<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
I thought John Albanese also helped found PCGS >>
And didn't they get their start buying the slabbing technology from someone else?
<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
I thought John Albanese also helped found PCGS >>
And didn't they get their start buying the slabbing technology from someone else? >>
I can't believe it is not a MS66 Ultra High Relief saint or an 1834 proof dcam or something. This just seems too.... out of character with their past celebrations.
Since then PCGS has certified several of the world's most valuable rare coins, including: the unique 1794 Flowing Hair dollar with a silver plug (PCGS Specimen-66); the $4.14 million Child's specimen 1804 Bust dollar (PCGS PF-67); the famous King of Siam proof set; and the finest known 1913 Liberty Head nickel (PCGS PF-66).
Hmmm - when certified by PCGS [not NGC], isn't it PR-67 or PR-66?
It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible!
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start? If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering.
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start? If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering. >>
All of the time it takes to grade coins isn't necessarily actually grading them. I would think they could speed up the data-entry process for instance without decreasing the time grading the coins.
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start? If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering. >>
All of the time it takes to grade coins isn't necessarily actually grading them. I would think they could speed up the data-entry process for instance without decreasing the time grading the coins. >>
Yes, I know. Was just thinking out loud. I would think these numbers must impact something besides bigger profits for PCGS. I recall reading online, here I think in the Q+A, that most coins take just a few minutes to grade. I know I am WAY oversimplifying but that is about 44,000 coins a month compared to some 154,000 a month at the current rate - averaged out of course. If my math is off please forgive - I am beat As I said - just thinking out loud.
Comments
At least it's a common coin. The 10,000,000th one was some rare gold piece if I recall correctly.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
<< <i>The 10,000,000th one was some rare gold piece if I recall correctly. >>
So was the 9th million, the 8th million, the 7th million, etc. (Not gold, just rare).
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
I thought John Albanese also helped found PCGS
<< <i>very nice
<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
I thought John Albanese also helped found PCGS
And didn't they get their start buying the slabbing technology from someone else?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
<< <i>
<< <i>very nice
<< <i>The company was founded in February 1986 by David Hall and five other prominent professional numismatists: Bruce Amspacher, Steve Cyrkin, John W. Dannreuther, Silvano DiGenova, Van Simmons and Gordon Wrubel. >>
I thought John Albanese also helped found PCGS
And didn't they get their start buying the slabbing technology from someone else?
PCGS has always denied the whole ACG thing.
The article says the 10 mil mark was reached just 6 months ago. Wow!
<< <i>Nice pic. >>
My OmniCoin Collection
My BankNoteBank Collection
Tom, formerly in Albuquerque, NM.
<< <i>Congratulations! I'll bet that holder adds a little value to the coin...
The article says the 10 mil mark was reached just 6 months ago. Wow! >>
So I guess Russ and Marty have been vewy vewy busy!
The name is LEE!
Hmmm - when certified by PCGS [not NGC], isn't it PR-67 or PR-66?
42/92
Looks like PCGS finally got a decent photographer!
You ever heard of him?
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
<< <i>Hey, DH!
Looks like PCGS finally got a decent photographer!
You ever heard of him? >>
I think they hired a foreigner.
<< <i>
<< <i>Hey, DH!
Looks like PCGS finally got a decent photographer!
You ever heard of him? >>
I think they hired a foreigner. >>
A greysider from the rumors!!
42/92
I really, totally, appreciate you posting it. However, in your case, I don't think the label will add one cent of value.
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start?
If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering.
Billy
<< <i>
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start?
If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering. >>
All of the time it takes to grade coins isn't necessarily actually grading them. I would think they could speed up the data-entry process for instance without decreasing the time grading the coins.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's more amazing to me that PCGS took only 6-1/2 months to grade the last 1 million coins. Almost 19 years to do 10 million coins and they do 1 million in the last 6+ months. Incredible! >>
What could this mean? What could the effects be? When did all those "the grading is way off" and threads start?
If more and more coins are submitted (or even if it stayed the same but output increased), and the number of graders does not grow in proprtion, will that not result in less "time" per coin to assign an "accurate" grade? More innacuracies? Or delayed grades? Just wondering. >>
All of the time it takes to grade coins isn't necessarily actually grading them. I would think they could speed up the data-entry process for instance without decreasing the time grading the coins. >>
Yes, I know. Was just thinking out loud. I would think these numbers must impact something besides bigger profits for PCGS. I recall reading online, here I think in the Q+A, that most coins take just a few minutes to grade. I know I am WAY oversimplifying but that is about 44,000 coins a month compared to some 154,000 a month at the current rate - averaged out of course. If my math is off please forgive - I am beat
Billy