Does PCGS and NGC exchange old certs?

1Bustcollector

If a coin is crossed do the grading services work together to return and document the old cert tags?

Also, how often do the pop reports get updated?

DIMEMAN

You are kidding........right!

GRANDAM

PCGS will send the old cert back with your order.

GrandAm

jcping

I don't think so

airplanenut

Think of all the grading credits PCGS could have at NGC!

19Lyds

<< <i>Think of all the grading credits PCGS could have at NGC! >>

Or not.

astrorat

<< <i>Think of all the grading credits PCGS could have at NGC! >>

puffer

This would be so easy, you check a box and if the coin crosses they send the old certification labels to the other company. What is the reason for this not being done? Is there any economic reason preventing the exchange or an online department that would handle it without the shipping department having to get involved? Hopefully this will be one of the things done in the grading services of the future. My other wish list: a box you check and you get attribution only if it matters. Lower value submissions within the same tier get processed faster. No grade "genuine" results get partially refunded. But I am probably being unrealistic considering how difficult it already is for them to run their business.

PerryHall

The OP asks a simple question and he gets six smart ass responses before someone gives him a serious answer to his question. Pathetic.

Shortgapbob

PCGS returns the old tags of the coins they cross to the submitter.

BAJJERFAN

It would seem like an "in your face"/FU gesture if the TPGs returned old inserts to each other. PCGS returns them to you. Not everyone wants to return them. Some keep the insert with the raw coin when putting the coin into an album. I usually sent NGC inserts back. They don't know the fate of the cracked out coin other than that it is no longer in their holder.

planetsteve

I just got an email a couple of weeks ago from NGC announcing that they would start paying 50 cents for returned slab tags. I was shocked because I thought they did this all along. (BTW, my naivete is also such that I thought PCGS would send NGC their tags. It'd be best for the hobby and the industry, rite?)

What's the procedure for sending in PCGS tags?

BStrauss3

sorry for another smart answer: do you really think that the TPGs care about what's best for the hobby?

to answer the original question NO: there's no exchange of information between the services.

in fact with many thought/hoped to be borderline coins resubmitted multiple times after being cracked out in the hopes of a grade upgrade the population reports within a service can be significantly inflated.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>I just got an email a couple of weeks ago from NGC announcing that they would start paying 50 cents for returned slab tags. I was shocked because I thought they did this all along. (BTW, my naivete is also such that I thought PCGS would send NGC their tags. It'd be best for the hobby and the industry, rite?)

What's the procedure for sending in PCGS tags? >>



Just send them to PCGS attn: customer service. Someone will open the package and make sure it gets sent on to the right person. It does seem to be an awful long time [2-3 months IIRC] before your bounty gets sent out.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>If a coin is crossed do the grading services work together to return and document the old cert tags?

Also, how often do the pop reports get updated? >>



Pop reports are updated every Sunday morning I believe.

PerryHall

<< <i>sorry for another smart answer: do you really think that the TPGs care about what's best for the hobby? >>



The pop reports are hopelessly inaccurate and nothing can fix them. Too many old labels have already been discarded. And, yes, I think the major grading services "care about what's best for the hobby." It's in their best interest to have the hobby strong and healthy.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>This would be so easy, you check a box and if the coin crosses they send the old certification labels to the other company. What is the reason for this not being done? Is there any economic reason preventing the exchange or an online department that would handle it without the shipping department having to get involved? Hopefully this will be one of the things done in the grading services of the future. My other wish list: a box you check and you get attribution only if it matters. Lower value submissions within the same tier get processed faster. No grade "genuine" results get partially refunded. But I am probably being unrealistic considering how difficult it already is for them to run their business. >>



My wish is that you could check a box and have PCGS send the coin back to NGC to be reholdered if something goes awry! Prolly just wishful thinking though.

leothelyon

Well, here goes my next, "no rewards for you" suggestion; What's the population of those coins in registry sets or could we have some means to register our certified coins. This should give us some kind of updated population report as long as we don't have people registering their old label certs.
How about a pop report of those coins that received a blue label or whatever of recent?
There has been a movement attaching photos to cert numbers......hows that going and what's the pop report on those?

DIMEMAN

>>>The OP asks a simple question and he gets six smart ass responses before someone gives him a serious answer to his question. Pathetic.<<<

Like it or not.....my reply was right on.

The day PCGS & ngc work together....will be the day "you know where" freezes over!

1Bustcollector

I guess I am a bit naive, but still hopeful that there is something here of benefit we might try and recover. I know the population reporting may never be perfect but it does have value and it can be made better in accuracy if we address simple accounting errors. If the services publish, maintain (and even reward individuals for old certs) an important database it does make sense they willfully and sincerely try in an effort that represents an important tool given to the collecting community. I only wanted to know the running rules and was hopeful to possibly find a simple solution that has haunted each service for years. Hasn't this database found its own revival since the inception of the Registry sets?

If the policy is structured in a way (as noted by others) where the old cert is returned "and" it is up to the individual to simply mail in these items to the respectable service then could we maybe try and alter that method by:

A) Asking the services to electronically scan those numbers to each other?

It sounds like the bigger problem is in the individuals not sending in the certs? Are we not blaming the services for some of our own faults?


If they want to mail the old certs back that is fine, but it should already be be decommissioned.

puffer

I see no rational reason to not make certification label return as efficient as possible for all concerned. Here was on photo opportunity: Text There are many others who have held on to labels for quite some time. On condition census coins I would think it would be imperative to get the numbers right.

winky

Not in this life time.

WTCG

<< <i>>>>The OP asks a simple question and he gets six smart ass responses before someone gives him a serious answer to his question. Pathetic.<<<

Like it or not.....my reply was right on.

The day PCGS & ngc work together....will be the day "you know where" freezes over! >>



NGC and PCGS sometimes cooperate on logistical matters like booking convention space and similar issues. They also speak to each other when there is a possibility of dealing with stolen coins, repeated doctored submissions, etc.

WTCG

Inserts are returned to the submitter when coins cross. Normally it is up to the submitter to return the inserts.

It happens very infrequently but sometimes a slab sent in for crossover gets accidentally cracked out or gets damaged by the grading company while in their possession. When that happens they will send in the damaged or cracked out coins for reholdering at their expense. I know this because many years ago on one of my submissions PCGS accidentally cracked out an NGC coin that they did not intend to. PCGS resubmitted the coin to NGC for reholdering.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>I guess I am a bit naive, but still hopeful that there is something here of benefit we might try and recover. I know the population reporting may never be perfect but it does have value and it can be made better in accuracy if we address simple accounting errors. If the services publish, maintain (and even reward individuals for old certs) an important database it does make sense they willfully and sincerely try in an effort that represents an important tool given to the collecting community. I only wanted to know the running rules and was hopeful to possibly find a simple solution that has haunted each service for years. Hasn't this database found its own revival since the inception of the Registry sets?

If the policy is structured in a way (as noted by others) where the old cert is returned "and" it is up to the individual to simply mail in these items to the respectable service then could we maybe try and alter that method by:

A) Asking the services to electronically scan those numbers to each other?

It sounds like the bigger problem is in the individuals not sending in the certs? Are we not blaming the services for some of our own faults?


If they want to mail the old certs back that is fine, but it should already be be decommissioned. >>



First of all the inserts don't belong to PCGS or NGC; they belong to the submitter or the owner/s of the coin/s. If you wish to have the inserts returned to say NGC just enclose an addressed stamped envelope envelope with a note for PCGS to drop them into the mail. Maybe they will. You may want to check with CS first tho.

1Bustcollector

The matter is very simple. No need to enclose an envelope, check boxes, or even write a note.

PCGS and NGC can simply take a photo of the cert/barcode, store it in a file (or CD) and electronically send (or mail) them periodically to each other, it's that simple. Then they get scanned on the other end and updated.

As far as ownership of the certs are concerned, don't change policy, send them back to the submitter (The certs are retained and returned as they are now).

Really, it's that simple and effective.....

BAJJERFAN

Of course it's that simple, but why should either one expend manpower and/or resources for issues that don't concern them. If you send 3 orders to PCGS in one package, they won't even go to the trouble to hold them and return them all in one package. More than likely you will pay to have 3 different packages returned to you. It's PCGS' best interest to have their pops accurate, but maybe not NGC's pops.

You can take pics of the labels/slabs and send them to the appropriate TPG yourself.

dbcoin

<< <i>The matter is very simple. No need to enclose an envelope, check boxes, or even write a note.

PCGS and NGC can simply take a photo of the cert/barcode, store it in a file (or CD) and electronically send (or mail) them periodically to each other, it's that simple. Then they get scanned on the other end and updated.

As far as ownership of the certs are concerned, don't change policy, send them back to the submitter (The certs are retained and returned as they are now).

Really, it's that simple and effective..... >>



If I can take a picture of a signed check and have it deposited into my bank account, taking a picture of a cert outside of a slab should also work to. Good idea.

1Bustcollector

Dbcoin, That's exactly my thought to help convince everyone. If you can perform banking online and take pictures and deposit them well....you get the idea.

Another way to look at it:

Look at it as though you have a camera that holds hundreds to thousands of pictures - storage memory is extremely cheap these days. These pictures can be downloaded into a file and sent electronically.

Now-a-days we also have an app that is on our Iphone that reads bar codes.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>

<< <i>The matter is very simple. No need to enclose an envelope, check boxes, or even write a note.

PCGS and NGC can simply take a photo of the cert/barcode, store it in a file (or CD) and electronically send (or mail) them periodically to each other, it's that simple. Then they get scanned on the other end and updated.

As far as ownership of the certs are concerned, don't change policy, send them back to the submitter (The certs are retained and returned as they are now).

Really, it's that simple and effective..... >>



If I can take a picture of a signed check and have it deposited into my bank account, taking a picture of a cert outside of a slab should also work to. Good idea. >>



A full pic of both sides of a slabbed PCGS coin is enough to convince PCGS that YOU are in possession and the owner of said coin. Until the TPGs have the inserts in their grubby little paws, they may not be convinced that the coin is no longer in their slab. If PCGS had a vested interest in this, I'd expect that they'd already be doing it. BTW shouldn't they be also sending them to CAC to keep their pops accurate too?

Something like this is too little, too late. It should have been done long ago. Besides what good is it if PCGS does it, but those who crack out NGC coins and submit them raw don't do it?