Options
Do you suppose that it would be good for business (for all services) if they all started net grading
dan1ecu
Posts: 1,573
Suppose PCGS started slabbing corroded, scratched, bent, etc. coins with a net grade. Well, if they were a little easier than ANACS, it might generate a large number of submissions from people trying to get higher grades for their ANACS net graded coins.
If PCGS were a bit tougher with net grading, it still might generate many submissions, as PCGS coins might command higher prices on the market.
The point is that there are a lot of problem coins out there... Are the services taking as much advantage of the opportunity as possible? With their current policies, are they serving collectors as well as they could be?
What do you think?
Dan
If PCGS were a bit tougher with net grading, it still might generate many submissions, as PCGS coins might command higher prices on the market.
The point is that there are a lot of problem coins out there... Are the services taking as much advantage of the opportunity as possible? With their current policies, are they serving collectors as well as they could be?
What do you think?
Dan
0
Comments
3 "DAMMIT BOYS"
4 "YOU SUCKS"
Numerous POTD (But NONE officially recognized)
Seated Halves are my specialty !
Seated Half set by date/mm COMPLETE !
Seated Half set by WB# - 289 down / 31 to go !!!!!
(1) "Smoebody smack him" from CornCobWipe !
IN MEMORY OF THE CUOF
It wouldn't be good for ANACS's business, because it distinguishes them in the marketplace.
And It wouldn't be good for NGC or PCGS because they would lose the perception that they don't grade problem coins, which distinguishes them in the marketplace.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
If TPG standards are not met to grade the coin, then return it in a "Genuine business strike" or "Genuine Proof Striking". No need to mention why the coin is ungraded. Just "Genuine..."
In this manner, all submitters would get something for their money.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I believe that all coins that are submitted should be returned encapsulated, if they are genuine.
If TPG standards are not met to grade the coin, then return it in a "Genuine business strike" or "Genuine Proof Striking". No need to mention why the coin is ungraded. Just "Genuine..."
In this manner, all submitters would get something for their money. >>
Because it was whizzed, the net grade was two positions lower. If that is an industry standard, ok.
COTC
Looking for alot of crap.
<< <i>he point is that there are a lot of problem coins out there... Are the services taking as much advantage of the opportunity as possible? With their current policies, are they serving collectors as well as they could be? >>
I think it would be horrible for the collecting market. The TPG companies are taking close to full potential advantage. Although they "do not slab problem coins" and if they decided to they would have more submissions. But on the other hand, there would be no BB's. Its up to you to weigh the two situations.
1. All coins get slabbed no matter what. Some have a net grade but all get slabbed.
OR
2. All "no problem" coins get slabbed. "Problem coins" get a BB but are still required to pay the $$.
Dave
<< <i>1. All coins get slabbed no matter what. Some have a net grade but all get slabbed.
OR
2. All "no problem" coins get slabbed. "Problem coins" get a BB but are still required to pay the $$. >>
Not necessarily. If you do as Julian suggests, you don't even *grade* the coin; it becomes like an NCS coin that's certified as "genuine." It wouldn't have a grade at all.
IMO, when you submit a coin, you are paying for not only a grading, but authentication. If a coin can't be graded because of problems, fine. But why can't it be authenticated?
The bottom line is this: If you submit a high-value, key-date coin for grading -- especially a circulated one -- the chances are that the authentication of the coin is as important as -- if not more important than -- the actual grade assigned. And if you pay to submit a coin for grading and authentication, even if you can't grade the coin because of problems, why can't you authenticate it? Seems to me you've *paid* for that service, and if the coin can be authenticated like any other 1909-S VDB or 1916-D dime or 1893-S Morgan, then it should be -- even if NO GRADE is assigned.
In fact, I don't think a grade (not even a net grade) should be assigned. You can make it ineligible for registry sets if you want. Or not include them in a population census. But I do think that if you pay to have a key date slabbed, they should be able to at least *authenticate* it.
I will have to say, in my case of not being able to grade, that I appreciate the information that my coin had been cleaned.
p8nt, I agree with you, but authentication should be included in the submission price. Most people in this forum, except me, upon receiving an authentication, but not a grade, would probably know why.
COTC
<< <i>PCGS already does it, especially with very difficult, early material. They just don’t tell you... >>
Exactly. They do it all the time, and so does NGC. Sometimes the problems aren't all that trivial, either.
I prefer ANACS' way of doing things, but I couldn't care less whether or not NGC or PCGS get in on it.
I think PCGS may better off NOT coming out with a "genuine" holder. Because when a coin gets BBed, it kind of encourages folks to try the same coin again. I have a coin I've been meaning to send in, maybe worth a thousand bucks as is, but double in a holder. It's on the edge of acceptability and definitely worth "trying" a few times.
Exactly. They do it all the time, and so does NGC. Sometimes the problems aren't all that trivial, either.
I totally agree with this- and part of the problem is that their policies on problem coins are inconsistent- coins should be authenticated and put into slabs, not just bodybagged with your fee taken from you. It's a hyprocrital policy to not slab "problem" coins, when vast numbers of 19th century coins are slabbed and are completely not "original"....
<< <i> PCGS already does it, especially with very difficult, early material. They just don’t tell you... >>
NGC does it as well. There aremany, many lightly cleaned early issues in both slabs and not a word about it.
Now...on the other hand, if it were used to add legitimacy to someone like morgan makers, give that bump in grade, crossing...all the little things people are doing to squeeze a couple of more bucks out of an already questionable coin then NO, it is not a good thing. I hate seeing the way people are pushing coins way beyond their value to where some newbie sees "slab" and scarfs it up like a rooster on a fresh june bug...dealer makes a few bucks, newbie has a 10 year wait to break even with a bad coin, if he does at all, and he still has a problem coin no matter what the "net graded" slab says. It lets in the harshly cleaned, AT, etc...
jmho
If the truth were known PGCS and NGC both net grade coins from time to time. Most often they do it for scarcer early coins that have less severe defects. It’s not a practice that does the companies proud, and it’s one that aggravates some collectors. Many collectors prefer coins that have “honest grades.” By that I mean that most collectors would prefer to have a no problem VF-30 than an EF-45 piece by sharpness that has lost 10 points to a defect.
<< <i>Net grading for PCGS and NGC would be a bad idea. Net grading has always been controversial because no one can agree on how much the sharpness grade would need to be lowered to compensate for the problem(s). Net grading would also damage the image of both companies because a lot more profoundly ugly coins would end up in their holders. >>
But what if they don't net grade? What if they only authenticate? They could easily put those in a holder with, say, a different color label, and merely indicate "genuine."
That way, the person who pays for the grading and authentication at least gets the authentication they paid for, and there's really no confusing ungraded "genuine only" coins with the "implied quality" of PCGS and NGC-graded coins.
(It should be noted that through NCS, NGC is already doing this sort of thing.)
But what about your ordinary AU 19th century type coin? What are the chances your raw reeded edge half is counterfeit? It might be more valuable if it were!