Options
What are your thoughts when you see the same coin 2x in Coin Facts but in two different grades?
mercurydimeguy
Posts: 4,625 ✭✭✭✭
Curious to hear your point of view...
0
Comments
Grading is subjective.
Agree....
And your own eye, experience, and gut reaction is the tie breaker....
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
Gradeflation?
Who's to say the grade went up?
-Paul
Gradeflation?
Who's to say the grade went up?
-Paul
Who's to say he was suggesting the grade went up? Gradeflation could be a play on words for inflation or deflation.
Gradeflation?
Who's to say the grade went up?
-Paul
Who's to say he was suggesting the grade went up? Gradeflation could be a play on words for inflation or deflation.
Ummm.....seriously doubt it.
Gradeflation is taken by most everyone that has used it to mean the same coin but a higher grade as standards have "adjusted". Whether true or not, that is the accepted definition.
would be very interesting, and surprising, if coinzip meant either/or with his comment versus the standard understanding.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Gradeflation?
Who's to say the grade went up?
-Paul
Who's to say he was suggesting the grade went up? Gradeflation could be a play on words for inflation or deflation.
Ummm.....seriously doubt it.
Gradeflation is taken by most everyone that has used it to mean the same coin but a higher grade as standards have "adjusted". Whether true or not, that is the accepted definition.
would be very interesting, and surprising, if coinzip meant either/or with his comment versus the standard understanding.
Yeah, I understand the connotation of the word. I was being silly. lol
When I see this, I usually think they should have the least-up-to-date one removed.
As for the question about grades, that's just part of the hobby.
My War Nickels https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/nickels/jefferson-nickels-specialty-sets/jefferson-nickels-fs-basic-war-set-circulation-strikes-1942-1945/publishedset/94452
My Washington Type B/C Set
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
http://www.shieldnickels.net
Links?
There many examples... Here's one I just ran across. The 63 and 64 are the same coin.
1869 Seated Half Dollars
Gradeflation?
Who's to say the grade went up?
-Paul
Its very possible that paul is correct.
With grading being as subjective as it is its very possible that the coin in question "in theory" should have been given the higher grade to begin with but was given the lower grade to reduce pcgs "risk" when submitted.
Example 1: an 1881-s $1 that looks like a borderline 65 but a lower end one. The difference in value is $60 vs $120 or apx $60. The liability for the grading service is minimum so the standards for when the above coin comes in for grading, the graders would be more likely to call it a 65.
Example 2: an 1880-o $1 in ms64 is worth around $1200. in ms65 its $30,000
The graders know what the difference are in values and therefor in order to keep the liability of pcgs at a lower level level will call the same type of coin an ms64 or ms64 9/10 times.
Realistically this same coin should be in a 65 holder as it has the right look and amount of hits. However since the coin is going to be scrutinized significantly more as its a 30k coin, pcgs wants to make sure that coin "deserves" the grade before it gets the grade. the 81-s in ms65 they really dont care as much and would have less problem giving it a 65
That is why you will find on many super valuable jump grades, like an 80-o, the ms65 coin will be just as clean as your 81-s ms66.
Now consider this being done to millions of coins where so many are held back because of liability and such. Those that crackout look to identify coins that while they are PQ graded in a lower holder, have the the technical qualities of the above grade. Eventually those borderline coins are likely to upgrade if submitted enough times and seen by different people.
Obviously pcgs/ngc do make mistakes but the above is how I understand it to work.
It's not gradeflation since the Coin Facts photos haven't been around forever. It's just the normal variability in grading. The majority of pre-1940 classic coins when submitted 3X or more will produce at least 2 different grades. I would consider the TPG's to be around 60-75% repeatable at any particular time. That means there's very reasonable odds that the coin will get a different grade the 2nd or 3rd time in. I've had very few coins that went the same grade on 4-5 consecutive submissions. Those are the kinds of coins that will continue to be resubmitted until one day they get the higher grade.
Joebb21's example above might not fit my scenario. But, those kinds of coins tend to be in the minority. But the TPG's have made a new home for those really high end pieces (assuming good eye appeal) with the + grade. So an 1880-0 MS64+ Morgan will fetch a nice premium to a regular 64. And when there are enough of the 64+ coins made, a few of those might be allowed to bump up to 65. The market is somewhat self-policing too. A low end MS65 1880-0 that somehow slipped through might only fetch $15K-$20K vs. an all there one at $30K. The much more moderate jump of 1.5-3X in type coins from 64 to 65, 65 to 66, and 66 to 67 is one of the reasons I prefer them. A 10X to 25X jump is really playing with fire.
Links?
There many examples... Here's one I just ran across. The 63 and 64 are the same coin.
1869 Seated Half Dollars
The 63 has a lower cert number...does that mean it was graded prior to the higher cert number? I thought that I read somewhere that the cert numbers were not sequential...to an extent.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Here's a fun example I found in the Heritage archives. I know this coin used to be owned by at least one board member, who stated that it was a very, very nice coin for the grade in the green holder.
1891 50c PR63 CAC
The coin later showed up in Heritage auction in a new PCGS PR65 holder, still with a CAC green bean. It's easily identifiable by the field mark near the elbow.
But wait, there's more! It has since shown up on ebay in a PCGS PR66 holder. The auction link is expired, but you can google search on "1891 seated 50c PCGS PR66" and it still pops up as the second image.
Eagerly awaiting the future auction where it shows up as a PR67, or maybe an NGC PR68*.
K
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
1. looks the same w/o micro inspection. heck of a coin in my book.
2. the 62 is great as well.
3. the 1839 in g4 is oops and lol.
.
2 points higher and CAC'ed with a green bean both times? Then on up to a 66? Hmmmm....grading is subjective I know but that is a good example of wide variations. The photos of the 66 on eBay are decent and although I don't know the series it does look to have more contact marks than something I would like to see in a PR66 holder. But as always, grading from photos is a push.
K
I have seen a common date AU Peace $ where PCGS accidentally swapped the grade with that of a VF coin (the other coin is obviously VF...).
The AU Peace $ got a green sticker in a VF holder.
In the same way that Joebb explains how PCGS works is the exact same way that CAC works. They have liabilities for gold stickers, albeit it's mostly a liability of market image.
OINK
I couldn't figure out why that one was in there.
pcgs and ngc have a storng interest to keep their brand name strong. If a blatantly obvious doctored coin gets graded, the grading service is supposed to be making an effort to take that coin off the market.
I know david hall has made mention of how many millions of dollars PCGS has spend on buying back overgrade/doctored coins over the years.
I know of multiple coins that were taken "to the top" because of blatant overgrading and were "bought back" and the grade lowered.
My thought would be to contact Powers That Be™ and request or recommend they resolve the confusion that resulted from the duplication.
This is what I have done. Send email to Ron Guth, RGuth@collectors.com. His reply...
Hi Lance,
Sorry for the delay in responding. Yes, we do not want duplicates on PCGS Coinfacts.
I removed all (I hope) of the duplicate images and the Pop Report will be revised downward at midnight tonight.
Thanks for your input.
Ron Guth
President
PCGS CoinFacts - the Internet Encyclopedia of U.S. Coins
www.PCGSCoinFacts.com
Who doesn't love a good curve ball in the game ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
flycrap out of pepper...Cheers, RickO
Grading is subjective for sure, and no mortal human can grade thousands of coins consistently without any variation from day to day. Change the lighting just a bit, and you might think your coin grades a point higher or lower. Even if the grading services keep their standards constant, people who resubmit for upgrades are taking advantage of statistical variations in grading from day to day. Submit enough times, and you'll probably get an outlier grade.
Here's a fun example I found in the Heritage archives. I know this coin used to be owned by at least one board member, who stated that it was a very, very nice coin for the grade in the green holder.
1891 50c PR63 CAC
The coin later showed up in Heritage auction in a new PCGS PR65 holder, still with a CAC green bean. It's easily identifiable by the field mark near the elbow.
But wait, there's more! It has since shown up on ebay in a PCGS PR66 holder. The auction link is expired, but you can google search on "1891 seated 50c PCGS PR66" and it still pops up as the second image.
Eagerly awaiting the future auction where it shows up as a PR67, or maybe an NGC PR68*.
That's an impressive swing. In the first auction as a 63 the bidders took it up to solid or strong 64 level ($2100+). They weren't fooled. And from that price level they were probably thinking PF65 before a PF64. The PF66 grade boggles my mind though. On the rattlers and early OGH's, if an otherwise spectacular looking proof seated or Barber half had a single obvious hairline across the central obverse it was grade 64 at best. Those same coins today sometimes reside in PF66/67 holders because of the "eye appeal" boost and a change in methodology because of a single minor mark.