Oh, you're all such idealists! The purpose of computer grading was to speed up grading as well as reduce costs and overhead in processing each unit. The concept was initiated during the boom in moderns when mass quantities of newly issued 'stuff' was flooding into the grading room and grader burnout was a factor. Let's face it, how many of you could sit in a darkened room staring at 10 or 20 monster boxes of ASE's, bang them out in a few seconds allotted per coin and maintain your sanity? Industrialization of something as subjective as grading can never be accomplished. The technical 'markers' might warrant a high grade, but if the human eye appeal isn't present, you've got an unsaleable dog.
David has it right. That was then and this is now. Things have changed. For the last 5 years I have served as President of the Association for Information Systems special interest group on Ontology-Driven Intelligent Systems. What was impossible a few years ago is common today.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
@GRANDAM said:
I don't understand the reason for the dislike of + grading?
We all know that many coins "just miss" making the next grade higher,,, thus the + grade.
This is actually a large part of my point. Truly accurate "+" coins get cracked out summarily and end up as low end upgrades. The overgraded + coins remain on the market and see values roughly equivalent to non-plus coins and thus the experiment doesn't work.... unless there is no such thing as upgrades. Then it can truly work. Which is why I advocate for at least a pause in them. I'm not losing sleep over the topic, but if you are a consumer (collector) of certified coins, it behooves you to understand the way the market works.
For those dealers advocating + grades on moderns, my opinion as that this is intended to add a new price point, not enhance the collector experience. Consider a typical modern commem with a value of $39 in MS69 and $500 in MS70. The submitters send in scores of coins to get 2-3 MS70's out of the deal, right?? The 69's are essentially unsellable, and actually worth less than fresh mint product because they've already been removed from the capsules, etc. If PCGS adds 69+. they'd get another price point of say, $100 in the middle. Who is truly looking for an MS69+ to put in their collection? How is this more satisfying than a plain old MS69?
I get the fact that some collectors insist on the best. MS70 or nothing. Ok. Fine. But what is a 69+????
John Feigenbaum Whitman Brands: President/CEO (www.greysheet.com; www.whitman.com) PNG: Executive Director (www.pngdealers.org)
@Insider2 said:
IMO, the ANA Grading Guide introduced some of our problems when it combined the # of marks on the coin with the amount of wear. To be precise, the only criteria for grading a coin from MS-60 down should be the amount of detail that is lost. That way a coin with a nice strike, virtually mark-free fields would go from AU-58 ("Very Choice" in the new edition) to AU-55 (Still Very Choice) to AU-50 (Still Very Choice). None of this AU "typical" BS. A baggy MS-60 would drop to a baggy AU-58 with some wear. Right now, There are possibly less than a dozen members here on this forum who can describe what an AU-53 $20 Liberty should look like to all of us using the present standards. Will it have a little friction and lots of marks or will it be worn down close to XF? >
BlindedByEgo Wrote: "Dear Mr Insider, please let me introduce you to Mr Humour and Mr Brevity, two gentlemen with whom you might well get acquainted.
I'd like to meet Mr. Humour. LOL, I get it and that's really very funny!
Is Mr. Humour the British cousin of Mr. Humor?
It is the correct spelling of humour, whether or not spell-check here likes it.
LOL! Maybe in your country BUT THIS IS THE U.S.A. not England. That's why your usage above made me grate my teeth and respond.
In the future I'll need to remember that folks who live all over the world post in this American Chat Board, That's a good thing too.
"I get the fact that some collectors insist on the best. MS70 or nothing. Ok. Fine. But what is a 69+????"
Probably this is not the right thread (Don Willis is out) to be discussing this entirely unrelated issue. That said, I will quickly reply to this continuing debate. I know MANY collectors that would love to buy a PR69+ 1995-W Silver Eagle at, say, $4,000 or $4,250 when the 69 is roughly $3,000 and the 70 is roughly $15,000 - $17,500. The spread between a single grade point is simply too high for many collectors who want a super nice coin for their collection but would prefer not to pay $13,000 or $14,000 for it. Getting a + for maybe $1,000 extra would be very appealing to many of these collectors. I could probably name 50-100 modern coins with the same "huge" spreads between the 69 and 70 grade where collectors would love a 69+ for a little more than the 69 price.
But, with all due respect, I know this market. I would never interject myself into a Barber Quarter discussion and pontificate on how Barber collectors feel about the + grade. Unless I worked with them day in and day out of course. I do appreciate the general position that the + grade is not working in the area of classic coins and should be dropped. I totally disagree with the premise. The "problem" is not with the + grade. The "problem" is with applying it in a uniform fashion by the grading services and maintaining consistency with the coins going out the door every day.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I wish Don WIllis the best of luck in his future endeavors. As I see it, when one door in life closes, another opens. That's been what I have experienced, as well.
@DIMEMAN said:
It's crazy that there are 11 grades of UNC! Then they make it an INSANE 21 with the + grade!
Anybody that thinks they can separate 21 grades of UNC is only fooling themselves!
There are actually only 18 MS grades (only 62-68 can have a +) but I agree with your point for most series. I think they give out a lot more plus grades for Morgans, for example, because those distinctions are easier to make.
@dpoole said:
If you want to speculate about the future:
Imagine standards set, programmed and scanable. Every collector or dealer can download the app, and apply it with their phone or phaser or whatever to any coin. The program technically evaluates (grades or checks for authenticity) the coin, and/or identifies it from the existing database.
No more people, no more opinions (save for individual taste). No more coin grading services (except for PCGS, of course, which would market the app).
You have to remember, PCGS tried to make this work. It didn't work. If I'm not mistaken, David Hall spent a good load of cash on the project...
Yes, I remember. But it's been awhile.
@Insider2 said: There can be no such thing as a '69+, UNLESS someone or some TPGS wishes to prove they have no idea what a 70 or 69 coin actually is.
BTW, the MS/PR-70 grade is the easiest to determine if you understand its English definition and examine a coin with due diligence.
If you create a 69+ grade, you may as well create the 70- grade.
The inherent problem with all of the current grades is that the map doesn't represent the territory.
At the risk of sounding unnecessarily philosophical, grading is a language that needs to correspond more directly with the attributes being described. At the moment, it doesn't, and no amount of adjustment of grading standards will fix the problem if the words (read: atomic grades, like MS65, or MS66+) don't contain a meaningful and consistent correspondence to the coins that they describe.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
The grading scale seems to be well understood by pros, and unfortunately misunderstood my novices (to their financial loss.) The current scale factors in a number of attributes on a coin but "not everything that effects value."
The tweaking of it that's happened of late is mostly just window-dressing of a scale that doesn't really tell you what a coin's state of preservation is.
Having the registry sets has really just made people become consumed with this fairly inaccurate grading system, when what they should be doing is not collecting "grade points", but simply the coin's themselves, with the grade points being a "help" in determining a coin's desirability and state of preservation.
@DrPete said:
I wish Don WIllis the best of luck in his future endeavors. As I see it, when one door in life closes, another opens. That's been what I have experienced, as well.
On the Twilight Zone...open doors should be avoided.
I sure can't tell on dimes, but with Peace dollars (my series) it's not so hard to tell what should be in a plus holder. The TPGs don't always agree with me.
@tradedollarnut said:
I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series
Hate to disagree with ya, but I do.
Based on what evidence? Or just out of general snarkiness....
I'm not being snarky. And it's just not you it is anybody. For example I am saying that if 10 63's and 10 63+'s and 10 64's were taken out of their holders...…..nobody could get near all of them with their holder.
@SullivanNumismatics said:
The grading scale seems to be well understood by pros, and unfortunately misunderstood my novices (to their financial loss.) The current scale factors in a number of attributes on a coin but "not everything that effects value."
The tweaking of it that's happened of late is mostly just window-dressing of a scale that doesn't really tell you what a coin's state of preservation is.
Having the registry sets has really just made people become consumed with this fairly inaccurate grading system, when what they should be doing is not collecting "grade points", but simply the coin's themselves, with the grade points being a "help" in determining a coin's desirability and state of preservation.
What's the likelihood that 2 independent graders could give the same written/verbal argument about why a certain 1881-S Morgan should be given a grade of ms67? They'd have to be given a list of criteria to look for and respond to.
@Insider2 said: " There can be no such thing as a '69+, UNLESS someone or some TPGS wishes to prove they have no idea what a 70 or 69 coin actually is." This is the proof :
"If you create a 69+ grade, you may as well create the 70- grade."
@DIMEMAN disagreed with this: "@tradedollarnut said: I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series."
I have found that there are some folks who can actually do what they say they can. Lesser folks cannot believe it.
@DIMEMAN said: "Anybody that thinks they can separate 21 grades of UNC is only fooling themselves!"
This is true in practice. Add day to day, month to month and it is virtually impossible. However, if even a YN is given 11 Morgan dollars in each grade of MS all at the same time both the YN and you will probably get it right a surprising amount of the time. Picking a + coin is harder unless you just are picking the pluses out of coins in the same MS.
The "Plus" designation has evolved. In the early 70's when true technical grading was invented for internal record keeping, the coin market was using the "+" to distinguish the top 50% of a grade. We narrowed the requirement down to only the "liners." A "+" was a coin in any grade that might be called XF one time and AU the next or MS-63 or MS-64. Our technical standard was so tight that a "+" was rare. Unfortunately, modern graders have opened the spread to the top 3% of a grade AND also polluted the scale by including a coin's eye appeal.
@tradedollarnut said:
I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series
Hate to disagree with ya, but I do.
Based on what evidence? Or just out of general snarkiness....
I'm not being snarky. And it's just not you it is anybody. For example I am saying that if 10 63's and 10 63+'s and 10 64's were taken out of their holders...…..nobody could get near all of them with their holder.
@tradedollarnut said:
I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series
Hate to disagree with ya, but I do.
Based on what evidence? Or just out of general snarkiness....
I'm not being snarky. And it's just not you it is anybody. For example I am saying that if 10 63's and 10 63+'s and 10 64's were taken out of their holders...…..nobody could get near all of them with their holder.
I'm sure TDN and Laura both could!
No way!
If those were resubmitted raw to PCGS...…...20 of the (at least) would come back a different grade.
@GRANDAM said:
OK, I will play Devils advocate here,,,,,
MS70 coins are easy to grade,,,,,,,, a perfect coin with no defects or problems.
It therefore seems to me a 69+ grade should be a coin with only 1 minute hit and no other problems.
OK, tell me where I am wrong?
ONE DEFECT = MS-69. There is no grade (+) or degree of imperfection between a 69 and perfection!
That does not mean that some FOOL will come up with something stupid like "net" grading!
Well, that is one way to look at it. However there are many MS69 coins with more than one tiny hit. Therefore if the MS69+ grade is to be utilized it has to have a standard and (1) small hit seems like a reasonable standard to me.
That's because grades are stretched. One or two miniscule defects that you'll need to search for is My Personal MS-69. I define a defect as a spot, hairline, or contact mark. Most don't count the tiny, mint-made lint marks or frost breaks due to strike thru's as a defect either. Each of us should have personal standards, Unfortunately, there are a lot of MS/PR-70's that don't measure up to published standards or my personal standards.
So IMO, what you are proposing (69+) is a further dilution of the '69 grade.
PS You will win this one when the first MS/PR-69 + coin is "made" at a TPGS and I can assure you that it will happen.
I recently sold a pop 2/0 modern to a young man I (indirectly) knew, who looked at it upon receipt and told me it was a grade lower, perhaps a grade lower plus. He offered me corresponding money for it. Because I knew that he had looked at literally thousands of such coins searching for high gradable specimens and knew that his personal integrity was unimpeachable, I accepted his judgment in the matter.
I think the same dynamic applies to John Albanese, given the power of the CAC endorsement.
The conceit that grading is objective and scientific is folly. It has to do with whether a) we respect the opinion of the person looking at the coin for us, or whether b) the grading servicing in question has the reputation of "most accurate" grading.
Yes, you can "grade" it yourself by your own looking at an adequate quantity of specimens. But that has to do with how familiar you are with the standards of the commercial grader in question, and how good you are at recognizing that grading standard. That certainly gives you a leg up with respect to recognizing what is under-graded or over-graded, etc. But when the people behind the grading curtain change, your "grading" skills can become suddenly--and frustratingly--"dated."
Purists say "buy the coin,not the holder." That's absolutely fine, if your goal is your own pleasure (like playing golf or buying a sailboat), and resale down the road is immaterial. But if you consider it important that the money expended on this hobby be at least substantially preserved for eventual resale, holders matter.
Perhaps, because status quo is stagnant and growth is a necessity. Again, this helps the current holders and only hurts the current yelpers, which in turn feeds the current holders again. #1 is always moving otherwise it becomes #2. Suggestion box says don't sell, patience will be virtue.
@dpoole said:
I recently sold a pop 2/0 modern to a young man I (indirectly) knew, who looked at it upon receipt and told me it was a grade lower, perhaps a grade lower plus. He offered me corresponding money for it. Because I knew that he had looked at literally thousands of such coins searching for high gradable specimens and knew that his personal integrity was unimpeachable, I accepted his judgment in the matter.
I think the same dynamic applies to John Albanese, given the power of the CAC endorsement.
The conceit that grading is objective and scientific is folly. It has to do with whether a) we respect the opinion of the person looking at the coin for us, or whether b) the grading servicing in question has the reputation of "most accurate" grading.
Yes, you can "grade" it yourself by your own looking at an adequate quantity of specimens. But that has to do with how familiar you are with the standards of the commercial grader in question, and how good you are at recognizing that grading standard. That certainly gives you a leg up with respect to recognizing what is under-graded or over-graded, etc. But when the people behind the grading curtain change, your "grading" skills can become suddenly--and frustratingly--"dated."
Purists says "buy the coin,not the holder." That's absolutely fine, if your goal is your own pleasure (like playing golf or buying a sailboat), and resale down the road is immaterial. But if you consider it important that the money expended on this hobby be at least substantially preserved for eventual resale, holders matter.
Bottom line is that grading is subjective and can and does change on the same coin submitted several times. No one is perfect.....NO ONE..... not even JA. Grading 11 grades of UNC is splitting hairs and placing +'s in between them is just crazy. I have looked at too many coins in holders not to realize this. And anyone out here that has done the same knows the same weather they want to admit it or not. I won't go on stating the obvious any more. I have better things to do.
@specialist said:
Even I had nothing to do w/the change here......Shows the caliber of the members.
I doubt Don cares, he is relaxing these days
Don left on his own terms. He didn't get fried. It's not a corporate stage-up. Nobody told him to quit. I'm sure he's happy with his choice. What better time is there to leave than after 10+ years of turning PCGS into the BEST grading service ever?
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
I feel that PCGS should hired a interim president that is very well respected in the coin business while it looks for its president. Grading needs to be stable which will upset some crack out folks but will be healthy for the hobby longterm. Over the last several years, I have sold some of my duplicates and found them in auctions and offered by dealers with + grades and some even 2 grades higher that I had them. When I submitted them, I didn't get the higher grade so imagine how I feel that the ones I own (which I feel the coin is superior to the duplicate that I sold) is currently in a lower grade than the one I sold. Not that I am stating its anyone specific that behind this but it hurts the coin hobby and needs to be fixed.
@GRANDAM said:
I don't understand the reason for the dislike of + grading?
We all know that many coins "just miss" making the next grade higher,,, thus the + grade.
This is actually a large part of my point. Truly accurate "+" coins get cracked out summarily and end up as low end upgrades. The overgraded + coins remain on the market and see values roughly equivalent to non-plus coins and thus the experiment doesn't work.... unless there is no such thing as upgrades. Then it can truly work. Which is why I advocate for at least a pause in them. I'm not losing sleep over the topic, but if you are a consumer (collector) of certified coins, it behooves you to understand the way the market works.
For those dealers advocating + grades on moderns, my opinion as that this is intended to add a new price point, not enhance the collector experience. Consider a typical modern commem with a value of $39 in MS69 and $500 in MS70. The submitters send in scores of coins to get 2-3 MS70's out of the deal, right?? The 69's are essentially unsellable, and actually worth less than fresh mint product because they've already been removed from the capsules, etc. If PCGS adds 69+. they'd get another price point of say, $100 in the middle. Who is truly looking for an MS69+ to put in their collection? How is this more satisfying than a plain old MS69?
I get the fact that some collectors insist on the best. MS70 or nothing. Ok. Fine. But what is a 69+????
Could not agree more regarding moderns. Believe CN feels the same.
A significant % of todays new collectors buy first from the US Mint. Worst yet HSN. Almost all big losers. Remember they are new not flippers. I feel this has hurt coin collecting more than aging demographics, bullion prices, etc., in the last 10 years.
@krueger said:
A friend of mine recently speculated that PCGS and NGC will eventually merge as many other corporations have
over the years. interesting thought.
Comments
Oh, you're all such idealists! The purpose of computer grading was to speed up grading as well as reduce costs and overhead in processing each unit. The concept was initiated during the boom in moderns when mass quantities of newly issued 'stuff' was flooding into the grading room and grader burnout was a factor. Let's face it, how many of you could sit in a darkened room staring at 10 or 20 monster boxes of ASE's, bang them out in a few seconds allotted per coin and maintain your sanity? Industrialization of something as subjective as grading can never be accomplished. The technical 'markers' might warrant a high grade, but if the human eye appeal isn't present, you've got an unsaleable dog.
David has it right. That was then and this is now. Things have changed. For the last 5 years I have served as President of the Association for Information Systems special interest group on Ontology-Driven Intelligent Systems. What was impossible a few years ago is common today.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
More than one collector and/or dealer has told me the roller coaster grading syndrome seems to coincide with market fluctuations.
Bad market = tight grading......good market=loose grading, but I don't know if I buy into this correlation.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
This is actually a large part of my point. Truly accurate "+" coins get cracked out summarily and end up as low end upgrades. The overgraded + coins remain on the market and see values roughly equivalent to non-plus coins and thus the experiment doesn't work.... unless there is no such thing as upgrades. Then it can truly work. Which is why I advocate for at least a pause in them. I'm not losing sleep over the topic, but if you are a consumer (collector) of certified coins, it behooves you to understand the way the market works.
For those dealers advocating + grades on moderns, my opinion as that this is intended to add a new price point, not enhance the collector experience. Consider a typical modern commem with a value of $39 in MS69 and $500 in MS70. The submitters send in scores of coins to get 2-3 MS70's out of the deal, right?? The 69's are essentially unsellable, and actually worth less than fresh mint product because they've already been removed from the capsules, etc. If PCGS adds 69+. they'd get another price point of say, $100 in the middle. Who is truly looking for an MS69+ to put in their collection? How is this more satisfying than a plain old MS69?
I get the fact that some collectors insist on the best. MS70 or nothing. Ok. Fine. But what is a 69+????
Whitman Brands: President/CEO (www.greysheet.com; www.whitman.com)
PNG: Executive Director (www.pngdealers.org)
LOL! Maybe in your country BUT THIS IS THE U.S.A. not England. That's why your usage above made me grate my teeth and respond.
In the future I'll need to remember that folks who live all over the world post in this American Chat Board,
That's a good thing too.
@Insider2
Did you grit your teeth too?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
YOU BIT. LOL. "Grate" is the British usage.
I bit, but did not gnash.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
"I get the fact that some collectors insist on the best. MS70 or nothing. Ok. Fine. But what is a 69+????"
Probably this is not the right thread (Don Willis is out) to be discussing this entirely unrelated issue. That said, I will quickly reply to this continuing debate. I know MANY collectors that would love to buy a PR69+ 1995-W Silver Eagle at, say, $4,000 or $4,250 when the 69 is roughly $3,000 and the 70 is roughly $15,000 - $17,500. The spread between a single grade point is simply too high for many collectors who want a super nice coin for their collection but would prefer not to pay $13,000 or $14,000 for it. Getting a + for maybe $1,000 extra would be very appealing to many of these collectors. I could probably name 50-100 modern coins with the same "huge" spreads between the 69 and 70 grade where collectors would love a 69+ for a little more than the 69 price.
But, with all due respect, I know this market. I would never interject myself into a Barber Quarter discussion and pontificate on how Barber collectors feel about the + grade. Unless I worked with them day in and day out of course. I do appreciate the general position that the + grade is not working in the area of classic coins and should be dropped. I totally disagree with the premise. The "problem" is not with the + grade. The "problem" is with applying it in a uniform fashion by the grading services and maintaining consistency with the coins going out the door every day.
As always, just my 2 cents.
Wondercoin
There can be no such thing as a '69+, UNLESS someone or some TPGS wishes to prove they have no idea what a 70 or 69 coin actually is.
BTW, the MS/PR-70 grade is the easiest to determine if you understand its English definition and examine a coin with due diligence.
Sorry to see him go, but we need new blood to stay in the game. I bet they still have some say but we will not see much of him.
Hoard the keys.
It's crazy that there are 11 grades of UNC! Then they make it an INSANE 21 with the + grade!
Anybody that thinks they can separate 21 grades of UNC is only fooling themselves!
I wish Don WIllis the best of luck in his future endeavors. As I see it, when one door in life closes, another opens. That's been what I have experienced, as well.
There are actually only 18 MS grades (only 62-68 can have a +) but I agree with your point for most series. I think they give out a lot more plus grades for Morgans, for example, because those distinctions are easier to make.
I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series
If you create a 69+ grade, you may as well create the 70- grade.
The inherent problem with all of the current grades is that the map doesn't represent the territory.
At the risk of sounding unnecessarily philosophical, grading is a language that needs to correspond more directly with the attributes being described. At the moment, it doesn't, and no amount of adjustment of grading standards will fix the problem if the words (read: atomic grades, like MS65, or MS66+) don't contain a meaningful and consistent correspondence to the coins that they describe.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
The grading scale seems to be well understood by pros, and unfortunately misunderstood my novices (to their financial loss.) The current scale factors in a number of attributes on a coin but "not everything that effects value."
The tweaking of it that's happened of late is mostly just window-dressing of a scale that doesn't really tell you what a coin's state of preservation is.
Having the registry sets has really just made people become consumed with this fairly inaccurate grading system, when what they should be doing is not collecting "grade points", but simply the coin's themselves, with the grade points being a "help" in determining a coin's desirability and state of preservation.
Hate to disagree with ya, but I do.
Based on what evidence? Or just out of general snarkiness....
On the Twilight Zone...open doors should be avoided.
I sure can't tell on dimes, but with Peace dollars (my series) it's not so hard to tell what should be in a plus holder. The TPGs don't always agree with me.
I'm not being snarky. And it's just not you it is anybody. For example I am saying that if 10 63's and 10 63+'s and 10 64's were taken out of their holders...…..nobody could get near all of them with their holder.
I totally agree with this.
What's the likelihood that 2 independent graders could give the same written/verbal argument about why a certain 1881-S Morgan should be given a grade of ms67? They'd have to be given a list of criteria to look for and respond to.
@Insider2 said: " There can be no such thing as a '69+, UNLESS someone or some TPGS wishes to prove they have no idea what a 70 or 69 coin actually is." This is the proof
:
"If you create a 69+ grade, you may as well create the 70- grade."
@DIMEMAN disagreed with this: "@tradedollarnut said: I can easily distinguish a + coin in my series."
I have found that there are some folks who can actually do what they say they can. Lesser folks cannot believe it.
@DIMEMAN said: "Anybody that thinks they can separate 21 grades of UNC is only fooling themselves!"
This is true in practice. Add day to day, month to month and it is virtually impossible. However, if even a YN is given 11 Morgan dollars in each grade of MS all at the same time both the YN and you will probably get it right a surprising amount of the time. Picking a + coin is harder unless you just are picking the pluses out of coins in the same MS.
The "Plus" designation has evolved. In the early 70's when true technical grading was invented for internal record keeping, the coin market was using the "+" to distinguish the top 50% of a grade. We narrowed the requirement down to only the "liners." A "+" was a coin in any grade that might be called XF one time and AU the next or MS-63 or MS-64. Our technical standard was so tight that a "+" was rare. Unfortunately, modern graders have opened the spread to the top 3% of a grade AND also polluted the scale by including a coin's eye appeal.
I'm sure TDN and Laura both could!
No way!
If those were resubmitted raw to PCGS...…...20 of the (at least) would come back a different grade.
Just because PCGS is inconsistent doesn’t mean that I am...
OK, I will play Devils advocate here,,,,,
MS70 coins are easy to grade,,,,,,,, a perfect coin with no defects or problems.
It therefore seems to me a 69+ grade should be a coin with only 1 minute hit and no other problems.
OK, tell me where I am wrong?
ONE DEFECT = MS-69. There is no grade (+) or degree of imperfection between a 69 and perfection!
That does not mean that some FOOL will come up with something stupid like "net" grading!
Well, that is one way to look at it. However there are many MS69 coins with more than one tiny hit. Therefore if the MS69+ grade is to be utilized it has to have a standard and (1) small hit seems like a reasonable standard to me.
That's because grades are stretched. One or two miniscule defects that you'll need to search for is My Personal MS-69. I define a defect as a spot, hairline, or contact mark. Most don't count the tiny, mint-made lint marks or frost breaks due to strike thru's as a defect either. Each of us should have personal standards, Unfortunately, there are a lot of MS/PR-70's that don't measure up to published standards or my personal standards.
So IMO, what you are proposing (69+) is a further dilution of the '69 grade.
PS You will win this one when the first MS/PR-69 + coin is "made" at a TPGS and I can assure you that it will happen.
I recently sold a pop 2/0 modern to a young man I (indirectly) knew, who looked at it upon receipt and told me it was a grade lower, perhaps a grade lower plus. He offered me corresponding money for it. Because I knew that he had looked at literally thousands of such coins searching for high gradable specimens and knew that his personal integrity was unimpeachable, I accepted his judgment in the matter.
I think the same dynamic applies to John Albanese, given the power of the CAC endorsement.
The conceit that grading is objective and scientific is folly. It has to do with whether a) we respect the opinion of the person looking at the coin for us, or whether b) the grading servicing in question has the reputation of "most accurate" grading.
Yes, you can "grade" it yourself by your own looking at an adequate quantity of specimens. But that has to do with how familiar you are with the standards of the commercial grader in question, and how good you are at recognizing that grading standard. That certainly gives you a leg up with respect to recognizing what is under-graded or over-graded, etc. But when the people behind the grading curtain change, your "grading" skills can become suddenly--and frustratingly--"dated."
Purists say "buy the coin,not the holder." That's absolutely fine, if your goal is your own pleasure (like playing golf or buying a sailboat), and resale down the road is immaterial. But if you consider it important that the money expended on this hobby be at least substantially preserved for eventual resale, holders matter.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Perhaps, because status quo is stagnant and growth is a necessity. Again, this helps the current holders and only hurts the current yelpers, which in turn feeds the current holders again. #1 is always moving otherwise it becomes #2. Suggestion box says don't sell, patience will be virtue.
Toot Toot! You got a submission in?
This thread seems to have little to do with Don Willis anymore. So, did I miss a thread about David Hall also no longer being with PCGS?
Bottom line is that grading is subjective and can and does change on the same coin submitted several times. No one is perfect.....NO ONE..... not even JA. Grading 11 grades of UNC is splitting hairs and placing +'s in between them is just crazy. I have looked at too many coins in holders not to realize this. And anyone out here that has done the same knows the same weather they want to admit it or not. I won't go on stating the obvious any more. I have better things to do.
Happy Hunting.
Even I had nothing to do w/the change here......Shows the caliber of the members.
I doubt Don cares, he is relaxing these days
Don left on his own terms. He didn't get fried. It's not a corporate stage-up. Nobody told him to quit. I'm sure he's happy with his choice. What better time is there to leave than after 10+ years of turning PCGS into the BEST grading service ever?
Hate to disagree but PCGS already was the best service prior to Don stepping in through the front door. He was a corporate yes man along for the ride.
I agree, I personally don't care for the plus grading...
My YouTube Channel
Hopefully @DonWillis will post again when he's ready. His account is still active but no longer a mod.
Of note, @homerunhall is still a mod but hasn't been active in over 6 months.
Wow you don't come on here for a week & the sky has fallen
Meanwhile back to reality... Happy Turkey Day Everyone!
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
I feel that PCGS should hired a interim president that is very well respected in the coin business while it looks for its president. Grading needs to be stable which will upset some crack out folks but will be healthy for the hobby longterm. Over the last several years, I have sold some of my duplicates and found them in auctions and offered by dealers with + grades and some even 2 grades higher that I had them. When I submitted them, I didn't get the higher grade so imagine how I feel that the ones I own (which I feel the coin is superior to the duplicate that I sold) is currently in a lower grade than the one I sold. Not that I am stating its anyone specific that behind this but it hurts the coin hobby and needs to be fixed.
Could not agree more regarding moderns. Believe CN feels the same.
A significant % of todays new collectors buy first from the US Mint. Worst yet HSN. Almost all big losers. Remember they are new not flippers. I feel this has hurt coin collecting more than aging demographics, bullion prices, etc., in the last 10 years.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Happy Thanksgiving Don.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
A friend of mine recently speculated that PCGS and NGC will eventually merge as many other corporations have
over the years. interesting thought.
Would they call it "PNGC"?