Tougher Grading
jonruns
Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭✭✭
I don't know if grading has gotten "tougher" or not...I don't submit enough coins to really know...personally the coins I have submitted recently have either crossed or gotten the grades I think they deserved...
I recently learned from a post here that 3rd party grading was originally started to settle disputes between collectors and dealers AFTER the sale...
IMHO third party grading has gone a long long way to help today's coin enthusiasts buy and sell with confidence...
And if "tougher" grading eliminates the arbitrage element from the coin game and reinforces consistent standards that is also IMHO a good thing. Seems like recently that the majority of my dealers' offerings come from the most recent auctions and have a new sticker or are in a new holder and are marked up 25%....with less easy money to be made on upgrades perhaps us collectors will start to see a little more "fresh" material...
Just my 2 cents...
Comments
Tougher grading is not going to make any difference unless all grading is subject to an established and internationally normed grading scale. Just like bolt sizes, or washers.
any sticker on top of another , agreeing or not with the original grade, is nothing but someone confirming or disagreeing with someone elses opinion.
I have asked this question before:
Please explain the difference between a MS67+ and a MS68!
we can argue about this subject until hell freezes over, it will not change.
Buy the goods, NOT the package! with nice letters and stamps on it
The 68 is better.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@jonruns said: "I recently learned from a post here that 3rd party grading was originally started to settle disputes between collectors and dealers AFTER the sale..."
Actually, I don't think that was the initial reason; however that aspect would be useful in possibly the .002% of the times it was ever used in arbitration. In reality, grading coins was needed to protect folks from unscrupulous practices in the marketplace at the time.
Hoskins and I were grading ANACS submissions for years in DC to help ID them along with their weight and photo. The grading system we used (true technical grading that was carried over to the first TPGS at INS) differed substantially from the system devised by the ANA and published for the Colorado TPGS to use).
For example the number of marks on a circulated coin (AU Typical or AU Choice) **had ABSOLUTELY NO RELATIONSHIP to the amount of wear on a coin! Thus a coin with a very slight amount of "cabinet friction" was an AU-58, no matter how baggy it was.
Simple concept of true technical grading: DON'T combine a coin's attributes and don't introduce eye-appeal (adds subjectivity) or value/rarity (really screws up everything). ID the coin's condition of preservation and let the dealers price them.
BTW, this is NOT the way grading has been practiced for decades so read this a historical post and forget it so you are not confused.
@YQQ .... Does a coin with alot of luster or a better strike overide scratches & gouges? Because I see alot on pcgs with a 67 etc. with some knarly marks.
Good thread.
My YouTube Channel
Agree
TPGS's for me are insurance against counterfeits and tampered with coins. The number is not as important as the look of the coin. I do not have the resources to play condition rarity on common coins.
Be careful, I had a post deleted that asked about grading trends. PCGS says that the standards remained unchanged.
I am not falling for this again!
I have 4 show orders going in at San Antonio, if standards are now the same as they always have been, I should do GREAT!!