Would like your input on interviews with the grading services for future Coin World article
Prethen
Posts: 3,454 ✭✭✭
After the ANA is all but history, I plan on setting up phone interviews with the top tier services (PCGS/NGC/ICG/ANACS) to discuss the overall environment of grading modern coins today. There's a lot of potential ground to cover. I already have a pretty decent list of questions I want to ask the lead graders/finalizers at each company. I don't want to print the list here because I don't want to prejudice anyone as to what I intended to cover and force any line of thinking. However, you folks might very well think of some things that I haven't. The main emphasis on this article are modern coins (in fact, one of the questions for the services is what do they consider a "modern" coin. My initial intention was to focus on the era of coinage where the mint has been minting an essentially, flawless product (1980's+, 90's+, ???).
This is not a "witch hunt", so I have no intention of asking any hostile or "leading" questions. I'd like to solicit for serious input of potential questions and material to cover by this article. Beth Deisher (Coin World's editor) has already noted that this will probably be a multi-part series due to the amount of potential material. She makes no commitment to picking up the article, but I think this could be quite an interesting one so it's likely she'll want to publish it. Even if you think your question is dumb, put it down, it might make for some great material for the article and/or background information. I do understand there's some decent camaraderie between the services and they tend to share some information. You might want to keep this in mind for various questions.
Please separate your questions by a blank line so it's easy for me to understand how to separate the concepts you wish to relay. Plus, it will help me with cutting and pasting to my interview documentation.
By the way, I do not have any pre-arranged contacts with any of the graders or the services. If you happen to have an "in" with someone at a service to facilitate getting me the interview, I would appreciate any help in this regard. Otherwise, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that PCGS and NGC will be fairly receptive to this type of article. If they're not, the article will die before it even gets started. I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to talk to either Keith Love or JP Martin at ICG and I have a gut feeling that ANACS shouldn't be too resistant.
I have a HUGE amount of work ahead of me in getting this whole thing together, so I have no idea at this point when it will be done. I'll try to keep y'all up-to-date when the interviews are finished and I'm ready (or maybe even done) getting the material into an article.
Thanks for help in advance,
Bruce
This is not a "witch hunt", so I have no intention of asking any hostile or "leading" questions. I'd like to solicit for serious input of potential questions and material to cover by this article. Beth Deisher (Coin World's editor) has already noted that this will probably be a multi-part series due to the amount of potential material. She makes no commitment to picking up the article, but I think this could be quite an interesting one so it's likely she'll want to publish it. Even if you think your question is dumb, put it down, it might make for some great material for the article and/or background information. I do understand there's some decent camaraderie between the services and they tend to share some information. You might want to keep this in mind for various questions.
Please separate your questions by a blank line so it's easy for me to understand how to separate the concepts you wish to relay. Plus, it will help me with cutting and pasting to my interview documentation.
By the way, I do not have any pre-arranged contacts with any of the graders or the services. If you happen to have an "in" with someone at a service to facilitate getting me the interview, I would appreciate any help in this regard. Otherwise, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that PCGS and NGC will be fairly receptive to this type of article. If they're not, the article will die before it even gets started. I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to talk to either Keith Love or JP Martin at ICG and I have a gut feeling that ANACS shouldn't be too resistant.
I have a HUGE amount of work ahead of me in getting this whole thing together, so I have no idea at this point when it will be done. I'll try to keep y'all up-to-date when the interviews are finished and I'm ready (or maybe even done) getting the material into an article.
Thanks for help in advance,
Bruce
0
Comments
<< <i> Beth Deisher (Coin World's editor) has already noted that this will probably be a multi-part series due to the amount of potential material. She makes no commitment to picking up the article, but I think this could be quite an interesting one so it's likely she'll want to publish it. >>
Here's a very important idea. Make sure you get a commitment to publish before you put so much effort into the article(s). You shouldn't have to do all that work on spec.
1. Any company still investigating computer grading possibilities, or has it finally been given up on?
2. Are there any changes forthcoming in the slabs themselves (ie, NGC multi)? Like smaller slabs (or more album friendly), edge viewing, etc.
3. What new designations are forthcoming (ie, FS, FB, etc)? Any consideration given to just a"full stike" or "full details" designation for all series (from QDB Coin World articles)?
4. Any possibility of an industry agreed upon grading standard ever emerging?
5. RE #4, why the hell not?!?!?!
Just some ideas, there have got to be more/better out there.
I'm curious why pop reports don't always seem to reflect the observed incidence of moderns. Certainly
much of it is caused by coins being graded "on the curve" and market forces making some high grade
coins not worth the slabbing fees, but are there other factors at work?
* What do you like best about your job?
* What personal (not company mind you) professional accomplishment are you most proud of?
* What do you see as your (both personal and company) biggest challenges in the next year (or two or five)?
* Where would you like to see your company in five years?
* If you had five minutes to talk to the general collecting public what would you like to say to them?
* Same question, but the audience is new collectors who just started collecting.
* Same question, but the audience is your major critics within the hobby who wish you would fold up shop and go away.
* From a collectors point of view, why should I choose your company to submit to?
* From a collectors point of view, why should I choose to buy coins that have been graded by your company vs. your competitors?
what percentage of your biz is post 1955 coins??
why are'nt there many if any proof/ms69 70 anx coins?
i think accourding to the ana standards there is no such thing as proof/ms70? so why this grade?? and how do you define a proof/ms70 grade in words??
what proof/ms 70 coin metal is hardest to get this top grade?? copper nickel silver gold platinum??
I'm interested in the apparently (to me) different grading standards between "classic" and "modern" coins of similar size and designs. The Mercury and Roosevelt dimes are a perfect example.
While an MS-66 Merc tends to be a very nice coin when it comes to strike, luster, and absence of marks, an MS-66 Roosey tends to be fairly so-so.
Since this may be only my impression, should you choose to go this route, the questions might go something like:
1. Describe how grading standards between classic and modern coins may be different.
2. (Assuming they don't agree with my assessment...which is more than likely). Don't you believe there is a general difference and easing of standards between classic and modern coins? Are the mark/luster/strike requirements the same for (for instance) Merc and Roosey dimes?
Go from there. If they say the standards are essentially the same, I led you down a dead end. If they state a difference, it may lead to additional questions.
Tom
<< <i>I'm always fascinated by the perceived changing of grading standards across time- when collectors feel things are "tightening up" or "loosening up" at a particular service- I'm not sure how to bring just one question out of this, but I'm curious (since this is about moderns) about the different companies' philosophies on giving out 69's and 70's- are there strict protocols on percentage of 69's vs. percentage of 70's..... if those numbers have changed through the years.... why they've decided to give out 70's in the first place...... I'm also curious about how they feel about grading moderns for coin tv shows, and if they think having modern slabs promoted heavily is a good thing for their reputations.......
Do you really think that you'll get a straight answer? Of course they'll claim their grading standards never change.
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
"newsman":
<< <i>Here's a very important idea. Make sure you get a commitment to publish before you put so much effort into the article(s). You shouldn't have to do all that work on spec. >>
You bring up a good point and one that I was concerned with myself. I already have three items published with Coin World and I really like working with Beth. Different publications work differently with their freelancers and Coin World isn't out of the ordinary by not committing before seeing the material. Beth expressed sincere interest and even offered some suggestions for the article. She seemed to be fairly confident that if I deliver the same type of quality I have to her in the past this article could prove to be extremely interesting for her readers. I agree. I'm getting more and more interested to start the interview process. And, by the way, for any of you who think I'm doing this for the money....you've got to be kidding!