Let's talk Slabbed Grades! -- and a problem that I see with it.
WingedLiberty1957
Posts: 2,961 ✭✭✭✭✭
Sorry if this has been discussed before -- but it's an interesting subject to me.
So I was trying to come up with a visual describing a problem that I think happens with slabbed grades.
Take for example a fairly rock solid MS64 Lincoln Cent -- and by rock solid I mean that the "consensus grade" (where the majority of graders would be) would come in at MS64.
If one keeps cracking that coin out and resubmitting it as a raw coin to a 3rd party grading company -- I think that eventually you would get a SPREAD of results similar to whats shown in this Gaussian Probability Curve shown below:
The majority of Submissions would result in an MS64 grade. However occurring less often would be results either 1 grade up (MS65) or 1 grade down (MS63). And very rarely you would get a result 2 grades up (MS66) or 2 grades down (MS62). And very occasionally a grading team might find some "questionable" flaw that could cause them to give the coin a Genuine Grade. (Questionable Color or Possibly Improperly Cleaned).
This spread of grading results is what I think causes a lot of people to resubmit coins looking for a higher grade. I myself have had a number of coins jump to a higher grades over the years.
I think the problem as I see it is that most coins in slabs tend to be "maxed out" in terms of grades. That is the owner of this MS64 coin in question might submit it a few times, and when they hit that MS65 grade they stop. So I wonder if in a lot of cases the slabbed grade might be the "best possible" grade in most instances.
I suppose that's where the interest in CAC comes in. This said coin might Gold Sticker in an MS63 slab, Green Sticker in an MS64 slab, and not sticker in an MS65 slab. So it does add a bit of information.
Ultimately coin grading is an instantaneous opinion of 3 people at a TPG at a given time -- and as grading teams swap out, the opinions could also change.
I think this is one reason why I generally don't like to buy coin where there is a huge price gap between 2 consecutive grades. It's too much of a fluid system to pay 3x to 5x money for a coin 1 grade higher. However if the price gap is small, I see no downside to buying a coin 1 grade up.
Thoughts?
Comments
Excellent thoughts. In a nutshell: are you suggesting it is easier for an MS63 to go MS64 or an MS64 to MS65? Either way, I am a proponant of cracking out strong coins and resubmitting Express (for the flastest, most pleasing results).
I'm a math prof whose dissertation was in statistics, and I find this interesting. A couple of questions immediately occur to me, for which I have no answers. I wonder if, at any given point in time, the distribution is really symmetric. I do think that symmetry is a reasonable assumption upon which to base a model, and that the normal distribution is a reasonable assumption as well. Or T. But here is my real wonder: I wonder what the cut-offs are that bound the green region. Those cut-offs define the total area of the tails, which represents the probability that a coin will come back with a different grade.
In my dreams, there is an independent organization with a bread-basket of 1000 U.S. coins ... nothing too rare or exotic ... coins with high pops such as the 81-s Morgan, 09-VDB Lincoln , etc ... in various mint-state grades, some original, some not. Each year, these coins get sent, unslabbed, to TPG X. Results are published, and a track record is built over the years. This is not a "gotcha" exercise; I think we all accept the reality that grading is subjective, and that coins will occasionally receive different grades from the most respected TPGs. But it may reveal trends, it may empirically define those cutoffs, and it may inspire discussion withing the TPGs themselves.
(No, I don't have the wealth to fund this. Wish I did.)
Whit
Interesting thoughts! I myself have seen 64 slabbed coins end up in 66 slabs eventually. So I know this does happen. I have also cracked out a 65 coin and then could not get it past 64 on future subs. It really leads me to think there is a +/- 1 grade standard deviation on most slabbed grades.
For that same reason I think "+" grades are kind of misleading -- it implies that the accuracy of grading can be cut into even smaller categories. That graders can tell the difference between a 64 and 64+ (considered 1/2 a grade?) ... while my experience says that a grade is usually accurate to +/- 1 grade only. So I think the whole concept of "+" grades is a bit flawed -- there is an implied accuracy there, which has not been demonstrated.
It's interesting but when I was a kid in the 1960's ... I recall only 3 UNC grades .... Uncirculated (UNC), Choice Unc (Ch.Unc.), and Gem Brilliant Unc (BU) -- is my memory correct?
That might correspond to
UNC = 60-62
Choice UNC = 63-65
Gem Unc = 66+
I guess what I am trying to say is I think the TPG's trying to cut the Uncirculated Grades into 20 categories is way too many and I dont think there is any Skill in doing that! It implies that grades are stable in 20 categories ... when I think the truth is most TPG's probably only have "fairly stable accuracy" in perhaps 3 (or maybe 4, or 5 at absolute most) categories in the Uncirculated Grades: 60-62 ... 63-65 ... and 66+ Or something similar
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
It's an interesting subject, one I've also thought about in these terms and concepts. Over the years, many have done Polls on this forum in the vein of, "grade the raw coin from these pictures" and we've seen some beautiful bell shaped curves, and others more skewed or narrow in favor of a rather obvious grade with fewer outliers.
Do agree that coins do tend to end up in their "best case" holder because of resubmissions and stopping when happy.
I also think that it is likely a mistake to think about this in terms of "probability" in the statistical sense, because the events (results of grading encounters) aren't random, as much as the influence of such environmental factors such as "catching the right grading team"... "Catching any given grading team on a "good day" ,... the presence of "set up coins", or other techniques expert submitters..
And of course there is the separately discussed but certainly related topic of "gradeflation" evolving the standards of things like market acceptability of surface alterations, and growing knowledge among graders of grading coins "as they tend to come" in terms of the strike quality of the original dies of the issues in question (vs wear, for mid grade and lower graded coins)
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
It seems like a great business plan for wringing out the wallets of some wacky OCD collector base
This is something that I am sure many of us have thought about doing just for fun, but the grading fees would really start to add up. Probably not doable on a large scale for most collectors.
I think for the best results and to ensure consistency each coin would have to be graded four times in the year, preferably leaving time in between each submission, instead of cracking and resubmitting right when you get the coins back from the TPG. Once all the data is received the grades would be averaged out to get the finalized grade for that year.
All of the data would certainly be interesting to look at and analyze after a few years to see whether or not grades slowly start increasing (or decreasing) as the years ago by, and whether or not the month coins are graded have any influence around the grades received (Around holidays, etc).
The OP's theory is basically what occurs. But that amount of "green" area under the bell curve changes drastically with series, grade, and particularly price. A common $10 Lincoln cent can fluctuate from MS63 to MS66 and barely change in price. There's no real risk in the TPG's assigning a MS66 grade and a $35 price tag (vs. $20 as MS65 or $5 as MS63). That kind of shift will just not occur with say a solid for the grade MS64 seated half dollar worth $1,000 or more. That coin will likely come back MS64 65%-85% of the time. Maybe one time out of 10 it will come back MS65 ($2500). And one time out of 10 it will come back MS63 ($750). It will never come back MS66 ($4000)...at least not until years down the road with another grading shift. As long as there is one up-grader who sees the MS65 potential, it will get submitted until it finally upgrades...10X if needed. At MS65 it's maxed out, lower end, and won't sticker. It will now sell for a discount to MS65 money...and trade for MS64+ CAC money, much the way it did before the upgrade occurred.
I've never personally submitted a seated coin that was solid as a MS64 and yet go up 2 grades higher. I am aware of a single seated half formerly graded MS66 that was indeed only 64 coin. That coin was later downgraded from 66 to 65....and last time out at auction it fetched typical MS64 money....despite the MS65 holder. More and more instances of the holders not being able to bail out the coins. The ex-Knoxville 1839 ND half MS67 has fetched MS65 money its last couple of times out. I thought it was MS64 at best.
In the pre-2009 market such a coin would trade for at least 85-95% of MS65 average money. That game is no longer in play. It's now more like 50-65% of MS65 money.
Grades are not the problem as much as collector valuation of grade bumps. Sometimes a factor of ten. With the first MS70 Lincoln graded a decade ago it was perhaps 200 fold.
Cracking and resubitting is not for the faint of heart.
To win big money you've got to bet big money.
Baley said, "I also think that it is likely a mistake to think about this in terms of "probability" in the statistical sense, because the events (results of grading encounters) aren't random, as much as the influence of such environmental factors such as "catching the right grading team"... "Catching any given grading team on a "good day" ,... the presence of "set up coins", or other techniques expert submitters.."
Indeed, it is precisely those factors that Baley describes that injects the variability into the system! Those factors are the very heart of the randomness. The question is: to what extent can those factors be controlled? The greater the control, the less variability in the resubmission grades. I rather long for the day in which computers are put to the task of technical grading (not necessarily authenticating), including strike. I wish I knew how to program for eye appeal.
And WingedLiberty1957 said, "For that same reason I think "+" grades are kind of misleading -- it implies that the accuracy of grading can be cut into even smaller categories. That graders can tell the difference between a 64 and 64+ (considered 1/2 a grade?) ... while my experience says that a grade is usually accurate to +/- 1 grade only. So I think the whole concept of "+" grades is a bit flawed -- there is an implied accuracy there, which has not been demonstrated."
I do agree that the fineness into which uncirculated grades have been partitioned suggests a degree of reliable or replicable discrimination that invites polite skepticism. Don't misunderstand me: I have enormous respect for first-world TPGs, but I too feel that there is an implied level of accuracy that hasn't been demonstrated. That doesn't mean that the accuracy isn't there. It means merely that no study or database of which I am aware can substantiate it. Anecdotes really don't cut it. (I believe I recall an old post from David Hall in which he stated quite honestly that a professional grader is apt to say something like, "It's in a 65 holder, but I wouldn't be offended to see it as a 66." My apology if my memory is not serving as well as I think.)
At any rate, the +/- grades really don't affect me that much as a hobbyist. At the conclusion of every one of my purchases, my eye has been on the coin 99% of the time and the grade on the label for a second or two.
Whit.
Grading has a subjective component. And that subjectivity can change. Opinions can change. TPG is an opinion and the process by which coins are evaluated to determine a grade does make for the best case study predicated in probability and statistical outcomes.
There will be those coins that are marginal for the grade and those that are truly representative for the grade and finally those that stand out. Consider the date and mint within the series in undertaking your analysis and remember that coins within the same grade. range are not created equal.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
As far as bell curves go it really does not mean that much for me, yes it is nice to get a higher grade for a coin submitted than I expected, and disappointed in receiving a lower grade than expected, I believe we all feel that way. As for the reason for getting a grade in the first place is that others would buy sight unseen based only on the grade. The only time I have done this is to pick up Moderns that are cheap at a 70, if the 70 is too much a 69 will do just fine if it is my collection. other than cheap moderns I will not buy a coin sight unseen when it carries a hefty price tag again unless it is from the Mint. I will pass by dealers that believe all their coins are under graded and insist on a price for a higher grade than assigned, and tend to be Leary of under priced for the grade without a close examination. I recently took a loss on a PCGS 2014 PR69 Kennedy Gold Half after examining the pictures on eBay every picture I looked at appeared to show a very nice coin, I thought I was getting a bargain, it was a "Buy It Now" with a price that was below market, besides 9999 fine 24k gold would not develop a black spot, at least that is what I believed, yet low and behold when I got it in hand it had a green / black spot just inside the rim by the date. The dealer had to have known the spot was there, of course it was one of three he had for sale at the same low price. I called him on it, after talking to him he claimed to look at the other two and low and behold they had spots on them also. I figured I would just check with PCGS, of course the Spot policy seemed to have changed since the last time I looked at it ten or so years ago, I may be mistaken on that. The best I could do was return it in trade for an NGC 69, not worth the same money as PCGS but it was an honest grade, in fact I found no reason at all why it did not make a 70 from NGC. Lesson learned, I guess I got lucky and the 1/10000th of the coin that was not gold spotted how lucky, after managing to finally sell the NGC at a loss of $150 between the price difference, postage and insurance to send it back for the trade I learned that anything in that price range I will be sure to drive the 70 miles to a trusted dealer to buy a raw coin and enjoy what I buy without the promise of being able to buy a TPG coin based on the belief that because it is graded by a reputable firm I can be assured by their guarantee that I can rest assured I can buy "Sight Unseen" and get what I expect.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
I was in a conversation today where we discussed this very subject. If TPGs could adapt a face recognition type software to coin grading, perhaps some of the grey area in grading might disappear. They still could have a panel review the computer grade and this would seem to at least increase the current grading accuracy.
I also think modern graders have too many different series to learn. I believe they need specialists. A collector who specializes in one particular series might do better on the coins they know than a grader who just has general knowledge of literally dozens of different series.
You have gold, silver, platinum, copper and more. Copper alone is very difficult. Learning copper coins is an immense undertaking just by itself. It is too much for the grader to master all those different types of coins and metal types.
I think the slab revolution was a genius advance in coin grading. The slabs also protect the coins. Nevertheless I think it is time for a new advance and the power of modern computers certainly seem to be a great place for the next revolution in coin grading to start. It might even pump new life into our struggling hobby.
I think the TPG's are looking forward to that day....and all the old holdered coins all get redone again.
Pic's of Spotted Gold Kennedy
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
Knowing your series can help a lot here. We recently saw a Jefferson get upgraded several times, going up one grade increment each time. If you knew your coin, you could get several grade increments.
We need a POPPYCOCK registry.
Don't you guys know that the higher grades are reserved for the pcgs insiders ! The average person can submit a coin several times in hopes of getting a higher grade with no luck, then he sells the coin to a pcgs insider and next thing you know it is in an auction with a higher grade within one or two months. Just look around the next time you are at a show you will see the insiders buying their next upgrades.
With all due respect, no, I don't know that .....
Whit
To the OP,
Amen.
@Whit ....Your points are excellent... and your dream experiment would be a marvelous study on grading. I spent a career in statistics oriented business and fact based studies. While the bell curve in the OP is good for conversation, one can not go beyond the hypothesis stage. Computer grading will eventually become a reality... certainly the technology already exists, however, the cost of programming is prohibitive and likely preventing it for the time being. AI will certainly have an effect on this soon. Once adopted, such a system will eliminate gradeflation/crackouts...While that may not be good for TPG business, they will be super busy regrading all the coins now out there in slabs - since, much like CAC, the market will demand the infallible computer grade based totally on objective evidence. Yes, there will still be a gray area involving tarnish...however, that market is based on personal appeal (be it real or imagined), and premiums will continue until - and if- reality sets in. Cheers, RickO
Pros and Cons of computer grading ...
Pro: Certainly the results would be (should be) very stable! Take the same coin and crack it out 100 times and the results will always be the same. (That is as long as the programmed parameters dont change). However that would probably kill the "crack out game". Therefore PERHAPS most TPG's would NOT be motivated to do this (something that might hurt their bottom line?)
Con: Are there aspects to a coin that cannot be (or are very difficult to be) programmed? For example eye appeal? Other?
What might be interesting to see if PCGS ever considered doing computer grading ... was a label with the MAN/TEAM opinion then in parens what the computer thought: Something like ... PCGS MS64RB (MS65BN) ... although that would just lead to a lot of confusion and therefore extremely unlikely ever to happen!
If nothing else, if PCGS simply kept the computer grade private and secret ... it might provide some information to the programmers OR THE GRADERS to look at why there was a difference of opinion. So it might lead to a better more accurate human grade to be assigned.
The other issue is who is more likely right? the computer or the human team? -- Based on that, do you tweak the computer to match the human opinion ... or the other way around? For these reasons I doubt this would ever be implemented by any major TPG. But it is interesting to think about.
If nothing else computer grading might be pretty reliable and useful in grading non toned moderns (current year issues for example). I bet looking for little flaws like that (only) might be right up a computers "wheelhouse" and probably spot on more than not. I might be more inclined to trust the opinion of a computer in sniffing out a perfect 70, than a human team.
Plus it would free up the human teams to focus on coins less "mind numbing" than tens of thousands of moderns in bulk submissions looking for perfect 70's -- that could lead to less human fatigue and more accurate human grades on older coins, which are less straight forward to grade.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
The whole "there are too many grades" thing is 'freakin ridiculous. If you HONESTLY think that a 60 is the same as a 62 or 3 (which can be arguably 58) or that a 64 is the same as a 66, a 66 the same as a 68, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. I'll buy ALL of YOUR key date coins that you call basic "UNC" and price at 60 that have a $3,000 price jump to 63 ALL DAY. BRING THEM TO ME.............that's right, you WON'T...because that whole argument is STUPID and frankly RIDICULOUS.
Absolutely awful that some people truthfully think that a 60 can be related to a 63, a 64 to a 66, and so on. That's one of the stupidest thing that I have ever heard and I've heard it more times than anyone would think. I'm not afraid to say it. Whoever thinks the above is actually a good idea or is better than having a concise system of grading is absurd. The whole reason grading came to be in the first place was BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEM YOU ARE TRYING TO PRAISE AS SUPERIOR! Dealers were widely dipping and/or whizzing coins and selling them as BU coins. Dealers can't as easily get away with that anymore.
What a joke, ya'll. Thanks for the laughs!
I'll go take a $100,000 loan out from the bank and buy all of you guys who "don't believe in grading companies" and "won't feed the monster" coins. Deal?! I'm ecstatic! Bring them here!
Again... you WON'T because even you know that viewpoint is absolutely ridiculous and stupid. Come on! Bring them to me! But don't be asking 63 prices because if you just call them UNC i'm buying them as AU sliders or 60's...
I'll wait for the messages to buy out your collections!
Many good points here.
The grade distribution is certainly affected if you are close to the price jump that happens near top-pop land. It is much harder to "make" an MS67 Peace dollar from a previously graded MS66+ coin than to "make" an MS65 out of an MS63. The TPGs don't want to incur liability for no reason.
All of that aside, years ago when I pulled off my first big "upgrade", I was actually disappointed that the coin came back looking just like it did when I sent it in. The same hits were there. The luster was no better. The only difference was on the label. The non-collector rational part of my brain incited a minor rebellion. Fortunately, through repeated exposure and deliberate effort, I've been able to suppress rational thought processes when it comes to this very strange religion called coin grading.
This stuff is too deep for my pockets.
I see these kind of "ranges" all the time ... slightly up or down ... with an occasional Genuine thrown in for good measure.
I still think my Gaussian Curve idea is on the right track.
This is not a huge deal ... except when there is a HUGE price gap between 2 consecutive grades. It's one of the reasons why I like to find the "value" grade when I buy something. If a PR67 is $20,000 and a PR66 is only $3000 -- I will find something nice in the PR66 range. I think that's a good way not to lose your shirt over the long term.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
I agree with most of your rant on the 2 or 3 grade spreads, but there are certainly not 22 grades of unc. Nobody can tell the difference between a 64....64+ and 65. NO WAY!
I might agree that 22 grades of UNC coming out of the TPG's is stretching things. But certainly there are thousands of graders out there (dealers/collectors) who CAN tell the difference from a 64....64+....and 65 coin. I'd love to cheery pick a choice/gem type coin/date set collection where the owner thinks 64 to 65 is all pretty much the same.
I would hope that anyone buying $750 to $10,000 gem MS seated quarters for example can routinely determine low end, average, and high end for any of the slabbed grades of 64, 65, 66. The last time we had this discussion a few years back, I came to the opinion that there are probably 17-20 MS seated quarter grades that top players could grade to....or where it mattered (60/61, 62, 62+, 63, 63+, 64 (3 levels), 65 (3), 66 (3), 67 (2), 68 (2), 69). In this example 19 grades, where I combine 60/61 as one grade. I can't tell 60/61 apart. And I might have a tough time telling the difference from an OK MS68 to a high end MS68. Not much of an issue since they are almost non-existant. I'd say 15 grades where there are sizable differences and value changes, would be the lowest I could ever squeeze it down to. There are certainly 15-22 "pricing" spreads on MS seated quarters from $300 to $30,000.
RR - I'm not saying there is not a difference between a 64 and 65. I'm saying that telling a 64 from a 64+ OR a 64+ from a 65 is a stretch.
Grading is over rated. As soon as one can come to terms with that the less of a problem it becomes. The coin is the coin.
mark
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......
Rule 1 of numismatics: buy the coin, not the grade. The grade is an metaphor for the coin, but the coin is the coin.
Respectfully, I've cracked and/or bought raw '64' coins that are in fact 65. My best example is here:
This coin was originally in an ANACS MS64 slab. I bought it off eBay from scans that I looked at for days, but I initially knew it would go 65 at PCGS. Low ad behold, I crack it, send it express to PCGS, and Voila! MS65 key date coin.
Just goes to show yah...
I still have yet to receive a SINGLE message regarding this. I think that just about settles this ridiculous argument.
Mark...we finally agree on something.
I knew it would happen here....probably never in sports. 
Grading may be overrated. But pricing certainly isn't. And on scarcer dates or type coins, there's often a big pricing difference from 64 to 64+, and again from 64+ to 65. It's ok to say grading doesn't matter. What we can't say is that pricing doesn't matter either. You need to know how to price, or how to grade. Either one can suffice. My point being that it is hard to separate the two.
There are just so many degrees of freedom ...
First you have the various grading teams with their individual bias's and subjective criteria.
I bet even with the exact same grading team, there might not be stability on grade on the same coin continually submitted raw (say 1 month apart). They might be in a bad mood one day or rushed.
I've even heard about funny psychological "tricks" the "Crackout Masters" play on "setting up a coin" in their submission. And how they can manipulate the graders via that technique. if the grading were less subjective, i bet tricks like that would not work.
Then you have grade "drift" with time ... for example I've read many posts on "grade creep" ... how grading standards seem to relax over time ... Yesterday's MS66 is tomorrows MS67
It's one of the reasons (I think) that old holders (old green pcgs holders especially) have such allure. People perceive that grading standards were much tougher years ago ...
So I still think that a grade on a coin is kind of a moving target ... both from varying the people (teams) grading the coin ... and from time going by and standards changing.
And when you have a moving target like that ... the more categories you cut grades into ... the less confidence I have that the grade would be stable over time.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Same coin!
Def not a 63 ...
Settles in somewhere in the 64, 64+, 65, or 65+ range.
Could it get a 66 someday? Maybe. I've seen some PCGS 66's I dont like as much.
Maybe with grade creep, it could achieve a 66 if I cracked it out 10 times. But might be difficult.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
I seem to have bought an MS-69 coin sight-unseen that is at least 3 standard deviations off from it's real grade. I have about 3 others that would suffer the same fate, if I chose to have them re-graded.
By the same token, the results on the coins I've submitted for FS 70 potential fall far below the average grade-through averages, and even in-hand and after close examination after the fact - there is no observable flaw to keep the coin from being a 70.
You have to ask the question, "why?"
I knew it would happen.
Then I obviously must be wrong
mark
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 don't want to even think what the sticker would look like.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
This discussion is exactly why all numismatics should take a grading class.
To repeat ad nauseum.....
Buy the coin not the holder. If grading were perfect, a significant portion of dealers would cease to be. It not science, it's sport :-)
For a single grading event per coin, that Gaussian distribution is, to a first approximation, correct. However, once the coins reach the marketplace and some look almost too nice for the assigned grade, there is sometimes a financial incentive to resubmit, or cross to the other major service and specify the minimum grade, and then try to cross these coins back. These regrading events skew the initial results, making the distribution somewhat biased in favor of the higher grade. Then people look at the fraction of the initial population that wasn't sent in for regrading, and conclude that these now look too nice for their assigned grades. Wash, repeat. Result: the distribution skews even more and moves to the right with the passage of time and gradeflation is the result.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
I still really have a hard time telling the difference between ms60 and ms61 and pr60 and pr61.
both are still bow-wow woof-woofs in my opinion.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
@BUFFNIXX ...Even ugly dogs need love.....
Cheers, RickO
This problem gets worse if you compare one grading company to another. I've had friends where their NGC coins sometimes go up a grade. But with my NGC crossover coins, at least for copper, they seems to always drop a grade and sometimes two. I wonder if thats where the old moniker "pcgs is tough on copper" comes from.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
This was an interesting case. Bought it in an NGC MS67RB slab. Tried to do a Crossover at PCGS in the NGC slab. it came back DNC (Did not cross) -- meaning PCGS thought it was not an MS67. I had a friend tell me I should crack it out of the NGC slab and send it in raw -- so sending this to pcgs raw it came back MS67, but in a different color class BN. At the time. this was the 2nd known MS67BN wheatbacked Lincoln -- I believe now there are 10 of those out of about 1/2 a million wheatbacked slabs.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
This coin had an effect I sometimes call "time inflation" -- this was an MS66BN for a decade. Then recently upgraded to MS67BN. It's a pretty coin though no matter what grade is on the label. It does seem like most coins have the ability to slowly raise their grades over time with persistent submissions. At least that's how it seems to me.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Yes. If you look at coinfacts, you will see that the NGC wheat Lincolns typically sell for less in the same grade column. I haven't done the math to see if it averages one point less, but there certainly is a material difference. Our host is tough on early Lincolns!
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase/2819