<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'? >>
Yes, essentially that. As long as you get the piece at a price that makes sense for the grade that it really is, then it can be graded very fine blue cheese for all one cares.
Sometimes coin and comic dealers will cut to the chase about such things -- "how do you grade this book" I once asked a comic dealer about an (unslabbed) book he had for sale -- "I grade it $500 is what I grade it." A terse reply, but not mean-spirited, and I knew what he meant and the price was fair.
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'? >>
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it.
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'? >>
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it. >>
Actually it would be a winner, but if you're talking the kind of coins TDN is talking, it's a game with slightly tweaked rules. Indeed might be a loser if you're talkin widgets.
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'? >>
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it. >>
Actually it would be a winner, but if you're talking the kind of coins TDN is talking, it's a game with slightly tweaked rules. Indeed might be a loser if you're talkin widgets. >>
My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit.
I don't pick what walks in, but I try my best to choose wisely, the buy. And THEY ARE 98% widget… outside of plastic. However, it adds up to 5, 6, 7 figures.
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth." This gets into the topic of grading from images/judging luster from images, calling out a (another dealer's) coin as to whether it would CAC or not at a grade level lower than what it's being graded and sold as, what PCGS would probably call it, etc.
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount.
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth." This gets into the topic of grading from images/judging luster from images, calling out a (another dealer's) coin as to whether it would CAC or not at a grade level lower than what it's being graded and sold as, what PCGS would probably call it, etc.
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount. >>
AU50 is an interesting grade, most of the time I see it used is for ugly coins, a sort of catch all net-grade. While the 73cc making AU50 isn't out of the question it becomes a C +coin at that level. That ebay example being no different, it isn't a nice au50 either maybe a C coin and it would be a liner to CAC at the 45 level too. That is kind of the point about grading is a coin can fit into multiple levels and be correct enough but that's why people say look for highend for the grade. The core problem of NGC not weighting luster heavy enough is true at least for seated coins.
I don't actually want that coin as to the "call Liz" part but collectors rarely get to pay actual grade monies at retail settings. One has to wait until it gets blown out at auction. There is no way that makes 53-55 at PCGS 99 out of a 100 times. As someone who has lost track of how many of these I have had graded, crossed over, cracked out ect. Let me inject my experience into the conversation instead of your guesses.
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth." This gets into the topic of grading from images/judging luster from images, calling out a (another dealer's) coin as to whether it would CAC or not at a grade level lower than what it's being graded and sold as, what PCGS would probably call it, etc.
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount. >>
AU50 is an interesting grade, most of the time I see it used is for ugly coins, a sort of catch all net-grade. While AU50 isn't out of the question it becomes a C coin at that level. That example being no different, it isn't a nice au50 either maybe a C coin and it would be a liner to CAC at the 45 level too.
I don't actually want that coin as to the "call Liz" part but collectors rarely get to pay actual grade monies at retail settings. One has to wait until it gets blown out at auction. There is no way that makes 53-55 at PCGS 99 out of a 100 times. As someone who has lost track of how many of these I have had graded, crossed over, cracked out ect. Let me inject my experience into the conversation instead of your guesses. >>
Happy to hear of all your experiences, as opposed to my guesses. But as long as we're grading from images, I noticed they also offer a PCGS-CAC AU-55 trade that looks awfully similar in detail and color to the NGC coin in question: AU-55 PCGS-CAC Trade $
So for my money, it would easily make at least 53 at PCGS -- based on the images. If you're convinced it won't, more power to you. I don't have the money to approach buying any higher grade Trade $ at this point, let alone a scarcer date in high grade, so the argument will have to rest there I'm afraid. We can each have our own opinions about this particular piece.
I generally hate the aesthetics of NGC holders. The only type of coin I prefer in them is a monster rainbow Morgan, which looks good against white. >>
Do you similarly drink Coke instead of Pepsi because you like the color red can more than blue??
I myself have always thought that what was inside of the package was far more important. lol >>
I don't consume soft drinks. In case you haven't heard, they aren't particularly healthy.
What's inside the package IS most important, but viewing coins is the ultimate experience of them, and if a large, distracting piece of white plastic detracts from that, then it's worth the price to me to eliminate it, especially in light of the added value of PCGS plastic which usually more than pays for the crossover.
YMMV. >>
What I offered was called an analogy.
It was clear from your previous posts that you don't drink soft drinks -- Kool-Aid is more your style.
-Brandon -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins] -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Put me in the #2 camp. I think people who wouldn't touch a coin in an NGC slab need to get out of the house more often.
Sure, there are rare examples of coins not properly graded or market graded that result in head scratching but, as a rule they are about as accurate as PCGS.
If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.
Just buy it. I ran across this perfect example on Gary Adkins website. I had a registry set of Lincolns and have viewed thousands. This is the nicest MS64BN 14-D Lincoln I have seen in ANY holder. Not my collecting interest at this time, but I'm struggling not to pull the trigger on this one.
Cross it to PCGS. But don't buy to cross at grade, rather grade it yourself and then buy it. Then send it in for cross at ANY and see if PCGS agrees with your grade. If you aren't comfortable grading coins (be they in a slab or raw), then don't buy any coin in a slab that you can't live with.
+1 I could care less about the plastic if I'm happy with the coin and the price. I have coins in PCGS, NGC, and ANACS holders. They will probably stay that way for a long time.
2, only if it is a PL/DPL but PCGS did not do PL/DMPL in the series. 2 -> 3, if I want to flip it and PCGS holder gives better price. 2 -> 4, if PCGS holder gives better price at the time. At the end, the same coin could be 50c for NGC but one dollar for PCGS, why not sell it in PCGS holder.
#3 for resale. I'd been watching an NGC graded coin for a long while on ebay. When the seller dropped it to $100.00 I couldn't resist as I thought it'd be the perfect experiment. I Cracked it and off to PCGS.
Comments
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'?
Yes, essentially that. As long as you get the piece at a price that makes sense for the grade that it really is, then it can be graded very fine blue cheese for all one cares.
Sometimes coin and comic dealers will cut to the chase about such things -- "how do you grade this book" I once asked a comic dealer about an (unslabbed) book he had for sale -- "I grade it $500 is what I grade it." A terse reply, but not mean-spirited, and I knew what he meant and the price was fair.
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'?
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'?
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it. >>
Actually it would be a winner, but if you're talking the kind of coins TDN is talking, it's a game with slightly tweaked rules. Indeed might be a loser if you're talkin widgets.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Where's the option for 'buy it, downgrade cross it to the correct grade, get it stickered and keep it'?
Its a loser, not a winner. It would be like trashing your car (replacing with lower grade engine) then spending money to get a spoiler or back window louvers on it. >>
Actually it would be a winner, but if you're talking the kind of coins TDN is talking, it's a game with slightly tweaked rules. Indeed might be a loser if you're talkin widgets. >>
Egggzactly
<< <i>A collector opts for the third choice.
A coin flipper probably picks #2. >>
I agree.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit.
However, it adds up to 5, 6,
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth."
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
For comparison, a PCGS AU-50 that sits on eBay currently: PCGS AU-50 1877-S Trade dollar
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount.
<< <i>
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth."
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
For comparison, a PCGS AU-50 that sits on eBay currently: PCGS AU-50 1877-S Trade dollar
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount. >>
AU50 is an interesting grade, most of the time I see it used is for ugly coins, a sort of catch all net-grade. While the 73cc making AU50 isn't out of the question it becomes a C +coin at that level. That ebay example being no different, it isn't a nice au50 either maybe a C coin and it would be a liner to CAC at the 45 level too. That is kind of the point about grading is a coin can fit into multiple levels and be correct enough but that's why people say look for highend for the grade. The core problem of NGC not weighting luster heavy enough is true at least for seated coins.
I don't actually want that coin as to the "call Liz" part but collectors rarely get to pay actual grade monies at retail settings. One has to wait until it gets blown out at auction. There is no way that makes 53-55 at PCGS 99 out of a 100 times. As someone who has lost track of how many of these I have had graded, crossed over, cracked out ect. Let me inject my experience into the conversation instead of your guesses.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>My problem with NGC is their actual standard of grading in the more classical detail loss standard even when market grading weighs looks, luster and toning into the grade.
Coins like this are my problem 1873cc. While it has minimal wear, the field friction and tone has killed the luster almost completely. The market would grade this a PQ(A+) 40 or a B+ 45. PCGS and CACs standards are more aligned with the current market's than NGC. I feel sorry for the collector who buys that for 55 money. While there are dogs in all plastic that isn't an uncommon occurrence at NGC and it is at the point that it happens more often as dealers in the know plastic shop when they have liners. I would love to buy a coin like that for xf money and cross it to XF plastic. AU money and we are talking about a multi thousand hit. >>
Well, there's always the option of calling Gail or Liz and offering them the XF money that it's "really worth."
I don't know if the "market" would call that NGC-graded AU-55 in question an XF, or whether PCGS would, but I guarantee you if I bought it, cracked it, looked at it raw and had the market, PCGS, NGC, CAC or anybody with a collector's pulse tell me that it was anything less than an AU-50, I'd call them nuts. It's got too much detail left to be regarded as an XF.
For comparison, a PCGS AU-50 that sits on eBay currently: PCGS AU-50 1877-S Trade dollar
All that said -- I'd call it at least AU-50. If I were a betting man, I'd see it as AU-55 or 53 at PCGS. Now that being just the grade -- has little to do with price, as a starter. It's up to buyer and seller to decide if a coin is a "gem" for the grade, or "ugly", and determine the relative premium and/or discount. >>
AU50 is an interesting grade, most of the time I see it used is for ugly coins, a sort of catch all net-grade. While AU50 isn't out of the question it becomes a C coin at that level. That example being no different, it isn't a nice au50 either maybe a C coin and it would be a liner to CAC at the 45 level too.
I don't actually want that coin as to the "call Liz" part but collectors rarely get to pay actual grade monies at retail settings. One has to wait until it gets blown out at auction. There is no way that makes 53-55 at PCGS 99 out of a 100 times. As someone who has lost track of how many of these I have had graded, crossed over, cracked out ect. Let me inject my experience into the conversation instead of your guesses. >>
Happy to hear of all your experiences, as opposed to my guesses. But as long as we're grading from images, I noticed they also offer a PCGS-CAC AU-55 trade that looks awfully similar in detail and color to the NGC coin in question: AU-55 PCGS-CAC Trade $
So for my money, it would easily make at least 53 at PCGS -- based on the images. If you're convinced it won't, more power to you. I don't have the money to approach buying any higher grade Trade $ at this point, let alone a scarcer date in high grade, so the argument will have to rest there I'm afraid. We can each have our own opinions about this particular piece.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>#3.
I generally hate the aesthetics of NGC holders. The only type of coin I prefer in them is a monster rainbow Morgan,
which looks good against white. >>
Do you similarly drink Coke instead of Pepsi because you like the color red can more than blue??
I myself have always thought that what was inside of the package was far more important. lol >>
I don't consume soft drinks. In case you haven't heard, they aren't particularly healthy.
What's inside the package IS most important, but viewing coins is the ultimate experience of them,
and if a large, distracting piece of white plastic detracts from that, then it's worth the price to me to
eliminate it, especially in light of the added value of PCGS plastic which usually more than pays for
the crossover.
YMMV. >>
What I offered was called an analogy.
It was clear from your previous posts that you don't drink soft drinks -- Kool-Aid is more your style.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins]
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Rainbow Stars
<< <i>What I offered was called an analogy.
It was clear from your previous posts that you don't drink soft drinks -- Kool-Aid is more your style.
What I offered was called a deflection as opposed to directly stating that your analogy was flawed.
Please explain to me how having a preference for the aesthetics of a clear holder is "drinking Kool-aid".
<< <i>Buy it, cross it, CAC it >>
US Civil War coinage
Historical Medals
+1
US Civil War coinage
Historical Medals
I think people who wouldn't touch a coin in an NGC slab need to get out of the house more often.
Sure, there are rare examples of coins not properly graded or market graded that result in head scratching but, as a rule they are about as accurate as PCGS.
interest at this time, but I'm struggling not to pull the trigger on this one.
<< <i>Buy it! >>
Yup, just that simple.
Why are so many using so many words for such a simple question?
Lance.
<< <i>3 >>
Nice to see you posting again Barndog!
Oh, I agree...........#3
<< <i>Definitely number 2. >>
+1 I could care less about the plastic if I'm happy with the coin and the price. I have coins in PCGS, NGC, and ANACS holders. They will probably stay that way for a long time.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
<< <i>Definitely number 2. >>
AGREED
BHNC #203
2 -> 3, if I want to flip it and PCGS holder gives better price.
2 -> 4, if PCGS holder gives better price at the time. At the end, the same coin could be 50c for NGC but one dollar for PCGS, why not sell it in PCGS holder.
Results with same grade,
NGC=$100
PCGS=$850
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1