absent proof to the contrary, I think that these "stories" of coins being submitted 10-20-30+ times are just make believe to prove a point.
We all know the definition of insanity...I think what you may be missing is the cumulative number of submissions of a particular coin FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Four times back to the same grading service is the most I've heard of for a single coin. Usually they are sent once or twice to both the top two TPGS rather than the same one. Dealers mix them in with new coins and at different tiers. When the coin is not graded higher and finally sold at the original grade the resubmission game begins again with another submitter.
I have heard graders talk about easily recognizable resubmissions - often appearing at their grading station several days after they last saw it!
There is a member here who did reconsider at a show, got the upgrade, and then did it again right away at the same show. Needless to say it did not go up again.
It seems to me that most of what we're discussing here was inevitable. And it seems to me that until the next stage in the evolution of grading - probably some form of computer assisted grading - nothing is going to get "fixed".
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
It seems to me that most of what we're discussing here was inevitable. And it seems to me that until the next stage in the evolution of grading - probably some form of computer assisted grading - nothing is going to get "fixed".
Even if you could fix a "grade" of each coin as an identifiable, quantifiable, unalterable "fact",
no one will ever be able to "fix" how much this one or that one actually COSTS,
because that depends on how it looks to the buyer and seller, and how badly they want to buy or sell it,
at the point in time they are negotiating the Price.
Originally posted by: keets Andy, what do you think would happen if PCGS scanned every coin as I suggested earlier, would that stop things??
If PCGS mapped and tracked every coin and refused to upgrade anything, yes, that would stop the upgrades at PCGS. But it would come at a huge cost. First, coins that were undergraded on the first try would be permanently misgraded. And second, NGC would gain huge competitive advantages, as long as they did not follow suit. NGC would get all of the crackout business. NGC would end up with more accurately and consistently graded coins in their holders, which would improve their image in the marketplace. And it probably doesn't stop there.
On the other hand, computer-assisted grading could do much to improve things. It would probably work something like this. An optical scanner and some sort of AI software generate the preliminary grade of a coin. Human graders input their grades. The computer analyzes any differences between human and computer grades, and tries to learn something. The human finalizer reviews the human and computer grades, reviews any prior grades assigned to the same coin on earlier submissions, and assigns a final grade. The computer learns from that as well. And then the coin gets slabbed, with the date of grading specified on the holder. Over time, the computer will improve its skills, fewer human graders will be required, and the grading standard may subtly shift. (As on aside, it's interesting to think that even if NGC and PCGS used the same software, two different grading standards would remain in place.)
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Andy, what do you think would happen if PCGS scanned every coin as I suggested earlier, would that stop things??
They are doing that for all high value coins ($50K+), all non-Modern World Coins, and all coins sent in for Secure Plus. Is there gradeflation on those tiers? They have been gradually lowering the high value threshold. I would not be surprised if it got lowered to $25K at some point.
It may take 10 or 20 years, but if the system gets completely out of hand for classic coins (not moderns), we will see something like the 100 point system put in place. I know that many members of this board hate the idea, but to me, it is inevitable.
I have heard a dealer speaking with a finalizer Rick M. at NGC on specific coins on why they graded particular coins he sent in, which is a rare event for most submitters. If there were an expansion of the reason for various grades assigned which would come up on a search for the certification number that would be helpful. (ie bright lustrous MS64 with a little field chatter; or no problem near gem satiny, not enough eye appeal for 65).
1928-S MS64+ Peace dollar per the Prige Guide = $2700. A really, really nice one will sell for that or more.
1928-S MS65 Peace dollar per the Price Guide = $21,500. A below-average 65 will sell for $17k.
$17,000 - 2700 = $14,300. For a show submission regrade, it's $125 per coin, slightly less if you're a dealer or individual who submits frequently. The difference in "value" pays for 114 grading attempts.
If you have a great eye and cherrypick a nice 64+ that you figure has a 10% chance of upgrading, you'd be a fool to not submit it a couple dozen times.........
absent proof to the contrary, I think that these "stories" of coins being submitted 10-20-30+ times are just make believe to prove a point.
Ask Mr. Eureka/Colonel Jessup and others if they're aware of submitters at the 10-30X level. Joe Ebb already stated this week that he's aware of a 20X to 30X submitter. Take the 10 biggest US rare coin dealer submitters and I'd guess several of them have done 10X or more. They aren't that uncommon. You think Contursi got his 13,000 old grading inserts by sending in no coin more than 2-5X?
I bought a coin once (way back when) for a customer that upgraded (I believe) the 63rd time through! In fact, I had the one that took 63 times offered to me along with another example (2 out of the total pop 3/0 at the time) that hit the grade the first (or second) time through I was told. Same price for each coin - my choice. And, we are talking about close to a $100,000 coin here. Both coins were very nice, but I personally liked the one that took 63 tries better! For peace of mind for my customer, I told him I was going to also ask three totally unbiased grading (super) pros which one they liked better (without telling them any of the grading history), including Rick Montgomery and Miles Standish. All three guys, hands down, picked the coin that took 63 tries! Roughly a decade of so later when both coins happened to reappear at major auction in the same year, same auction house, same platinum night setting (just different auctions) the one that took 63 tries sold for more money than the fresh, (I believe) first or second time through piece.
I agree this is a very extreme circumstance that probably happens today maybe just a few times every year or two, especially because dealers these days need strong cash flow and often place their "liner" coin in an auction after 5 or 10 tries in order to have two other pros fight for it. Then the new buyer can start his count on how many times he submits the "liner coin" before selling it off if it does not work.
As always, just my two cents.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
OldLineCoins: I think the TPG should make a limit of 3 times that the same slab can be submitted for reconsideration. I think this would help stop gradeflation.
A 3x "regrade" limit would not make a significant difference. Please read my next response, which relates to another point by "OldLineCoins."
OldLineCoins: I hate the idea that someone can submit a coin still in the same holder for reconsideration as many times as they want without limit. If you want to try over and over to get the same coin a better grade you should have to crack the coin out and resubmit raw to risk getting a lower grade while fishing for a higher grade.
There are a quite a few wholesalers who derive a large percentage of their respective incomes from getting upgrades. Over the years, I have discussed pertinent issues with many of them. My impression is that almost all of their upgrades are achieved after coins are 'cracked out' and submitted raw. Put simply, the upgrades of scarce, classic U.S. coins usually come from submissions of raw coins.
Roadrunner: I did that once by cracking out a PCGS MS64 $10 Lib that looked full gem 65+ to me. It came back NG/altered surfaces at both PCGS and NGC. I gave up on the coin to take my lumps at auction (raw). The auction house decided to send it back one more time....went MS66.
Such events happen more often than most coin buyers realize.
Roadrunner: The whole game of assigning grades and values has gotten to weird extremes that we all would have called implausible in the past.
There are at least two dozen dealers who make a living (or much of their respective 'livings') by cracking coins out of holders and resubmitting them. Some are coin doctors; other are not, they just keep cracking. They are often major buyers from and consignors to auctions, and they trade privately through the mail. The existence of such a group (some of whom are active at major shows) of dealers who keep buying and upgrading, to the tune of millions of dollars, is indicative of a problem that needs to be further addressed.
these multiple submission stories may be anecdotal but I still don't believe them to be very common at all. that really shouldn't be the whole point of the thread, though, unless you are on the side(as I am) that submitters bear as much fault as the TPG's with what we call grade-flation.
it is hard to stop a problem when you are the cause and continue to do what you want stopped.
I believe the buyers are responsible for grade inflation. If they took the time to learn the basics of grading, they wouldn't buy overgraded material, and the TPGs would hear from the dealers trying to sell that overgraded material.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
"It's far easier to fight for principles, than to live up to them." Adlai Stevenson
Keets: ... what do you think would happen if PCGS scanned every coin as I suggested earlier, would that stop things?
DBtunr: They are doing that for all high value coins ($50K+), all non-Modern World Coins, and all coins sent in for Secure Plus. Is there gradeflation on those tiers
There is grade-inflation for U.S. coins that are valued above $50,000 each. In fairness to PCGS, however, it may be true that most of those upgrades are of coins that were PCGS holdered before March 2010.
In 2010, Don Willis, David Hall and others at PGCS had a brilliant plan, which included incentives for resubmissions. The coin analyzer, the sniffer, and the ray gun were all used on SecurePlus tier submissions, and (originally) only those were eligible for plus grades. Don Willis pointed out then that if 1 out of X coins received a plus grade, then it was financially worthwhile for collectors to resubmit all their coins. A few months later, this plan was abandoned and standard tier submissions became eligible for plus grades, too.
Mr. Eureka: If PCGS mapped and tracked every coin and refused to upgrade anything, yes, that would stop the upgrades at PCGS. But it would come at a huge cost
Come on Andy, there is no need to interpret Keets' point in an extreme manner. It would not be necessary for PCGS to "refuse to upgrade anything"! In such a scenario, the upgrades could be much rarer than in the current reality and could come about after a review process that involves several experts. For an expensive coin, maybe five or six of seven graders should have to be in favor of an upgrade for an upgrade to occur. A policy of publicly announcing upgrades on the PCGS site should be considered as well. Few people would be upset by occasional upgrades. Under the current system, dozens of people make a living (or most of their incomes) by cracking out coins and re-submitting them. New policies resulting in much fewer upgrades and more transparency may amount to a tremendous improvement.
"In order to understand the scarce coins that you own or see, you must learn about coins that you cannot afford." -Me
I believe the buyers are responsible for grade inflation. If they took the time to learn the basics of grading, they wouldn't buy overgraded material, and the TPGs would hear from the dealers trying to sell that overgraded material.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
If it were a 75-cc I would certainly agree as those come with the shield area weak. The raised "LIBERTY" makes 20c pieces different than other seated material. I'd say nearly all of the details of your coin are closer to VF than they are Fine.
What about a gold coin graded and stabbed then later determined to have been puttied. Coin goes back to TPG. Putty removed. Coin is regraded and given same grade as before.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
BidAsk: What about a gold coin graded and stabbed then later determined to have been puttied. ... Coin goes back to TPG. Putty removed. ... Coin is regraded and given same grade as before.
Some examples might be educational. A highly certified, 1920-S Eagle comes to my mind.
"In order to understand the scarce coins that you own or see, you must learn about coins that you cannot afford." -Me
When you go to a show and buy 100 OGH Morgans or whatever series you buy, you are buying coins that have been shopped, showed, seen and reviewed by many and what's left are the coins at which cracking and upgrading are not worth the cost or not worthy or overgraded to a large extant.
What RR is referring too, is go to a fresh collection of PCGS OGH that have not seen the light of day in 20 years and send those in, results will be considerably different I can assure you. Most will grade the same if not upgrade. Ive sen it too many times from really fresh deals, where you get a true sampling of how coins were graded during that tenure!
Originally posted by: Steve27 I believe the buyers are responsible for grade inflation. If they took the time to learn the basics of grading, they wouldn't buy overgraded material, and the TPGs would hear from the dealers trying to sell that overgraded material.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
If it were a 75-cc I would certainly agree as those come with the shield area weak. The raised "LIBERTY" makes 20c pieces different than other seated material. I'd say nearly all of the details of your coin are closer to VF than they are Fine.
From the book Photograde (1988) and the definition of F12 "Obverse: Most of the word "LIBERTY" will show (with no more than 2 1/2 letters missing), but will be very weak in spots. The major details of liberty's gown will show." Definition of VF20: "Obverse: There will be a full "LIBERTY." Liberty's gown will show considerable detail."
"It's far easier to fight for principles, than to live up to them." Adlai Stevenson
From the book Photograde (1988) and the definition of F12 "Obverse: Most of the word "LIBERTY" will show (with no more than 2 1/2 letters missing), but will be very weak in spots. The major details of liberty's gown will show." Definition of VF20: "Obverse: There will be a full "LIBERTY." Liberty's gown will show considerable detail."
1988 Photograde is not without its flaws. Some of the "standards" of that era didn't even hold for that era. I recall the ANA grading guide of the 1980's required a full rim and denticles on all "Good 4" early bust coins, not to mention all 19th century type. Just try to find draped bust coins like that. Those early grading guides caused me to pass on some really good coins that I should have bought. Those guides were good for dealers being able to buy based on those strict standards. If you think about it, they were basically telling us you could grade an entire coin, based on how many letters of "LIBERTY" remained. Almost sounds foolish when you're ignoring 85% of the obverse. And the requirements to have split reverse leaves on F/VF early seated dimes and half dimes was misguided as well.
BidAsk: What about a gold coin graded and stabbed then later determined to have been puttied. ... Coin goes back to TPG. Putty removed. ... Coin is regraded and given same grade as before.
Some examples might be educational. A highly certified, 1920-S Eagle comes to my mind.
I know of a 1807 bust left $5 gold that it happened ......
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
If you think about it, they were basically telling us you could grade an entire coin, based on how many letters of "LIBERTY" remained.
there are still dealers(and obviously collectors) who grade like that, just as there are still some who obv/rev grade Barber Half-Dollars. it's all good for a starting point and draws attention to an important design detail, but you can't really grade like that anymore. I think that's a good thing.
If the majority of expensive coins are sent in to the TPG's over and over and over again until the TPG accidentally misgrades them too high, then the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Originally posted by: CaptHenway If the majority of expensive coins are sent in to the TPG's over and over and over again until the TPG accidentally misgrades them too high, then the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded.
Do you think it's possible that a grader will tire of a coin, that they'll eventually cave and give what the submitter wants, perhaps to reduce their workload? But two of three would need to come to this breaking point. Which brings up another question, for the ultimate grades; MS67, MS68 and PR70.....do they need everyone's approval, all three graders and the finalist before such grades are made? Makes perfect sense to me.
I know.....we don't live in a perfect world....but....why not?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Ask Mr. Eureka/Colonel Jessup and others if they're aware of submitters at the 10-30X level. Joe Ebb already stated this week that he's aware of a 20X to 30X submitter. Take the 10 biggest US rare coin dealer submitters and I'd guess several of them have done 10X or more. They aren't that uncommon. You think Contursi got his 13,000 old grading inserts by sending in no coin more than 2-5X?
I accept that they happen, just not very often at all.
what I see described above by you fits within the criteria of an Urban Legend --- it is always something related by someone who knows a person, Urban Legends always start like that. in this case, you know someone who knows someone who has submitted a coin 30 times.
I don't believe it happens very often at all and when it does it means what the good Captain posted is spot on --- the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded. if a coin is graded 29 times as MS65 and then it gets graded MS66..................I blame the grade-flation on the submitter.
Ask Mr. Eureka/Colonel Jessup and others if they're aware of submitters at the 10-30X level. Joe Ebb already stated this week that he's aware of a 20X to 30X submitter. Take the 10 biggest US rare coin dealer submitters and I'd guess several of them have done 10X or more. They aren't that uncommon. You think Contursi got his 13,000 old grading inserts by sending in no coin more than 2-5X?
I accept that they happen, just not very often at all.
what I see described above by you fits within the criteria of an Urban Legend --- it is always something related by someone who knows a person, Urban Legends always start like that. in this case, you know someone who knows someone who has submitted a coin 30 times.
I don't believe it happens very often at all and when it does it means what the good Captain posted is spot on --- the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded. if a coin is graded 29 times as MS65 and then it gets graded MS66..................I blame the grade-flation on the submitter.
Did the submitter grade the coin as MS66 on trip #30?
How can you blame the submitter?
There's no players if there's no "game."
The TPGs encourage the "game" to get more submissions.
Would multiple submissions for the same coin go down if Secure Plus was required for every coin due to the fact that coin submissions are recorded in a database and can be retrieved for comparison on resubmissions?
Clearly a novice but based on my take it seems like grade inflation is the submitter's fault. If I can take a coin that is AU 50 and resubmit it as many times as I want, I know that grading isn't perfect. Statistically the grades I get will vary, probably along some narrowly peaked bell curve - but it's a bell curve with deviation, not a delta function. Next time I might get XF45. The time after AU50, then AU 50, then AU50, but if I get AU 55 once, I would stop and now my coin is AU55. Statistically it's going to happen. Just a matter of when assuming a finite deviation in grading.
For that reason I blame the people submitting coins for grade inflation. Could part of the problem be fueled by lowering grading standards? Sure maybe. But regardless of the standards, people will keep resubmitting to try to get 1 grade higher, doesn't matter.
Hard to blame "all" those who resubmitted while grading standards loosened a lot from 1996-2008. Now you could have taken the high road and watched your coins start being exceeded in grade by lesser examples or you could have kept up with the Jones'. I kept my coin's current to market from 1997-2008 if only to ensure if I became incapacitated that my family would get current market value for them....not what the 1988-1990 grades were. Who knew back then that CAC would come around in 2007 and re-level the field? Actually, they tipped back in favor of conservatively graded, older-holdered coins being worth more despite a lower grade. Had I know that was coming, all my coins would have remained in their rattlers, ogh's, and old fatties.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector. My first resubmits came in 1997 when a couple dealers told me the TPG's were giving out upgrades left and right. My MS65's from 1988 were now 66's and my 66's were now 67's. Of course I sent them in. For a few hundred bucks in grading fees, the value of those several coins went up $10,000 or more. I also never saw it coming that collectors would fall in love with old holders....including CAC 10 years later in 2007.
Originally posted by: roadrunner Hard to blame "all" those who resubmit when grading standards loosened a lot from 1996-2008. Now you could have taken the high road and watched your coins start being exceeded in grade by lesser examples or you could have kept up with the Jones'. I kept my coin's current to market from 1997-2008 if only to ensure if I became incapacitated that my family would get current market value for them....not what the 1988-1990 grades were. Who knew back then that CAC would come around in 2007 and re-level the field? Actually, they tipped back in favor of conservatively graded, older-holdered coins being worth more despite a lower grade. Had I know that was coming, all my coins would have remained in their rattlers, ogh's, and old fatties.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector.
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
If you aren't planning on selling the coins any time soon, does it really matter if you re-submit every time grade inflation creeps a bit? One could just wait until they want to sell.
Hard to blame "all" those who resubmit when grading standards loosened a lot from 1996-2008. Now you could have taken the high road and watched your coins start being exceeded in grade by lesser examples or you could have kept up with the Jones'. I kept my coin's current to market from 1997-2008 if only to ensure if I became incapacitated that my family would get current market value for them....not what the 1988-1990 grades were. Who knew back then that CAC would come around in 2007 and re-level the field? Actually, they tipped back in favor of conservatively graded, older-holdered coins being worth more despite a lower grade. Had I know that was coming, all my coins would have remained in their rattlers, ogh's, and old fatties.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector.
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
And don't forget that if the market crashes like it did in the early 1980's, the incorrect overgrade you can get now will no longer be available.
Same coin, it just won't be overgraded.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Bruce, you are a World Class Grader, you don't need to submit anything to anyone to know what the grade is.
Yes. But will future potential buyers of the set be "world class" graders too? When Bruce sold the set back around 2007-2008 do you think he would have gotten as much for it if the coins had never been regraded since 1988-1993....grading the overall set 1/2-1 pt lower and losing pop top status on many of them? I would think potential buyers would be interested in knowing the overall grade of the set AND where each coin stands with respect to current condition census rankings. All the more reason to keep the set graded to current standards. You only need to do that every 5-10 yrs or so....or when some major grading shift occurs. The "+" addition was one such change....so would have been CAC in 2007-2008. If CAC gold beaned any of the coins do you think they'd have stayed that way?
And even a top notch grader who is not a seated dollar specialist will not know where all the coins stand in the condition census. They can only go by where they stand on the pop reports. While Bruce might know how every coin stacks up, I doubt the last owner of the set did. A lot of big money buyers out there can't grade to TPG standards, some might not be able to grade at all. So what would they go other than the currently assigned label?
so I will ask the inevitable question --- do you believe that the lack or perceived lack of "consistency" by a TPG such as PCGS or NGC is a conspiracy or a consequence of coin grading?? it is a topic which has been bandied about at this forum for years, and the underlying "tone" always seems to be that it is something perpetrated by the TPG's with the submitter as the unwilling dupe in the equation. I see this as nonsense.
--- if you believe inconsistent grading is an intentional ploy it seems foolish to play the game.
--- if you believe inconsistent grading is an unavoidable consequence it seems foolish to play the game.
Although collectors buy coins largely based on what a coin has been graded by NGC or PCGS, it seems to me that now more than ever, collectors should be buying coins with much less attention to a numeric grade, and far more attention to general eye-appeal and condition of the coin's surfaces. Buying coins based on if they are MS-64 VS MS-65 should probably not even be much of a factor. Why?
1."Experts" frequently disagree on a coin's numeric grade.
2.The current grading standards give large (massive at times) value additions to coins with even a couple minor contact marks in one location VS another--is it really worth thousands of dollars to have those contact marks in a particular location, just because a standard was set 4 decades ago to say that that was the most important location? What makes that standard so perfect and "correct"? Yes, it is what is currently used to asses coin's values, but should it be?
3.Standards are a moving target, and it is probably impossible to ever have a "absolute" system of grading using the standards currently used (strike, wear, contact marks, luster, surfaces, etc.)
4.Coin doctors have ways to cover up minor contact marks, or "improve" small details which allow a coin to slip into the next grade bracket, or even two brackets, and unfortunately these coins are only some of the time caught and kept out of 3rd party grading holders.
Bottom line: collecting coins based on their numeric grade is a bad idea.
around the turn of the Century when I was starting my resurgence in the Hobby I lurked here for awhile. it was around this same time that I first began to become involved with encapsulated coins. I can't recall who the member was that proffered the following advice, but I didn't understand it and thought it was ludicrous. what they said was that when they viewed an encapsulated coin they didn't even bother to check the grade on the insert, they analyzed the coin/came up with their grade/checked a price guide/asked the seller for their price.
Comments
absent proof to the contrary, I think that these "stories" of coins being submitted 10-20-30+ times are just make believe to prove a point.
We all know the definition of insanity...I think what you may be missing is the cumulative number of submissions of a particular coin FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Four times back to the same grading service is the most I've heard of for a single coin. Usually they are sent once or twice to both the top two TPGS rather than the same one. Dealers mix them in with new coins and at different tiers. When the coin is not graded higher and finally sold at the original grade the resubmission game begins again with another submitter.
I have heard graders talk about easily recognizable resubmissions - often appearing at their grading station several days after they last saw it!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
It seems to me that most of what we're discussing here was inevitable. And it seems to me that until the next stage in the evolution of grading - probably some form of computer assisted grading - nothing is going to get "fixed".
Even if you could fix a "grade" of each coin as an identifiable, quantifiable, unalterable "fact",
no one will ever be able to "fix" how much this one or that one actually COSTS,
because that depends on how it looks to the buyer and seller, and how badly they want to buy or sell it,
at the point in time they are negotiating the Price.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Andy, what do you think would happen if PCGS scanned every coin as I suggested earlier, would that stop things??
If PCGS mapped and tracked every coin and refused to upgrade anything, yes, that would stop the upgrades at PCGS. But it would come at a huge cost. First, coins that were undergraded on the first try would be permanently misgraded. And second, NGC would gain huge competitive advantages, as long as they did not follow suit. NGC would get all of the crackout business. NGC would end up with more accurately and consistently graded coins in their holders, which would improve their image in the marketplace. And it probably doesn't stop there.
On the other hand, computer-assisted grading could do much to improve things. It would probably work something like this. An optical scanner and some sort of AI software generate the preliminary grade of a coin. Human graders input their grades. The computer analyzes any differences between human and computer grades, and tries to learn something. The human finalizer reviews the human and computer grades, reviews any prior grades assigned to the same coin on earlier submissions, and assigns a final grade. The computer learns from that as well. And then the coin gets slabbed, with the date of grading specified on the holder. Over time, the computer will improve its skills, fewer human graders will be required, and the grading standard may subtly shift. (As on aside, it's interesting to think that even if NGC and PCGS used the same software, two different grading standards would remain in place.)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Andy, what do you think would happen if PCGS scanned every coin as I suggested earlier, would that stop things??
They are doing that for all high value coins ($50K+), all non-Modern World Coins, and all coins sent in for Secure Plus. Is there gradeflation on those tiers? They have been gradually lowering the high value threshold. I would not be surprised if it got lowered to $25K at some point.
Then we start all over.
1928-S MS65 Peace dollar per the Price Guide = $21,500. A below-average 65 will sell for $17k.
$17,000 - 2700 = $14,300. For a show submission regrade, it's $125 per coin, slightly less if you're a dealer or individual who submits frequently. The difference in "value" pays for 114 grading attempts.
If you have a great eye and cherrypick a nice 64+ that you figure has a 10% chance of upgrading, you'd be a fool to not submit it a couple dozen times.........
absent proof to the contrary, I think that these "stories" of coins being submitted 10-20-30+ times are just make believe to prove a point.
Ask Mr. Eureka/Colonel Jessup and others if they're aware of submitters at the 10-30X level. Joe Ebb already stated this week that he's aware of a 20X to 30X submitter. Take the 10 biggest US rare coin dealer submitters and I'd guess several of them have done 10X or more. They aren't that uncommon. You think Contursi got his 13,000 old grading inserts by sending in no coin more than 2-5X?
I bought a coin once (way back when) for a customer that upgraded (I believe) the 63rd time through! In fact, I had the one that took 63 times offered to me along with another example (2 out of the total pop 3/0 at the time) that hit the grade the first (or second) time through I was told. Same price for each coin - my choice. And, we are talking about close to a $100,000 coin here. Both coins were very nice, but I personally liked the one that took 63 tries better! For peace of mind for my customer, I told him I was going to also ask three totally unbiased grading (super) pros which one they liked better (without telling them any of the grading history), including Rick Montgomery and Miles Standish. All three guys, hands down, picked the coin that took 63 tries! Roughly a decade of so later when both coins happened to reappear at major auction in the same year, same auction house, same platinum night setting (just different auctions) the one that took 63 tries sold for more money than the fresh, (I believe) first or second time through piece.
I agree this is a very extreme circumstance that probably happens today maybe just a few times every year or two, especially because dealers these days need strong cash flow and often place their "liner" coin in an auction after 5 or 10 tries in order to have two other pros fight for it. Then the new buyer can start his count on how many times he submits the "liner coin" before selling it off if it does not work.
As always, just my two cents.
Wondercoin
A 3x "regrade" limit would not make a significant difference. Please read my next response, which relates to another point by "OldLineCoins."
OldLineCoins:
There are a quite a few wholesalers who derive a large percentage of their respective incomes from getting upgrades. Over the years, I have discussed pertinent issues with many of them. My impression is that almost all of their upgrades are achieved after coins are 'cracked out' and submitted raw. Put simply, the upgrades of scarce, classic U.S. coins usually come from submissions of raw coins.
Roadrunner:
Such events happen more often than most coin buyers realize.
Roadrunner: in the past.
There are at least two dozen dealers who make a living (or much of their respective 'livings') by cracking coins out of holders and resubmitting them. Some are coin doctors; other are not, they just keep cracking. They are often major buyers from and consignors to auctions, and they trade privately through the mail. The existence of such a group (some of whom are active at major shows) of dealers who keep buying and upgrading, to the tune of millions of dollars, is indicative of a problem that needs to be further addressed.
How will Coin Collectors Interpret Certified Coin Grades in the Future?
it is hard to stop a problem when you are the cause and continue to do what you want stopped.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
DBtunr: They are doing that for all high value coins ($50K+), all non-Modern World Coins, and all coins sent in for Secure Plus. Is there gradeflation on those tiers
There is grade-inflation for U.S. coins that are valued above $50,000 each. In fairness to PCGS, however, it may be true that most of those upgrades are of coins that were PCGS holdered before March 2010.
In 2010, Don Willis, David Hall and others at PGCS had a brilliant plan, which included incentives for resubmissions. The coin analyzer, the sniffer, and the ray gun were all used on SecurePlus tier submissions, and (originally) only those were eligible for plus grades. Don Willis pointed out then that if 1 out of X coins received a plus grade, then it was financially worthwhile for collectors to resubmit all their coins. A few months later, this plan was abandoned and standard tier submissions became eligible for plus grades, too.
The PCGS SecurePlus Program, Part 2: Reform
Mr. Eureka:
Come on Andy, there is no need to interpret Keets' point in an extreme manner. It would not be necessary for PCGS to "refuse to upgrade anything"! In such a scenario, the upgrades could be much rarer than in the current reality and could come about after a review process that involves several experts. For an expensive coin, maybe five or six of seven graders should have to be in favor of an upgrade for an upgrade to occur. A policy of publicly announcing upgrades on the PCGS site should be considered as well. Few people would be upset by occasional upgrades. Under the current system, dozens of people make a living (or most of their incomes) by cracking out coins and re-submitting them. New policies resulting in much fewer upgrades and more transparency may amount to a tremendous improvement.
I believe the buyers are responsible for grade inflation. If they took the time to learn the basics of grading, they wouldn't buy overgraded material, and the TPGs would hear from the dealers trying to sell that overgraded material.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
If it were a 75-cc I would certainly agree as those come with the shield area weak. The raised "LIBERTY" makes 20c pieces different than other seated material. I'd say nearly all of the details of your coin are closer to VF than they are Fine.
Coin goes back to TPG. Putty removed.
Coin is regraded and given same grade as before.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
BidAsk:
Some examples might be educational. A highly certified, 1920-S Eagle comes to my mind.
When you go to a show and buy 100 OGH Morgans or whatever series you buy, you are buying coins that have been shopped, showed, seen and reviewed by many and what's left are the coins at which cracking and upgrading are not worth the cost or not worthy or overgraded to a large extant.
What RR is referring too, is go to a fresh collection of PCGS OGH that have not seen the light of day in 20 years and send those in, results will be considerably different I can assure you. Most will grade the same if not upgrade. Ive sen it too many times from really fresh deals, where you get a true sampling of how coins were graded during that tenure!
I believe the buyers are responsible for grade inflation. If they took the time to learn the basics of grading, they wouldn't buy overgraded material, and the TPGs would hear from the dealers trying to sell that overgraded material.
I submitted this one to see if it would come back as a VG10, F12, or F15. It came back as a VF20; do you agree?
If it were a 75-cc I would certainly agree as those come with the shield area weak. The raised "LIBERTY" makes 20c pieces different than other seated material. I'd say nearly all of the details of your coin are closer to VF than they are Fine.
From the book Photograde (1988) and the definition of F12 "Obverse: Most of the word "LIBERTY" will show (with no more than 2 1/2 letters missing), but will be very weak in spots. The major details of liberty's gown will show." Definition of VF20: "Obverse: There will be a full "LIBERTY." Liberty's gown will show considerable detail."
1988 Photograde is not without its flaws. Some of the "standards" of that era didn't even hold for that era. I recall the ANA grading guide of the 1980's required a full rim and denticles on all "Good 4" early bust coins, not to mention all 19th century type. Just try to find draped bust coins like that. Those early grading guides caused me to pass on some really good coins that I should have bought. Those guides were good for dealers being able to buy based on those strict standards. If you think about it, they were basically telling us you could grade an entire coin, based on how many letters of "LIBERTY" remained. Almost sounds foolish when you're ignoring 85% of the obverse. And the requirements to have split reverse leaves on F/VF early seated dimes and half dimes was misguided as well.
BidAsk:
Some examples might be educational. A highly certified, 1920-S Eagle comes to my mind.
I know of a 1807 bust left $5 gold that it happened ......
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
there are still dealers(and obviously collectors) who grade like that, just as there are still some who obv/rev grade Barber Half-Dollars. it's all good for a starting point and draws attention to an important design detail, but you can't really grade like that anymore. I think that's a good thing.
If the majority of expensive coins are sent in to the TPG's over and over and over again until the TPG accidentally misgrades them too high, then the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded.
Do you think it's possible that a grader will tire of a coin, that they'll eventually cave and give what the submitter wants, perhaps to reduce their workload? But two of three would need to come to this breaking point. Which brings up another question, for the ultimate grades; MS67, MS68 and PR70.....do they need everyone's approval, all three graders and the finalist before such grades are made? Makes perfect sense to me.
I know.....we don't live in a perfect world....but....why not?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
The TPGs.
Who do I think is responsible for gradeflation?
The TPGs.
Do you mean, for getting the grades wrong on so many coins, the first time through?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I accept that they happen, just not very often at all.
what I see described above by you fits within the criteria of an Urban Legend --- it is always something related by someone who knows a person, Urban Legends always start like that. in this case, you know someone who knows someone who has submitted a coin 30 times.
I don't believe it happens very often at all and when it does it means what the good Captain posted is spot on --- the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded. if a coin is graded 29 times as MS65 and then it gets graded MS66..................I blame the grade-flation on the submitter.
Ask Mr. Eureka/Colonel Jessup and others if they're aware of submitters at the 10-30X level. Joe Ebb already stated this week that he's aware of a 20X to 30X submitter. Take the 10 biggest US rare coin dealer submitters and I'd guess several of them have done 10X or more. They aren't that uncommon. You think Contursi got his 13,000 old grading inserts by sending in no coin more than 2-5X?
I accept that they happen, just not very often at all.
what I see described above by you fits within the criteria of an Urban Legend --- it is always something related by someone who knows a person, Urban Legends always start like that. in this case, you know someone who knows someone who has submitted a coin 30 times.
I don't believe it happens very often at all and when it does it means what the good Captain posted is spot on --- the majority of expensive coins on the market are overgraded. if a coin is graded 29 times as MS65 and then it gets graded MS66..................I blame the grade-flation on the submitter.
Did the submitter grade the coin as MS66 on trip #30?
How can you blame the submitter?
There's no players if there's no "game."
The TPGs encourage the "game" to get more submissions.
It is that simple.
oh, brother.
For that reason I blame the people submitting coins for grade inflation. Could part of the problem be fueled by lowering grading standards? Sure maybe. But regardless of the standards, people will keep resubmitting to try to get 1 grade higher, doesn't matter.
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector. My first resubmits came in 1997 when a couple dealers told me the TPG's were giving out upgrades left and right. My MS65's from 1988 were now 66's and my 66's were now 67's. Of course I sent them in. For a few hundred bucks in grading fees, the value of those several coins went up $10,000 or more. I also never saw it coming that collectors would fall in love with old holders....including CAC 10 years later in 2007.
Hard to blame "all" those who resubmit when grading standards loosened a lot from 1996-2008. Now you could have taken the high road and watched your coins start being exceeded in grade by lesser examples or you could have kept up with the Jones'. I kept my coin's current to market from 1997-2008 if only to ensure if I became incapacitated that my family would get current market value for them....not what the 1988-1990 grades were. Who knew back then that CAC would come around in 2007 and re-level the field? Actually, they tipped back in favor of conservatively graded, older-holdered coins being worth more despite a lower grade. Had I know that was coming, all my coins would have remained in their rattlers, ogh's, and old fatties.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector.
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
If you aren't planning on selling the coins any time soon, does it really matter if you re-submit every time grade inflation creeps a bit? One could just wait until they want to sell.
Just wondering.
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Hard to blame "all" those who resubmit when grading standards loosened a lot from 1996-2008. Now you could have taken the high road and watched your coins start being exceeded in grade by lesser examples or you could have kept up with the Jones'. I kept my coin's current to market from 1997-2008 if only to ensure if I became incapacitated that my family would get current market value for them....not what the 1988-1990 grades were. Who knew back then that CAC would come around in 2007 and re-level the field? Actually, they tipped back in favor of conservatively graded, older-holdered coins being worth more despite a lower grade. Had I know that was coming, all my coins would have remained in their rattlers, ogh's, and old fatties.
If you didn't upgrade along the way, your REG sets lost point value, your coins on paper lost value, etc. Judging by how few coins remain in those old holders, the vast majority decided to upgrade along the way. Had grading standards not loosened, there would have been no need to resubmit. Hard to blame all that on the collector.
Correct. Is it my fault that I'm practically forced to resubmit my seated dollar set to maintain its value in the face of creeping gradeflation?
And don't forget that if the market crashes like it did in the early 1980's, the incorrect overgrade you can get now will no longer be available.
Same coin, it just won't be overgraded.
Great posts, totally. I agree with you, and welcome aboard!
Thanks
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
Bruce, you are a World Class Grader, you don't need to submit anything to anyone to know what the grade is.
Yes. But will future potential buyers of the set be "world class" graders too? When Bruce sold the set back around 2007-2008 do you think he would have gotten as much for it if the coins had never been regraded since 1988-1993....grading the overall set 1/2-1 pt lower and losing pop top status on many of them? I would think potential buyers would be interested in knowing the overall grade of the set AND where each coin stands with respect to current condition census rankings. All the more reason to keep the set graded to current standards. You only need to do that every 5-10 yrs or so....or when some major grading shift occurs. The "+" addition was one such change....so would have been CAC in 2007-2008. If CAC gold beaned any of the coins do you think they'd have stayed that way?
And even a top notch grader who is not a seated dollar specialist will not know where all the coins stand in the condition census. They can only go by where they stand on the pop reports. While Bruce might know how every coin stacks up, I doubt the last owner of the set did. A lot of big money buyers out there can't grade to TPG standards, some might not be able to grade at all. So what would they go other than the currently assigned label?
so I will ask the inevitable question --- do you believe that the lack or perceived lack of "consistency" by a TPG such as PCGS or NGC is a conspiracy or a consequence of coin grading?? it is a topic which has been bandied about at this forum for years, and the underlying "tone" always seems to be that it is something perpetrated by the TPG's with the submitter as the unwilling dupe in the equation. I see this as nonsense.
--- if you believe inconsistent grading is an intentional ploy it seems foolish to play the game.
--- if you believe inconsistent grading is an unavoidable consequence it seems foolish to play the game.
1."Experts" frequently disagree on a coin's numeric grade.
2.The current grading standards give large (massive at times) value additions to coins with even a couple minor contact marks in one location VS another--is it really worth thousands of dollars to have those contact marks in a particular location, just because a standard was set 4 decades ago to say that that was the most important location? What makes that standard so perfect and "correct"? Yes, it is what is currently used to asses coin's values, but should it be?
3.Standards are a moving target, and it is probably impossible to ever have a "absolute" system of grading using the standards currently used (strike, wear, contact marks, luster, surfaces, etc.)
4.Coin doctors have ways to cover up minor contact marks, or "improve" small details which allow a coin to slip into the next grade bracket, or even two brackets, and unfortunately these coins are only some of the time caught and kept out of 3rd party grading holders.
Bottom line: collecting coins based on their numeric grade is a bad idea.
I have learned to practice that approach.