Options
Knowledgeable Numismatists at ICG
ddink
Posts: 2,748
From comments that have been made on this board:
Is not ICG commonly referred to as a "third world" grading service? Does not the numismatic community sharply discount high grade coins in ICG slabs? Are not most of the ICG MS70s at best MS67 or 68 at PCGS/NGC? Why would an apparently knowledgeable collector such as Cameron go to work for ICG? I mean, if it's their policy to grade MS67s as 69s and 70s, is he just going to have to conform his grading standards to theirs?
***I have neither a positive or negative opinion of ICG since I've never owned (or even seen) a coin that was graded by them. The questions above do not necessarily represent my opnion, but rather are things about ICG that I have read on this board.
Is not ICG commonly referred to as a "third world" grading service? Does not the numismatic community sharply discount high grade coins in ICG slabs? Are not most of the ICG MS70s at best MS67 or 68 at PCGS/NGC? Why would an apparently knowledgeable collector such as Cameron go to work for ICG? I mean, if it's their policy to grade MS67s as 69s and 70s, is he just going to have to conform his grading standards to theirs?
***I have neither a positive or negative opinion of ICG since I've never owned (or even seen) a coin that was graded by them. The questions above do not necessarily represent my opnion, but rather are things about ICG that I have read on this board.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
0
Comments
42/92
<< <i>While their modern grading is all over the chart, their circulated classics are generally dead on >>
Do you think that their modern grading is intentional, or simply the result of not having qualified numismatists? If the latter, than perhaps Cameron could do great things for them.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
<< <i>With Cameron grading there, I'd be willing to send some in for grading! >>
Problem is, he 's not the finalizer.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>While their modern grading is all over the chart, their circulated classics are generally dead on... >>
42/92
They have good graders
They do well on "non-modern" coins
(They do overgrade moderns)
They have a chance to do more than PCGS
etc
To make themselves more marketable and respectable, esp for moderns, they need to:
Get away from overgrading moderns so much (don't undergrade, just be accurate as you can) and,
switch the slab so it is a new, distinctive, generation of slabs that are easily distinguishable from prior slabs.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Doesn't bother me none; I like old coins
On old coins, ICG may still be a little liberal, giving the "benefit of the doubt" (which PCGS doesn't, unless you're an "insider"
However the multiplier for grading a 190 year old coin VF 30 where the most conservative may call it VF 25 or 20, is not the same price multiplier as on the ga ga grade PR70DCAM modern creations where "it is or it isn't" perfect...
Anyway, it doesn't seem to matter much to me; not many ICG slabs of nice old coins, I only have 2 ICG coins; my icon half eagle, and a 2000 1 Oz. platinum eagle MS69
All jmho
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I believe that ICG has graders who are very well qualified and knowledgeable. To my knowledge, two of them previously worked as graders at PCGS and a third worked at ANACS, and long ago turned down a job at NGC. >>
How could one work there and retain his/her professional integrity? If they know how to grade coins right, and they instead grade them too loosely, how can they keep any vestiges of their professional integrity?
EDIT to add: I guess the question I have is this: If they know how to grade coins right, why don't they do so? Are the graders instructed to raise the grade by x points when examining coins, or is that done by the person who verifies the grade? If you believe a coin is MS66 and the grade verifier bumps the grade to MS69 on a consistent basis, how could you stand to work there?
<< <i>Why would an apparently knowledgeable collector such as Cameron go to work for ICG? >>
This rationale is hard for me to understand. The young man is in his early 20s and it's his first job. He's working his way up the ladder. He may be starting at ICG, but I wouldn't assume he's going to end there, or that he'll somehow by stygmatized for taking a job there. When he goes to work next week he's going to look at hundreds of coins, consult all day long with other professionals, get his way paid to coin shows, and soak up vast amounts of knowledge just being in that environment. People with his acumen have a way of using these experiences to their advantage.
Moreover, he's getting paid. The kid has to eat, probably has student loans to pay back and has a car insurance bill coming up. He could work construction or flip burgers until PCGS calls, but that could be some hard time on the chain gang instead of doing something you not just bear, but actually love. I would imagine the experience he gains there beats looking at coins under a lamp in his bedroom, hanging out at some local coin shop after a day of sweeping up somewhere. I can't imagine a job that would rate as better preparation for a similar position at a first-rate company.
I bet it hurts the kid's morale a bit, someone questioning (albeit unintentionally) the most important choice he's made thus far in his life, shooting down his pride. He isn't playing for the Yankees yet, but I'd think the big teams keep an eye on whose making noise in the minor leagues.
<< <i>While their modern grading is all over the chart, their circulated classics are generally dead on... ICG is an easy 4th, and more of a 2nd tier slabber, along with SEGS, not a 3rd world company... it would seem ICG is trying to gain more market share, and bringing on more knowledgable and accurate graders onto their staff is a good way to do it... they've been marketing pretty heavilly in the major publications... ICG is definately trying to improve it's reputation... >>
Great response! I have several ICG slabbed gold coins and they are accurately graded. Most of the criticism on these boards seem to be directed toward their grading of high end moderns which I don't collect.
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
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
mmmmmmmm not to be too harsh .... just telling it like it is
i am so happy to hear this...because it means i have more coins to pick from than you ....therefore...if all other things are equal....you cannnot possibly compete with me and i can build a better set than you
***ALWAYS REMEMBER IF YOU COLLECT ONLY ONLY ONE GRADING SERVICE`S COINS YOU CAN NEVER COMPETE WITH THOSE THAT DO
there are just too many excellent coins in other slabs
thus
a registry who allows only it`s slabs in it....many times is not really the best ...as smart collectors who dont close there eyes to the quality of other companys coins WIL not be handcuffed nor limited to such narrow sightedness
while i dont do moderns and dont know how icg grades them ( i cant tell the diference between a 69 or 70 )......i have to tell you that you would be stunned at how many pop 1 pcgs coins once lived in icg or ngc holders......
i cant tell you how many times ive seen an icg coin in a 67 holder purchased at 15,000 and over night go into a pcgs 67 holder and sold to a guy 30,000 who passed on the exact coin a few days before
i have personally upgraded some icg coins....one coin went from ngc 66 to icg 67 to pcgs 68....now that was nice hit
monsterman
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
<< <i>There are no shortage of knowledgeable numismatists at ICG. >>
For knowledgeable numismatics, they sure can't grade for beans. How do these "experts" explain that fact? I'd love to hear their explanation of this situation at a grading seminar. "Well, these are the important aspects of grading uncirculated Barber Quarters, but don't use ICG coins as an example, because in our grading room we don't execute what we are telling you here......"
JrGman2004, they aren't usually dead on with circulated material, in my experience, and they are the pits in every aspect of grading, again, in my opinion.
I would call ICG 4th tier, considerably lower than ANACS and slightly better than Segs. Not in the realm of ACG or numistrust.
I think the part about ICG that infuriates me the most is the first comment above. The people employed over there are supposed to be reputable and knowledgeable. Maybe they are trying to be cutting edge, grading wise, and change the way everyone else grades?
i wouldn't buy a sight unseen ICG graded coin if............
As far as Cameron being employed over there, heck, it's a fantastic oppurtunity for him to be around such knowledgeable numismatists and I wish him the best of luck, and he should come away with that experience with more knowledge than he could have dreamed.
At the NY Invitational this past week, I looked at a cute 3csilver in a pcgs ms/64 rattler slab. Asked for a price from this "experienced" dealer (he's been in the business for.....ever, I'm not naming names though) and he quoted me ms/65 numbers. I asked "why so much", and he said that he was pricing the coin as gem. I gave him he coin back, and told him I didn't realize that "gems" had staple scratches (the coin had a light scratch in the field). Just another example of how experience doesn't translate into accuracy.
LSCC#1864
Ebay Stuff
Cameron gets a coin that he feels is MS65 but is told that it's ICG's policy to grade such a coin as MS67. Cameron truly believes it's 65. Does he sign off on the grade of 67 when he does not believe it's a 67?
OR
Cameron grades a coin MS65 and sends it to another grader and then to verification. The coin ultimately is bumped to 67 at the verification stage. No big deal--except that every time Cameron grades a coin 65 or 66, it's always bumped two points at the verification stage. How would he feel about that?
My point is that Cameron knows how to grade, yet it is being said here that ICG's modern grading is inflated. Will Cameron himself reverse the trend, or will he be forced to comply and rubberstamp grades that he does not believe in?
<< <i>i am so happy to hear this...because it means i have more coins to pick from than you ....therefore...if all other things are equal....you cannnot possibly compete with me and i can build a better set than you >>
All else being equal, perhaps. But I cannot presently afford to collect coins due to college bills
I would suppose that ICG initially came out trying to be pretty darn close to the standards of PCGS and NGC too. But just a few tenths of a grade off to gather business on "liner" coins. There's probably not room for a 3rd, top tier grading company and so they gave any chance of that model up long ago. At shows that I attend, ICG type coins are usually discounted by a full grade. I wouldn't as a rule buy them either unless discounted by a full grade. Just not worth the risk. For every one you make, several losers will bury you. And in a market that is much fussier now than 2-3 years ago, it is critical that what you have is as liquid as possible.
ICG falls behind ANACS, by a lot too imo, in the ranking of the top 4.
roadrunner
At MS 62, it's undergraded, in my opinion. I don't care that ICG undergraded it. If I were to sell this coin, the buyer will need to pay me what I want for it or I will keep it.
If I were to crack it out of its ICG holder and submit to PCGS, they would call it at least a MS 63. I'm almost sure of this but will never know because I'm not going to be foolish and do such a thing for $30-$40 cost for a coin that a dealer at a show once offered me $100 when it was raw.
I'm cool with ICG.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
I think that one way to explain Cameron's grading is to envision that ICG has one grading scale and PCGS has another. Presumably, NGC, SEGS, etc. have still more grading scales. So Cameron might look at a coin and think "It's a 65 using the PCGS scale, a 66 using the NGC scale, and a 67 using the ICG scale. I'm working for ICG, so the coin is a 67."
I think there is nothing wrong about the existence of different grading scales. I do think there is something wrong with using a particular grading scale and then trying to imply to customers that the coins are graded using another grading scale. For instance, ebayers who attempt to sell coins grading using a bottom feeder scale by touting PCGS prices strike me as pond scum.
In my view, what Cameron is doing is 100% OK. I truly envy all the knowledge he is gaining; I wish he and I could trade places. However, if we trade I want to keep my wife, my kids, and my salary if it's higher than what he is currently being paid.
Mark
<< <i>
Cameron gets a coin that he feels is MS65 but is told that it's ICG's policy to grade such a coin as MS67. Cameron truly believes it's 65. Does he sign off on the grade of 67 when he does not believe it's a 67?
OR
Cameron grades a coin MS65 and sends it to another grader and then to verification. The coin ultimately is bumped to 67 at the verification stage. No big deal--except that every time Cameron grades a coin 65 or 66, it's always bumped two points at the verification stage. How would he feel about that?
My point is that Cameron knows how to grade, yet it is being said here that ICG's modern grading is inflated. Will Cameron himself reverse the trend, or will he be forced to comply and rubberstamp grades that he does not believe in?
>>
He may have to rubberstamp coins and their standard may be inflated. He may not like that; that typically is where a young person's ambition kicks in and they work their butt off so they are more qualified to attain a better job. As long as his expertise is such that he rubberstamps knowing what the true grade would be if he were at a better grading house, it's rather irrelevant. He's being a company man and good employee--and the bigger companies will appreciate his pattern of loyalty when he goes in for the interview.
No, it's very unlikely Cameron could reverse the trend. I'm sure the higher-ups are aware of their lenient grading standards, have them in place for their own strange reasons, and require their graders to subscribe to their philosophy.
In any case, it's obvious you like the kid, and apologies if I chastened you too much.
<< <i>for a coin that a dealer at a show once offered me $100 when it was raw. >>
A dealer offered you $100 for an MS63 1880-S Morgan? Can I have this dealer's phone number?
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>I think that one way to explain Cameron's grading is to envision that ICG has one grading scale and PCGS has another. Presumably, NGC, SEGS, etc. have still more grading scales. So Cameron might look at a coin and think "It's a 65 using the PCGS scale, a 66 using the NGC scale, and a 67 using the ICG scale. I'm working for ICG, so the coin is a 67." Mark >>
I agree 100%. The graders at PCGS try to grade against their grading scale while NGC, ANACS, ICG, etc., all use their own scales. There is NO "correct" grading scale. What we'd all like is for each grader to "consistently" use their company's grading scale. Then we'd know which coins are worth a closer look (since it is the coin after all that counts
CoolKarma
MS Buffalo
MS 1951
<< <i>I think that one way to explain Cameron's grading is to envision that ICG has one grading scale and PCGS has another. Presumably, NGC, SEGS, etc. have still more grading scales. So Cameron might look at a coin and think "It's a 65 using the PCGS scale, a 66 using the NGC scale, and a 67 using the ICG scale. I'm working for ICG, so the coin is a 67 >>
Isn't that the same argument ACG used? At the very least it's disingenuous--all use the 1-70 Sheldon scale, yet they expect us to believe that they don't intend on THEIR MS67 being compared to PCGS' MS67? Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?
I disagree. The "correct" grading scale is the ANA grading scale. It's defined in their book. The biggest mistake they made was not copyrighting it (the grading definitions, that is), so anyone can come along and call whatever they want MS63, etc.
I agree with your comment that "different grading scales" was one argument that ACG used. Indeed, that's why I added that I think TPG companies using one scale but trying their best to imply that they use another scale are scum. (I also have oher thoughts on ACG, but I'll reserve these to myself.)
Barry:
I guess I sort of look at different grading scales as I do languages: There is no "correct" language. There are dominant languages--currently perhaps English and maybe in the future some sort of Chinese--but even so different nations still use different languages. So, I'd argue that there is no "correct" grading scale, though there are dominant grading scales--currently perhaps PCGS or the ANA's scale. Different TPG companies then use different scales. But I don't think that we can say that either the PCGS scale or the ANA's scale (or the PCGS/ANA scale, if you think they are the same) are "correct" in the sense that other scales are wrong and will remain wrong forever in precisely the same way that we cannot say that a language other than English is wrong.
Mark
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Yes. He was captivated by the lovely gold and russett tones.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
I have read this thread and I can't believe some of the comments made. Everyone believes that ICG overgrades because of the perception made about that company when they started by giving out a large amount of PR70's and some MS 70's on modern coins. Then everyone has an opinion about how Cameron grades for ICG. It would be great to hear Cameron tell us in his own words, but unfortunately we realize he can't do that. The perception about ICG grading is a direct result of how the market treats their slabs. Grading, as we all know, is subjective to begin with. Once we add to that the perception that each third party grader has different grading rules we really can go bonkers. Bottom line is, if you like the COIN and the price is what YOU believe is fair, then buy it. If it is the grade you are buying, then you had better be a great grader yourself or you will probably be sorry later. JMHO. Steve
>>
Assuming that the coins were ****sight unseen,**** had the same asking price, and you had to buy one or the other:
Would you buy a 1999 Delaware quarter, MS70, in a PCGS slab or an ICG slab?