@mr1931S said:
The sticker idea is a good one for the new 100 point scale. The TPG can just apply the appropriate 1-100 number sticker on the already Sheldon system number graded slab. Serial number of slabbed coin is printed along with new number on the sticker to thwart fraud. $5 a pop unless 25 or more slabs submitted then a discount can be applied to make the cost say,$4/slab. Fresh sticker with new number is applied over the existing grade number. Count me out if the new system involves $h!tcanning a lot of plastic. Let's be sensible about this.
$5 maximum for such stickering? I think you’re dreaming.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@mr1931S said:
The sticker idea is a good one for the new 100 point scale. The TPG can just apply the appropriate 1-100 number sticker on the already Sheldon system number graded slab. Serial number of slabbed coin is printed along with new number on the sticker to thwart fraud. $5 a pop unless 25 or more slabs submitted then a discount can be applied to make the cost say,$4/slab. Fresh sticker with new number is applied over the existing grade number. Count me out if the new system involves $h!tcanning a lot of plastic. Let's be sensible about this.
$5 maximum for such stickering? I think you’re dreaming.
No breaking coin out of existing slab since it technically already has a grade New grade is number that has an equivalent in the former 70 point system. For example, old MS 65 is now a MS 95. Or MS 90. Or whatever the folks who know numbers say it is. Apply the new grade sticker with it's slab serial number matching the slab serial number over the old grading number. Each slab gets a unique sticker that costs the TPG less than $1 to make. A robot could be invented to do the sticker application. Collector is happy with new higher grade number on his slab. TPG makes 400 to 500% profit on each sticker. Not dreaming. A vision for the future of the TPG graded coin industry.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
While I'm not a fan of a 100 point grading scale, if it were ever adopted, I'd hope that the population reports would start over and some type of scanning tool would be implemented to catch crackouts being sent in repetitively thereby ensuring population report integrity.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@tonedcoinlover said:
So what is keeping any grading company from doing this?
Would this not help a potential buyer?
Would this not help a seller justify his pricing?
What is keeping this from not being implemented across the hobby?
I see more upside reasons than I do downside reasons.
Discussion please.
As just one of many randomly selected examples that could be provided, maybe the grading companies already realize that they wouldn’t be able to distinguish an MS or PR 96 from a 95 or a 97 (or maybe even a 94 or a 98) to an acceptable level of consistency. Do you really think that grading to the nearest point (or plus grade) under the current grading scale is accurate and consistent enough to warrant an attempt at being even more precise? I don’t.
Agreed, but what about the 96+ instead of the 96! Even with some imaginary future AI based system, we will never even be able to get completely happy with a 70 point system, where quite a few grades are not ever used.
A 3-digit XXX 1000 point grading system that addresses the strike, condition and the luster of an uncirculated coin sounds practicable. Each of the three most important aspects of a coin, the strike, condition and the luster would be graded on a 0 through 9 scale. The first number would tell us how much detail in on the coin; The 2nd number would tell us the condition of the coin, again on a scale from 0 to 9. And the 3rd and last number would be all about the luster, 0 to 9. The final grades would take the form of MS675, MS486, MS745 and there would be 997 more combinations exemptifing the strike, condition and the luster of a coin! Each number in the grade would actually have its own meaning that would easily be understood by all collectors. They would be able to compare two coins and see why the strike, condition or luster of one coin received a higher or lower number over another coin! Make coin grading less complicated, more collectors would undertand how their coins grade! But, of course, this system would only take meaning among collectors who actually look at their coins and care about the level of details- the strike, the condition whether they would stand for having too many marks on their coins in higher grades! A nd the luster of the coins they're buying to build their collections! Who doesn't love luster! Leo
An added note, I haven't looked at how the above 1000 point grading system would apply to circulated coins. My guess is the grading of coins with wear would fall back to the two digit/number system since the luster of circulated coins usually fades out as the wear becomes more apparent.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
System seems ingrained—like scoring in tennis. In any event, thought it might be informative to provide some background on Sheldon. Might be a factor for some, one way or the other, to keep or jettison.
.
Sheldon was a psychiatrist—a rather infamous one- for his years long nude photographing of incoming Ivy league freshman, antisemitism, and classification of people based on “somatypes.”/ “anthropological types.” He flirted early in his career with the eugenics crowd. His post war research work for the Navy was of highly questionable professional ethics then, and far out of bounds today .
He had all sorts of scales for people. His people sorting for “Temperament” used “7” point” sub scales (if you were a person could score 140 as opposed to max for his later coin scale of 70). From 1946 (before his cent grading system was promulgated):
His scales, and psychiatrist theories today are seen as fringe- at best.
Then there are the theft allegations….
Hope all who might read this receive a perfect “Sheldon’s Temperament Scale” ---and that each of you bean!
How many people can accurately and consistently tell the difference between a MS62 and a MS63? These old eyes can't. This would be worse with a 100 point scale.
The Sheldon scale isn't a "70-point scale". It's a 30-point scale (as currently defined by PCGS). You could just as easily renumber all the grades between G-6 and AU-58, to G-5 through to AU-19, and have the MS/PF grades run from 20 through to 30, and you'd have a system that's functionally identical to the Sheldon scale. So from that point of view, the Sheldon scale is already redundantly over-precise.
Adding precision without adding accuracy is just adding meaningless numbers. One could just as readily propose a 700-point scale simply by adding an extra digit to the current Sheldon number: "MS-673" would be three-tenths of the way between an MS-670 and an MS-680. Would graders even within a TPG be able to definitively hit the same grade for the same coin, time after time? The only people who would benefit would be the TPGs, who would receive many more crackouts in an effort to bump up their grades by one more point.
The only benefit to a 100-point scale, as opposed to a 70 point scale, 700 point scale, 30 point scale or some other random number, is that a 100-point scale "looks metric". And Americans are the last culture that you should be trying to sell a metricized system to.
The 100-point system has been attempted in more metricized parts of the world, as the Sheldon grading standard is very much an American invention. British grading company CGS-UK attempted to grade British coins using a 100-point grading scale. That company failed back in 2016, not because nobody liked the 100-point grading system but simply because British collectors didn't want their coins to be slabbed and weren't prepared to support a local TPG start-up to the extent that would have seen the company succeed. https://londoncoins.co.uk/?page=WhyBuyCertifiedCoins
Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one. Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Not sure what a 100 point scale really solves. We already have plus grades for granularity in MS grades and if you feel you need more grades at AU or below there’s still space in the existing scale. If you were starting from scratch a 100 point scale feels more natural/metric but since a 70-point scale already exists why change?
Comments
$5 maximum for such stickering? I think you’re dreaming.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
No breaking coin out of existing slab since it technically already has a grade New grade is number that has an equivalent in the former 70 point system. For example, old MS 65 is now a MS 95. Or MS 90. Or whatever the folks who know numbers say it is. Apply the new grade sticker with it's slab serial number matching the slab serial number over the old grading number. Each slab gets a unique sticker that costs the TPG less than $1 to make. A robot could be invented to do the sticker application. Collector is happy with new higher grade number on his slab. TPG makes 400 to 500% profit on each sticker. Not dreaming. A vision for the future of the TPG graded coin industry.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
People are always complaining about the TPG's screwing up with 70 grades to choose from - you want to give them 30 more?
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
Sheldon devised the scale as a pricing system. It’s now useless for that. I say stick with 70 scale …. it’s so set that to alter it would be chaotic.
While I'm not a fan of a 100 point grading scale, if it were ever adopted, I'd hope that the population reports would start over and some type of scanning tool would be implemented to catch crackouts being sent in repetitively thereby ensuring population report integrity.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Agreed, but what about the 96+ instead of the 96!
Even with some imaginary future AI based system, we will never even be able to get completely happy with a 70 point system, where quite a few grades are not ever used.
A 3-digit XXX 1000 point grading system that addresses the strike, condition and the luster of an uncirculated coin sounds practicable. Each of the three most important aspects of a coin, the strike, condition and the luster would be graded on a 0 through 9 scale. The first number would tell us how much detail in on the coin; The 2nd number would tell us the condition of the coin, again on a scale from 0 to 9. And the 3rd and last number would be all about the luster, 0 to 9. The final grades would take the form of MS675, MS486, MS745 and there would be 997 more combinations exemptifing the strike, condition and the luster of a coin! Each number in the grade would actually have its own meaning that would easily be understood by all collectors. They would be able to compare two coins and see why the strike, condition or luster of one coin received a higher or lower number over another coin! Make coin grading less complicated, more collectors would undertand how their coins grade! But, of course, this system would only take meaning among collectors who actually look at their coins and care about the level of details- the strike, the condition whether they would stand for having too many marks on their coins in higher grades! A nd the luster of the coins they're buying to build their collections! Who doesn't love luster! Leo
An added note, I haven't looked at how the above 1000 point grading system would apply to circulated coins. My guess is the grading of coins with wear would fall back to the two digit/number system since the luster of circulated coins usually fades out as the wear becomes more apparent.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
System seems ingrained—like scoring in tennis. In any event, thought it might be informative to provide some background on Sheldon. Might be a factor for some, one way or the other, to keep or jettison.
.
Sheldon was a psychiatrist—a rather infamous one- for his years long nude photographing of incoming Ivy league freshman, antisemitism, and classification of people based on “somatypes.”/ “anthropological types.” He flirted early in his career with the eugenics crowd. His post war research work for the Navy was of highly questionable professional ethics then, and far out of bounds today .
He had all sorts of scales for people. His people sorting for “Temperament” used “7” point” sub scales (if you were a person could score 140 as opposed to max for his later coin scale of 70). From 1946 (before his cent grading system was promulgated):
His scales, and psychiatrist theories today are seen as fringe- at best.
Then there are the theft allegations….
Hope all who might read this receive a perfect “Sheldon’s Temperament Scale” ---and that each of you bean!
I think a 100 point scale would make more sense, but we are too far into the 70 point scale now to turn back.
No
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
How many people can accurately and consistently tell the difference between a MS62 and a MS63? These old eyes can't. This would be worse with a 100 point scale.
No,
all because you can change something doesn’t mean you should change it
The Sheldon scale isn't a "70-point scale". It's a 30-point scale (as currently defined by PCGS). You could just as easily renumber all the grades between G-6 and AU-58, to G-5 through to AU-19, and have the MS/PF grades run from 20 through to 30, and you'd have a system that's functionally identical to the Sheldon scale. So from that point of view, the Sheldon scale is already redundantly over-precise.
Adding precision without adding accuracy is just adding meaningless numbers. One could just as readily propose a 700-point scale simply by adding an extra digit to the current Sheldon number: "MS-673" would be three-tenths of the way between an MS-670 and an MS-680. Would graders even within a TPG be able to definitively hit the same grade for the same coin, time after time? The only people who would benefit would be the TPGs, who would receive many more crackouts in an effort to bump up their grades by one more point.
The only benefit to a 100-point scale, as opposed to a 70 point scale, 700 point scale, 30 point scale or some other random number, is that a 100-point scale "looks metric". And Americans are the last culture that you should be trying to sell a metricized system to.
The 100-point system has been attempted in more metricized parts of the world, as the Sheldon grading standard is very much an American invention. British grading company CGS-UK attempted to grade British coins using a 100-point grading scale. That company failed back in 2016, not because nobody liked the 100-point grading system but simply because British collectors didn't want their coins to be slabbed and weren't prepared to support a local TPG start-up to the extent that would have seen the company succeed. https://londoncoins.co.uk/?page=WhyBuyCertifiedCoins
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded the DPOTD twice.
Not sure what a 100 point scale really solves. We already have plus grades for granularity in MS grades and if you feel you need more grades at AU or below there’s still space in the existing scale. If you were starting from scratch a 100 point scale feels more natural/metric but since a 70-point scale already exists why change?