What would happen if the hobby dumped the 1-70 grading scale for something else?

This thread's question asks for opinions, speculation and prognostication.
Grading has evolved from "new" and "used"; to adjectival [poor, fair, good, fine extremely fine, almost uncirculated, uncirculated, choice uncirculated, gen uncirculated, etc.]; to Sheldon's numerical 1-70 scale. The 1-70 scale apparently became the norm in the industry/hobby in the 1970's after industry/hobby leaders decided to changed from adjectival to numerical and decided on 1-70 instead of 1-100 [with 1-59 being reserved for circulated coins and 60-70 being reserved for uncirculated coins; BTW has anyone ever seen a raw or slabbed coin graded Fine 11, EF 42, AU 52?].
Since the numerical 1-70 grading scale became the norm, suggestions have been made to tweak same into tenths [ie. MS65.3, MS 62.7] to accomodate needs, demands, wants and desires of persons involved in the 60-70 MS part of the grading scale. Thus far grading broken down into tenths of a point has not caught on [thankfully IMHO].
Grading is subjective and always will be. However, this will not stop people from expanding the frontiers of knowledge and one day some "new" way to grade [i.e., computerized] will catch on and become the next stage in the evolution of grading.
Does anyone care to give their opinion/thoughts on what the next evolution in grading might be?
What will happen to the hobby when the next evolution in grading arrives to displace the current numerical 1-70 system [i.e. for slabbed coins tucked away in their plastic coffins with a numerical grade assigned to it, what will happen to them? will they go up in value, down in value or will they become valueless artifacts (like demonetized coins replaced by the Euro)? For TPG's with gaurantees, how will they react to the next evolution in grading? Looking forward to your replies.
Grading has evolved from "new" and "used"; to adjectival [poor, fair, good, fine extremely fine, almost uncirculated, uncirculated, choice uncirculated, gen uncirculated, etc.]; to Sheldon's numerical 1-70 scale. The 1-70 scale apparently became the norm in the industry/hobby in the 1970's after industry/hobby leaders decided to changed from adjectival to numerical and decided on 1-70 instead of 1-100 [with 1-59 being reserved for circulated coins and 60-70 being reserved for uncirculated coins; BTW has anyone ever seen a raw or slabbed coin graded Fine 11, EF 42, AU 52?].
Since the numerical 1-70 grading scale became the norm, suggestions have been made to tweak same into tenths [ie. MS65.3, MS 62.7] to accomodate needs, demands, wants and desires of persons involved in the 60-70 MS part of the grading scale. Thus far grading broken down into tenths of a point has not caught on [thankfully IMHO].
Grading is subjective and always will be. However, this will not stop people from expanding the frontiers of knowledge and one day some "new" way to grade [i.e., computerized] will catch on and become the next stage in the evolution of grading.
Does anyone care to give their opinion/thoughts on what the next evolution in grading might be?
What will happen to the hobby when the next evolution in grading arrives to displace the current numerical 1-70 system [i.e. for slabbed coins tucked away in their plastic coffins with a numerical grade assigned to it, what will happen to them? will they go up in value, down in value or will they become valueless artifacts (like demonetized coins replaced by the Euro)? For TPG's with gaurantees, how will they react to the next evolution in grading? Looking forward to your replies.
0
Comments
IMO, the only cases in which decimal grading would make sense is when, for example, a MS64 is $500 and an MS65 is $5000, and a coin is truly in between, a MS64.5 or a 64* or some other modifier to "MS64" might be called for in order to value the coin.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I also don't think that it is needed.....
blue skies!
david
-Bochiman
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you.
-unknown
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
WNC Coins, LLC
1987-C Hendersonville Road
Asheville, NC 28803
wnccoins.com
And decimal grading will add to gradeflation. When you have a big price jump between grades, that jump tends (tends, not guarantees) to ensure that only the lock coins make it to the next level. Add decimal grading, and in the example cited of MS64=$500 / MS65=$5000, a lot of those MS64 coins to move to MS64.5. And the really nice MS64 coins that might sell for $1000 will now sell for $2000. Not long after, some of those 64.5s will sneak into 65 holders because the big price jump isn't quite as severe.
That being said, it's probably inevitable that something will change in time. I suspect it will either be more designations or some supplemental description (maybe Full Reeds
Looking at how things evolved, it might have been better if only the 65 to 70 grades were used for Uncs. With only five (six, technically, but you don't see many 70s) possible grades, there would be a lot more agreement on a grade.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
Why does one occasionally see a coin that is between "fine" and "very fine" assigned the not-recognized-by-ANA-standards of grading the letter/number, "F18"? Why not, "VF20(-2)" or "MS60(-42)"?
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Kranky, I believe you actually make the case FOR decimal grading with this statement.
I submit that the vast majority of the "inconsistency" with respect to grade/regrade is due to liner coins that deserve a .5 after the lower number, and be done with "crack and resubmit" for that coin, unless someone wants to try and try again for half a point and half the profit.
And, as JRocco said, "pcgs would love" that
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I agree that most of the inconsistency is due to the liner coins, but adding more increments will just create more liners. A higher grade always means higher cost (not that I think that is right, but it is one of the cardinal rules of the business if you exclude toning) and you'll just end up with more coins being cracked out and resubmitted in the quest for that next half-point.
I still think that gradeflation takes place much easier when the price jumps between grades are smaller, and I think half-point increments would fuel that.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Tom
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
I know....I'm dreaming...but, hey, it's my fantasy....okay?!
Dave
E PLVRIBVS VNVM
I like the replies posted so far. Very interesting to see what thoughs/opinions there are on the topic.
No one has yet given a specific response to one aspect of my thread [though some replies have alluded to it]:
If the 1-70 numerical system is discarded and replaced with some other system, what would happen to all of the coins slabbed by TPG's with grading guarantee's?
My own opinion is that these TPG's [i.e. PCGS] would not allow the 1-70 system to be discarded without there being some agreement regarding its guarantee [i.e., it will reholder a PCGS slabbed coin with a conversion from its assigned 1-70 grade to an assigned equivalent grade in the new system; initially (for some specific period of time to facilitate the transition to the new system; or for the first X thousand number of coins) at no charge to the owner of the coin, thereafter with a token charge to the owner of the coin and thereafter at whatever price the market will bear; plus an acknowledgement by the owner of the coin that he/she waives any and all rights they have through the date of reholdering under the PCGS guarantee]. If a change in the grading system from 1-70 to something else is going to happen, the movers and shakers in the industry will acknowedge the inevitability of the change and will creatively figure out how to not only minimize any liabilities they have stemming from the 1-70 system, but to make money off of the change.
Any other thoughts?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry