politics of grading
Bankerbob56
Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭
I posted this on the Registry Set wall......
perhaps more exposure here?
Friday September 12, 2014 2:06 PM (NEW!)
Subscribe to this thread Email this thread to someone User is online Send user a private message View thread in raw text format
Over the years I have heard a few of the Registry Set players complain about their coins "not making the grade".
While my Washington quarter set "howaboutthesequarters" is only ranked 9th on the current finest list, I am not too concerned about moving up the registry boards. I do like nice high-end coins, but not just to move up the list. Others, however, strive to move up and are apparently convinced that "who" sends the coin in for grading is often times a deciding factor on the ultimate grade. Having seen some of the coins with top pop grades, I too wonder, how did that coin get that grade! Especially if I see much nicer coins with lower grades. For the sake of this discussion, please spare me rancor about grading being an opinion, and all of the other "noise" associated with grading.
Do any of you think that the "who" in the coin submission impacts final grades?
I'll answer first.
Yes, I do believe that it does.....
perhaps more exposure here?
Friday September 12, 2014 2:06 PM (NEW!)
Subscribe to this thread Email this thread to someone User is online Send user a private message View thread in raw text format
Over the years I have heard a few of the Registry Set players complain about their coins "not making the grade".
While my Washington quarter set "howaboutthesequarters" is only ranked 9th on the current finest list, I am not too concerned about moving up the registry boards. I do like nice high-end coins, but not just to move up the list. Others, however, strive to move up and are apparently convinced that "who" sends the coin in for grading is often times a deciding factor on the ultimate grade. Having seen some of the coins with top pop grades, I too wonder, how did that coin get that grade! Especially if I see much nicer coins with lower grades. For the sake of this discussion, please spare me rancor about grading being an opinion, and all of the other "noise" associated with grading.
Do any of you think that the "who" in the coin submission impacts final grades?
I'll answer first.
Yes, I do believe that it does.....
What we've got here is failure to communicate.....
Successful BST xactions w/PCcoins, Drunner, Manofcoins, Rampage, docg, Poppee, RobKool, and MichealDixon.
Successful BST xactions w/PCcoins, Drunner, Manofcoins, Rampage, docg, Poppee, RobKool, and MichealDixon.
0
Comments
Personally, I think the thing that makes the most sense is that they grade them just like they say they do - blind to the owner and in a manner free from as much bias as possible. If word got out otherwise it would compromise the integrity of the entire service and market confidence in the brand would be seriously damaged. That would threaten their business model and future earnings.
Some other real differences probably do exist though. I think it's reasonably to conclude that it's possible to "set up" a submission. If graders see a hundred MS63 Morgans and then a really nice one, they're likely to grade it 65. If they see 100 MS65/MS66 coins and they a really nice one, it might get a 67..... that sort of thing. If a grader is chugging through a huge set of drecky economy graded coins, they're accustomed to handing out appropriate grades....... If a grader is working at a show, they're likely to see more valuable coins and they'll subconsciously be more willing to hand out higher grades......
Grading is subjective and there really isn't any way to completely eliminate the human element. People who don't think their perceptions can be manipulated haven't worked around a really good defense lawyer.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH.
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
I think it's less to do with who, but more to do with "how" they are submitted/staged. Even then it's marginal imo.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
However, I am just a small collector, yet I have received grading that is as favorable as it gets. So, from personal experience and in general, I disagree.
At the real top pop level of the registry sets, which is what your comment addresses, I have no idea what happens as I don't participate. I do have difficulty seeing the long term benefit to the grading company, however. Long term, everything would seem to weigh in favor of a level playing field.
Tom
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
I have seen just the opposite happen. Coin goes back to the little guy and "bam" ... it makes the grade.
Tom
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
I think it's less to do with who, but more to do with "how" they are submitted/staged. Even then it's marginal imo.
MJ >>
That's possible too, but I'm told the setup strategy doesn't work all that well either. I would assume that by now the graders are well aware of it.
There is no magic back-door.
Are they perfect? No process is. Are they without bias, no one person is and that is why a coin is actually looked at and then approved by different people.
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
As a scientist, and critical thinker, single anecdotal stories like this bug me a little. Anecdotes are noting more than stories of what happened once, somewhere. They do not describe the "usual" or "customary" practices of a company. The TPGs grade millions of coins. It is EASY to find a few (or even several) really bizarre stories. It's more art than science. Grades are just opinions, not facts.
I bought a coin from a reasonably large, well-respected dealer who submitted it four times with no upgrade. I submitted it once and voila - upgrade. This PROVES collectors get preferential treatment to dealers...... n'est-ce pas?
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
As a scientist, and critical thinker, single anecdotal stories like this bug me a little. Anecdotes are noting more than stories of what happened once, somewhere. They do not describe the "usual" or "customary" practices of a company. The TPGs grade millions of coins. It is EASY to find a few (or even several) really bizarre stories. It's more art than science. Grades are just opinions, not facts.
I bought a coin from a reasonably large, well-respected dealer who submitted it four times with no upgrade. I submitted it once and voila - upgrade. This PROVES collectors get preferential treatment to dealers...... n'est-ce pas? >>
I'm not citing it as evidence, just relating it as it was told to me. The story, if true, does make one wonder tho.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd like to believe it doesn't matter who submits the coin, but I've heard too many stories to the contrary.
Just recently a dealer told me that he bought a raw SLQ [that he thought/knew should go 64FH] from one of the country's foremost experts on SLQs with the agreement that it go 64FH or he could return it. He submitted it 4 times and not even close. He returned it to the dealer who submitted it and wowsa it came back 64FH. >>
I think it's less to do with who, but more to do with "how" they are submitted/staged. Even then it's marginal imo.
MJ >>
That's possible too, but I'm told the setup strategy doesn't work all that well either. I would assume that by now the graders are well aware of it. >>
The great ones in any field adjust and adapt. Like I said, its marginal but if I had one coin I had to make I know who I would go to. Don't ask as I'm not telling
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>
Do any of you think that the "who" in the coin submission impacts final grades?
>>
I, for one, do not.
<< <i>I would love to comment on this but I know better >>
During my busiest 3 years in the coin business my grading fees totalled around $25,000. I have numerous anecdotes on coins that I bought raw, coins that I bought slabbed and cracked, and coins that I saw "change" grades after I sold them or gave up on them. I have my own opinions as to the OP's question and it's based on a lot more than one example. Cheers.
I had some serious discussions over the years with some of the biggest players on how they staged their coins for optimization. These guys have PhD's in the Art of Submissions. But it goes well beyond that. And it's a lot more than a handful who really know the answer. I'd say more like hundreds if not more. Those are the people that tended to rely on grading to make their living. There's definitely potential rewards on both sides of the table too.
Also, is it a good practice to have individuals with Registry Sets involved within the very business that assigns grades?
Is it a coincidence that someone on the "Board of Experts" is a high-end registry player? I don't know the answers, that why I pose the questions.
In my mind, if you want to be involved in the business of grading coins in any capacity, then perhaps you should recuse yourself from the registry game? Again, this would alleviate the "perceptions" that anyone MAY get preferential treatment in the fiercely competitive world of the registry sets.
Successful BST xactions w/PCcoins, Drunner, Manofcoins, Rampage, docg, Poppee, RobKool, and MichealDixon.
<< <i>Would it help if PCGS provided a line drawing with grading points pointed out just like GIA does for diamonds? >>
GIA? GIA? You know that GIA is owned but the diamond companies? Talk about...what was the word....rigged?
<< <i>Would it help if PCGS provided a line drawing with grading points pointed out just like GIA does for diamonds? >>
INDEED it would! Good point.
Successful BST xactions w/PCcoins, Drunner, Manofcoins, Rampage, docg, Poppee, RobKool, and MichealDixon.
<< <i>
<< <i>Would it help if PCGS provided a line drawing with grading points pointed out just like GIA does for diamonds? >>
GIA? GIA? You know that GIA is owned but the diamond companies? Talk about...what was the word....rigged? >>
Are diamonds collected like coins? Do individuals compete for the best graded diamonds? Is there a diamond forum?
Successful BST xactions w/PCcoins, Drunner, Manofcoins, Rampage, docg, Poppee, RobKool, and MichealDixon.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Would it help if PCGS provided a line drawing with grading points pointed out just like GIA does for diamonds? >>
GIA? GIA? You know that GIA is owned but the diamond companies? Talk about...what was the word....rigged? >>
Are diamonds collected like coins? Do individuals compete for the best graded diamonds? Is there a diamond forum? >>
The entire worth of a diamond is set by GIA based on the 4C's. Conflict of interest, no?
the diamond companies hold back diamond sales to create scarcity. Talk about rigged.
<< <i>
<< <i>
Do any of you think that the "who" in the coin submission impacts final grades?
>>
I, for one, do not. >>
Make that at least 2. Large number submitters have the odds in their favor, to the small submitter is all. Of getting a TOP POP they also get more lower grades back.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Would it help if PCGS provided a line drawing with grading points pointed out just like GIA does for diamonds? >>
GIA? GIA? You know that GIA is owned but the diamond companies? Talk about...what was the word....rigged? >>
Are diamonds collected like coins? Do individuals compete for the best graded diamonds? Is there a diamond forum? >>
The entire worth of a diamond is set by GIA based on the 4C's. Conflict of interest, no?
the diamond companies hold back diamond sales to create scarcity. Talk about rigged. >>
My point was to have PCGS provide the reasoning behind the grade assigned to a coin by documenting the factors that determined the grade on a line drawing similar to how GIA documents the flaws in a diamond. By doing so there would be a couple benefits:
1) Showing the problems that resulted in lower than a 70 grade.
2) Less disagreements on the grade assigned (maybe ?)
3) As an extra coin identity cross check...no 2 coins would have the same flaws in exactly the same places. Would guard against counterfeit holders and labels if you could verify the on file line drawing against the coin in hand.
4) It would be a marketing boost for PCGS (until the other TPG's copy idea at least)
The rigged GIA system is a whole other discussion.
<< <i>
My point was to have PCGS provide the reasoning behind the grade assigned to a coin by documenting the factors that determined the grade on a line drawing similar to how GIA documents the flaws in a diamond. By doing so there would be a couple benefits:
1) Showing the problems that resulted in lower than a 70 grade.
2) Less disagreements on the grade assigned (maybe ?)
3) As an extra coin identity cross check...no 2 coins would have the same flaws in exactly the same places. Would guard against counterfeit holders and labels if you could verify the on file line drawing against the coin in hand.
4) It would be a marketing boost for PCGS (until the other TPG's copy idea at least)
The rigged GIA system is a whole other discussion. >>
Getting the grade right with 90% or better accuracy is probably achievable, though probably not cost effective with all the extra time involved to do that. The TPG business is also about generating a profit. And part of those profits include getting a steady return flow of previously graded coins, from all TPG's. To do what you propose above would probably double the current cost of grading your coins. Could you live with $50 or so to grade a common date MS63-MS65 Morgan dollar on the economy line? Sure, every single coin through PCGS could be photographed/fingerprinted and exacto-graded with specific details on why the coin graded what it did (ie specific flaws from each grader that viewed the coin). And for all that an economy submission might run you up to $100/coin. An entire tier of coins would probably disappear as no one would spend that kind of money to grade them. Those coins probably make up the bulk of PCGS revenue. Basically, it's never been about getting the grade perfectly right. Acceptably graded coins is where we currently are. I do agree that the Registry Set idea was pure genius.
There's no doubt that staging coins optimally plays a role regardless if the TPG says they pull coins out of the box randomly. Have you ever seen auction lot viewers just pull lots out of box randomly? There's also no doubt in my mind that larger submitters have an edge. And there's also no doubt that different sets of graders will view coins differently. Therefore, who is grading what at any particular time plays a role, especially with the more high powered coins.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>the system is not perfect. >>
I am crushed.
CG
I am happy with PCGS, and do not at all think they are playing favorites behind the scenes. If you told your best graders they had to put a grade on a coin they didn't agree with, you would not have your best graders around for very long. You don't hire someone for an expert opinion, and then tell them their opinion does not matter.
In decades of grading, do you think it just might be possible some coins might be better or worse in the same graded holder? Also, in all these years, not even one person has ever come forward with proof of preferential treatment?
Do you know the real secret? Know what you're looking at and have the guts to crack it and send it raw.
<< <i>.... Also, in all these years, not even one person has ever come forward with proof of preferential treatment? >>
I've witnessed it first hand and mentioned those very examples multiple times over the years on this forum. It's not like coming forward with names/dates is going to change anything. Rather than fight city hall, I preferred to team up with those individuals when I could get that preferential treatment on coins we split 50-50. It worked rather well when I was more active. I don't think I would have gotten those same results on my own. That was a number of years ago. Things might have changed.
It doesn't take any guts these days to crack out an NGC coin. For the most part many are considered and valued as one pt lower at PCGS....at least this is true for the areas I specialize in. This has made the decision game much easier. Just crack them out. Then they'll grade what they truly deserve (65% of the time). Simple. If you get the lower grade (with or w/o a +) odds are they will still be worth the same money...maybe even more.
<< <i>
<< <i>
My point was to have PCGS provide the reasoning behind the grade assigned to a coin by documenting the factors that determined the grade on a line drawing similar to how GIA documents the flaws in a diamond. By doing so there would be a couple benefits:
1) Showing the problems that resulted in lower than a 70 grade.
2) Less disagreements on the grade assigned (maybe ?)
3) As an extra coin identity cross check...no 2 coins would have the same flaws in exactly the same places. Would guard against counterfeit holders and labels if you could verify the on file line drawing against the coin in hand.
4) It would be a marketing boost for PCGS (until the other TPG's copy idea at least)
The rigged GIA system is a whole other discussion. >>
Getting the grade right with 90% or better accuracy is probably achievable, though probably not cost effective with all the extra time involved to do that. The TPG business is also about generating a profit. And part of those profits include getting a steady return flow of previously graded coins, from all TPG's. To do what you propose above would probably double the current cost of grading your coins. Could you live with $50 or so to grade a common date MS63-MS65 Morgan dollar on the economy line? Sure, every single coin through PCGS could be photographed/fingerprinted and exacto-graded with specific details on why the coin graded what it did (ie specific flaws from each grader that viewed the coin). And for all that an economy submission might run you up to $100/coin. An entire tier of coins would probably disappear as no one would spend that kind of money to grade them. Those coins probably make up the bulk of PCGS revenue. Basically, it's never been about getting the grade perfectly right. Acceptably graded coins is where we currently are. I do agree that the Registry Set idea was pure genius.
There's no doubt that staging coins optimally plays a role regardless if the TPG says they pull coins out of the box randomly. Have you ever seen auction lot viewers just pull lots out of box randomly? There's also no doubt in my mind that larger submitters have an edge. And there's also no doubt that different sets of graders will view coins differently. Therefore, who is grading what at any particular time plays a role, especially with the more high powered coins. >>
I'm not sure there would be any extra cost and only a few seconds of added time. Certainly not to the $100 per coin level. But it could be an added service just like special labels. You really think a slip of paper costs $25? Or First Strike cost $18? I'd pay $18 for the line drawing or actual image capture.
The magnified view is already on the graders screen. Capturing that image would be a simple button push. Then circling the coins major problems on that image would be less than 10 seconds using a stylus on the touch screen. Saving that annotated image is another button push. No printing needed, leave it to the customer, so no added expense.
Haven't you ever asked your self why a coin got a 69 rather than a 70? Looked perfect when you sent it in. You'd know if the annotated picture was on the certificate info page. Print it if you like or not.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
My point was to have PCGS provide the reasoning behind the grade assigned to a coin by documenting the factors that determined the grade on a line drawing similar to how GIA documents the flaws in a diamond. By doing so there would be a couple benefits:
1) Showing the problems that resulted in lower than a 70 grade.
2) Less disagreements on the grade assigned (maybe ?)
3) As an extra coin identity cross check...no 2 coins would have the same flaws in exactly the same places. Would guard against counterfeit holders and labels if you could verify the on file line drawing against the coin in hand.
4) It would be a marketing boost for PCGS (until the other TPG's copy idea at least)
The rigged GIA system is a whole other discussion. >>
Getting the grade right with 90% or better accuracy is probably achievable, though probably not cost effective with all the extra time involved to do that. The TPG business is also about generating a profit. And part of those profits include getting a steady return flow of previously graded coins, from all TPG's. To do what you propose above would probably double the current cost of grading your coins. Could you live with $50 or so to grade a common date MS63-MS65 Morgan dollar on the economy line? Sure, every single coin through PCGS could be photographed/fingerprinted and exacto-graded with specific details on why the coin graded what it did (ie specific flaws from each grader that viewed the coin). And for all that an economy submission might run you up to $100/coin. An entire tier of coins would probably disappear as no one would spend that kind of money to grade them. Those coins probably make up the bulk of PCGS revenue. Basically, it's never been about getting the grade perfectly right. Acceptably graded coins is where we currently are. I do agree that the Registry Set idea was pure genius.
There's no doubt that staging coins optimally plays a role regardless if the TPG says they pull coins out of the box randomly. Have you ever seen auction lot viewers just pull lots out of box randomly? There's also no doubt in my mind that larger submitters have an edge. And there's also no doubt that different sets of graders will view coins differently. Therefore, who is grading what at any particular time plays a role, especially with the more high powered coins. >>
I'm not sure there would be any extra cost and only a few seconds of added time. Certainly not to the $100 per coin level. But it could be an added service just like special labels. You really think a slip of paper costs $25? Or First Strike cost $18? I'd pay $18 for the line drawing or actual image capture.
The magnified view is already on the graders screen. Capturing that image would be a simple button push. Then circling the coins major problems on that image would be less than 10 seconds using a stylus on the touch screen. Saving that annotated image is another button push. No printing needed, leave it to the customer, so no added expense.
Haven't you ever asked your self why a coin got a 69 rather than a 70? Looked perfect when you sent it in. You'd know if the annotated picture was on the certificate info page. Print it if you like or not. >>
Maybe you should start your own grading company then. Read RR's take to your idea. He is spot on.
I've witnessed it first hand and mentioned those very examples multiple times over the years on this forum.
Hard to accept this as fact. Not that I don't think it's possible, but it's hard to imagine a scenario where you could be sure of what has happened. Sure, a dealer can tell you he has the inside track at a TPG, but how do you know if he really does? Maybe he's just trying to become your partner in a potential upgrade?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Short of giving you unrestricted access to the grading process, PCGS can't change your mind if you choose to believe grading and the Registry are rigged in some fashion. Even then, you may still think something is unfair toward you.
Anyway, what if the answer was yes? So what?
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
the politics happen before the coin gets submitted, because it is common knowledge that people will "show" the coin around for a while if it is a tough coin, and try to get consensus and experts might be consulted, but we are talking about the rarest of the rare, and the downright obscure...on 95% of the material, the process is as it is.
I do not......If it happened, and could be proved, it would destroy the TPG....and humans are lousy at keeping secrets. Cheers, RickO
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection