I personally think the standard is very out of whack. How American Eagles that have been clearly artificially toned can be slabbed, yet classic coinage with natural patina is called AT. Kool-aid drinkers feel free to comment. I personally don't have loyalty to any one TPG. My personal thoughts are if you didn't slab it 10 years ago, dont slab it today. But if you felt it was acceptable 10 years ago, why is it no longer acceptable today?
Just my two cents.
AJ >>
Sounds like you are upset because the grades on some coins you sent to PCGS didn't get graded according to your standards or guidelines.--------------------------BigE
And just to clarify, I am not talking about coins that have been professionally messed with by coin doctors. I am talking more about classic coinage that was graded for years and now all of a sudden is not acceptable. And how do you call older coinage AT when you have graded many modern silver eagles that have blatant AT? Something is just not right there. I understand things change and standards/guidelines also change. But when for SO many years (20 years plus) classic coinage that was considered acceptable SHOULD STILL BE ACCEPTABLE. Yes prices will reflect quality. But based on these new standards/guidlines, I cant imagine how anyone can buy a PCGS holdered coin sight unseen.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>BigE, am I upset about them not crossing things due to various reasons? Yes.
And just to clarify, I am not talking about coins that have been professionally messed with by coin doctors. I am talking more about classic coinage that was graded for years and now all of a sudden is not acceptable. And how do you call older coinage AT when you have graded many modern silver eagles that have blatant AT? Something is just not right there. I understand things change and standards/guidelines also change. But when for SO many years (20 years plus) classic coinage that was considered acceptable SHOULD STILL BE ACCEPTABLE. Yes prices will reflect quality. But based on these new standards/guidlines, I cant imagine how anyone can buy a PCGS holdered coin sight unseen. >>
I apologize, because now I don't know what kinds of coins you are talking about. Some actually examples of real coins might be useful for clarity.
If you are mostly talking about toners, coin docs tone coins, as well as a ton of other tricks. A toned coin in a PCGS holder sells for a lot more than a raw coin, that's where the profit is. Coin docs will do most anything to a coin if the money is good enough, and some toners sell for big money. Some report that there are docs with rooms full of albums, and other holders, with hundreds of coins, and other accelerants so as to reproduce the natural looking toning patterns. Again, the debate on AT/NT is rather meaningless, because the chemical processes are nearly the same. So should the TPGs holder the coins if they have a strong suspicion that the toners are being churned out factory-style by a few individuals? If you vote yes, well then, that is a fine opinion, but one that I would disagree with.
If this thread is headed towards to another meaningless AT/NT debate, count me out. The question is meaningless to me. What matters to me is how old the toning is, the chemical processes are nearly the same.
PCGS may go easier on a colorful eagle, but there is a lot less to lose for them and the stockholders than a toned bust half that may be hiding something under the surface.---------BigE
<< <i>Put yourself in their shoes , grade 999 coins right on the button ; but God help you on that 1000 th one you messed up on .....
If 999 were graded right on the button, missing #1000 would be irrelevant. Flip that 999 over and that's much closer to how many are graded right on the button first time around.
ColonelJessup's second paragraph sums up the current situation pretty well.
roadrunner >>
....like Meatloaf's song : " Two out of three ain't bad "
..........I don't think I ever did that - that would be buying the holder and not the coin ; which is universally thought to be a no-no
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
DISCLAIMER: WE as a grading company think the listed grade is accurate. However, that could change at any time for any reason. Or we may in the future determine this coin not gradable for any reason.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
The debate usually starts when someone buys the label and disagrees with what's inside the plastic. The arguement starts when a coin is cracked out, re-submitted, and doesn't come back "as it was" or "better".
Silly game, isn't it ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I rarely buy a coin sight unseen and when I do there must be a return privilege. To often I end up returning the coin because I don't like it. Buying early type coins sight unseen is risky but sometimes it's worth the risk to acquire a rare date. Although golfer72's statements are true, 'that its nice to buy the TPG's misgraded coins for less money! Also nice to buy non PCGS coins for good prices that the Kool-Aid drinkers wont even look at". I don't think they address AnkurJ's concerns/questions or are the best virtues of the current grading system.
Colonel, better advise I have not heard "Keep learning to train and educate your "eye". Best consumer protection there is. Market risk? Past performance is no guarantee...." :ThumbsUp
PCGS and NGC are more PRICING services than grading services. Instead of grading a coin 65 on technical guidelines, it's called a 65 because it's "worth" the value of a 65.
<< <i>What's choice and what's gem? What's marginal eye appeal, and what's a blazer? How minor is a minor scratch? Is a few bagmarks 2 or 10?
PCGS and NGC are more PRICING services than grading services. Instead of grading a coin 65 on technical guidelines, it's called a 65 because it's "worth" the value of a 65. >>
again Frank is spelling out down to earth, common sense rational : it is a concept that if fully understood , would eliminate the confusion about why/how PCGS establishes a grade/price