@MasonG said:
I own NGC graded coins and their guarantee figured 0% in my decision to buy them.
FWIW...
.... because you assumed you had a lifetime guarantee like the other TPGs, so it didn't have to factor into your decision.
Going forward, knowing their guarantee is only leased for 10 years, I would expect this would play at least a minor role in deciding to purchase an NGC-graded coin, especially an expensive coin.
@MWallace said:
Do TPGs authenticate that many coins that turn out to be counterfeit? It seems to me that NGC will lose more money in a reduction of submissions than paying off the occasional authenticated coin that turns out to be counterfeit.
Assuming there is a reduction in submissions. That's a huge TBD.
This change was apparently implemented in June, and people are first talking about this now. So far, so good for NGC.
Now we'll see what happens. People here are clearly unhappy. What percentage of their business do we constitute? Almost by definition, most here are PCGS fanboys, and many already pooh pooh NGC as being inferior to PCGS, CACG, and the revered PCGS with a CAC sticker.
My understanding is that the bulk of the revenue today comes from modern submissions from large bulk dealers. As others have said, and as I agreed with, the only thing that is going to matter is what retail customers of moderns from large dealers do. The private equity bet is that they are not sophisticated enough to care.
People here already prefer our hosts, so all the whining here isn't really costing them much. And then, it's worth keeping in mind that PCGS is also now owned by private equity. If NGC gets away with this, it will be shocking if PCGS does not follow suit.
CACG is the wildcard. They were established to be different, and are not owned by private equity. But CAC's claim to fame was stickering classic coins, and not touching moderns.
Yet CACG had to bow to the reality that the money in grading today is in moderns, and they play the game, including BS attributions like First Delivery, Advance Release, etc. along with the competition. So let's see what they do if NGC and PCGS get away with eliminating their lifetime liability on their slabs.
As with everything else with grading, "market acceptability" will rule. People have tolerated grade inflation, a degree of artificial toning, etc. Don't be shocked if these guys don't eventually condition the market to accept 10 year guarantees. After all, they didn't get to where they are by being dumber than the rest of us.
I have owned a few NGC graded coins before, but don't own any now. Might end up being some good buys available if you know the series and how to grade. Bust them out and send to PCGS or CACG
If people think that a coin’s grade in a holder is “only an opinion,” they’re being pretty naive, if not foolish. If you collect purely for fun, you can ignore the holder and the grade—just buy what you like. However, if you think you might resell your coin later, even just to recoup your costs rather than make a profit, you should consider its grade and the grading company. The idea that a coin needs to be in a high-grade holder to sell for a high price has become a trend, and most buyers believe in and follow it.
@MasonG said:
I own NGC graded coins and their guarantee figured 0% in my decision to buy them.
FWIW...
.... because you assumed you had a lifetime guarantee like the other TPGs, so it didn't have to factor into your decision.
Going forward, knowing their guarantee is only leased for 10 years, I would expect this would play at least a minor role in deciding to purchase an NGC-graded coin, especially an expensive coin.
No, not really. I wasn't assuming anything- I wasn't considering the guarantee at all. Going forward? It won't play a minor role- not anymore than buying a raw coin. But then, I don't buy what I would consider to be "expensive coins".
The irony now is that for NGC-certified coins graded ten or more years ago and sold at $500 and up on ebay, the company that is guaranteeing the authenticity will be PCGS and not NGC!
@TomB said:
The irony now is that for NGC-certified coins graded ten or more years ago and sold at $500 and up on ebay, the company that is guaranteeing the authenticity will be PCGS and not NGC!
Right. Is that a lifetime guarantee, or only for as long as eBay's return policy applies?
No, there won’t be a sudden “mass cross over” event, mass boycotts, or mass liquidations. The average collector won’t notice or won’t care, and NGC will continue printing money certifying modern mint products, numismatic widgets and all the other collectibles that CCG’s other business lines handle by the millions.
Indeed, their reputation and business will erode among sophisticated collectors (the present audience) and they will lose market share in higher end numismatic material (ie. stuff like the Mormon posted earlier). Relatively, that segment is a small part of their business compared to their mass market machine.
The policy change seems like a calculated move to lop off a large chunk of potential liability, not a reaction to some secret information about counterfeits. PE firms do not want to own companies forever and they surely recognize that a potential buyer will discount a purchase price due to unknown potential liabilities stretching back decades.
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
The policy change seems like a calculated move to lop off a large chunk of potential liability, not a reaction to some secret information about counterfeits.
I don't believe the "counterfeit" thing, I was just fooling around. I'd be more likely to go with the "lop off" angle.
What percent of their income is generated by grading/certifying higher end numismatic material? What percent of their potential liability is represented by grading/certifying that same material?
@MasonG said:
What percent of their income is generated by grading/certifying higher end numismatic material? What percent of their potential liability is represented by grading/certifying that same material?
I suspect the answer is in there somewhere.
Not to mention the higher costs in the form of expert grading talent, insurance, cargo theft risk, etc.
Looking ahead, labor-intensive “boutique” numismatics may not fit with a potential plan to automate their processes with AI. Perhaps they’re comfortable ceding that business to PCGS and CACG.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Perhaps they’re comfortable ceding that business to PCGS and CACG.
Based on the opinions of most of the folks who post here, they're already #3 on that list (PCGS, CACG & NGC). How much $ would it cost to move up the list vs. how much $ would it save to not try?
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
PCGS is not PE.
It is owned by D1 Capital Partners, L.P. and Cohen Private Ventures, LLC
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
No, there won’t be a sudden “mass cross over” event, mass boycotts, or mass liquidations. The average collector won’t notice or won’t care, and NGC will continue printing money certifying modern mint products, numismatic widgets and all the other collectibles that CCG’s other business lines handle by the millions.
Indeed, their reputation and business will erode among sophisticated collectors (the present audience) and they will lose market share in higher end numismatic material (ie. stuff like the Mormon posted earlier). Relatively, that segment is a small part of their business compared to their mass market machine.
The policy change seems like a calculated move to lop off a large chunk of potential liability, not a reaction to some secret information about counterfeits. PE firms do not want to own companies forever and they surely recognize that a potential buyer will discount a purchase price due to unknown potential liabilities stretching back decades.
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
I may very well be wrong, but if classic coin grading dies off so will the larger registry set phenomenon which drives the demand for grading of widget coins and moderns which you contend (probably correctly) are their bread and butter. It is a domino effect. And if the guarantee is finite, why pay so much for a 70? And if you can live with a 69, well that makes up most of the coins. There is no need for a TPG at that point.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
PCGS is not PE.
It is owned by D1 Capital Partners, L.P. and Cohen Private Ventures, LLC
For those defending NGC (not all of you that disagree are), you are opening Pandora's box. Collectors will continue to be screwed over by abuses in this hobby (grade inflation, weakened guarantees, and now retroactively voided guarantees) if we continue to allow it. Vote with your wallet and don't buy any NGC modern coins or widgets or submit to NGC.
Most of the big money in the hobby is because of the alleged stability that TPG guarantees provide. If TPGs can freely renege on their guarantees, a lot of that money may very well exit the market and leave collectors holding the bag. This cannot be good for long term market stability. CAC can't buy them all.
@cameonut2011 said:
For those defending NGC (not all of you that disagree are), you are opening Pandora's box. Collectors will continue to be screwed over by abuses in this hobby (grade inflation, weakened guarantees, and now retroactively voided guarantees) if we continue to allow it. Vote with your wallet and don't buy any NGC modern coins or widgets or submit to NGC.
Most of the big money in the hobby is because of the alleged stability that TPG guarantees provide. If TPGs can freely renege on their guarantees, a lot of that money may very well exit the market and leave collectors holding the bag. This cannot be good for long term market stability. CAC can't buy them all.
You are missing one thing. All the auction companies are now exclusively auctioning certified coins. They are the biggest customers of the TPGs, not the little people.
And I don't own a single US NGC coin I do have ONE silver Panda
I made a choice back in 1986 when this first started and my choice was PCGS because I believe that they did a better job of grading and aligned with my opinion
And I don't own a single US NGC coin I do have ONE silver Panda
I made a choice back in 1986 when this first started and my choice was PCGS because I believe that they did a better job of grading and aligned with my opinion
There wasn’t a choice available between PCGS and NGC in 1986. NGC wasn’t founded until 1987, a year after PCGS.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Of the roughly 400+ slabs that I have I only have around 20 or less in NGC, the rest are PCGS except for about 3 ANACS. Seems like I have been making the right call all along…. 😎 ✌🏻
To retroactively end the guaranty that arguably attaches to previously NGC graded coins simply fails to pass the straight face test...
Now... on a going forward basis starting on X date that should feature a new slab ID tracking number, coins graded with a 10 year guaranty is fair game if that is the direction NGC chooses to go even though they are bucking the trend or are simply trying to change it by imposing limitations.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Any NGC coin with a cac sticker automatically can be crossed into their top notch holder which is what I would be doing and then live with the cac guarantee:
Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) provides a financial guarantee for coins encapsulated directly in its own CAC holders, as well as market-making and verification standards for its legacy stickers.
CAC Grading Guarantee (Directly Graded Coins)
• What is covered: CAC guarantees that coins in official CAC Grading holders are genuine, authentic, and correctly graded.
• Financial remedy: If an eligible coin is later proven to be over-graded or if it is re-holdered with a corrected lower grade, verified owners can receive the Fair Market Value (FMV) difference or sell the coin back to CAC at its original grade value.
• Eligibility limits: The guarantee applies only to the verified owner of a coin still sealed in its original CAC holder without tampering. It does not apply to the original submitter or their agents.
• Key exclusions:
• Copper, bronze, brass, or copper-plated coins (which can change color or tone over time)
• Counterfeit, altered, or damaged holders
• Subsequent environmental damage after encapsulation
• Third-party attributions or mechanical/clerical errors handled via separate review processes.
Legacy Stickering vs. Full Grading
• Green and Gold Stickers: For coins originally graded by PCGS or NGC that received a CAC sticker ("green bean"), CAC does not offer a formal financial guarantee in the same manner as its proprietary holders, though CAC acts as a strong market maker and buyer for stickered inventory.
• Crossovers: When crossing a stickered coin into a CAC slab, plus (+) grades or specific sub-designations from PCGS/NGC are not automatically guaranteed to transfer over at the plus level.
@logger7 said:
Any NGC coin with a cac sticker automatically can be crossed into their top notch holder which is what I would be doing and then live with the cac guarantee:
Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) provides a financial guarantee for coins encapsulated directly in its own CAC holders, as well as market-making and verification standards for its legacy stickers.
CAC Grading Guarantee (Directly Graded Coins)
• What is covered: CAC guarantees that coins in official CAC Grading holders are genuine, authentic, and correctly graded.
• Financial remedy: If an eligible coin is later proven to be over-graded or if it is re-holdered with a corrected lower grade, verified owners can receive the Fair Market Value (FMV) difference or sell the coin back to CAC at its original grade value.
• Eligibility limits: The guarantee applies only to the verified owner of a coin still sealed in its original CAC holder without tampering. It does not apply to the original submitter or their agents.
• Key exclusions:
• Copper, bronze, brass, or copper-plated coins (which can change color or tone over time)
• Counterfeit, altered, or damaged holders
• Subsequent environmental damage after encapsulation
• Third-party attributions or mechanical/clerical errors handled via separate review processes.
Legacy Stickering vs. Full Grading
• Green and Gold Stickers: For coins originally graded by PCGS or NGC that received a CAC sticker ("green bean"), CAC does not offer a formal financial guarantee in the same manner as its proprietary holders, though CAC acts as a strong market maker and buyer for stickered inventory.
• Crossovers: When crossing a stickered coin into a CAC slab, plus (+) grades or specific sub-designations from PCGS/NGC are not automatically guaranteed to transfer over at the plus level.
I wouldn’t indiscriminately cross all NGC/CAC coins to CACG. Here are some reasons why:
CAC doesn’t recognize plus grades, so If it’s a plus grade coin, there’s no assurance that CACG will cross it with the plus.
An NGC/CAC coin provides two professional opinions and some buyers will still prefer that to a single (CACG) opinion.
Old NGC “Fatty” holders, in particular, offer the assurance that the coin was encapsulated long ago and provides some added assurance as to its’ stability.
Despite the understandable disappointment and outrage among many people over the revised guarantee, there are likely at most, only a tiny % of NGC coins that might merit legitimate concern regarding authenticity. And there are a great many perfectly fine coins of all types and grades in NGC holders that wouldn’t/shouldn’t even be considered for grade guarantee submissions.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
For the record, I own many NGC graded coins. I consider myself fortunate to own what I own. I do not suspect that there are counterfeits or even coins graded that fall outside my grading range for each coin whereby I could assert a claim of anykind.
I am leaving my NGC graded coins as they are with one possible exception... there are a handful I would consider crossing to PCGS to add to my PCGS registry sets.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@logger7 said:
Any NGC coin with a cac sticker automatically can be crossed into their top notch holder which is what I would be doing and then live with the cac guarantee:
Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) provides a financial guarantee for coins encapsulated directly in its own CAC holders, as well as market-making and verification standards for its legacy stickers.
CAC Grading Guarantee (Directly Graded Coins)
• What is covered: CAC guarantees that coins in official CAC Grading holders are genuine, authentic, and correctly graded.
• Financial remedy: If an eligible coin is later proven to be over-graded or if it is re-holdered with a corrected lower grade, verified owners can receive the Fair Market Value (FMV) difference or sell the coin back to CAC at its original grade value.
• Eligibility limits: The guarantee applies only to the verified owner of a coin still sealed in its original CAC holder without tampering. It does not apply to the original submitter or their agents.
• Key exclusions:
• Copper, bronze, brass, or copper-plated coins (which can change color or tone over time)
• Counterfeit, altered, or damaged holders
• Subsequent environmental damage after encapsulation
• Third-party attributions or mechanical/clerical errors handled via separate review processes.
Legacy Stickering vs. Full Grading
• Green and Gold Stickers: For coins originally graded by PCGS or NGC that received a CAC sticker ("green bean"), CAC does not offer a formal financial guarantee in the same manner as its proprietary holders, though CAC acts as a strong market maker and buyer for stickered inventory.
• Crossovers: When crossing a stickered coin into a CAC slab, plus (+) grades or specific sub-designations from PCGS/NGC are not automatically guaranteed to transfer over at the plus level.
I wouldn’t indiscriminately cross all NGC/CAC coins to CACG. Here are some reasons why:
CAC doesn’t recognize plus grades, so If it’s a plus grade coin, there’s no assurance that CACG will cross it with the plus.
An NGC/CAC coin provides two professional opinions and some buyers will still prefer that to a single (CACG) opinion.
Old NGC “Fatty” holders, in particular, offer the assurance that the coin was encapsulated long ago and provides some added assurance as to its’ stability.
Despite the understandable disappointment and outrage among many people over the revised guarantee, there are likely at most, only a tiny % of NGC coins that might merit legitimate concern regarding authenticity. And there are a great many perfectly fine coins of all types and grades in NGC holders that wouldn’t/shouldn’t even be considered for grade guarantee submissions.
Wouldn't a CACG coin be worth more than a NGC plus coin in 99.999% of the cases? The market often treats unbeaned PCGS coin as such.
Also for legacy CAC coins (before June 2023), there is a "L" on the label so wouldn't that moot the second one?
@SimonW said:
Ancients don’t carry any kind of guarantee with NGC, I don’t think they ever have. I don’t like it, but where else can you go?
I’m sure they’re just following suit, realizing how much money and liability is saved by not guaranteeing.
Guarantee is literally in the name.
They don’t seem to care do they?
No, but I do wonder whether the FTC would care about a guarantee corporation that refuses to honor the guarantee that it advertised.
I doubt it, a name of a company frequently has nothing to do with what a company does. If it did, “American Apparel” (made overseas) “Subway” “The Cheesecake Factory” “Apple” “BlackBerry” would all be in trouble. The name of the company is the one thing they probably won’t get in trouble for.
NGC has never had a real guarantee, not a full one that supports and financially backs up the claim, that’s what PCGS had that nobody else had. For a long time NGC has only been the “NOP” Numismatic Opinion People. (It's convenient that it also sounds like “Nope!)
@NJCoin said:
CACG is the wildcard. They were established to be different, and are not owned by private equity. But CAC's claim to fame was stickering classic coins, and not touching moderns.
Yet CACG had to bow to the reality that the money in grading today is in moderns, and they play the game, including BS attributions like First Delivery, Advance Release, etc. along with the competition. So let's see what they do if NGC and PCGS get away with eliminating their lifetime liability on their slabs.
@SimonW said:
Ancients don’t carry any kind of guarantee with NGC, I don’t think they ever have. I don’t like it, but where else can you go?
I’m sure they’re just following suit, realizing how much money and liability is saved by not guaranteeing.
Guarantee is literally in the name.
They don’t seem to care do they?
No, but I do wonder whether the FTC would care about a guarantee corporation that refuses to honor the guarantee that it advertised.
I doubt it, a name of a company frequently has nothing to do with what a company does. If it did, “American Apparel” (made overseas) “Subway” “The Cheesecake Factory” “Apple” “BlackBerry” would all be in trouble. The name of the company is the one thing they probably won’t get in trouble for.
NGC has never had a real guarantee, not a full one that supports and financially backs up the claim, that’s what PCGS had that nobody else had. For a long time NGC has only been the “NOP” Numismatic Opinion People. (It's convenient that it also sounds like “Nope!)
If it would mislead a consumer of ordinary intelligence, then it could be consider a deceptive business practice. The FTC has gone after companies for similar issues in the past. And the real meat isn't the name of the company but the retroactive voiding of its guarantee. I threw the name out there tongue in cheek.
@NJCoin said:
CACG is the wildcard. They were established to be different, and are not owned by private equity. But CAC's claim to fame was stickering classic coins, and not touching moderns.
Yet CACG had to bow to the reality that the money in grading today is in moderns, and they play the game, including BS attributions like First Delivery, Advance Release, etc. along with the competition. So let's see what they do if NGC and PCGS get away with eliminating their lifetime liability on their slabs.
I have never been a CAC hater, but I have always advised against a narrow minded view. As much as I hate to admit this... Laura may have been right after all.
@messydesk while I don't doubt JA's authenticity when he says that, I'd bet he would have said the same thing about NGC when he founded it. Maybe it takes 40 years to play out, but "never say never".
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
If at the time of the NGC grading service in the past they offered an 'unlimited time' guarantee in exchange for some monetary consideration, I don't think they can legally change that at some point in the future. Would be like GM offering 10 year/100,000 mile guarantee on some part and then afterwards saying it is really 5 years/50,000 miles. Now going forward starting in June, NGC can limit that guarantee going forward. But believe they would need to honor all past guarantees. Still a bad business decision and they will lose in the long run.
@P0CKETCHANGE said: @messydesk while I don't doubt JA's authenticity when he says that, I'd bet he would have said the same thing about NGC when he founded it. Maybe it takes 40 years to play out, but "never say never".
This ^^^^. In addition, while CACG purports to be holier than thou, it had to bow to market reality with respect to moderns in order to have a viable business. So let's just see what will happen if the competition limits liability and gets away with it.
"Never" is a VERY long time for something not to happen. Maybe someone should ask JA what Advance Release or First Delivery adds to the true value of a coin, and why he happily accepts money to slap that designation on a label, and is willingly part of a supply chain that induces suckers to pay more for it at initial sale, when he knows full well it adds zero value at resale.
He's one of the most brilliant people in the industry. If the world moves to 10 year guarantees, and his company has a lower enterprise value because it has higher contingent liabilities per dollar of revenue than the competition, "never" will have likely arrived for JA and his partners.
Now, just like with Advance Release and First Delivery, if CACG can differentiate itself by charging more for a lifetime guarantee, and if people are willing to pay for that, it will be a different story. But we'll just have to wait and see what additional value the market puts on a lifetime guarantee if 10 years becomes the standard.
People are understandably upset when something they are used to getting for free is taken away from them. Like checked bags on a plane, or advance seat assignments on an economy ticket. When they are asked to pay extra in order to restore what they were used to, many learn to live without.
Could very well end up being the same thing here with CACG. Because I am pretty sure they do not presently charge significantly more for their services than the competition.
@logger7 said:
Any NGC coin with a cac sticker automatically can be crossed into their top notch holder which is what I would be doing and then live with the cac guarantee:
Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) provides a financial guarantee for coins encapsulated directly in its own CAC holders, as well as market-making and verification standards for its legacy stickers.
CAC Grading Guarantee (Directly Graded Coins)
• What is covered: CAC guarantees that coins in official CAC Grading holders are genuine, authentic, and correctly graded.
• Financial remedy: If an eligible coin is later proven to be over-graded or if it is re-holdered with a corrected lower grade, verified owners can receive the Fair Market Value (FMV) difference or sell the coin back to CAC at its original grade value.
• Eligibility limits: The guarantee applies only to the verified owner of a coin still sealed in its original CAC holder without tampering. It does not apply to the original submitter or their agents.
• Key exclusions:
• Copper, bronze, brass, or copper-plated coins (which can change color or tone over time)
• Counterfeit, altered, or damaged holders
• Subsequent environmental damage after encapsulation
• Third-party attributions or mechanical/clerical errors handled via separate review processes.
Legacy Stickering vs. Full Grading
• Green and Gold Stickers: For coins originally graded by PCGS or NGC that received a CAC sticker ("green bean"), CAC does not offer a formal financial guarantee in the same manner as its proprietary holders, though CAC acts as a strong market maker and buyer for stickered inventory.
• Crossovers: When crossing a stickered coin into a CAC slab, plus (+) grades or specific sub-designations from PCGS/NGC are not automatically guaranteed to transfer over at the plus level.
I wouldn’t indiscriminately cross all NGC/CAC coins to CACG. Here are some reasons why:
CAC doesn’t recognize plus grades, so If it’s a plus grade coin, there’s no assurance that CACG will cross it with the plus.
An NGC/CAC coin provides two professional opinions and some buyers will still prefer that to a single (CACG) opinion.
Old NGC “Fatty” holders, in particular, offer the assurance that the coin was encapsulated long ago and provides some added assurance as to its’ stability.
Despite the understandable disappointment and outrage among many people over the revised guarantee, there are likely at most, only a tiny % of NGC coins that might merit legitimate concern regarding authenticity. And there are a great many perfectly fine coins of all types and grades in NGC holders that wouldn’t/shouldn’t even be considered for grade guarantee submissions.
Wouldn't a CACG coin be worth more than a NGC plus coin in 99.999% of the cases? The market often treats unbeaned PCGS coin as such.
Also for legacy CAC coins (before June 2023), there is a "L" on the label so wouldn't that moot the second one?
No, I don’t think that a CACG coin would be worth more than an NGC plus coin 99.999% of the time, or anywhere close to that.
What do you mean by “… so wouldn't that moot the second one?” ?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
To be honest, I don't really care about this, and it's for a number of reasons.
1) How many of us have ever actually needed the guarantee on a personal level? I know I've never used it on one of my PC coins. I think @lermish is the only one who I have heard of using it for such a purpose, and I may be wrong on that.
2) When I have used the guarantee it is because there is a misgraded coin up for auction. I would never buy the coin myself because I know better. Does it save the person in that deal - sure, but otherwise the guarantee is a moot thing for a knowledgeable collector who knows what to avoid. Knowledge is better than any guarantee.
3) The guarantee is a pain in the butt to use for the collector. The sole arbiter of claims is the TPG itself - so... draw your own conclusions there. Also, the guarantee is exempted for almost every possible reason that you could need it for - changes in status, variety attribution, or mechanical errors (very broad category there). Unless they have holdered a counterfeit or altered coin, you're facing a major uphill battle.
4) The ten year limit has been a thing for a while for NGC copper coins. It never bothered me there. IIRC, a reholder resets the grade date, so you could just reholder every ten years if it truly matters to you.
Lastly, what I think is much more likely to happen here is that PCGS will reduce their guarantee rather than NGC backpedaling. Just my opinion, but that's a quid pro quo relationship that I can see the P.E. owners snatching up really quickly.
I emailed Scott Schechter at NGC and asked for clarification regarding the effective date of the 10-year time limit for their guarantee. Here’s his answer that he posted on the NGC forum:
“Mark Feld emailed me asking for clarification on the Guarantee.
The 10-year time limit applies only to collectibles graded on June 2, 2026, or later. It does not apply retroactively.
Right now, the 10-year period can be extended by submitting a collectible for regrade before the Guarantee expires. Well before this date approaches, however, we'll introduce simple mechanisms for collectors and dealers to extend the coverage. I understand the concerns about this change as I am also a collector. In practical terms, its impact will be limited for at least the next decade, and coverage for those graded subsequently can be extended, with some collector-forward innovations forthcoming to enable this.”
I thanked him and let him know that, as written, the revision to the guarantee and the 10-year time limit appears to be retroactive.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@SimonW said:
Ancients don’t carry any kind of guarantee with NGC, I don’t think they ever have. I don’t like it, but where else can you go?
I’m sure they’re just following suit, realizing how much money and liability is saved by not guaranteeing.
Guarantee is literally in the name.
They don’t seem to care do they?
No, but I do wonder whether the FTC would care about a guarantee corporation that refuses to honor the guarantee that it advertised.
NGC has never had a real guarantee, not a full one that supports and financially backs up the claim, that’s what PCGS had that nobody else had. For a long time NGC has only been the “NOP” Numismatic Opinion People. (It's convenient that it also sounds like “Nope!)
1) How many of us have ever actually needed the guarantee on a personal level? I know I've never used it on one of my PC coins. I think @lermish is the only one who I have heard of using it for such a purpose, and I may be wrong on that.
I did indeed. It was a nightmare, mostly because of PCGS' process and poor communication.
However, I have also brought plenty of coins belonging to others to light that have invoked the authenticity guarantee, typically by flagging counterfeit or badly misattributed coins listed at auction.
"Right now, the 10-year period can be extended by submitting a collectible for regrade before the Guarantee expires. Well before this date approaches, however, we'll introduce simple mechanisms for collectors and dealers to extend the coverage."
My guess is ante up; the insurance covering the guarantee needs to be fed into due to their increased liability.
@OwenSeymour said: @njcoin offering first delivery is not an indication of willingness to nullify a guarantee. What?
I know John well. To suggest he would pull the same stunt that NGC did is ridiculous.
No. Offering First Delivery is just "an indication of willingness" to play the game, meet the market where it is, and to grab the money.
CACG could have been a niche service, catering to the high end of the hobby that appreciates quality, and is willing to pay for it, just like CAC stickering is. Classics only. No label games. But instead, they decided to go mass market and make money.
I honestly don't think anyone "nullified a guarantee," no matter how people are reading the website, because I'm pretty sure that would not be legal. Even though both NGC and PCGS did that with milk spots and coppers. I'll bet large sums of money that the new guarantee limitation only applies to coins slabbed after they posted the change to their website in June, where they not only dated the announcement, but also now publish the date coins are graded.
Comments
.... because you assumed you had a lifetime guarantee like the other TPGs, so it didn't have to factor into your decision.
Going forward, knowing their guarantee is only leased for 10 years, I would expect this would play at least a minor role in deciding to purchase an NGC-graded coin, especially an expensive coin.
Assuming there is a reduction in submissions. That's a huge TBD.
This change was apparently implemented in June, and people are first talking about this now. So far, so good for NGC.
Now we'll see what happens. People here are clearly unhappy. What percentage of their business do we constitute? Almost by definition, most here are PCGS fanboys, and many already pooh pooh NGC as being inferior to PCGS, CACG, and the revered PCGS with a CAC sticker.
My understanding is that the bulk of the revenue today comes from modern submissions from large bulk dealers. As others have said, and as I agreed with, the only thing that is going to matter is what retail customers of moderns from large dealers do. The private equity bet is that they are not sophisticated enough to care.
People here already prefer our hosts, so all the whining here isn't really costing them much. And then, it's worth keeping in mind that PCGS is also now owned by private equity. If NGC gets away with this, it will be shocking if PCGS does not follow suit.
CACG is the wildcard. They were established to be different, and are not owned by private equity. But CAC's claim to fame was stickering classic coins, and not touching moderns.
Yet CACG had to bow to the reality that the money in grading today is in moderns, and they play the game, including BS attributions like First Delivery, Advance Release, etc. along with the competition. So let's see what they do if NGC and PCGS get away with eliminating their lifetime liability on their slabs.
As with everything else with grading, "market acceptability" will rule. People have tolerated grade inflation, a degree of artificial toning, etc. Don't be shocked if these guys don't eventually condition the market to accept 10 year guarantees. After all, they didn't get to where they are by being dumber than the rest of us.
I have owned a few NGC graded coins before, but don't own any now. Might end up being some good buys available if you know the series and how to grade. Bust them out and send to PCGS or CACG
My only NGC coin I own (there goes the authentication guarantee):
Somehow, from all the people on this forum, I knew that coin had to be yours!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
If people think that a coin’s grade in a holder is “only an opinion,” they’re being pretty naive, if not foolish. If you collect purely for fun, you can ignore the holder and the grade—just buy what you like. However, if you think you might resell your coin later, even just to recoup your costs rather than make a profit, you should consider its grade and the grading company. The idea that a coin needs to be in a high-grade holder to sell for a high price has become a trend, and most buyers believe in and follow it.
No, not really. I wasn't assuming anything- I wasn't considering the guarantee at all. Going forward? It won't play a minor role- not anymore than buying a raw coin. But then, I don't buy what I would consider to be "expensive coins".
The irony now is that for NGC-certified coins graded ten or more years ago and sold at $500 and up on ebay, the company that is guaranteeing the authenticity will be PCGS and not NGC!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Right. Is that a lifetime guarantee, or only for as long as eBay's return policy applies?
No, there won’t be a sudden “mass cross over” event, mass boycotts, or mass liquidations. The average collector won’t notice or won’t care, and NGC will continue printing money certifying modern mint products, numismatic widgets and all the other collectibles that CCG’s other business lines handle by the millions.
Indeed, their reputation and business will erode among sophisticated collectors (the present audience) and they will lose market share in higher end numismatic material (ie. stuff like the Mormon posted earlier). Relatively, that segment is a small part of their business compared to their mass market machine.
The policy change seems like a calculated move to lop off a large chunk of potential liability, not a reaction to some secret information about counterfeits. PE firms do not want to own companies forever and they surely recognize that a potential buyer will discount a purchase price due to unknown potential liabilities stretching back decades.
I’m not defending their decision by any means, and perhaps we’ll see NGC backpedal. Or, they’ll stick with it, the backlash dies down, and our own PE-backed hosts start to consider whether they should follow suit. Either way, the comments about NGC’s imminent demise or PCGS dealing them a death blow seem a bit overblown.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
I don't believe the "counterfeit" thing, I was just fooling around. I'd be more likely to go with the "lop off" angle.
What percent of their income is generated by grading/certifying higher end numismatic material? What percent of their potential liability is represented by grading/certifying that same material?
I suspect the answer is in there somewhere.
Not to mention the higher costs in the form of expert grading talent, insurance, cargo theft risk, etc.
Looking ahead, labor-intensive “boutique” numismatics may not fit with a potential plan to automate their processes with AI. Perhaps they’re comfortable ceding that business to PCGS and CACG.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
Based on the opinions of most of the folks who post here, they're already #3 on that list (PCGS, CACG & NGC). How much $ would it cost to move up the list vs. how much $ would it save to not try?
Edited: I'm wrong. PCGS is owned by PE.
It is owned by D1 Capital Partners, L.P. and Cohen Private Ventures, LLC
https://www.numismaticnews.net/us-coins/collectors-universe-to-be-privately-owned
I may very well be wrong, but if classic coin grading dies off so will the larger registry set phenomenon which drives the demand for grading of widget coins and moderns which you contend (probably correctly) are their bread and butter. It is a domino effect. And if the guarantee is finite, why pay so much for a 70? And if you can live with a 69, well that makes up most of the coins. There is no need for a TPG at that point.
Me either. But for reasons unrelated to the current kerfuffle.
I stand corrected. I was unaware.
The guarantee won’t influence my purchase of NGC coins, However, resale considerations will. Time will tell.
Ancients don’t carry any kind of guarantee with NGC, I don’t think they ever have. I don’t like it, but where else can you go?
I’m sure they’re just following suit, realizing how much money and liability is saved by not guaranteeing.
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
Guarantee is literally in the name.
For those defending NGC (not all of you that disagree are), you are opening Pandora's box. Collectors will continue to be screwed over by abuses in this hobby (grade inflation, weakened guarantees, and now retroactively voided guarantees) if we continue to allow it. Vote with your wallet and don't buy any NGC modern coins or widgets or submit to NGC.
Most of the big money in the hobby is because of the alleged stability that TPG guarantees provide. If TPGs can freely renege on their guarantees, a lot of that money may very well exit the market and leave collectors holding the bag. This cannot be good for long term market stability. CAC can't buy them all.
You are missing one thing. All the auction companies are now exclusively auctioning certified coins. They are the biggest customers of the TPGs, not the little people.
And I don't own a single US NGC coin
I do have ONE silver Panda
I made a choice back in 1986 when this first started and my choice was PCGS because I believe that they did a better job of grading and aligned with my opinion
Mike
My Indians
Dansco Set
There wasn’t a choice available between PCGS and NGC in 1986. NGC wasn’t founded until 1987, a year after PCGS.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Of the roughly 400+ slabs that I have I only have around 20 or less in NGC, the rest are PCGS except for about 3 ANACS. Seems like I have been making the right call all along…. 😎 ✌🏻
I sense a fear here that NGC graded coins will ….. I dunno, BECOME COUNTERFEIT?
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!
To retroactively end the guaranty that arguably attaches to previously NGC graded coins simply fails to pass the straight face test...
Now... on a going forward basis starting on X date that should feature a new slab ID tracking number, coins graded with a 10 year guaranty is fair game if that is the direction NGC chooses to go even though they are bucking the trend or are simply trying to change it by imposing limitations.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Any NGC coin with a cac sticker automatically can be crossed into their top notch holder which is what I would be doing and then live with the cac guarantee:
Certified Acceptance Corporation (CAC) provides a financial guarantee for coins encapsulated directly in its own CAC holders, as well as market-making and verification standards for its legacy stickers.
CAC Grading Guarantee (Directly Graded Coins)
• What is covered: CAC guarantees that coins in official CAC Grading holders are genuine, authentic, and correctly graded.
• Financial remedy: If an eligible coin is later proven to be over-graded or if it is re-holdered with a corrected lower grade, verified owners can receive the Fair Market Value (FMV) difference or sell the coin back to CAC at its original grade value.
• Eligibility limits: The guarantee applies only to the verified owner of a coin still sealed in its original CAC holder without tampering. It does not apply to the original submitter or their agents.
• Key exclusions:
• Copper, bronze, brass, or copper-plated coins (which can change color or tone over time)
• Counterfeit, altered, or damaged holders
• Subsequent environmental damage after encapsulation
• Third-party attributions or mechanical/clerical errors handled via separate review processes.
Legacy Stickering vs. Full Grading
• Green and Gold Stickers: For coins originally graded by PCGS or NGC that received a CAC sticker ("green bean"), CAC does not offer a formal financial guarantee in the same manner as its proprietary holders, though CAC acts as a strong market maker and buyer for stickered inventory.
• Crossovers: When crossing a stickered coin into a CAC slab, plus (+) grades or specific sub-designations from PCGS/NGC are not automatically guaranteed to transfer over at the plus level.
They don’t seem to care do they?
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
No, but I do wonder whether the FTC would care about a guarantee corporation that refuses to honor the guarantee that it advertised.
I wouldn’t indiscriminately cross all NGC/CAC coins to CACG. Here are some reasons why:
CAC doesn’t recognize plus grades, so If it’s a plus grade coin, there’s no assurance that CACG will cross it with the plus.
An NGC/CAC coin provides two professional opinions and some buyers will still prefer that to a single (CACG) opinion.
Old NGC “Fatty” holders, in particular, offer the assurance that the coin was encapsulated long ago and provides some added assurance as to its’ stability.
Despite the understandable disappointment and outrage among many people over the revised guarantee, there are likely at most, only a tiny % of NGC coins that might merit legitimate concern regarding authenticity. And there are a great many perfectly fine coins of all types and grades in NGC holders that wouldn’t/shouldn’t even be considered for grade guarantee submissions.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
For the record, I own many NGC graded coins. I consider myself fortunate to own what I own. I do not suspect that there are counterfeits or even coins graded that fall outside my grading range for each coin whereby I could assert a claim of anykind.
I am leaving my NGC graded coins as they are with one possible exception... there are a handful I would consider crossing to PCGS to add to my PCGS registry sets.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Wouldn't a CACG coin be worth more than a NGC plus coin in 99.999% of the cases? The market often treats unbeaned PCGS coin as such.
Also for legacy CAC coins (before June 2023), there is a "L" on the label so wouldn't that moot the second one?
I doubt it, a name of a company frequently has nothing to do with what a company does. If it did, “American Apparel” (made overseas) “Subway” “The Cheesecake Factory” “Apple” “BlackBerry” would all be in trouble. The name of the company is the one thing they probably won’t get in trouble for.
NGC has never had a real guarantee, not a full one that supports and financially backs up the claim, that’s what PCGS had that nobody else had. For a long time NGC has only been the “NOP” Numismatic Opinion People. (It's convenient that it also sounds like “Nope!)
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
If it would mislead a consumer of ordinary intelligence, then it could be consider a deceptive business practice. The FTC has gone after companies for similar issues in the past. And the real meat isn't the name of the company but the retroactive voiding of its guarantee. I threw the name out there tongue in cheek.
I have never been a CAC hater, but I have always advised against a narrow minded view. As much as I hate to admit this... Laura may have been right after all.
@messydesk while I don't doubt JA's authenticity when he says that, I'd bet he would have said the same thing about NGC when he founded it. Maybe it takes 40 years to play out, but "never say never".
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
If at the time of the NGC grading service in the past they offered an 'unlimited time' guarantee in exchange for some monetary consideration, I don't think they can legally change that at some point in the future. Would be like GM offering 10 year/100,000 mile guarantee on some part and then afterwards saying it is really 5 years/50,000 miles. Now going forward starting in June, NGC can limit that guarantee going forward. But believe they would need to honor all past guarantees. Still a bad business decision and they will lose in the long run.
This ^^^^. In addition, while CACG purports to be holier than thou, it had to bow to market reality with respect to moderns in order to have a viable business. So let's just see what will happen if the competition limits liability and gets away with it.
"Never" is a VERY long time for something not to happen. Maybe someone should ask JA what Advance Release or First Delivery adds to the true value of a coin, and why he happily accepts money to slap that designation on a label, and is willingly part of a supply chain that induces suckers to pay more for it at initial sale, when he knows full well it adds zero value at resale.
He's one of the most brilliant people in the industry. If the world moves to 10 year guarantees, and his company has a lower enterprise value because it has higher contingent liabilities per dollar of revenue than the competition, "never" will have likely arrived for JA and his partners.
Now, just like with Advance Release and First Delivery, if CACG can differentiate itself by charging more for a lifetime guarantee, and if people are willing to pay for that, it will be a different story. But we'll just have to wait and see what additional value the market puts on a lifetime guarantee if 10 years becomes the standard.
People are understandably upset when something they are used to getting for free is taken away from them. Like checked bags on a plane, or advance seat assignments on an economy ticket. When they are asked to pay extra in order to restore what they were used to, many learn to live without.
Could very well end up being the same thing here with CACG. Because I am pretty sure they do not presently charge significantly more for their services than the competition.
@njcoin offering first delivery is not an indication of willingness to nullify a guarantee. What?
I know John well. To suggest he would pull the same stunt that NGC did is ridiculous.
Head coin nerd @ Rarity7
No, I don’t think that a CACG coin would be worth more than an NGC plus coin 99.999% of the time, or anywhere close to that.
What do you mean by “… so wouldn't that moot the second one?” ?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
To be honest, I don't really care about this, and it's for a number of reasons.
1) How many of us have ever actually needed the guarantee on a personal level? I know I've never used it on one of my PC coins. I think @lermish is the only one who I have heard of using it for such a purpose, and I may be wrong on that.
2) When I have used the guarantee it is because there is a misgraded coin up for auction. I would never buy the coin myself because I know better. Does it save the person in that deal - sure, but otherwise the guarantee is a moot thing for a knowledgeable collector who knows what to avoid. Knowledge is better than any guarantee.
3) The guarantee is a pain in the butt to use for the collector. The sole arbiter of claims is the TPG itself - so... draw your own conclusions there. Also, the guarantee is exempted for almost every possible reason that you could need it for - changes in status, variety attribution, or mechanical errors (very broad category there). Unless they have holdered a counterfeit or altered coin, you're facing a major uphill battle.
4) The ten year limit has been a thing for a while for NGC copper coins. It never bothered me there. IIRC, a reholder resets the grade date, so you could just reholder every ten years if it truly matters to you.
Lastly, what I think is much more likely to happen here is that PCGS will reduce their guarantee rather than NGC backpedaling. Just my opinion, but that's a quid pro quo relationship that I can see the P.E. owners snatching up really quickly.
Coin Photography
I emailed Scott Schechter at NGC and asked for clarification regarding the effective date of the 10-year time limit for their guarantee. Here’s his answer that he posted on the NGC forum:
“Mark Feld emailed me asking for clarification on the Guarantee.
The 10-year time limit applies only to collectibles graded on June 2, 2026, or later. It does not apply retroactively.
Right now, the 10-year period can be extended by submitting a collectible for regrade before the Guarantee expires. Well before this date approaches, however, we'll introduce simple mechanisms for collectors and dealers to extend the coverage. I understand the concerns about this change as I am also a collector. In practical terms, its impact will be limited for at least the next decade, and coverage for those graded subsequently can be extended, with some collector-forward innovations forthcoming to enable this.”
I thanked him and let him know that, as written, the revision to the guarantee and the 10-year time limit appears to be retroactive.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You mean they’ve been lying to me??!! 😳
No. Do not have any NGC CAC coins. All my CAC material CACG. Stickered coins sold out quite awhile back.
Wow it’s 10/26/26. 26 is my unlucky number.
I did indeed. It was a nightmare, mostly because of PCGS' process and poor communication.
However, I have also brought plenty of coins belonging to others to light that have invoked the authenticity guarantee, typically by flagging counterfeit or badly misattributed coins listed at auction.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
"Right now, the 10-year period can be extended by submitting a collectible for regrade before the Guarantee expires. Well before this date approaches, however, we'll introduce simple mechanisms for collectors and dealers to extend the coverage."
My guess is ante up; the insurance covering the guarantee needs to be fed into due to their increased liability.
No. Offering First Delivery is just "an indication of willingness" to play the game, meet the market where it is, and to grab the money.
CACG could have been a niche service, catering to the high end of the hobby that appreciates quality, and is willing to pay for it, just like CAC stickering is. Classics only. No label games. But instead, they decided to go mass market and make money.
I honestly don't think anyone "nullified a guarantee," no matter how people are reading the website, because I'm pretty sure that would not be legal. Even though both NGC and PCGS did that with milk spots and coppers. I'll bet large sums of money that the new guarantee limitation only applies to coins slabbed after they posted the change to their website in June, where they not only dated the announcement, but also now publish the date coins are graded.