I will offer a contrary data point to show that AnkurJ's OP is misguided.
In 47 years of collecting, I have only submitted 10 coin for grading or crossovers to PCGS. Much of my early half dollar collection is raw, puchased from auctions and dealers before everthing was slabbed. I will keep them raw until its time to sell, with the exception of some registry coins (I drank a cup of koolaid one day, and decided to play the PCGS Registry game). Here is ALL of my crossover attempts:
1803 .50 Small 3 NGC40 crossed in holder PCGS40 (Heritage) 1806 .50 Knobbed 6 Large Stars NGC45 crossed in holder PCGS45 (unattributed from D Lawrence, condition census) 1806 .50 Pointed 6 NGC45 crossed in holder PCGS45 (Heritage) 1806 .50 1806/Inv 6 NGC40 crossed in holder PCGS40 (Alpine Numis) 1838 $5 NGC58 crossed in holder PCGS58 (Doug Winter, my icon coin)
and a raw example:
1806 .50 small stars raw VF30 B&M Russ Logan auction PCGS VF35
All of these are in my PCGS Registries. So I am 5/5 or 100% on my crossover attempts, in holder.
The best investment opportunities for mid priced coins are with NGC and ANACS unstickered holders, for the astute dealer/collector/investor. To limit oneself to stickered PCGS coins will forego all of these opportunities to others. That being said, I am not an investor, and have numerous NGC coins that I know will not cross, but they fit into my collecting goals. NGC generally does grade more liberally than PCGS, but not always. As I stated in my first post, the NGC and PCGS duopoly works because they do not grade to the same standard, which gives opportunities for knowledgeable people, along with crackout/crossover/resubmission revenue for TPG's.
Know your series, and opportunities will arise in ANACS, NGC, PCGS, or raw.
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
<< <i>There have been so many coins I have purchased in NGC holders over the years, and 90% of them have come back significantly lower when crossed or cracked out and submitted to PCGS. Now many of these coins were purchased years ago when I started collecting and did not know how to grade as well as I do now. But it seems to me the newer holders contain many coins that are overgraded by more than one grade. I have seen multiple examples of this.
I know many here say buy the coin not the holder, but after being burned so many times, I am hesitant buying a coin in an NGC holder unless it is CAC'd. If the grade is on the borderline when you look at it, it most likely will be one grade less when you send it to PCGS. With this overgrading, it is no surprise that many major dealers send their coins to NGC in order to max out the coin.
Fire away. AJ >>
Both services have graded millions of coins, and a small sampling cannot be used to scientifically and conclusively draw any conclusions. With this said, I have seen dogs in both NGC and PCGS holders. I think collectors are overly dependent on the grade of the plastic, and they should learn to grade for themselves rather than using TPGs as a crutch. Moreover, you are also overlooking the fact that TPGs are looking at a coin through a plastic holder when submitted as a crossover; thus, they are going to be more conservative. Also, NGC's holders are bulky, making it difficult to judge some aspects (e.g. luster).
<< <i>I would venture to say that PCGS will cross very few NGC coins just because they are in the NGC holder. >>
Are you saying that you should crack it out first if you want a fair grade?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The comments from Nysoto are very insightful. That said, as time goes by there is more reason to be concerned about why an attractive coin is still in an unstickered NGC or ANACS holder. Moreover, one of my reactions to viewing many holdered coins at major auctions has been the thought that if a winning bidder wins an NGC or ANACS type coin sight unseen, he or she is going to be pretty disappointed when the coin arrives.
<< <i>The series I collect I know how to grade for the most part. >>
Your confidence and your crossover results are at odds with each other.
Others who have suggested you look inwards for the source of the problem are correct, in my opinion. That's not a flame nor a hit, but rather suggesting you take ownership of the issue and seek to correct it rather than "blame" NGC. Recognize, learn, and adapt.
NGC and PCGS grade to different standards -- particularly in AU and high MS grades. Neither are right or wrong but they are different -- it is up to you to figure it out and apply that to your collecting.
Respectfully....Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>I would venture to say that PCGS will cross very few NGC coins just because they are in the NGC holder. >>
Are you saying that you should crack it out first if you want a fair grade? >>
The coins pictured above were all sent in raw. They were cracked out long ago for an album and then sent in. So based on that small population, I dont think it matters if they are sent in raw or as crossovers. I have five more coins I just sent in for crossover. All NGC. Will see what happens.
And just to clarify, I still buy NGC coins, but just prefer PCGS due to the registry. For higher priced coins ($500 and up) I try to stick with CAC'd coins, especially when buying online.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>The comments from Nysoto are very insightful. That said, as time goes by there is more reason to be concerned about why an attractive coin is still in an unstickered NGC or ANACS holder. >>
Because many good coins are purchased and kept in good collections by collectors who do not play the crackout, resubmit, bean,star or plus games. I may even venture to say that the coins that are constantly purchased and regraded and beaned and all of the above are those coins that have not yet found good homes. Maybe you should stop looking at recirculated slabs and keep an eye out for fresh coins entering the market.
When is PCGS Going To Start Grading TOKENS and MEDALS !!!!!!!
Another Huge Market Ripe for the picking. >>
PCGS Services UpdateFriday, April 22, 2011 7:45 PM
From: "Don Willis" <info@pcgs.com>I
would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your continued support of PCGS. PCGS Collector Club members continue to be a valuable part of our business.
I have a brief update regarding PCGS services and a couple submission form changes.
We now have a new submission form that addresses the oversized holders. There are a couple of policy changes to accompany that change.
First, ATB coins no longer have to be submitted under the Regular service and can now be submitted under the Modern service (that’s a savings of $16). Of course you can submit the coins at a higher service level if you need a quicker turnaround or simply choose to do so.
Second, PCGS is beginning to encapsulate medals in the new oversized holders. We have already encapsulated certain medals in the oversized holders. We plan to replace the Photo Certificate service that we have previously used for some medals and coins with the Oversized Holder service. If you have questions about a specific coin or medal please contact PCGS Customer Service.
Third, any submission requiring an oversized holder will require the payment of an oversized holder fee of $20 per coin. We are compelled to add this fee due to much higher material costs as well as increased labor costs associated with the handling of these larger coins. These new services and rates will be effective for all submissions received beginning May 1, 2011. We are excited about the introduction of the new oversized holders. We believe they offer an attractive package to display your coins and medals and we hope to expand our offerings in this area as we go forward.
Best wishes,
Don Willis
President, PCGS
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I'll give them a call monday and see if that means all Medals and of all sizes. I will also ask about any other updates that might have taken place since
the date of the letter you posted. Thanks!
NumbersUsa, FairUs, Alipac, CapsWeb, and TeamAmericaPac
I agree with you 100%-on everything you say. Just look at the difference between what a PCGS coin and an NGC coin sells for in the same grade-especially the "super grades." I'm sure there's a good reason for why this is so. Seems I've seen more and more BADLY overgraded stuff in NGC holders.
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Someone said pics would help this thread, so here are a few.
Ex NGC AU55, now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted as a crossover.
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted raw
Ex NGC AU53. Now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw >>
Here are my thoughts, for whatever they're worth: Coin 1: AU55 is the correct grade; NGC was Correct Coin 2: I disagree with both NGC and PCGS. I would have graded it AU53 Coin 3: AU 55; I think NGC was correct Coin 4: PCGS is correct; I agree that the coin is overgraded and should only appear in a XF45 holder.
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT. >>
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I can understand the resentment over your large cent ordeal. I agree that the mark was unacceptable at the grade. I hope you were able to recoup your money.
Here is my last crack out I ever did!! I believe that pcgs gives bulk submitters better grades.
Well I recently picked up 20 1975-S Roosevelts all in PCGS holders. I ended up cracking out 8 of them and submitted them to NGC......well I was totally shocked by the results. I will never play the crack out game again. I though all of them were ultra cameo or I wouldn't of even submitted them!!
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT. >>
How can consigning to auction be a meaningful metric of correctly graded when 95% or more of the bidders won't see what they are bidding on until the auction house ships it to them?
<< <i>Just look at the difference between what a PCGS coin and an NGC coin sells for in the same grade-especially the "super grades." I'm sure there's a good reason for why this is so. >>
I don't know... do you suppose the two services might have different grading standards?
<< <i>Seems I've seen more and more BADLY overgraded stuff in NGC holders. >>
Are you sure about that? Maybe PCGS is undergrading.
I have looked at many NGC finest known or nearabouts bust dollars. Many I simply refused to buy as the problems were just too severe. So far I've kept one as is and downgraded two to what I felt was the proper grade. I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS. I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever...
<< <i>Someone said pics would help this thread, so here are a few.
Ex NGC AU55, now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted as a crossover.
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted raw
Ex NGC AU53. Now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw >>
My honest opinion? I don't think PCGS did any more good than NGC here, yet you've squarely blamed NGC only, as if PCGS could do no wrong. The 1837 half has way too much meat to be an XF45 unless it has some problem that caused PCGS to net grade it down. If that were the case, I doubt CAC would have stickered it, so suffice it to say, I think PCGS went low.
The 1854 quarter could easily be a nice 53 depending on the lustre and the exact look in hand. Certainly not a low-end 50, or even a mid-level. NGC may have been optimistic, but PCGS may have been similarly tight.
PCGS undergraded the 1838 half. Period.
The 1829 dime I'd want to see in hand. If it's not completely flat as the picture shows, AU50 might not be out of the question.
The point here? You've blamed NGC for overgrading, but not PCGS for undergrading by just as much. That's a lot of Kool Aid to be drinking.
<< <i>Coin is pending sale. It sold for more than XF money though. I had a few inquiries about it from my site. Even with what it sold for, I took close to a $120 loss on it as I paid AU55 money for it. >>
This refers to the 1837 half, and beautifully illustrates my point. Yes the coin sold for more than XF money, as it should have, because it's not just XF. If you took a loss, that's YOUR FAULT for simply buying what the label said. If the label said MS65, would you have spent that much money? Don't blame NGC if you're going to follow them blindly; look at the coin, say "this isn't the grade on the label" and then determine what the grade should be. If the price matches, then the price is right. Think about it another way. At AU55 money, the coin was overpriced. At XF45 money, the coin was underpriced. The coin should have graded in between the too, and shockingly, the price is... in between that of the two grades! The price is based on the coin, as it should be.
Jeremy, my thoughts echo yours - nicely stated. Wish I had had the opportunity to grab the 37 half from ankur, as I said earlier, had it been my coin and I got that 45 grade, out of the slab it would come and I'd think on it some before being in a rush to sell.
I've told this several years ago now, but had a 1904 2.5 piece in an old anacs ms62 pl that I simply wanted in pcgs plastic. Pcgs was first crossover stop - negative. So ok, tried an ngc crossover - negative again! Thoroughly disgusted now, as I'd studied the coin at length and believed it to be a good one, I cracked it and sent off to pcgs again. Result: ms63.
Not every such attempt will end that way, but a collector interested in paying anything more than the most nominal cash should have some confidence in their grading ability. Though ankur has taken pokes here, its a good thread, and I especially enjoyed roadrunner's insights. Knowledge that you can be right, but still the market goes against you re: ngc coins, lets you act on this and seek pcgs plastic when needed for resale. And if in this attempt, you get graded too tightly - recognize it and go from there.
Jeremy, Most of these were purchased very early in my collecting time so I had to depend on the label at the time. Today I know a little better how to grade the series I collect.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather be satisfied than dissatisfied. The best way to do that is to buy the coin, not the label. >>
According to a recent thread IIRC most respondents said that they know a nice coin when they see it. If that is true then why do we continually have these discussions about about TPG A being better than TPG B?
<< <i>Jeremy, Most of these were purchased very early in my collecting time so I had to depend on the label at the time. Today I know a little better how to grade the series I collect. >>
No one put a gun to your head and said you HAD to depend on the label. Instead of spending on coins, you could have educated yourself first. Now that $120 loss should be counted as tuition. If the coin had been graded AU55 by PCGS, that still wouldn't MEAN it is worth AU55 money. It's the same coin that shouldn't be called an AU55.
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather have CORRECTLY graded or at least consistently. Overgrading and undergrading are not preferable in any case. If you have an undergraded coin, you have to make sure your buyer agrees that the coin is undergraded. With some dealers, that can be very difficult. If the coin is overgraded, a dealer may feel more entitled and thus it is harder to buy the piece at a reasonable price level. But if you know the coin yourself, the problem goes away. You keep yourself from buying overgraded and overpriced coins, and maybe even get a score on something that should be priced higher. But if the grading is consistent, what does it matter? At all normal temperatures, Fahrenheit is a larger number than Celsius. But they're both consistent, so if you say the number and the unit of measure, you know what to wear. The same with grading, but you get to see the coin and decide the scale for yourself.
Now, suppose you bought that PCGS XF45 half as a 45 and paid 45 money for it. Your buyer then upgrades it to AU50 or AU53. How happy would you be for them? You didn't lose money, but you lost the opportunity to make money. Undergrading has its flaws, too.
Two of the four coins that a shown (photographed) are CAC'd and two arent. Does that mean that even after being sent to PCGS and downgraded that CAC didn't like them? If so perhaps there is something that you can't see in the photo is keeping them from being as nice as you, and several other forum members, think they are. I've said it before, and most likely will again, that you can't truly grade a coin from a photo.
<< <i>Two of the four coins that a shown (photographed) are CAC'd and two arent. Does that mean that even after being sent to PCGS and downgraded that CAC didn't like them? If so perhaps there is something that you can't see in the photo is keeping them from being as nice as you, and several other forum members, think they are. I've said it before, and most likely will again, that you can't truly grade a coin from a photo.
NJCC >>
All four are CAC'd actually. Images were taken before submitting to CAC.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
The majority of bidders will see the coin in hand at the preview or the on line catalog- >>
How many bidders in tonite's TeleTrade auction do you think will have seen the coin in hand, besides those who work for TT? I don't consider pics to be the same as sight seen, although they do reveal the gross features that will let you pass or play, it's still a gamble. As the post below states, you can't always grade from pictures. Maybe our hosts could have an online grading contest. At least there you'd be seeing the coin out of the holder.
<< <i>I have looked at many NGC finest known or nearabouts bust dollars. Many I simply refused to buy as the problems were just too severe. So far I've kept one as is and downgraded two to what I felt was the proper grade. I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS. I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever... >>
What you're saying is that to buy NCG coins correctly, the buyer must have their own expertise. The mission statement of TPGs is to provide a 3rd party opinion on a coin to help people buy and sell without having to be and expert grader themselves. Seems NGC is not accomplishing this mission in your (expert) opinion. --Jerry
Not that it matters a whole lot, but will note British coins appear much less accurately graded at PCGS - several examples such as an 1951 matte proof halfcrown have been detailed in the darkside pages of this forum where it seems that this type of proof is not really understood.
I still like the PCGS holder better, but just saying as others have that as good as PCGS is, they are not omnipotent. Bottom line is still knowing how to grade yourself and to buy the coin and not the holder.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Here is my last crack out I ever did!! I believe that pcgs gives bulk submitters better grades.
Well I recently picked up 20 1975-S Roosevelts all in PCGS holders. I ended up cracking out 8 of them and submitted them to NGC......well I was totally shocked by the results. I will never play the crack out game again. I though all of them were ultra cameo or I wouldn't of even submitted them!! >>
I don't understand this at all, what did you hope to gain? 70?
<< <i>I have looked at many NGC finest known or nearabouts bust dollars. Many I simply refused to buy as the problems were just too severe. So far I've kept one as is and downgraded two to what I felt was the proper grade. I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS. I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever... >>
What you're saying is that to buy NCG coins correctly, the buyer must have their own expertise. The mission statement of TPGs is to provide a 3rd party opinion on a coin to help people buy and sell without having to be and expert grader themselves. Seems NGC is not accomplishing this mission in your (expert) opinion. --Jerry >>
Why are you immediately assuming the NGC higher grade is wrong and the correct grade is the lower PCGS grade? Could it be possible that the NGC grade is correct and the PCGS grade is under-grading the coin? Or maybe an average of the two? Or maybe PCGS errs on the side of a lower grade and NGC errs on the side of a higher grade? Or maybe they are both consistent to their own grading standards. Yours may fall in line with TPG-A while mine may fall in line with TPG-B. You are making a blanket assumption that may not be correct and may be misleading in one direction.
PCGS has a greater incentive to grade coins slightly more conservatively due to their "grade buy-back guarantee", than NGC. That said, the psychology of PCGS should be that if a TPG grader has to choose between two grades, for the benefit of PCGS, he/she will likely choose the lesser of the two grades. But that's not saying that PCGS is always going to grade conservative, and sometimes (and this is my opinion) they overgrade coins. Neither TPG is perfect.
To shun one TPG for another is disallowing yourself the opportunity to add great coins to your collection when the coin is in the "wrong" plastic.
Comments
In 47 years of collecting, I have only submitted 10 coin for grading or crossovers to PCGS. Much of my early half dollar collection is raw, puchased from auctions and dealers before everthing was slabbed. I will keep them raw until its time to sell, with the exception of some registry coins (I drank a cup of koolaid one day, and decided to play the PCGS Registry game). Here is ALL of my crossover attempts:
1803 .50 Small 3 NGC40 crossed in holder PCGS40 (Heritage)
1806 .50 Knobbed 6 Large Stars NGC45 crossed in holder PCGS45 (unattributed from D Lawrence, condition census)
1806 .50 Pointed 6 NGC45 crossed in holder PCGS45 (Heritage)
1806 .50 1806/Inv 6 NGC40 crossed in holder PCGS40 (Alpine Numis)
1838 $5 NGC58 crossed in holder PCGS58 (Doug Winter, my icon coin)
and a raw example:
1806 .50 small stars raw VF30 B&M Russ Logan auction PCGS VF35
All of these are in my PCGS Registries. So I am 5/5 or 100% on my crossover attempts, in holder.
The best investment opportunities for mid priced coins are with NGC and ANACS unstickered holders, for the astute dealer/collector/investor. To limit oneself to stickered PCGS coins will forego all of these opportunities to others. That being said, I am not an investor, and have numerous NGC coins that I know will not cross, but they fit into my collecting goals. NGC generally does grade more liberally than PCGS, but not always. As I stated in my first post, the NGC and PCGS duopoly works because they do not grade to the same standard, which gives opportunities for knowledgeable people, along with crackout/crossover/resubmission revenue for TPG's.
Know your series, and opportunities will arise in ANACS, NGC, PCGS, or raw.
<< <i>There have been so many coins I have purchased in NGC holders over the years, and 90% of them have come back significantly lower when crossed or cracked out and submitted to PCGS. Now many of these coins were purchased years ago when I started collecting and did not know how to grade as well as I do now. But it seems to me the newer holders contain many coins that are overgraded by more than one grade. I have seen multiple examples of this.
I know many here say buy the coin not the holder, but after being burned so many times, I am hesitant buying a coin in an NGC holder unless it is CAC'd. If the grade is on the borderline when you look at it, it most likely will be one grade less when you send it to PCGS. With this overgrading, it is no surprise that many major dealers send their coins to NGC in order to max out the coin.
Fire away.
AJ >>
Both services have graded millions of coins, and a small sampling cannot be used to scientifically and conclusively draw any conclusions. With this said, I have seen dogs in both NGC and PCGS holders. I think collectors are overly dependent on the grade of the plastic, and they should learn to grade for themselves rather than using TPGs as a crutch. Moreover, you are also overlooking the fact that TPGs are looking at a coin through a plastic holder when submitted as a crossover; thus, they are going to be more conservative. Also, NGC's holders are bulky, making it difficult to judge some aspects (e.g. luster).
<< <i>I would venture to say that PCGS will cross very few NGC coins just because they are in the NGC holder. >>
Are you saying that you should crack it out first if you want a fair grade?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>The series I collect I know how to grade for the most part. >>
Your confidence and your crossover results are at odds with each other.
Others who have suggested you look inwards for the source of the problem are correct, in my opinion. That's not a flame nor a hit, but rather suggesting you take ownership of the issue and seek to correct it rather than "blame" NGC. Recognize, learn, and adapt.
NGC and PCGS grade to different standards -- particularly in AU and high MS grades. Neither are right or wrong but they are different -- it is up to you to figure it out and apply that to your collecting.
Respectfully....Mike
<< <i>
<< <i>I would venture to say that PCGS will cross very few NGC coins just because they are in the NGC holder. >>
Are you saying that you should crack it out first if you want a fair grade? >>
The coins pictured above were all sent in raw. They were cracked out long ago for an album and then sent in. So based on that small population, I dont think it matters if they are sent in raw or as crossovers. I have five more coins I just sent in for crossover. All NGC. Will see what happens.
And just to clarify, I still buy NGC coins, but just prefer PCGS due to the registry. For higher priced coins ($500 and up) I try to stick with CAC'd coins, especially when buying online.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>The comments from Nysoto are very insightful. That said, as time goes by there is more reason to be concerned about why an attractive coin is still in an unstickered NGC or ANACS holder. >>
Because many good coins are purchased and kept in good collections by collectors who do not play the crackout, resubmit, bean,star or plus games.
I may even venture to say that the coins that are constantly purchased and regraded and beaned and all of the above are those coins that have not yet found good homes.
Maybe you should stop looking at recirculated slabs and keep an eye out for fresh coins entering the market.
When is PCGS Going To Start Grading TOKENS and MEDALS !!!!!!!
Another Huge Market Ripe for the picking.
<< <i>All I Want To Know Is ::::::::
When is PCGS Going To Start Grading TOKENS and MEDALS !!!!!!!
Another Huge Market Ripe for the picking. >>
PCGS Services UpdateFriday, April 22, 2011 7:45 PM
From: "Don Willis" <info@pcgs.com>I
would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your continued support of PCGS. PCGS Collector Club members continue to be a valuable part of our business.
I have a brief update regarding PCGS services and a couple submission form changes.
We now have a new submission form that addresses the oversized holders. There are a couple of policy changes to accompany that change.
First, ATB coins no longer have to be submitted under the Regular service and can now be submitted under the Modern service (that’s a savings of $16). Of course you can submit the coins at a higher service level if you need a quicker turnaround or simply choose to do so.
Second, PCGS is beginning to encapsulate medals in the new oversized holders. We have already encapsulated certain medals in the oversized holders. We plan to replace the Photo Certificate service that we have previously used for some medals and coins with the Oversized Holder service. If you have questions about a specific coin or medal please contact PCGS Customer Service.
Third, any submission requiring an oversized holder will require the payment of an oversized holder fee of $20 per coin. We are compelled to add this fee due to much higher material costs as well as increased labor costs associated with the handling of these larger coins.
These new services and rates will be effective for all submissions received beginning May 1, 2011.
We are excited about the introduction of the new oversized holders. We believe they offer an attractive package to display your coins and medals and we hope to expand our offerings in this area as we go forward.
Best wishes,
Don Willis
President, PCGS
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
I'll give them a call monday and see if that means all Medals and of all sizes. I will also ask about any other updates that might have taken place since
the date of the letter you posted. Thanks!
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Why don't we all say we are done with this thread? >>
Not quite.
Not every single (valid) point as been repeated five times yet.
peacockcoins
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Someone said pics would help this thread, so here are a few.
Ex NGC AU55, now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted as a crossover.
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted raw
Ex NGC AU53. Now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
Here are my thoughts, for whatever they're worth:
Coin 1: AU55 is the correct grade; NGC was Correct
Coin 2: I disagree with both NGC and PCGS. I would have graded it AU53
Coin 3: AU 55; I think NGC was correct
Coin 4: PCGS is correct; I agree that the coin is overgraded and should only appear in a XF45 holder.
<< <i>Okay-
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT. >>
<< <i>+100 and counting.
Don't get me started on NGC copper.
Lance. >>
I can understand the resentment over your large cent ordeal. I agree that the mark was unacceptable at the grade. I hope you were able to recoup your money.
I believe that pcgs gives bulk submitters better grades.
Well I recently picked up 20 1975-S Roosevelts all in PCGS holders.
I ended up cracking out 8 of them and submitted them to NGC......well I was totally
shocked by the results. I will never play the crack out game again.
I though all of them were ultra cameo or I wouldn't of even submitted them!!
This article is relevant to the topic of this thread:
Early Silver Dollars & Grading Issues
<< <i>Okay-
I am just going to write what I really think and let the chips fall where they may-
This whole thread is absurd- why?
I am very disappointed in so many different ways so I will start with the following:
Grading is subjective and there are opinions and while some opinions are better than others, the grade by TPG remains an opinion. There seems to be a very unhealthy doubt among collectors in their own grading abilities as well as trusting the grading of TPG- and if this premise is wrong, then CAC would not exist- period.
The coins that seem to be at issue that created this thread all seem to have a value of under 700.00 and likely lower than that-the spread between the grades does not warrant the criticism that seems to be the main thrust of the thread. Nice coins speak for themselves- not plastic and stickers especially at this level. If the issue is resale, then consign to an auction house and let the market be the judge of the coin and its merits- if it is undergraded or over graded, it will be apparent at that time.
So what we have seen here is crossing from one TPG to another and then complaining that the grades don't cross - leading to the discussion of different standards- one TPG is unable to grade and is the other is the greatest since sliced bread. Well, WAKE UP- GRADING IS NOT A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA AND INVOLVES THINGS THAT JUST CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO NUMBERS THAT WILL MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY ALL THE TIME- so the grading results are going to vary- that's the way it is- GET OVER IT. >>
How can consigning to auction be a meaningful metric of correctly graded when 95% or more of the bidders won't see what they are bidding on until the auction house ships it to them?
<< <i>Just look at the difference between what a PCGS coin and an NGC coin sells for in the same grade-especially the "super grades." I'm sure there's a good reason for why this is so. >>
I don't know... do you suppose the two services might have different grading standards?
<< <i>Seems I've seen more and more BADLY overgraded stuff in NGC holders. >>
Are you sure about that? Maybe PCGS is undergrading.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't know... do you suppose the two services might have different grading standards?
<< <i>Seems I've seen more and more BADLY overgraded stuff in NGC holders. >>
Are you sure about that? Maybe PCGS is undergrading. >>
Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded?
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
Based on what? Depending on the situation, either could be good or bad.
Supposing a coin is graded differently by two different services, it's still the same coin. The only thing different is the number on the insert.
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather be satisfied than dissatisfied. The best way to do that is to buy the coin, not the label.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS.
I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever...
<< <i>Someone said pics would help this thread, so here are a few.
Ex NGC AU55, now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted as a crossover.
EX NGC AU55, now PCGS AU50. Submitted raw
Ex NGC AU53. Now PCGS XF45. Submitted raw
My honest opinion? I don't think PCGS did any more good than NGC here, yet you've squarely blamed NGC only, as if PCGS could do no wrong. The 1837 half has way too much meat to be an XF45 unless it has some problem that caused PCGS to net grade it down. If that were the case, I doubt CAC would have stickered it, so suffice it to say, I think PCGS went low.
The 1854 quarter could easily be a nice 53 depending on the lustre and the exact look in hand. Certainly not a low-end 50, or even a mid-level. NGC may have been optimistic, but PCGS may have been similarly tight.
PCGS undergraded the 1838 half. Period.
The 1829 dime I'd want to see in hand. If it's not completely flat as the picture shows, AU50 might not be out of the question.
The point here? You've blamed NGC for overgrading, but not PCGS for undergrading by just as much. That's a lot of Kool Aid to be drinking.
<< <i>Coin is pending sale. It sold for more than XF money though. I had a few inquiries about it from my site.
Even with what it sold for, I took close to a $120 loss on it as I paid AU55 money for it. >>
This refers to the 1837 half, and beautifully illustrates my point. Yes the coin sold for more than XF money, as it should have, because it's not just XF. If you took a loss, that's YOUR FAULT for simply buying what the label said. If the label said MS65, would you have spent that much money? Don't blame NGC if you're going to follow them blindly; look at the coin, say "this isn't the grade on the label" and then determine what the grade should be. If the price matches, then the price is right. Think about it another way. At AU55 money, the coin was overpriced. At XF45 money, the coin was underpriced. The coin should have graded in between the too, and shockingly, the price is... in between that of the two grades! The price is based on the coin, as it should be.
I've told this several years ago now, but had a 1904 2.5 piece in an old anacs ms62 pl that I simply wanted in pcgs plastic. Pcgs was first crossover stop - negative. So ok, tried an ngc crossover - negative again! Thoroughly disgusted now, as I'd studied the coin at length and believed it to be a good one, I cracked it and sent off to pcgs again. Result: ms63.
Not every such attempt will end that way, but a collector interested in paying anything more than the most nominal cash should have some confidence in their grading ability. Though ankur has taken pokes here, its a good thread, and I especially enjoyed roadrunner's insights. Knowledge that you can be right, but still the market goes against you re: ngc coins, lets you act on this and seek pcgs plastic when needed for resale. And if in this attempt, you get graded too tightly - recognize it and go from there.
<< <i> Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever... >>
What an incredibly powerful sentence.
<< <i>
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather be satisfied than dissatisfied. The best way to do that is to buy the coin, not the label. >>
Right on Joe (as so many have said)!
And there's the few that use a third eye instead of their own, I know what I like and go by that.
Most of these were purchased very early in my collecting time so I had to depend on the label at the time. Today I know a little better how to grade the series I collect.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather be satisfied than dissatisfied. The best way to do that is to buy the coin, not the label. >>
According to a recent thread IIRC most respondents said that they know a nice coin when they see it. If that is true then why do we continually have these discussions about about TPG A being better than TPG B?
<< <i>Jeremy,
Most of these were purchased very early in my collecting time so I had to depend on the label at the time. Today I know a little better how to grade the series I collect. >>
No one put a gun to your head and said you HAD to depend on the label. Instead of spending on coins, you could have educated yourself first. Now that $120 loss should be counted as tuition. If the coin had been graded AU55 by PCGS, that still wouldn't MEAN it is worth AU55 money. It's the same coin that shouldn't be called an AU55.
<< <i>Which would you rather have? Something overgraded or undergraded? >>
I'd rather have CORRECTLY graded or at least consistently. Overgrading and undergrading are not preferable in any case. If you have an undergraded coin, you have to make sure your buyer agrees that the coin is undergraded. With some dealers, that can be very difficult. If the coin is overgraded, a dealer may feel more entitled and thus it is harder to buy the piece at a reasonable price level. But if you know the coin yourself, the problem goes away. You keep yourself from buying overgraded and overpriced coins, and maybe even get a score on something that should be priced higher. But if the grading is consistent, what does it matter? At all normal temperatures, Fahrenheit is a larger number than Celsius. But they're both consistent, so if you say the number and the unit of measure, you know what to wear. The same with grading, but you get to see the coin and decide the scale for yourself.
Now, suppose you bought that PCGS XF45 half as a 45 and paid 45 money for it. Your buyer then upgrades it to AU50 or AU53. How happy would you be for them? You didn't lose money, but you lost the opportunity to make money. Undergrading has its flaws, too.
The majority of bidders will see the coin in hand at the preview or the on line catalog-
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
NJCC
<< <i>Two of the four coins that a shown (photographed) are CAC'd and two arent. Does that mean that even after being sent to PCGS and downgraded that CAC didn't like them? If so perhaps there is something that you can't see in the photo is keeping them from being as nice as you, and several other forum members, think they are. I've said it before, and most likely will again, that you can't truly grade a coin from a photo.
NJCC >>
All four are CAC'd actually. Images were taken before submitting to CAC.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
NJCC
<< <i>Bajjerfan
The majority of bidders will see the coin in hand at the preview or the on line catalog- >>
How many bidders in tonite's TeleTrade auction do you think will have seen the coin in hand, besides those who work for TT? I don't consider pics to be the same as sight seen, although they do reveal the gross features that will let you pass or play, it's still a gamble. As the post below states, you can't always grade from pictures. Maybe our hosts could have an online grading contest. At least there you'd be seeing the coin out of the holder.
<< <i>Were they CAC'd before, in their NGC grades?
NJCC >>
They were all submitted raw to PCGS. I cracked them out for my 7070 years before CAC.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>I have looked at many NGC finest known or nearabouts bust dollars. Many I simply refused to buy as the problems were just too severe. So far I've kept one as is and downgraded two to what I felt was the proper grade.
I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS.
I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever... >>
What you're saying is that to buy NCG coins correctly, the buyer must have their own expertise. The mission statement of TPGs is to provide a 3rd party opinion on a coin to help people buy and sell without having to be and expert grader themselves. Seems NGC is not accomplishing this mission in your (expert) opinion. --Jerry
I still like the PCGS holder better, but just saying as others have that as good as PCGS is, they are not omnipotent.
Bottom line is still knowing how to grade yourself and to buy the coin and not the holder.
Well, just Love coins, period.
<< <i>Here is my last crack out I ever did!!
I believe that pcgs gives bulk submitters better grades.
Well I recently picked up 20 1975-S Roosevelts all in PCGS holders.
I ended up cracking out 8 of them and submitted them to NGC......well I was totally
shocked by the results. I will never play the crack out game again.
I though all of them were ultra cameo or I wouldn't of even submitted them!!
I don't understand this at all, what did you hope to gain? 70?
<< <i>
<< <i>I have looked at many NGC finest known or nearabouts bust dollars. Many I simply refused to buy as the problems were just too severe. So far I've kept one as is and downgraded two to what I felt was the proper grade.
I have looked at many more NGC finest known or nearabouts seated dollars. Many from private collections crossed at the same grade, several downgrade crossed. A few I wouldn't purchase even at a lower grade. A few downgrade crossed and were later upgraded at PCGS.
I have looked at a few NGC finest known or nearabouts trade dollars. Two crossed at the same grade and a few I refused to buy.
I will ALWAYS look at an NGC graded coin as many of the finest knowns are in NGC holders - they may just be optimistically graded by my standards. As long as the price is commensurate to the quality, I'm game. Plastic is transient, a coin's quality is forever... >>
What you're saying is that to buy NCG coins correctly, the buyer must have their own expertise. The mission statement of TPGs is to provide a 3rd party opinion on a coin to help people buy and sell without having to be and expert grader themselves. Seems NGC is not accomplishing this mission in your (expert) opinion. --Jerry >>
Why are you immediately assuming the NGC higher grade is wrong and the correct grade is the lower PCGS grade? Could it be possible that the NGC grade is correct and the PCGS grade is under-grading the coin? Or maybe an average of the two? Or maybe PCGS errs on the side of a lower grade and NGC errs on the side of a higher grade?
Or maybe they are both consistent to their own grading standards. Yours may fall in line with TPG-A while mine may fall in line with TPG-B.
You are making a blanket assumption that may not be correct and may be misleading in one direction.
That said, the psychology of PCGS should be that if a TPG grader has to choose between two grades, for the benefit of PCGS,
he/she will likely choose the lesser of the two grades. But that's not saying that PCGS is always going to grade conservative,
and sometimes (and this is my opinion) they overgrade coins. Neither TPG is perfect.
To shun one TPG for another is disallowing yourself the opportunity to add great coins to your collection when the coin is in
the "wrong" plastic.
Cheers