My recommendation to PCGS
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,165 ✭✭✭✭✭
Since revenue must flow:
Acknowledge that some AU coins can be graded as high as 64 by openly creating the AU 60-64 grades.
19
Comments
Respectfully, that makes no sense....
That is just plain crazy.
It makes more sense than putting obviously circulated coins in MS64 holders...
Excuse me Mr Coin dealer- But why is this saint is graded AU64 while this one MS64?
The 63 and 64 MS numbers are supposed to be for coins that meet the "choice uncirculated" criteria. Every truly uncirculated coin would be a "gem" under the the new scheme?
“I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.”
“Then you trust more to your imagination than to your knowledge?”
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Albert Einstein- quoted in Saturday Evening Post interview (1929)
I think more explanation is needed for the original proposition.
When I first heard this suggestion it seemed a little to radical. However, after seeing so many early type coins that fall into this category I understand the merits of this idea. The problem would be whether the grading could be executed with consistence, the market would determine values.
Said coins should be in 58 or 58+ holders. Why make up grades just to make up for mistakes made by graders.
I think that's a brilliant idea, talk about a marketing, or should I say remarketing coup. The massive number of submissions to take advantage of this opportunity to give an added plus to a lackluster quadrant of the market will ensure that the doors at PCGS remain open for many years. New vistas awaken for the numismatic community and most importantly of all, a home for all the dreck that has been shunned and vilified for so long.
Agree, except it's simpler:
Drop the letters in front of the number, and just grade it 1-70
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
No they shouldn’t. The grade of a coin should reflect its value. Many coins with a bit of rub sell for MS64 money. The idea their grade maxes out at 58 has come and gone. May as well acknowledge it openly
Why stop at 64... What's wrong with AU67?
And many coins with no wear at all, but tons of bagmarks, grade less than 60.
The unrealistic and artificial "line" at 60 has never made sense to me.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Grade should have nothing to do with market value! Listen to yourself. The grade of a coin should be the exact remains from when it was struck.
The entire premise of the Sheldon scale was exactly that grade and value were related
The grade of a coin should in no way reflect its value. The grade is the measure of the preservation of the coin. Then comes value based one grade, rarity, and demand.
IMHO
Hopefully these AU60-64s are still eligible to get the cac'd. maybe even assign them a special purple sticker.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
It has worked for the last 32-33 years for the services.
Now, I’ve heard it all...
Isn’t there already enough confusion?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Ah yes, but you are overlooking the most important question of all: Would they sticker?
@specialist
One would have to be severely naive to believe that the tpg’s aren’t putting circ coins in ms holders. Why not come out of the closet and be open about it???
Because it calls into question the value and meaning of the guarantee and third party grading all together. If standards can change at will then the guarantee is, in effect, worthless. Admitting it doesn't seem wise regardless of the reality.
P.S. I think you're going to give poor @specialist a heart attack when she realizes her business partner is encouraging grade inflation.
I agree with your value statements, but with all due respect, I maintain that MS grades are 60 and over and that should be reserved for truly mint state coins. For the super AU coins, maybe a designation may be appropriate. After all, we accept Red cents, FB mercury dimes, FBL Franklins, DMPL dollars, etc.
==Looking for pre WW2 Commems in PCGS Rattler holders, 1851-O Three Cent Silvers in all grades
Successful, problem free and pleasant transactions with: illini420, coinguy1, weather11am,wayneherndon,wondercoin,Topdollarpaid,Julian, bishdigg,seateddime, peicesofme,ajia,CoinRaritiesOnline,savoyspecial,Boom, TorinoCobra71, ModernCoinMart, WTCG, slinc, Patches, Gerard, pocketpiececommems, BigJohnD, RickMilauskas, mirabella, Smittys, LeeG, TomB, DeusExMachina, tydye
Please post a photo of a coin that is Au 64.... All three sides...
@Broadstruck started the companion thread doing just that.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1010868/post-your-au64s#latest
This suggestion would work for EAC
If the contention is that coins are already being graded 64 that have rub, why would anyone resubmit an MS64 to get an AU64? I can see if someone thought a coin that was currently a 58 or 58+ could upgrade, but 1) the services could have already netted it in the low MS category if they thought it was warranted and 2) 58+ coins already go for 63 money in many series. (Obviously not for coins like an 84-S Morgan).
Exactly. The well has already been poisoned, and the recommended enhancements would only confuse collectors even more. Imagine the looks on their faces when they realize those beautiful near gems they were taught were BU are really sliders. I thought that is one of the problems the services were started to correct to begin with.
Adding AU grades in the 60+ range would add confusion and doesn't make much sense.
We already have the AU58+ grade for a really nice AU coin and we all know that the very nice AU coins have often been market graded into low MS grades anyways.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Grade and value have nothing to do with each other. Doesn’t eye appeal come into play? Where are the marks, how is the the toning, has it been dipped, what about the adjustment marks?
I absolutely agree 100% that coins with rub are getting into MS holders. I especially see that with Capped Bust half dollars. However, this idea is going to open up a hornets nest.
Bottom line, everybody better learn how to identify a coin with rub, versus weak details due to conditions of the dies, etc. Granted, it is not easy.
I agree, Bruce. A couple of years ago you posted some examples of lightly circ'd coins that deserved a higher grade than current AU parameters. Maybe one of the forum detectives can dig up the thread.
Looks like accugrade had it right
This is the real problem. Market grading is a source of confusion and instability in this hobby as the market grade can change based on whim, caprice, and fluctuating market conditions. We should go back to describing coins technically and then allow the market to consider the coin as a whole and its merits.
Market grading vs Technical grading. The conundrum.
Current TPG = Market grading.
I recall seeing coins like this in the bust half series. Weakness in strikes with 200 years of non-archival storage methods lead to coins of questionable uncirculated status. The coins are sometimes net graded 61-62.
A 62 bust half is often a nice coin. Maybe not truly uncirculated. A 62 Morgan is usually not so nice.
This is the limit of numeric grading. What you’re left with is descriptive grading, which is perhaps beyond the purpose of the slab.
Changing the rules long after the game is started will not help attract new
collectors.
How about recommending to the TPG's to keep 58's in 58 holders and allow
the market to value the coin as it sees fit.
Agree!! I once had a guy offer me an MS 66 slabbed common date Peace dollar. He wanted to get rid of it in the worst way. Sheet was $600 at the time. It had a huge gash on the reverse. Value to me was a heck of a lot less than that. I don’t care what the holder reads. I can buy a 65 common date any day of the week for a song. Why pay up for junk? AU 63 or 64 grade will kill the hobby because while a lot of people know how to grade coins, there are multiples of people that don’t and need their hands held all the time. Gee, let’s just confuse the heck out of everyone.
Non-linear thinking. I like that. I have to admit that I struggle with the obvious duality, however.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
The basic issue here is why a tiny trace of wear can crush the grade from 64 to 58. While hideous bag/contact marks only takes it down to 60 thru 62. Eliminating the old school grading as part of the Sheldon scale could take care of this. Only use the numeric. An expansion could be used to denote or describe if wear is present such as:
Sheldon: 64
Wear: Yes/No
As we know, the problem with this is the scale requires a coin to have no wear to hit 60+. And that is the circular argument we have here for years on end. Consensus on changing this rule on the Sheldon scale appears to be the stopper. And of course what to do with the millions of currently graded coins. Oh yeah, our host would love that prospect of all those re-grading/holder fees as @tradedollarnut hinted at.
If all you high-end coin holders are so worried about gradeflation, why not crack them all out and send them back in right now. I PROMISE you they will not come back the same, they will be lower. Put your money where your mouth is and make us all proud of you.
See my other thread
So this is for the purpose of flowing revenue?
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
We're not talking so much about Franklins and Peace dollars.
Think pre-1816 type coins.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I did. That coin was nice before and most likely not sent in raw. There are some coins from long ago that truly were under-graded since PCGS did not want to guarantee the high values when they were younger. I still stand by my own experience, crack-outs will go down right now. In Texas, one of my old holder 65 CAC's went down to 63. Not an 1880-S Morgan either!
I agree at least in part with TDN although I am not sure I would go so high as 64 for a coin with some obvious rub.
The conundrum is that there are some beautiful 58 coins out there (slight breaks in luster or slight rub) and some baggy ugly 61s and 62s. But the market will not price the 58 above the 62 so the natural result is an AU beauty ends up in a 61 or 62 holder.
I think eye appeal and unmarred surfaces are more important than slight wear vs. no wear. But the current grading system does not acknowledge this.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
PLEASE don't make more confused than I already have
That's what AU58 and AU58+ are for!
That's an idea I never considered.
Pete
I like this idea and could imagine expanding it beyond the AU level. For instance, a "perfect" VG (no marks, totally original) is incredibly hard to find, but gets no grading love and is worth 10%? over what a normal one would cost.
How about:
AG through UNC. Score 0 through 9. No details grades.
This would cause all kinds of problems, but it'd be so much fun! Imagine the Registry battles in the mid grades...