Options
Question regarding Errors Grading
keoj
Posts: 1,064 ✭✭✭✭
This is a simple opinion question, just looking for a broader perspective.
For Errors, CAC does not sticker but does grade at CACG.
In the niche world of errors, is there any benefit to having errors in a CACG holder vs a PCGS holder? Or, are errors just so unique that a grade opinion from CACG and PCGS is generally equivalent?
Thanks, Keoj
0
Comments
Evaluating the need for certifying error coins at all is a whole conversation unto itself, but sticking with your specific question: to me, the benefit of grading error coins is authentication / attribution, not so much the numeric grade. Knowing that that the person who used to authenticate errors for PCGS is doing the same task at CACG, I would expect errors in those holders to be viewed on equal footing. I have submitted a couple of error coins to CACG and I was quite pleased with the results, and I personally have no problem buying errors in either holder.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
NGC is also a good option for errors, in my opinion.
I buy and sell mint errors in NGC, PCGS and CACG holders with absolutely NO preference. None of my customers have ever passed on a mint error because of the holder that it was in.
A few customers commented that they might try to cross a mint error after purchasing it from me, to match the others in their collection but the purchase was still made.
The ultimate example of this was Jim Gately purchasing my unique gold Buffalo Nickel for $400k. His Buffalo Nickel PCGS Registry set was exclusively PCGS. He still purchased my gold Buffalo Nickel, certified in a NGC holder. PCGS crossed it after the sale.
Mike. JBK and Sean,
Thanks! Perfect guidance. Best, keoj
I sent 39 ngc graded errors to PCGS for cross-over. 4 DNC, 35 crossed but most of them downgraded. Many of them downgraded a couple of grades. Ngc is not a first-tier grading company anymore in light of the Guarantee fiasco.
As has been noted by others, for most errors (I'm not referring to varieties that are often referred to as errors), the actual grade is usually unimportant. It's all about authentication and properly describing the error if it's not immediately obvious what occurred.
There is no need to be chasing a point or two upgrade on a significant error coin.
I like ANACS.
Exactly!
The critical aspect of third party (PCGS, NGC and CACG) certification for mint errors is authentication, not the grade!
Obviously no one wants a VF 20 in a AU 58 holder.
But whether it’s a MS 63 or MS 64 Franklin Half struck on a Quarter blank in a PCGS, NGC or CACG holder is irrelevant in my opinion.
I have never had a customer pass on a mint error due to being in a different holder (discussed above).
Or pass on a mint error certified as an AU 58 instead of a MS 61, or a MS 63 instead of a MS 64.
The grade helps a little but is not critical.
There are many examples where PCGS crossed a NGC mint error and RAISED the grade.
Here is the unique Proof Ike Dollar in bronze from an NGC Proof 61 to a PCGS Proof 62:
And here is the unique (it went viral) Washington Quarter struck on a Canadian Quarter that went from NGC Proof 65 to PCGS Proof 66:
Since you guys said the grade is not that important for Mint Error, I just emailed PCGS to drop my minimum grade requirement from current to any on a pending Mint Error crossover order. I hope PCGS or CACG will have a crossover special soon. I will have a couple hundred NGC-holder coins that I would like to cross.
On my pending mint error crossover order, I believe two of the coins were ex byers coins.