OPA: I thought the 2011-S was the most expensive coin in the set? How do you explain not getting 1 70 2011-S coin out of 10 sets when supposedly half were minted at different times? But the kicker is they were graded at the same time? I have contacted PCGS and I guess a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins? OK?? Sorry to vent so much on this but I have to explain to my freind why her 5 sets graded the way they did? I talked her into spending the money on grading and spending the extra money on the first strike holder also. Sometimes it pays not to be friends when it comes to something like this. I know this is peanuts to a lot of you on this tread but not to me. There is a lot of money tied up in 10 sets with grading fees, etc.
<< <i>fishcooker: When I said the thing about the grocery money it was a figure of speach. What I'm saying is how can 10 of the most expensive coins in the sets come back with no 70's and they had to have been graded by one grader? Can someone here on this forum tell me if I am right or not whether on one person would have graded those 10 2011-S coins? Plus, how can 5 sets sent from the Mint a week apart come up with the same grades. Does anybody else have coins from the Mint shipped on 11/7/2011 and 11/14/2011 and graded with no 2011-S 70 coins in all 10 sets? Please can anybody explain to me how this could even be possible? >>
Well I can't speak to your particular coins but I will say this: I just got my submission back from NGC today. My MS 70 grade through rate was about 56%, which is on the low end for NGC, but I'm satisfied with it. My order was received by them on 12/7 (rather late in the game). I got the coins from the mint very early though (my order was placed in the first 1/2 hour) but I procrastinated in submitting them. There seems to be a phenomena of "diminishing grades" that occurs with all TPG's after an issue is in it's infancy. What the reason for it is any one's guess, but as time goes on during the grading cycle of a new issue the standards seem to tighten. It may be the novelty wears off for the graders and they get tired of seeing the same thing day in and day out. It may be something else also. I just spent considerable time examining my coins under magnification and the overwhelming majority of the coins I got back that graded MS 69 could have been placed in an MS 70 slab and no one would ever question them. This is one of the problems with collectors relying so heavily on TPG's to lead the way. There is entirely too much inconsistency displayed by all the TPG's for them to be looked at as anything more than a single opinion when it comes to the condition of a coin. We all need to buy the coin we like and not the slab. Until a system is developed that removes the human element from the grading equation, a coin in a slab is a coin with an educated opinion attached and nothing more. I know it sucks to have probably $2K tied up in grading fees and hear this but it is the way I see it. I have never seen a newly issued coin with a population report that has an increasing grade through rate of MS 70 as time moves forward. If any of you have please share.
"a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins?"
Ervil: A serious question ... would you have demanded this guy slightly higher up from the janitor speak with you had all (10) of your S mint coins graded MS70? There was NO discrepancy at all with your 10 coins... they were all MS9 quality. Tough break to be sure, but it happens just like "snake eyes" come up on the dice one in every 36 times.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I agree with you 100% on not depending on the TPG's as to the condition of the coin that you want in your collection. But the problem is when it comes to sell these coins no one agrees with you about the value of the coin. But what pisses me off is people are letting one person's (or I should say 3 people's) opinion decide what your grandchildren are going to inherit and like you say it could be because they are getting sick of looking at one series for such a long time, and if that is the case that is very sad!!
<< <i>OPA: I thought the 2011-S was the most expensive coin in the set? PCGS hasn't given prices on the reverse proof yet? How do you explain not getting 1 70 2011-S coin out of 10 sets when supposedly half were minted at different times? But the kicker is they were graded at the same time? I have contacted PCGS and I guess a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins? OK?? Sorry to vent so much on this but I have to explain to my freind why her 5 sets graded the way they did? I talked her into spending the money on grading and spending the extra money on the first strike holder also. Sometimes it pays not to be friends when it comes to something like this. I know this is peanuts to a lot of you on this tread but not to me. There is a lot of money tied up in 10 sets with grading fees, etc. >>
Looks like you got about 26% 70s. I know someone whose sets yielded even less than that....around 20% (also with zero S 70s). Your results aren't great but they could be worse! Basically, it's kind of a luck of the draw, especially with sealed boxes. There are no guarantees with these things. I'd be very cautious to talk up potential profits, etc. with friends when great results do not always pan out. It is a risky game to play that's heavily based on chance. On the bright side of life, you're probably still in the black with four rev. proof 70s and you could probably trade a few of those without much pain for S 70s if you want a few full sets.
PF
Successful transactions with keepdachange, tizofthe, adriana, wondercoin
<< <i>OPA: I thought the 2011-S was the most expensive coin in the set? How do you explain not getting 1 70 2011-S coin out of 10 sets when supposedly half were minted at different times? But the kicker is they were graded at the same time? I have contacted PCGS and I guess a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins? OK?? Sorry to vent so much on this but I have to explain to my freind why her 5 sets graded the way they did? I talked her into spending the money on grading and spending the extra money on the first strike holder also. Sometimes it pays not to be friends when it comes to something like this. I know this is peanuts to a lot of you on this tread but not to me. There is a lot of money tied up in 10 sets with grading fees, etc. >>
PCGS has given a price on the rev. proof....just go back and peruse GB stats. FYI.. I, received 4/70's out of 6 sets submitted and you don't see me cry about it on any forum It's obvious you gambled on a super quick rich scheme and came up short. If you want to know how the grading works, go on our host's website and watch the video.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
<< <i>"a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins?"
Ervil: A serious question ... would you have demanded this guy slightly higher up from the janitor speak with you had all (10) of your S mint coins graded MS70? There was NO discrepancy at all with your 10 coins... they were all MS9 quality. Tough break to be sure, but it happens just like "snake eyes" come up on the dice one in every 36 times.
Wondercoin >>
Wondercoin:
Yes I would have wanted to talk to someone if 10 fo the S mints came back as 70, that would be as bad as what I received. I might not have been posting as much in these treads though? That is pretty sad when your saying grading is like throwing dice and every 36 times you might get paid? How can you say there was no discrepancy with the 10 sets I sent in when you didn't grade them, are you reading from a script? There is one thing I have noticed though after reading your posts, you should maybe do some commercials for our hosts, I think you do a damn good job promoting what they do and how they do it? Do you get a break on your fees?
IMO grading sealed boxes is a dice toss. If you are a bulk submitter the average will even out soley because of the sheer number submitted will move the extremes to the middle.
Successful transactions with keepdachange, tizofthe, adriana, wondercoin
Ervil: When you submit SEALED boxes of coins for grading ... coins you have never even looked at before submitting them ... you are "throwing the dice". You think you "crapped out" on the submisison and that is your right to believe that. But, you take that chance when you submit SEALED BOXES OF COINS... right? Have you even looked carefully at the (10) S MS69 coins before commenting here? If you "did not grade them", then you must be reading from the same script I am reading from
Now, the next serious question for you ... if you tell me you DID study the (10) MS69 coins carefully after you got them back from PCGS, then I ask you ... how many of those coins are MS70 in your opinion? Can you please post some nice clean scans of those coins you believe are 70's? I am here to help you ... not to hurt you.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
In all honesty with the grading ..especially with these sets...I bet some of the 69s look like 70s..and some of the 70s look like 69s.... ..btw...I myself have one beautiful Ungraded set...
I've been hard at work trying to find a perfect S coin. The closest I have gotten is one I just received recently and it's a little sad I'm happy about it because it's still not perfect.
This S Coin I got is perfect on the obverse and reverse face, ABSOLUTELY PERFECT in 40x magnification. HOWEVER: I look at the edges of the coin where the plastic is holding it and I see scratch marks ><
I think it was a perfect 70 until the machine put it in the holder. Maybe the reason why PCGS changed their holders recently without telling anyone?
I didn't know you had the capabilities to look at a coin from a scan which was taken through a plastic holder and then posted on this forum and tell me whether the coin is MS-69 or MS-70, I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday? If you read my first post I think I mentioned that I have not received the coins back yet, is that a prerequisite before a person can post on this thread? I thought this thread was about how the grades have gone down drastically from a couple of weeks ago? If I'm wrong would Goldbully let me know?
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!!
Ervil, I think PCGS is quite consistent in grading the FLAG LABEL. If you carefully read through the thread, you will know what happened. I have sent in five box of 5 and this is the result of 2 boxes. I'd say all my 5 boxes are pretty consistent with mediocre grades. You are not alone. Don't look at the pop report and you will not be disappointed.
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!! >>
FWIW. I'm just an average collector. I very seldom submit coins for grading. It is a gamble and a crap shoot. I took my chance on 5 sealed sets and received 9/25 coins 70 grades. I was very happy to say the least. I sent these coins in around Nov 19. I had my order from the Mint completed at 11:09 EST using Google Chrome.
Some day's you get the Dog, some days the Dog get's you.
Would you say the flag first strike holders grade much lower than the signed and tombstone holders? If so, why do you think the reason is? Why are NGC grades still averaging around 60% to 70% 70's yet? They have a nice holder also.
Would you say the flag first strike holders grade much lower than the signed and tombstone holders? If so, why do you think the reason is? Why are NGC grades still averaging around 60% to 70% 70's yet? They have a nice holder also. >>
I submitted two 2007 platinum anniversary sets two years later and both sets received pcgs first strike 70s on all 4 coins. I think it is the luck of the draw. Not anything to do with any TPGs being tighter later on.
I can see marks in scans, which I assume your (10) S coins may each have some of.
Anyway, don't you think you should review the coins in their MS69 holders BEFORE questioning the grades? What if you look at all (10) coins and see they are all MS69 quality? It soulds like you are putting the "cart before the horse".
Just my 2 cents
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
It is interesting to read people speculate about grading.
If you could witness the process you would feel a lot better about some things, maybe worse about others.
In all the comments I have read I don't see shoddy Mint packaging figured into the equation. Do you have any idea how many times we opened boxes with loose coins bouncing around. In some cases they were even out of their plastic holders.
Getting a coin graded 70 is tough, as it should be. PCGS' strict standards are the reason buyers know the quality they are getting and will spend appropriately.
"In some cases they were even out of their plastic holders"
Even more incredible is the fact that the coins are loose bouncing around across the country as they reach the collectors AND THE EMPTY CAPSULES ARE SEALED WITH NO COINS IN THEM AND SITTING RIGHT IN THEIR PROPER SLOTS!!
I have opened many non-First Strike sets and have seen this far more times than I wish I had!!
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
You've done not bad - certainly not worse than some of us and certainly better than me. Assuming you've got your 2 boxes from the Mint - you still make money if you listen to people on this board. You scored 4 Reverse Proof 70s - you can easily trade 2 of them for two MS70 2011-S with no extra money (maybe just postage). That will make 2 full 70 sets and a few extra 70s. IT IS NOT TOO BAD ! You will get over it
Just to prove the point I just shared my November submission where I've got only 5 70s out of 5 sets much earlier - only one 2011-S and no 70 2011-P RP
Line # Item # Cert # PCGS No. CoinDate Denomination Variety Country Grade 1 1 24075001 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70 1 2 24075002 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 1 3 24075003 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 1 4 24075004 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 1 5 24075005 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 2 1 24075006 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 2 2 24075007 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 2 3 24075008 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 2 4 24075009 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 2 5 24075010 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70 3 1 24075011 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70 3 2 24075012 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 3 3 24075013 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70 3 4 24075014 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 3 5 24075015 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69 4 1 24075016 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR70DC 4 2 24075017 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC 4 3 24075018 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC 4 4 24075019 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC 4 5 24075020 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR68DC 5 1 24075021 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69 5 2 24075022 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69 5 3 24075023 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69 5 4 24075024 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69 5 5 24075025 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69 Total Items: 25 Date Received: 11/23/2011 Date Shipped: 12/2/2011
And with these stinky results I still doubled my money including grading fees/PayPal/Ebay/Shipping/etc
I am doing just fine with PCGS graded coins and so are many other folks.
We all have our good days and bad days at the grading "roulette table". Right in front of me, I am looking at a PCGS-MS63 2011-S I recently got back in one of my bulk batches. Darn thing looks like an MS64 to me all day long (NOT)! The graders are looking at the coins carefully. I have seen a few THOUSAND PCGS 25th Anniv slabs already. Overall, amazing consistency thus far with the grading! No joke ... some of the most consistent grading I have seen in the past 10-15 years.
Wondercoin >>
Wonder -- I have asked this question a few times over the past few weeks, but have not really received a good answer yet. I am new to this, and am trying to figure out where to send my 5 sets in for grading where I will either lose the least or make the most. I am only sending them in at all because I would like to actually be able to enjoy the coins, and I realize that I will destroy their future value by breaking the seal on the mint box to look at them without having them slabbed.
Anyway, while you state that the grading on these coins has been consistent, it's that very consistency that has me puzzled. How can the apparent disparity between the bulk grades and the regular submissions be explained, when all of the boxes are being submitted sight unseen, and all of the limited mintage was struck at the same time? Unopened boxes that received Mercanti and black labels consistently pulled around 70% 70s, while the population reports are now trending towards 50% 70s now that non-bulk submissions are showing up in the reports. Also non-FS submissions, which are exactly the same unopened boxes, are pulling 30% 70s, consistently. The only difference (besides the grading results) appears to be the grading fees ($14 non-FS, $32 FS, $40 black label and $50 Mercanti, with 25 coin minimums for the latter 2 options).
At this point, it seems as though the only options that make sense (assuming the bulk grading stays generous) is to submit bulk or take my chances ATS and hope that non-ER coins end up being worth the same as ER. Common sense leads me to believe that ER and FS should not carry a premium for a set where all of the sets were struck at the same time, and virtually all of them were shipped in the first 30 days, but I realize that common sense does not always prevail.
Do you have any thoughts on the consistent disparity between the grades received by unopened boxes of theoretically identical coins?
<< <i>It is interesting to read people speculate about grading.
If you could witness the process you would feel a lot better about some things, maybe worse about others.
In all the comments I have read I don't see shoddy Mint packaging figured into the equation. Do you have any idea how many times we opened boxes with loose coins bouncing around. In some cases they were even out of their plastic holders.
Getting a coin graded 70 is tough, as it should be. PCGS' strict standards are the reason buyers know the quality they are getting and will spend appropriately. >>
Got my 5-set box and every single set had at least one coin bouncing around inside the display. Many with multiple coins out of their respective receptacles and even capsules! I even had one closed capsule still in the display case receptacle and found the raw coin loose! Don't ask me how, but I'm guessing poor engineering design of the display case with respect to unanticipated shipping rigors.
I am curious, how many of these loosed coins DIDN'T get damaged and garnished a high grade?
Cheers!
Kirk
"Please help us keep these boards professional and informative…. And fun." - DW --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
NJCoin... there is a 3rd option of course and that is to sell the box sealed and make about 125% return in 60 days. Just send me a PM and I will gladly quote you a strong price on your sealed box.
Anyway, back to your question to me ... first, I can not speak to your open set/non-First strike percentages, because I have yet to submit a single coin to PCGS that was not FS qualified. My "consistency" comment addresses FS coins only as that is all I have ever submitted to PCGS and the thousands of holders I have looked at have all been FS coins.
Second, regarding the "early 70%" vs. the later 40% or 50% you argue (or suggest) ... I have pointed out before that First Strike S mint and P mint REV PROOF coins were being pre-screened before submission to some extent. That extent looks like perhaps an additional 300-400 coins(?) being submitted and perhaps 600 or 800 sets (just a guess on my part) being broken up to submit the best 300-400? So, that might explain some portion of the difference of the grade through rates involving those 2 specific coins.
Third, turing to the other (3) "commons" (and addressing the S and Rev proof to some extent as well)... I see the 10%-19% reduction in 70's from the earliest graded coins to the latest graded coins being graded. So, what could be causing that difference besides "inconsistent grading" being suggested here? I am not going to confess that I know the answer, because I don't. But, I am keeping an eye out for the issue of slight deteriorating quality of the coins over time ... if 1 or 2 coins from a decent portion of the sets in these boxes develop microscopic spots from being exposed to the air, or if some of the coins are losing their 'freshness" with time (especially the MS coins). All factors to consider. Could the graders have been slightly "generous" with the 70 grade on the first 10% of the coins they graded as a possibility too? Who knows. That is what a few of the board members have suggested as "the explanation". I can only speak to my grading results over the past roughly 6 weeks... mega-consistent from week to week. And, the board member I graded coins for in week 1/2 has been just as happy as the board members who got them graded in weeks 3/4/5. In fact, the "week 1/2" board member did not get the highest grade through rate of the members I submitted coins for thus far.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!! >>
4/70 graded coins out of 6 sets (30 coins)
Suggest you read the rules governing this forum... Rule 8) This forum is provided for the education and sharing of information. Not as a personal soapbox. If you want to learn and share information about US Coins you are welcome.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
<< <i>NJCoin... there is a 3rd option of course and that is to sell the box sealed and make about 125% return in 60 days. Just send me a PM and I will gladly quote you a strong price on your sealed box.
Anyway, back to your question to me ... first, I can not speak to your open set/non-First strike percentages, because I have yet to submit a single coin to PCGS that was not FS qualified. My "consistency" comment addresses FS coins only as that is all I have ever submitted to PCGS and the thousands of holders I have looked at have all been FS coins.
Second, regarding the "early 70%" vs. the later 40% or 50% you argue (or suggest) ... I have pointed out before that First Strike S mint and P mint REV PROOF coins were being pre-screened before submission to some extent. That extent looks like perhaps an additional 300-400 coins(?) being submitted and perhaps 600 or 800 sets (just a guess on my part) being broken up to submit the best 300-400? So, that might explain some portion of the difference of the grade through rates involving those 2 specific coins.
Third, turing to the other (3) "commons" (and addressing the S and Rev proof to some extent as well)... I see the 10%-19% reduction in 70's from the earliest graded coins to the latest graded coins being graded. So, what could be causing that difference besides "inconsistent grading" being suggested here? I am not going to confess that I know the answer, because I don't. But, I am keeping an eye out for the issue of slight deteriorating quality of the coins over time ... if 1 or 2 coins from a decent portion of the sets in these boxes develop microscopic spots from being exposed to the air, or if some of the coins are losing their 'freshness" with time (especially the MS coins). All factors to consider. Could the graders have been slightly "generous" with the 70 grade on the first 10% of the coins they graded as a possibility too? Who knows. That is what a few of the board members have suggested as "the explanation". I can only speak to my grading results over the past roughly 6 weeks... mega-consistent from week to week. And, the board member I graded coins for in week 1/2 has been just as happy as the board members who got them graded in weeks 3/4/5. In fact, the "week 1/2" board member did not get the highest grade through rate of the members I submitted coins for thus far.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin >>
Wonder -- Thanks for answering me so quickly! I appreciate your insight, and everything you say makes a certain amount of sense. You may have slightly misunderstood at least some of my question. I wasn't thinking about opened or non-FS eligible sets, and also did not consider just the 2 keys. I am looking at complete graded sets. At least until the past 2 weeks or so, all unopened boxes submitted to PCGS were FS eligible, whether or not the submitter paid extra for the designation. That said, FS 70 rates have always, consistently been significantly higher than non-FS, for all 5 coins. There is no obvious explanation for this anomaly. Moreover, the shared reports indicate that non-bulk submitter FS 70 rates have been similar to the non-FS rates. (The one assumption I did make is that all bulk submissions were FS, since that was included in the grading fee for both Mercanti and the tombstones.) Since the shared reports are so different for the pop reports, it leads to the possibility that the bulk submitters received much higher 70 rates than the non-bulk submitters.
By the way, I totally agree with you that there is no basis to believe that, if there is a bias, that it is based on who makes the submission. Not only can I submit through you, but I can also make a bulk submission myself on these. My question really boils down to this -- is it really true (as the reports to date suggest) that my unopened box of 5 sets, received by me from the mint on 11/11, can be expected to yield 20-30% 70s if I pay between $350 and $800 to have them graded regular way (either $14 or $32 times 25), whereas it can be expected to yield 60-70% 70s if I pay between $1000 and $1250 for the bulk submission? It just seems implausible that the coins are degrading, in quantity, all over the country after sitting in sealed capsules in closed boxes within sealed boxes for only 4-6 weeks, so I really cannot believe that is accounting for lower 70 rates (especially since you deal in quantity yourself and you have not yet experienced that), although I guess that is as possible as anything else, other than a looser standard being applied to bulk submission (at least intially).
Thank you for the offer to sell to you, but I never bought them with the intent of selling. I felt lucky to be able to get through to place the order, and originally wanted to place 5 orders, each for an individual set, so that I could keep some sealed (possibly to sell later) and at least one to open and enjoy. I had so much trouble getting through, however, that when I finally did I changed the quantity in the cart from 1 to 5, thinking I'd be sorry if I couldn't get through again. Now, rather than have them sit in a closet unopened for years, I've decided to have them graded so that I could enjoy a few and, again, maybe sell some later. For what it's worth, I'm not trying to uncover some grand conspiracy or anything. I'm just trying to figure out how and why PCGS pop reports went from 60-70% 70s to approaching 50% in a few short weeks on unopened, unseen sets that could not have possibly been cherry picked, in order to minimize my chances of getting burned by submitting my box. I'm kind of sorry that I missed the window to submit to NGC for ER, since there was one price for all, with one label and no up-charge for ER, and so far everyone seems to be getting similar results, but what's done is done.
From what I've seen so far, coins coming back 69 are money losers after taking grading fees into account. PCGS 70s are clearly worth more than NGCs, and probably always will be, but they also cost way more to have graded. Therefore, as others have pointed out, it all comes down to expected 70 yields. They run from 60-70% at NGC, and seem to have run similarly for the bulk submitters at PCGS, at least initially. If they are still running that way, making a bulk submission to PCGS may now be the only way to go, especially now that the boxes are no longer ER eligible at NGC. Of course, that calculus changes if NGC ERs do not end up carrying a premium over non-ER. It could also change if bulk submission grading becomes tighter going forward, possibly due to the chatter on boards like this. The only problem is, I wouldn't know this until after the fact! Decisions, decisions. -- Mark
Mark - Just to be clear ... when I screened a bunch of opened sets during weeks 1 and 2 (and I know someone else that did the very same thing on a decent quantity) and submitted the vey best "S" and Rev proof coins from those boxes during weeks 1 and 2 (about 50% of the coins) ... without question that would contribute to the higher graed through rate during the first weeks.... right? Obviously, I still have a pile of "reject" S and rev proof coins that PCGS never got to see. I believe this accounts for the 300-400 extra S and Rev proofs that I think are still showing in the pop report... and I assume those coins came from roughly 600-800 screened sets. Obviously, I am making some assumptions here ... do you have a problem with these assumptions?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>it really doesn't get worse than that from a mint sealed box... does it? !!
Wondercoin
P.S. So, what if the entire box of coins looked like this and PCGS graded the box in the first week ... would I have had a shot at some 70's? >>
Nah; probably a 69
Seriously, though, you referred to it as coming from a bulk submission, but, at least for me, the bulk submissions I have been referring to are the Mercantis and the tombstones, not regular bulk submissions that people like me are not eligible to make (due to the 100 coin requirement). All reports seem to indicate that the flags have not been grading as high, which is why they have been selling in the market for a premium to the other labels
<< <i>Mark - Just to be clear ... when I screened a bunch of opened sets during weeks 1 and 2 (and I know someone else that did the very same thing on a decent quantity) and submitted the vey best "S" and Rev proof coins from those boxes during weeks 1 and 2 (about 50% of the coins) ... without question that would contribute to the higher graed through rate during the first weeks.... right? Obviously, I still have a pile of "reject" S and rev proof coins that PCGS never got to see. I believe this accounts for the 300-400 extra S and Rev proofs that I think are still showing in the pop report... and I assume those coins came from roughly 600-800 screened sets. Obviously, I am making some assumptions here ... do you have a problem with these assumptions?
Wondercoin >>
Wonder -- No, I do not have a problem at all with what you are saying, and I agree 100% with your conclusion on that point. Again, I am looking at all 5 coins, not just the 2, and I am comparing the shared reports to the initial pop reports and to the weekly changes in the pop reports, as well as to the non-FS pop reports, again on all 5 coins. Hopefully you agree that, statistically, there should be no difference in the 3 non-keys that are eligible for the "set" designation but were sent submitted for a non-FS label, and those that have a FS label, especially for those shipped by the mint prior to 12/8. And yet, there has been a huge difference in the grades since the first pop report, where the only difference in the boxes has been how much the submitter paid to have the coins graded. That's what started my inquiry.
After digging a little deeper, I saw the shared reports and realized that the difference in the grades was not so much FS and non-FS, but bulk (Mercanti and tombstone) and regular submission. Coincidentally, whereas bulk submissions normally receive a discount (I assume, since I've never actually done one), these bulk submissions actually carried a premium cost due to the special, limited edition labels and the signed letter. Which all leads to the apparent result that, at least so far, with all else being equal (not counting cherry picked coins and not looking at only the 2 keys) the sight unseen coins in the slabs that cost the most have yielded the highest percentage of 70s. If that continues to be the case going forward, at least I'll know what to do to maximize my yield of 70s. -- Mark
I think you are being generous with a 60 obverse. I think it's no grade, post mint damage. If that was on a WLH as sharp and distinct as it is, I think the marking on the sun would be a showstopper. That your coin is a 63...........................
Why is it that if I post the results of my 10 sets and then comment on the results is somehow making this thread a soapbox? That is what I see everybody else doing here?
Comments
<< <i>fishcooker: When I said the thing about the grocery money it was a figure of speach. What I'm saying is how can 10 of the most expensive coins in the sets come back with no 70's and they had to have been graded by one grader? Can someone here on this forum tell me if I am right or not whether on one person would have graded those 10 2011-S coins? Plus, how can 5 sets sent from the Mint a week apart come up with the same grades. Does anybody else have coins from the Mint shipped on 11/7/2011 and 11/14/2011 and graded with no 2011-S 70 coins in all 10 sets? Please can anybody explain to me how this could even be possible? >>
Well I can't speak to your particular coins but I will say this: I just got my submission back from NGC today. My MS 70 grade through rate was about 56%, which is on the low end for NGC, but I'm satisfied with it. My order was received by them on 12/7 (rather late in the game). I got the coins from the mint very early though (my order was placed in the first 1/2 hour) but I procrastinated in submitting them. There seems to be a phenomena of "diminishing grades" that occurs with all TPG's after an issue is in it's infancy. What the reason for it is any one's guess, but as time goes on during the grading cycle of a new issue the standards seem to tighten. It may be the novelty wears off for the graders and they get tired of seeing the same thing day in and day out. It may be something else also. I just spent considerable time examining my coins under magnification and the overwhelming majority of the coins I got back that graded MS 69 could have been placed in an MS 70 slab and no one would ever question them. This is one of the problems with collectors relying so heavily on TPG's to lead the way. There is entirely too much inconsistency displayed by all the TPG's for them to be looked at as anything more than a single opinion when it comes to the condition of a coin. We all need to buy the coin we like and not the slab. Until a system is developed that removes the human element from the grading equation, a coin in a slab is a coin with an educated opinion attached and nothing more. I know it sucks to have probably $2K tied up in grading fees and hear this but it is the way I see it. I have never seen a newly issued coin with a population report that has an increasing grade through rate of MS 70 as time moves forward. If any of you have please share.
Ervil: A serious question ... would you have demanded this guy slightly higher up from the janitor speak with you had all (10) of your S mint coins graded MS70? There was NO discrepancy at all with your 10 coins... they were all MS9 quality. Tough break to be sure, but it happens just like "snake eyes" come up on the dice one in every 36 times.
Wondercoin
I agree with you 100% on not depending on the TPG's as to the condition of the coin that you want in your collection. But the problem is when it comes to sell these coins no one agrees with you about the value of the coin. But what pisses me off is people are letting one person's (or I should say 3 people's) opinion decide what your grandchildren are going to inherit and like you say it could be because they are getting sick of looking at one series for such a long time, and if that is the case that is very sad!!
<< <i>OPA: I thought the 2011-S was the most expensive coin in the set? PCGS hasn't given prices on the reverse proof yet? How do you explain not getting 1 70 2011-S coin out of 10 sets when supposedly half were minted at different times? But the kicker is they were graded at the same time? I have contacted PCGS and I guess a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins? OK?? Sorry to vent so much on this but I have to explain to my freind why her 5 sets graded the way they did? I talked her into spending the money on grading and spending the extra money on the first strike holder also. Sometimes it pays not to be friends when it comes to something like this. I know this is peanuts to a lot of you on this tread but not to me. There is a lot of money tied up in 10 sets with grading fees, etc. >>
Looks like you got about 26% 70s. I know someone whose sets yielded even less than that....around 20% (also with zero S 70s). Your results aren't great but they could be worse! Basically, it's kind of a luck of the draw, especially with sealed boxes. There are no guarantees with these things. I'd be very cautious to talk up potential profits, etc. with friends when great results do not always pan out. It is a risky game to play that's heavily based on chance. On the bright side of life, you're probably still in the black with four rev. proof 70s and you could probably trade a few of those without much pain for S 70s if you want a few full sets.
PF
<< <i>OPA: I thought the 2011-S was the most expensive coin in the set? How do you explain not getting 1 70 2011-S coin out of 10 sets when supposedly half were minted at different times? But the kicker is they were graded at the same time? I have contacted PCGS and I guess a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins? OK?? Sorry to vent so much on this but I have to explain to my freind why her 5 sets graded the way they did? I talked her into spending the money on grading and spending the extra money on the first strike holder also. Sometimes it pays not to be friends when it comes to something like this. I know this is peanuts to a lot of you on this tread but not to me. There is a lot of money tied up in 10 sets with grading fees, etc. >>
PCGS has given a price on the rev. proof....just go back and peruse GB stats.
FYI.. I, received 4/70's out of 6 sets submitted and you don't see me cry about it on any forum It's obvious you gambled on a super quick rich scheme and came up short. If you want to know how the grading works, go on our host's website and watch the video.
<< <i>"a person that is a little higher in position than the janitor is going to give me a call and explain how this grading works and why there is such a discrepansy in the 10 2011-S coins?"
Ervil: A serious question ... would you have demanded this guy slightly higher up from the janitor speak with you had all (10) of your S mint coins graded MS70? There was NO discrepancy at all with your 10 coins... they were all MS9 quality. Tough break to be sure, but it happens just like "snake eyes" come up on the dice one in every 36 times.
Wondercoin >>
Wondercoin:
Yes I would have wanted to talk to someone if 10 fo the S mints came back as 70, that would be as bad as what I received. I might not have been posting as much in these treads though? That is pretty sad when your saying grading is like throwing dice and every 36 times you might get paid? How can you say there was no discrepancy with the 10 sets I sent in when you didn't grade them, are you reading from a script? There is one thing I have noticed though after reading your posts, you should maybe do some commercials for our hosts, I think you do a damn good job promoting what they do and how they do it? Do you get a break on your fees?
Now, the next serious question for you ... if you tell me you DID study the (10) MS69 coins carefully after you got them back from PCGS, then I ask you ... how many of those coins are MS70 in your opinion? Can you please post some nice clean scans of those coins you believe are 70's? I am here to help you ... not to hurt you.
Wondercoin
..btw...I myself have one beautiful Ungraded set...
This S Coin I got is perfect on the obverse and reverse face, ABSOLUTELY PERFECT in 40x magnification. HOWEVER: I look at the edges of the coin where the plastic is holding it and I see scratch marks ><
I think it was a perfect 70 until the machine put it in the holder. Maybe the reason why PCGS changed their holders recently without telling anyone?
I didn't know you had the capabilities to look at a coin from a scan which was taken through a plastic holder and then posted on this forum and tell me whether the coin is MS-69 or MS-70, I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday? If you read my first post I think I mentioned that I have not received the coins back yet, is that a prerequisite before a person can post on this thread? I thought this thread was about how the grades have gone down drastically from a couple of weeks ago? If I'm wrong would Goldbully let me know?
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!!
If you carefully read through the thread, you will know what happened.
I have sent in five box of 5 and this is the result of 2 boxes. I'd say all my 5 boxes are pretty consistent with mediocre grades.
You are not alone. Don't look at the pop report and you will not be disappointed.
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS70
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS68
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS70
1 509408 2011 MS69
1 509408 2011 MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS68
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS68
2 509189 2011-S MS69
2 509189 2011-S MS68
2 509189 2011-S MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS70
3 509409 2011-W MS70
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS70
3 509409 2011-W MS69
3 509409 2011-W MS70
4 509410 2011-W PR70DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
4 509410 2011-W PR69DC
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR69
5 509194 2011-P PR69
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR69
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR70
5 509194 2011-P PR69
<< <i>OPA:
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!!
FWIW. I'm just an average collector. I very seldom submit coins for grading. It is a gamble and a crap shoot. I took my chance on 5 sealed sets and received 9/25 coins 70 grades. I was very happy to say the least. I sent these coins in around Nov 19. I had my order from the Mint completed at 11:09 EST using Google Chrome.
Some day's you get the Dog, some days the Dog get's you.
2- S Mint
3- Reverse Proof
1- Proof DCAM
2- W Mint
1- NMM
I did however receive a PR65DCAM and 2 MS68's
Would you say the flag first strike holders grade much lower than the signed and tombstone holders? If so, why do you think the reason is? Why are NGC grades still averaging around 60% to 70% 70's yet? They have a nice holder also.
<< <i>revoldlog:
Would you say the flag first strike holders grade much lower than the signed and tombstone holders? If so, why do you think the reason is? Why are NGC grades still averaging around 60% to 70% 70's yet? They have a nice holder also.
Mine were Flag Holders
Box of 20
Who want's a label with a signature of a Mint Engraver, or Black Tombstone looking label.........
Anyway, don't you think you should review the coins in their MS69 holders BEFORE questioning the grades? What if you look at all (10) coins and see they are all MS69 quality? It soulds like you are putting the "cart before the horse".
Just my 2 cents
Wondercoin
<< <i>American "First Strike" Flag
Who want's a label with a signature of a Mint Engraver, or Black Tombstone looking label.........
You guys think that PCGS might offer a Flag signature label down the road?
<< <i>
<< <i>American "First Strike" Flag
Who want's a label with a signature of a Mint Engraver, or Black Tombstone looking label.........
You guys think that PCGS might offer a Flag signature label down the road?
I think they should have a slab like the 08 Buffalo's. Instead of the Buffalo, add a Tombstone with a Mercanti sig, with an American Flag.
All coins sent in would grade "First Strike 70" The Mint should keep producing these until every last human on earth has one.
GET OVER IT ALREADY
If you could witness the process you would feel a lot better about some things, maybe worse about others.
In all the comments I have read I don't see shoddy Mint packaging figured into the equation. Do you have any idea how many times we opened boxes with loose coins bouncing around. In some cases they were even out of their plastic holders.
Getting a coin graded 70 is tough, as it should be. PCGS' strict standards are the reason buyers know the quality they are getting and will spend appropriately.
Even more incredible is the fact that the coins are loose bouncing around across the country as they reach the collectors AND THE EMPTY CAPSULES ARE SEALED WITH NO COINS IN THEM AND SITTING RIGHT IN THEIR PROPER SLOTS!!
I have opened many non-First Strike sets and have seen this far more times than I wish I had!!
Wondercoin
70's rate pretty steady week to week.
Joe
IMHO The 95-W mintage will never be broken
IMHO The 11-S mintage will never be broken
Too many people upset over the ordering process. 2011-S should be the key for many years to come
You've done not bad - certainly not worse than some of us and certainly better than me. Assuming you've got your 2 boxes from the Mint - you still make money if you listen to people on this board. You scored 4 Reverse Proof 70s - you can easily trade 2 of them for two MS70 2011-S with no extra money (maybe just postage). That will make 2 full 70 sets and a few extra 70s. IT IS NOT TOO BAD ! You will get over it
Just to prove the point I just shared my November submission where I've got only 5 70s out of 5 sets much earlier - only one 2011-S and no 70 2011-P RP
Line # Item # Cert # PCGS No. CoinDate Denomination Variety Country Grade
1 1 24075001 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70
1 2 24075002 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
1 3 24075003 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
1 4 24075004 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
1 5 24075005 509408 2011 $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
2 1 24075006 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
2 2 24075007 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
2 3 24075008 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
2 4 24075009 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
2 5 24075010 509189 2011-S $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70
3 1 24075011 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70
3 2 24075012 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
3 3 24075013 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS70
3 4 24075014 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
3 5 24075015 509409 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA MS69
4 1 24075016 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR70DC
4 2 24075017 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC
4 3 24075018 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC
4 4 24075019 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR69DC
4 5 24075020 509410 2011-W $1 Silver Eagle USA PR68DC
5 1 24075021 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69
5 2 24075022 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69
5 3 24075023 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69
5 4 24075024 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69
5 5 24075025 509194 2011-P $1 Silver Eagle Reverse PR USA PR69
Total Items: 25
Date Received: 11/23/2011
Date Shipped: 12/2/2011
And with these stinky results I still doubled my money including grading fees/PayPal/Ebay/Shipping/etc
Good luck and happy New Year to all
<< <i>THANK YOU---Joe--for the excellent table. I am assuming this is without counting non-FS? >>
Your welcome, no non FS in these #'s
Joe
<< <i>If you could witness the process you would feel a lot better about some things, maybe worse about others. >>
Don, can you elaborate on this? What do you think are the strengths of the PCGS grading process? What might I feel worse about?
I'd really like to understand what actually happens during grading.
<< <i>"Granted this is all hypothetical"
It sure is!
I am doing just fine with PCGS graded coins and so are many other folks.
We all have our good days and bad days at the grading "roulette table". Right in front of me, I am looking at a PCGS-MS63 2011-S I recently got back in one of my bulk batches. Darn thing looks like an MS64 to me all day long (NOT)! The graders are looking at the coins carefully. I have seen a few THOUSAND PCGS 25th Anniv slabs already. Overall, amazing consistency thus far with the grading! No joke ... some of the most consistent grading I have seen in the past 10-15 years.
Wondercoin
Wonder -- I have asked this question a few times over the past few weeks, but have not really received a good answer yet. I am new to this, and am trying to figure out where to send my 5 sets in for grading where I will either lose the least or make the most. I am only sending them in at all because I would like to actually be able to enjoy the coins, and I realize that I will destroy their future value by breaking the seal on the mint box to look at them without having them slabbed.
Anyway, while you state that the grading on these coins has been consistent, it's that very consistency that has me puzzled. How can the apparent disparity between the bulk grades and the regular submissions be explained, when all of the boxes are being submitted sight unseen, and all of the limited mintage was struck at the same time? Unopened boxes that received Mercanti and black labels consistently pulled around 70% 70s, while the population reports are now trending towards 50% 70s now that non-bulk submissions are showing up in the reports. Also non-FS submissions, which are exactly the same unopened boxes, are pulling 30% 70s, consistently. The only difference (besides the grading results) appears to be the grading fees ($14 non-FS, $32 FS, $40 black label and $50 Mercanti, with 25 coin minimums for the latter 2 options).
At this point, it seems as though the only options that make sense (assuming the bulk grading stays generous) is to submit bulk or take my chances ATS and hope that non-ER coins end up being worth the same as ER. Common sense leads me to believe that ER and FS should not carry a premium for a set where all of the sets were struck at the same time, and virtually all of them were shipped in the first 30 days, but I realize that common sense does not always prevail.
Do you have any thoughts on the consistent disparity between the grades received by unopened boxes of theoretically identical coins?
<< <i>It is interesting to read people speculate about grading.
If you could witness the process you would feel a lot better about some things, maybe worse about others.
In all the comments I have read I don't see shoddy Mint packaging figured into the equation. Do you have any idea how many times we opened boxes with loose coins bouncing around. In some cases they were even out of their plastic holders.
Getting a coin graded 70 is tough, as it should be. PCGS' strict standards are the reason buyers know the quality they are getting and will spend appropriately. >>
Got my 5-set box and every single set had at least one coin bouncing around inside the display. Many with multiple coins out of their respective receptacles and even capsules! I even had one closed capsule still in the display case receptacle and found the raw coin loose! Don't ask me how, but I'm guessing poor engineering design of the display case with respect to unanticipated shipping rigors.
I am curious, how many of these loosed coins DIDN'T get damaged and garnished a high grade?
Cheers!
Kirk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>There is no way to look at the pops specifically for Mercantis, Tombstones, etc. specifically, are there? >>
None that I have found!!!!
Anyway, back to your question to me ... first, I can not speak to your open set/non-First strike percentages, because I have yet to submit a single coin to PCGS that was not FS qualified. My "consistency" comment addresses FS coins only as that is all I have ever submitted to PCGS and the thousands of holders I have looked at have all been FS coins.
Second, regarding the "early 70%" vs. the later 40% or 50% you argue (or suggest) ... I have pointed out before that First Strike S mint and P mint REV PROOF coins were being pre-screened before submission to some extent. That extent looks like perhaps an additional 300-400 coins(?) being submitted and perhaps 600 or 800 sets (just a guess on my part) being broken up to submit the best 300-400? So, that might explain some portion of the difference of the grade through rates involving those 2 specific coins.
Third, turing to the other (3) "commons" (and addressing the S and Rev proof to some extent as well)... I see the 10%-19% reduction in 70's from the earliest graded coins to the latest graded coins being graded. So, what could be causing that difference besides "inconsistent grading" being suggested here? I am not going to confess that I know the answer, because I don't. But, I am keeping an eye out for the issue of slight deteriorating quality of the coins over time ... if 1 or 2 coins from a decent portion of the sets in these boxes develop microscopic spots from being exposed to the air, or if some of the coins are losing their 'freshness" with time (especially the MS coins). All factors to consider. Could the graders have been slightly "generous" with the 70 grade on the first 10% of the coins they graded as a possibility too? Who knows. That is what a few of the board members have suggested as "the explanation". I can only speak to my grading results over the past roughly 6 weeks... mega-consistent from week to week. And, the board member I graded coins for in week 1/2 has been just as happy as the board members who got them graded in weeks 3/4/5. In fact, the "week 1/2" board member did not get the highest grade through rate of the members I submitted coins for thus far.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
There is a real storm brewing in that Sun!
The obverse is an MS60 and the reverse is an MS69 .... net grade MS63
The bulk graders got this one right! But, wait .... is it an error coin?
Wondercoin
<< <i>OPA:
Are you saying you received only 4 coins graded 70 out of 30 coins (6 sets) or you received 4 sets graded 70 out of 6 sets? There is a big difference. My mistake on the prices on the reverse proof, it was the 2011-S that didn't have a price when he started this thread? Also, are these forums and threads reserved just for your posts and opinions or are they for the genaral public?? Happy holidays to you to!!
4/70 graded coins out of 6 sets (30 coins)
Suggest you read the rules governing this forum...
Rule 8) This forum is provided for the education and sharing of information. Not as a personal soapbox. If you want to learn and share information about US Coins you are welcome.
Winner!
Wondercoin
P.S. So, what if the entire box of coins looked like this and PCGS graded the box in the first week ... would I have had a shot at some 70's?
<< <i>NJCoin... there is a 3rd option of course and that is to sell the box sealed and make about 125% return in 60 days. Just send me a PM and I will gladly quote you a strong price on your sealed box.
Anyway, back to your question to me ... first, I can not speak to your open set/non-First strike percentages, because I have yet to submit a single coin to PCGS that was not FS qualified. My "consistency" comment addresses FS coins only as that is all I have ever submitted to PCGS and the thousands of holders I have looked at have all been FS coins.
Second, regarding the "early 70%" vs. the later 40% or 50% you argue (or suggest) ... I have pointed out before that First Strike S mint and P mint REV PROOF coins were being pre-screened before submission to some extent. That extent looks like perhaps an additional 300-400 coins(?) being submitted and perhaps 600 or 800 sets (just a guess on my part) being broken up to submit the best 300-400? So, that might explain some portion of the difference of the grade through rates involving those 2 specific coins.
Third, turing to the other (3) "commons" (and addressing the S and Rev proof to some extent as well)... I see the 10%-19% reduction in 70's from the earliest graded coins to the latest graded coins being graded. So, what could be causing that difference besides "inconsistent grading" being suggested here? I am not going to confess that I know the answer, because I don't. But, I am keeping an eye out for the issue of slight deteriorating quality of the coins over time ... if 1 or 2 coins from a decent portion of the sets in these boxes develop microscopic spots from being exposed to the air, or if some of the coins are losing their 'freshness" with time (especially the MS coins). All factors to consider. Could the graders have been slightly "generous" with the 70 grade on the first 10% of the coins they graded as a possibility too? Who knows. That is what a few of the board members have suggested as "the explanation". I can only speak to my grading results over the past roughly 6 weeks... mega-consistent from week to week. And, the board member I graded coins for in week 1/2 has been just as happy as the board members who got them graded in weeks 3/4/5. In fact, the "week 1/2" board member did not get the highest grade through rate of the members I submitted coins for thus far.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin >>
Wonder -- Thanks for answering me so quickly! I appreciate your insight, and everything you say makes a certain amount of sense. You may have slightly misunderstood at least some of my question. I wasn't thinking about opened or non-FS eligible sets, and also did not consider just the 2 keys. I am looking at complete graded sets. At least until the past 2 weeks or so, all unopened boxes submitted to PCGS were FS eligible, whether or not the submitter paid extra for the designation. That said, FS 70 rates have always, consistently been significantly higher than non-FS, for all 5 coins. There is no obvious explanation for this anomaly. Moreover, the shared reports indicate that non-bulk submitter FS 70 rates have been similar to the non-FS rates. (The one assumption I did make is that all bulk submissions were FS, since that was included in the grading fee for both Mercanti and the tombstones.) Since the shared reports are so different for the pop reports, it leads to the possibility that the bulk submitters received much higher 70 rates than the non-bulk submitters.
By the way, I totally agree with you that there is no basis to believe that, if there is a bias, that it is based on who makes the submission. Not only can I submit through you, but I can also make a bulk submission myself on these. My question really boils down to this -- is it really true (as the reports to date suggest) that my unopened box of 5 sets, received by me from the mint on 11/11, can be expected to yield 20-30% 70s if I pay between $350 and $800 to have them graded regular way (either $14 or $32 times 25), whereas it can be expected to yield 60-70% 70s if I pay between $1000 and $1250 for the bulk submission? It just seems implausible that the coins are degrading, in quantity, all over the country after sitting in sealed capsules in closed boxes within sealed boxes for only 4-6 weeks, so I really cannot believe that is accounting for lower 70 rates (especially since you deal in quantity yourself and you have not yet experienced that), although I guess that is as possible as anything else, other than a looser standard being applied to bulk submission (at least intially).
Thank you for the offer to sell to you, but I never bought them with the intent of selling. I felt lucky to be able to get through to place the order, and originally wanted to place 5 orders, each for an individual set, so that I could keep some sealed (possibly to sell later) and at least one to open and enjoy. I had so much trouble getting through, however, that when I finally did I changed the quantity in the cart from 1 to 5, thinking I'd be sorry if I couldn't get through again. Now, rather than have them sit in a closet unopened for years, I've decided to have them graded so that I could enjoy a few and, again, maybe sell some later. For what it's worth, I'm not trying to uncover some grand conspiracy or anything. I'm just trying to figure out how and why PCGS pop reports went from 60-70% 70s to approaching 50% in a few short weeks on unopened, unseen sets that could not have possibly been cherry picked, in order to minimize my chances of getting burned by submitting my box. I'm kind of sorry that I missed the window to submit to NGC for ER, since there was one price for all, with one label and no up-charge for ER, and so far everyone seems to be getting similar results, but what's done is done.
From what I've seen so far, coins coming back 69 are money losers after taking grading fees into account. PCGS 70s are clearly worth more than NGCs, and probably always will be, but they also cost way more to have graded. Therefore, as others have pointed out, it all comes down to expected 70 yields. They run from 60-70% at NGC, and seem to have run similarly for the bulk submitters at PCGS, at least initially. If they are still running that way, making a bulk submission to PCGS may now be the only way to go, especially now that the boxes are no longer ER eligible at NGC. Of course, that calculus changes if NGC ERs do not end up carrying a premium over non-ER. It could also change if bulk submission grading becomes tighter going forward, possibly due to the chatter on boards like this. The only problem is, I wouldn't know this until after the fact! Decisions, decisions.
Wondercoin
<< <i>it really doesn't get worse than that from a mint sealed box... does it? !!
Wondercoin
P.S. So, what if the entire box of coins looked like this and PCGS graded the box in the first week ... would I have had a shot at some 70's?
Nah; probably a 69
Seriously, though, you referred to it as coming from a bulk submission, but, at least for me, the bulk submissions I have been referring to are the Mercantis and the tombstones, not regular bulk submissions that people like me are not eligible to make (due to the 100 coin requirement). All reports seem to indicate that the flags have not been grading as high, which is why they have been selling in the market for a premium to the other labels
<< <i>Mark - Just to be clear ... when I screened a bunch of opened sets during weeks 1 and 2 (and I know someone else that did the very same thing on a decent quantity) and submitted the vey best "S" and Rev proof coins from those boxes during weeks 1 and 2 (about 50% of the coins) ... without question that would contribute to the higher graed through rate during the first weeks.... right? Obviously, I still have a pile of "reject" S and rev proof coins that PCGS never got to see. I believe this accounts for the 300-400 extra S and Rev proofs that I think are still showing in the pop report... and I assume those coins came from roughly 600-800 screened sets. Obviously, I am making some assumptions here ... do you have a problem with these assumptions?
Wondercoin >>
Wonder -- No, I do not have a problem at all with what you are saying, and I agree 100% with your conclusion on that point. Again, I am looking at all 5 coins, not just the 2, and I am comparing the shared reports to the initial pop reports and to the weekly changes in the pop reports, as well as to the non-FS pop reports, again on all 5 coins. Hopefully you agree that, statistically, there should be no difference in the 3 non-keys that are eligible for the "set" designation but were sent submitted for a non-FS label, and those that have a FS label, especially for those shipped by the mint prior to 12/8. And yet, there has been a huge difference in the grades since the first pop report, where the only difference in the boxes has been how much the submitter paid to have the coins graded. That's what started my inquiry.
After digging a little deeper, I saw the shared reports and realized that the difference in the grades was not so much FS and non-FS, but bulk (Mercanti and tombstone) and regular submission. Coincidentally, whereas bulk submissions normally receive a discount (I assume, since I've never actually done one), these bulk submissions actually carried a premium cost due to the special, limited edition labels and the signed letter. Which all leads to the apparent result that, at least so far, with all else being equal (not counting cherry picked coins and not looking at only the 2 keys) the sight unseen coins in the slabs that cost the most have yielded the highest percentage of 70s. If that continues to be the case going forward, at least I'll know what to do to maximize my yield of 70s. -- Mark
<< <i>The obverse is an MS60
Wondercoin >>
I think you are being generous with a 60 obverse. I think it's no grade, post mint damage. If that was on a WLH as sharp and distinct as it is, I think the marking on the sun would be a showstopper. That your coin is a 63...........................
Wondercoin
Why don't you read rules 3, 4 and 5.
Why is it that if I post the results of my 10 sets and then comment on the results is somehow making this thread a soapbox? That is what I see everybody else doing here?