OGHs in the era of Reconsideration
RYK
Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭
With the announcement of the new Reconsideration service late last year, in which, among other things, PCGS will evaluate OGH era coins for possible upgrades but leave the coin in the holder if no upgrade is warranted. A dealer friend predicted the demise of the OGH and its cache. After all, the only coins left in OGHs would be the ones that did not warrant the upgrade, right?
Well, nine months into the Reconsideration Era, I believe that the OGH is still alive and well. People appreciate coins that have been graded and left alone for 15+ years and recognize that perhaps some still may be undergraded. I personally own dozens of coins in OGHs and have little interest in submitting them at his point in time. I do not know anyone who has submitted their OGHs to this service but would be interested to learn if others have and what their experience has been.
Well, nine months into the Reconsideration Era, I believe that the OGH is still alive and well. People appreciate coins that have been graded and left alone for 15+ years and recognize that perhaps some still may be undergraded. I personally own dozens of coins in OGHs and have little interest in submitting them at his point in time. I do not know anyone who has submitted their OGHs to this service but would be interested to learn if others have and what their experience has been.
0
Comments
as I prefer the aura and mystique of owning coins in an ogh to the
possibility of a Reconsideration.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Edited to correct a typo.
Latin American Collection
they don't need an upgrade.
but...buyer beware. there are many genuine coins with grades in ogh's, as they net graded, rare coins. there are a few on heritage in the up-coming auction.
I agree with Boosibri's point that collectors may tend to value the OGH more than dealers, but I see that some dealers are wise to the premium for the OGH and are valuing them as such.
I also agree that it's nice to know the coin might not have been messed with in years........ but it could have been messed with years ago and still stayed stable.
The coin Doc's might not have been as sophisticated as today, but no doubt they were around, and maybe even some good ones. That's my worthless opinion anyway.
Bobby
My Early Large Cents
<< <i>Can someone explain the logic/fairness behind the 1% fee on upgrades? I don't see the rationale at all. Why should you pay a penalty fee to get your coin into the holder it belongs?
Bobby >>
It has never been explained to me, but my rationale would be that when cracking out coins from other holders, occasionally mistakes are made or encountered: rim problems, damage sustained cracking out the coins, surface problems only detectable outside the holder, etc. The 1% fee covers the potential liability that PCGS takes when cracking out your coin.
If you do not want to pay it, submit raw, and you take on the liability described above.
<< <i>when they are like this...
they don't need an upgrade.
but...buyer beware. there are many genuine coins with grades in ogh's, as they net graded, rare coins. there are a few on heritage in the up-coming auction. >>
Agreed. And nice coin! I used to own it!
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>
<< <i>Can someone explain the logic/fairness behind the 1% fee on upgrades? I don't see the rationale at all. Why should you pay a penalty fee to get your coin into the holder it belongs?
Bobby >>
It has never been explained to me, but my rationale would be that when cracking out coins from other holders, occasionally mistakes are made or encountered: rim problems, damage sustained cracking out the coins, surface problems only detectable outside the holder, etc. The 1% fee covers the potential liability that PCGS takes when cracking out your coin.
If you do not want to pay it, submit raw, and you take on the liability described above. >>
I understand that, but it isn't what I asked. I want to know the justification.
My Early Large Cents
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Can someone explain the logic/fairness behind the 1% fee on upgrades? I don't see the rationale at all. Why should you pay a penalty fee to get your coin into the holder it belongs?
Bobby >>
It has never been explained to me, but my rationale would be that when cracking out coins from other holders, occasionally mistakes are made or encountered: rim problems, damage sustained cracking out the coins, surface problems only detectable outside the holder, etc. The 1% fee covers the potential liability that PCGS takes when cracking out your coin.
If you do not want to pay it, submit raw, and you take on the liability described above. >>
I understand that, but it isn't what I asked. I want to know the justification. >>
There is a real additional cost compared to raw grading because of issues described above. Or, if you do not like that explanation, they charge it because they can. Finally, you can flip and ask how they could possibly have done crossovers for free for all of those years.
Along with a rattler.
I'm curious, how do collectors feel now about rattlers? They were the "OGH" of years ago, and would bet the best rattlers wound
up in OGHs. Most of the rattlers that have survived are the lower tier of that grading era. I think the OGH very high grade coins will
exist forever because they represent the best of two eras of the strictest PCGS grading, plus have that OGH vintage value which is
worth as much or more than a sticker. But the ones that have high value upgrade potential will eventually go the way of the rattler.
<< <i>the topic of this thread makes me appreciate, among other things, the wisdom of DHeath who is fond of stating that the time for encapsulation is at the point of sale. just because PCGS starts a new service is no reason to have a coin regarded. >>
One might argue that there is never a reason to have a coin regarded.
It does make sense to me that most all of the remaining OGH have already been tried for upgrades, and failed.
From an aesthetics standpoint the rattlers are the dinosaur of slabs. The complete opposite of their replacement, which has become an icon.
But the coin always lasts longer than the plastic and eventually most of the OGH coins will go the way of the rattlers. Hopefully I'm wrong and
and if I'm not I hope it takes a very long time.
RADAR OGH.
Gold just looks better with the green label.
<< <i>It does make sense to me that most all of the remaining OGH have already been tried for upgrades, and failed. >>
Are you suggesting that all of them have already been sent in for the Reconsideration service? 'Cuz that's the only way they could have been "tried".
Coin Rarities Online
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
<< <i>
<< <i>It does make sense to me that most all of the remaining OGH have already been tried for upgrades, and failed. >>
Are you suggesting that all of them have already been sent in for the Reconsideration service? 'Cuz that's the only way they could have been "tried". >>
I can account for six dozen or so that have never been Reconsidered.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>I agree with Boosibri's point that collectors may tend to value the OGH more than dealers, but I see that some dealers are wise to the premium for the OGH and are valuing them as such. >>
Like toning, many are more wise to the premium when selling than they are when buying.
<< <i>
<< <i>Can someone explain the logic/fairness behind the 1% fee on upgrades? I don't see the rationale at all. Why should you pay a penalty fee to get your coin into the holder it belongs?
Bobby >>
It has never been explained to me, but my rationale would be that when cracking out coins from other holders, occasionally mistakes are made or encountered: rim problems, damage sustained cracking out the coins, surface problems only detectable outside the holder, etc. The 1% fee covers the potential liability that PCGS takes when cracking out your coin. >>
It might also be that they are getting tired of cutting big checks to submitters while they get but a pittance grading fee. In many cases, the successful crossover results in more value to the submitter than if the coin wasn't crossed. Obviously more than just the submission cost or nobody would be doing it. Maybe a year ago I cracked out a 1890-S NGC ms64 Morgan [roughly a $300 coin]. It came back from PCGS as ms65. I sold the thing [which did not bean BTW] for around $900 so [assuming like results would have been gotten on crossover submission] PCGS in effect wrote me a check for $600 in exchange for a measly $25 fee.
siliconvalleycoins.com
A top pop is another good example -- I've considered sending in my 1917 Walker for reconsideration both because I suspect it's nicer than the other 67s and also I would love to have a TrueView of it. But it's in an early OGH type that Oreville started a census on and I like to speculate that it might have been one of the first Walkers from the teens or twenties to make 67 at PCGS:
There are other examples but I think the thought that most OGHs have been tried or will be tried is simply not correct. I have plenty in my collection and I'm sure many others do as well.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
<< <i>the topic of this thread makes me appreciate, among other things, the wisdom of DHeath who is fond of stating that the time for encapsulation is at the point of sale. just because PCGS starts a new service is no reason to have a coin regarded. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>the topic of this thread makes me appreciate, among other things, the wisdom of DHeath who is fond of stating that the time for encapsulation is at the point of sale. just because PCGS starts a new service is no reason to have a coin regraded. >>
Registry participants interested in maximizing points / grades will feel differently.
Coin Rarities Online
Latin American Collection
Okay, here's a dozen tens:
<< <i>So, is there any financial incentive by a theoretical TPG firm to upgrade a coin that shouldn't upgrade?? >>
I do not believe so. Compromising standards for 1% would be penny wise and pound foolish.
There are about a half dozen coins in my collection, primarily generics, that would probably benefit from Reconsideration, if I were going to sell them. The majority would likely not benefit, and some might even be diminished in value in higher grade holders.
<< <i>
<< <i>So, is there any financial incentive by a theoretical TPG firm to upgrade a coin that shouldn't upgrade?? >>
I do not believe so. Compromising standards for 1% would be penny wise and pound foolish.
There are about a half dozen coins in my collection, primarily generics, that would probably benefit from Reconsideration, if I were going to sell them. The majority would likely not benefit, and some might even be diminished in value in higher grade holders.
If not harmed in value, quite a few would likely face greatly reduced liquidity.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
<< <i>
Agreed. And nice coin! I used to own it!
and thank you, sir, for selling it! ;-)
oh yeah, ryk...i see at least one coin from dwn you beat me to...nice coins, everyone!
A conclusion can easily be drawn as to the subjective nature of grading which is far more significant than most collectors seem to believe
I enjoyed the first 6 no motto Eagles- the images of those coins really capture the difficulty of finding quality examples in any grade
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.