Even though grading is subjective , _________________.
TwoSides2aCoin
Posts: 44,624 ✭✭✭✭✭
TwoSides2aCoin
Posts: 44,624 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
One needs to maintain standards or the hobby is dead. When AU's have been sold as "Gem BU" at sky high prices to ignorant people, the hobby has suffered greatly. And yes, that happened in the 1980s. I am not making it up.
...one still needs to understand the standards upon which grading is based in order to understand the value of specific items. Nobody says you have to AGREE with every grading decision, or like every coin at a certain grade level. But not understanding how the grades are determined is a recipe for economic disaster.
Even though grading is subjective , _________________. A broken clock is still right twice a day.
I will second that. I remember the large ads in Coin World, placed regularly by certain dealers that my grandmother told me to stay away from.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Even though grading is subjective... I like to think my subjectivity is more correct than yours.
It's been shown and proven that standards change over time. Use your best knowledgeable judgement and listen to others opinions but remember not everyone will agree.
There are some very influential people in this industry that do try and succeed in changing opinions and standards.
"There are some very influential people in this industry that do try and succeed in changing opinions and standards."
Yep, and some change collector behavior in clever ways---introducing coin boards (and albums), getting people to buy into a flawed grading system (this was obvious within a few years of Sheldon's publications), adding new grade increments (even when there isn't a high degree of reproducibility), getting the Red Book editors to agree to add new items (or recategorize them), getting people to put up collections on registry sites (including P01 sets).....
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
This echoes what Bill Jones said, but...
Even though grading is subjective that should not be used as an excuse by dealers to self grade their raw stuff several grades higher than the coins actually are.
I've seen it happen almost as a standard operating procedure by many coin dealers (and lots of eBay sellers). Then when you question the obvious over-grading, you hear from the other side of the table...
"Well, grading is subjective."
At which point my inner voice always remarks "That may be true, but it doesn't excuse your blatant dumbassery and your attempted chicanery."
"......one still needs to understand the standards upon which grading is based in order to understand the value of specific items. "
This is the root of the problem. We are locked into a grading system that is partly based on an exercise in circular reasoning. Ask yourself why grades are even needed. Some people want condition-census coins (or even THE best), so comparative data are needed for this application. What about an EF 1912 Barber half dollar? Why can't a seller and buyer arrive at a price without all of the nonsense that goes on today? Grades, it seems, primarily serve to lessen buyer price resistance. And a given grade does not necessarily imply equal value in today's market (hence CAC and plus designations and NGC stars). It's just a game. The trick for collectors is to learn to use the inconsistencies/irregularities to their advantage. There is a learning curve (and some apparently never get it), and repeated practice is a must.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
...., you should still be in the ballpark of current generally acceptable standards if you're going to be taken seriously."
Like BarberFanatic was indicating above....nothing turns me off faster at a show, etc. than seeing blatantly over graded (raw) coins. Right or wrong, I immediately think the person is a shyster trying to take advantage of other people. Now of course there are examples where a person doesn't know a particular series, etc. - that I can understand. And I have a dealer friend who's general practice was to over grade roughly one grade level too high, but priced the wares at the next grade down, giving the appearance of a bargain.
SUBJECTIVE word is the problem.....IMHO too many experts / graders / sellers are not as OBJECTIVE for various reasons which I think mostly financials
The grade and price must meet my criteria or I will respectfully take a pass. I’m not interested in how a coin is graded within a slab or a raw coin that is dealer graded. A colonial dealer by the name of Richard Picker would just put a price on his envelope. No grade. The buyer had to grade it. Of course he knew the grade but left it up to the buyer. He was dealing before my time but I can understand his reasoning, especially with colonials where they each have there own characteristics.
Even though grading is subjective, it has been a key marketing tool for sellers. And a source of confusion and herd mentality for buyers.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Even though grading is subjective , objective parameters can and must be observed or I'll throw you all out with no lunch. No lunch!
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
... the EAC approach makes more sense to me.
Smitten with DBLCs.
There are subjectivity issues with this type of grading too.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Of course!
Smitten with DBLCs.
Good luck trying to buy a VF-25 coin that is EAC graded VG for a VG price.
Even though grading is subjective ,____
edited: due to defective spell check, this comment has been removed.
EAC net grades do not track with commercial grades set by TPGs. This is why price guides have appeared periodically to fill in the gap. See the numismatic literature website that Charlie Davis maintains for a copy of Penny Prices by Noyes.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Even though grading is subjective ,They got it wrong if I'm buying, it's right if I'm selling.
Hoard the keys.
Even though grading is subjective, could you ignore the corrosion and tell me what this penny is worth?
Even though grading is subjective, rarity is not (although popularity/desirability is, I suppose)...
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
OUCH!
Grading cannot get more any more subjective than "net grading." Want proof? Read the EAC grading guide where this is stated at least twice. My book is at home in my bathroom
or I'd quote from it.
PS If you can't beat them, join them. I've decided to apply to join EAC again soon. I was a member at one time. Let's see if I get approved for membership.
Based on your use of their grading book, I wouldn't expect them to ask you to be their new librarian.....
@TommyType said: "Based on your use of their grading book, I wouldn't expect them to ask you to be their new librarian....."
LOL, That's my quiet office for writing and concentration.
I highly recommend the book and have been taking notes for a future column. If I get around to it, I'm going to suggest some changes for the second edition. They do a very good job of explaining net grading and how it relates to TPG grading. The color images are great too. It should be in every numismatists library. That ought to get me accepted Tommy.
a collector needs to think like a dealer when grading potential purchases.
Of course net grading is subjective. The beauty of the system is that an otherwise attractive early large cent (for example) is not condemned to the dreaded "details" grave simply because it's got a bit of fine porosity or a historic scratch on the reverse. There are a lot of details early coppers that have much greater eye appeal than their straight-graded brothers and sisters. The EAC approach recognises that.
Net grading is not, however, the only aspect of the EAC approach with which I agree. There is also the concept of judging eye appeal separate from the technical grade. I'll also suggest that most would agree that EAC grading has not experienced the same level of gradeflation that we've seen from the TPGs.
I do have the book. As the only EAC member in New Zealand, it would be terrible if I didn't have a copy!
Smitten with DBLCs.
Thanks for your response. Tell me what you would say to a very intelligent, detail oriented, young numismatist who comes up to you in a coin club meeting with an XF 1793 Large cent that exactly matches the image of an XF in all the grading guides. The dealer he bought it from graded the coin XF and discounted the price closer to that of a F-VF.
The young man tells you that I told him in a grading class that the coin had some problems and it should only grade F+ or just make VF-20 (net grade) at the max! Is his coin XF or is it VF? What would you say to him? Does he need to learn a new way to grade copper coins so he is in line with the specialists in that series?
Here is a fact. If we were to give a grading guide to a homeless man on the street who was sober with good eyesight and ask him to match that cent with an image in the grading guide, what would he (and every other NON-NUMISMATIST) pick? I'll save you the time...
XF
That's the problem with a fantasy grading system that was invented by (?) for a group of knowledgeable numismatist specialists. Unfortunately, it has no relation to the real world and most of us.
PS The main reason I get so upset with net grading (besides everything else) is because in 1973, I developed a very simple, easy to use/teach, very strict, precise, and never changing grading system. I called it "Technical Grading" and most folks throw that term around w/o any idea what they are talking about.
Net grading is FOLLY! Rant over.
PPS I'll agree that Net Grading has remained fairly consistent as far as determining the actual grade of a coin and before lowering it .
That's because the EAC folks know how to grade coins "the old fashion way" back when MS coins had no trace of wear. 
Good post. Maybe another, Because grading is subjective_____________.
A pass should not be given to graders who bend rules for various coins, not acceptable to others.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Even though grading is subjective, proper grading is the objective.
Even though grading is subjective, some opinions are better than others.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@Insider2: Your comments are reasonable. The EAC approach (which cannot be summarised simply as "net grading") has its warts, of course. All grading systems have them. I only asserted that the EAC approach makes more sense to me. I happen to collect early coppers (surprise, surprise). The EAC system works well within that world. Beyond the world of early coppers, maybe not so much.
To the young numismatist, I would suggest he quickly learn the difference between EAC and TPG grading and to get comfortable speaking in both languages. Neither is escapable if one is truly keen on early large cents.
Smitten with DBLCs.
The "money" or market grades need to be close, or consumers will lose confidence in trusted experts.
CDN used to say that though their pricing was based on certified coins, giving % correlation to PCGS, NGC and the rest in recent sales, and that even raw coins could be traded around the Greysheet prices as long as they adhered to ANA grading standards. These standards are spelled out reasonably with thousands of examples across grades and types of coins. It should be a lot more than "subjective".
... it is only when you are selling that one is informed by the buyer just how subjective that grade must have been.
Very well said. And a good grading teacher includes "Net" grading in their lectures and recommends that if you collect copper you better learn it.
Fortunately, the TPGS usually don't net grade coins. I enjoy reading the auction catalogues with the TPG on the slab and the EAC grade listed with the lot.
According to the Apostle Paul and restated by a much later ecclesiastic "We see through a glass darkly".
There is "eye" and there is learned artful analysis, and some who just can't get it.
Then 10,000 hours of mastery.
My guess is that a seasoned EAC grader might intuitively grade a common Morgan MS67 more accurately (even though EAC MS67 means "hallucinatory OMG flaming gem" and comes up once a decade rather than 500 time a month) than a guy who does the 67/67+ line well on Morgans can grade anything to within an point in MS on a Bustie from AU57 on up.
No matter how you fine-tune it, your subjectivity is in interplay with the consensual reality of the other subjective individuals who grade. And a computer will start with a base knowledge informed by subjectively affected codifiers of the various exemplars and algorithms.
I will now not take several paragraphs to further elucidate
I'll go with the seasoned EAC grader also in a guess the grade contest as long as they promise not to net grade any of the coins.
10,000 hours of real expertise; but then regular practice. I used to do a lot of log splitting with the "Supersplit"--two seconds forward a second to spring back. Dangerous? Not if you are focused, it becomes second nature. https://anahatabhakti.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/cutting-up-an-ox-chuang-tzu-transl-thomas-merton/
In the late 70's, a lot of us nailed it without knowing it, and so did some of the amazing others around, and also some pretty sharp guys who'd seen a lot but stultified beyond "choice". A lot of murky PR67's were then merely choice. And generic crap unless gorgeous. @roadrunner and I didn't know each other then, but we both remember the silver Type in the 1976 Stacks ANA.
Encyclopedic Eliasberg was at the nadir. Aside from a few intuitive naturals who'd been around for a while like @FredWeinberg, no one who was learning to grade had seen or knew bupkis about rarity.
By 1984 the market had come back strongly enough that an increasing number of newer auction bidders were all getting our skills honed by twice-monthly major auctions of very fresh neat coins. Then we started comparing notes, discussing theory, expounding it, all informed by the greatest peak and crash and reboot-to plateau level at overall levels much higher than the last plateau.
Then the TPGS and momentously classic long time collections and, more really sharp guys emerging, it was "consensualized", and the outliers became easier to discern and thus discriminate. The guys who knew non-ultra rarity were totally out if they couldn't grade because they couldn't believe minute gradations of quality could . And the coins kept coming, maybe a billion bucks worth at current prices in ten years. and every one in-hand. That exposure, that experience, will never be available again.
And, still, none of us, whatever whoever the best, are really going to get it "right". The best of us never did. But we thrived on agreeing an awful lot.
If you're not a bit confused or "off" sometimes, it's because you aren't paying attention
Bitchin'
For some reason, the tune of "Happy Days are Here Again" pops into my head when I read this. We're not quite that bad... yet.
It's always been said, buy the coin, not the holder....
Those who cannot adopt must live in the past as they slowly head off to extinction. In another twenty years, all the old time numismatists will be DEAD! "No trace of wear" will only be used to describe tire treads.
How fortunate you were to have a grandmother's advice such as this. I have a feeling that many of us were not so lucky and had to learn our own lessons about coin world ads.
Oh no, I had to learn plenty of lessons. It's why some of my posts seem snarky.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
It was not just CW. All the major publications had large adds from several "dealers." We all knew what was going on.
it is very important to learn how pcgs grades
Even though grading is subjective, people continue to talk about standards. Standards are objective, and grading has NO standards. There are grading guidelines, and people can be taught these guidelines. That being said, without standards, guidelines become blurry and gradeflation creeps in. Just look at posts by @Insider2 ... He often states a grade 'now' and mentions what it 'would have been'...And he is correct. Without standards, boundaries change. This is clear even with TPG's....For example, the concept (not without foundation) that OGH's are under graded in relation to today's grading. Cheers, RickO
Just think how much less money some people would make if grades were truly based on a standard.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]