Older holders, a non-scientific analysis of gradeflation, and GTGs
TPRC
Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭
I purchased a group of these early ANACS soft packs recently, and liked them, so I sent them into our hosts for grading. They include an 1883-CC, 1884-CC, and an 1898-O. The ANACS soft packs are pictured below, and the graded coins with TrueView are also pictured. Sorry, I neglected to take pics of the coins in or out of the soft packs.
Let me know your thoughts and GTGs, if you like. I liked them all and thought they were strong 65s, with a shot at a higher grade, except for, perhaps, the 84-CC.
And here are the TrueViews (no looking):
Tom
2
Comments
This is kind of an Apples and Clams comparison.
Grading at the time of the Photo Certs was very technical, based on the ANA Grading standards. Today's grading is quite different.
Nice coins, regardless!
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
BStrause3, having just watched Bob Bair's presentation at the recent NNP Symposium on "Technical" versus "Market" Grading, I could not agree more. It seems to me that "Market Grading" is not a standard at all, as it floats with the times, and so to refer to it as a "standard" is a bit disingenuous. I still would prefer a set and repeatable "standard" which I think would improve the industry.
Tom
Interesting topic, can you post the grades for each coin so I don't have to look each of them up, makes it easier to compare and will make your post much more meaningful unless I am the laziest member here
thanks
Sure!
65,65 and 66, respectively, so not much, if any, grade-flation, which surprised me.
Personally, I thought the 83-CC should have made 66, but I don't have them in-hand yet, and when I get coins back from PCGS, I usually agree with the assigned grades. Certainly, it is a very nice coin, and one I would expect to receive a CAC sticker. The 98-O also has a pretty big hit on the neck, so, even though the reverse is stunning, I thought that 65 might be the best grade for that coin.
Tom
I might minorly pick a nit about the 84CC, but CCs are normally given a tad more leeway on minor marks due to how they were shipped/stored. And on the 98-O if you average the photo cert grades you'd net a 66 anyway so all in all I think the outcome is pretty much accurate.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
I love standards. Especially when there is more than one, like three. Because the first thing that happens is everybody decides we need a new standard. And then we have four standards. Nobody EVER retires a standard...
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
1st and 3rd looked 66 to me.
As always, there’s an XKCD for that:
https://xkcd.com/927/
I guessed 65, 65 and 66. I felt comfortable with the 84-CC because mine in rattler is graded 65 and has that same odd looking mark / line in front of the nose
Really nice coins! My guesses before taking a look are 65, 65, 65+.
Thank you for an interesting - even if nonscientific analysis. Over the years it seems to be proven (at least to my satisfaction) that the old photo certificate days at ANACS were consistently well graded.
Got the coins back. Upon further personal inspection, I agree with the grades assigned by our hosts and, frankly, by ANACS as well!
Tom
Interesting and fun project. Nice coins IMO
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken
After 50+ years of collecting coins, I feel like I can reasonably grade most coins up to MS64. After that, when one tiny mark (that I can often barely see) can change the grade by a point or two, I leave it to others. And I never buy anything above MS65 for that very reason. Well, that and because I don't have the extra thousands needed to acquire those coins. But for those who have the means, enjoy!
So in other words, we got them right back in 1983 and 84.
Or PCGS got them right in 2024.
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
On the subject of "technical grading" vs. "market grading," some personal experience.
When I started the ANA Grading Service for the ANA on March 1, 1979, as an add-on to the ANA Certification Service, I tried to grade according to the ANA Grading Guide as best I could. I am only human and as fallible as anybody else, but I tried to stay consistent.
At about the same time the Hunt Brothers attempt to corner the market on silver started its big run up and everybody made tons of money, collectors selling their hoards and dealers selling it on to refiners for even more money. A lot of that money got plowed into the coin market and prices shot up. "Market Grading" loosened way up, so that what we were calling a "63" was selling as a "65." The "Market" was "overgrading, so Dealers complained that we were "undergrading."
Eventually the coin market utterly collapsed for a variety of reasons that have been discussed elsewhere. If a dealer was going to buy a coin as a "65," it had to be what we were calling a "67." The "Market" was now "undergrading, and so those same Dealers now complained that we were "overgrading."
The bottom line was that if you had a "Market Graded" coin you had no idea what you had. If you had an ANACS graded coin you at least had a published book of standards you could compare it to.
Tom DeLorey
Former Senior Authenticator, ANA
Tom-Yes you did! And since I took grading courses at the ANA Summer Programs in the early 2000s, with, among others, you, you also taught me well! So, thanks for that.
Tom
Interesting names on the ANACS certificates, I believe Fernandez and Armstrong were counterfeiting PGGS slabs in the 1980's.