Options
For $50 American Buffalos & PCGS - What is outta wack here?
COINB0Y
Posts: 4,505
What's the deal here?
When you look at the numbers below which organization is skewed? BOTH?
This is a huge descrepency with the grades!
PCGS:
POP shows there are 55,910 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 3,439 or 6.15% got MS70 = $1,350 in Pricing Guide.
POP shows there are 6,710 - 2006 PR Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 1,315 or 19.5% got PR70DC = $2,500 in Pricing Guide.
NGC:
POP shows there are 62,360 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 30,090 or 48.25% got MS70
POP shows there are 13,715 - 2006 PR Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 6,934 or 50.55% got PF70 (Includes "FS")
______________________________________________________________________
For year 2006, 62,620 Customers Go to PCGS vs. 76,075 Customers Go to NGC - that is a 21% difference.
PCGS started the business, but it is getting blasted in the Market place because of the Grading differences.
When the Proof Buffalo Singles and the new Proof Buffalo Sets come out in 2007, what will happen? Does NGC get more?
After reading the PCGS results Year over Year with REPORT of a declining customer base, what you see above and what is going on with the low POPs of 70's for the Modern grading with the Plats/Golds, PCGS is facing some serious choices here in how the customer is receiving the 'product' that they provide.
----------------------------------------
Look at the Buffalos as just one example as to WHY there is a decline in the demand for services!
"PCGS Units
Coins authenticated and graded by PCGS decreased by approximately 21% in the second quarter of fiscal year 2007 to 281,400 units, or 43% of the total units authenticated and graded by the Company, from 357,000 units in the same period in fiscal 2006. Coins authenticated and graded increased by 1% to 762,700 units or 50% of the total units authenticated and graded, in the first half of fiscal year 2007 from 752,000 units in the six month period ended December 31, 2005."
When you look at the numbers below which organization is skewed? BOTH?
This is a huge descrepency with the grades!
PCGS:
POP shows there are 55,910 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 3,439 or 6.15% got MS70 = $1,350 in Pricing Guide.
POP shows there are 6,710 - 2006 PR Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 1,315 or 19.5% got PR70DC = $2,500 in Pricing Guide.
NGC:
POP shows there are 62,360 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 30,090 or 48.25% got MS70
POP shows there are 13,715 - 2006 PR Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 6,934 or 50.55% got PF70 (Includes "FS")
______________________________________________________________________
For year 2006, 62,620 Customers Go to PCGS vs. 76,075 Customers Go to NGC - that is a 21% difference.
PCGS started the business, but it is getting blasted in the Market place because of the Grading differences.
When the Proof Buffalo Singles and the new Proof Buffalo Sets come out in 2007, what will happen? Does NGC get more?
After reading the PCGS results Year over Year with REPORT of a declining customer base, what you see above and what is going on with the low POPs of 70's for the Modern grading with the Plats/Golds, PCGS is facing some serious choices here in how the customer is receiving the 'product' that they provide.
----------------------------------------
Look at the Buffalos as just one example as to WHY there is a decline in the demand for services!
"PCGS Units
Coins authenticated and graded by PCGS decreased by approximately 21% in the second quarter of fiscal year 2007 to 281,400 units, or 43% of the total units authenticated and graded by the Company, from 357,000 units in the same period in fiscal 2006. Coins authenticated and graded increased by 1% to 762,700 units or 50% of the total units authenticated and graded, in the first half of fiscal year 2007 from 752,000 units in the six month period ended December 31, 2005."
0
Comments
The decline in submissions is due in part to marketers seeking the easier 70 grade instead of the slim chance 70 grade. Look at most of the mass market coin sites and see what grading service they have in stock. NGC has become the fast food franchise of the coin hobby. Good for NGC coffers but bad for NCG's reputation.
I am glad PCGS has held the line.
That is why I became a submitting member here and not across the street.
To be a truly Impartial Grading Company vs. Angering the Customers when they look what's happening across the street.
The Problem is, Money usually beats out Integrity every time.
<< <i>The market feels PCGS has stricter standards and it shows up in the higher $ value of a PCGS graded coin.
The decline in submissions is due in part to marketers seeking the easier 70 grade instead of the slim chance 70 grade. Look at most of the mass market coin sites and see what grading service they have in stock. NGC has become the fast food franchise of the coin hobby. Good for NGC coffers but bad for NCG's reputation.
I am glad PCGS has held the line.
That is why I became a submitting member here and not across the street. >>
You said it sweet and succinct!!!!!!!!!
Without question...........................
And if anyone wants a PCGS Gold Buff PR70DCAM I'll let mine go for $100 off the price guide - and throw in free delivery
up in the higher $ value of a PCGS graded coin. "
//////////////////////////////////////////
While there are many reasons that a coin might sell for
more/less on any given day, PCGS' standards being
perceived as stricter does provide an edge for price
appreciation in the short term.
I do not know if PCGS can continue to lose market
share to the more liberal graders, and still keep its
services priced as attractively as they currently are.
POP shows there are 55,910 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 3,439 or 6.15% got MS70
NGC:
POP shows there are 62,360 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 30,090 or 48.25% got MS70
///////////////////////////////////////////
If/when those numbers are widely disbursed, I would not like to
be trying to sell ANY NGC 70s.
<< <i>"PCGS:
POP shows there are 55,910 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at PCGS, of that 3,439 or 6.15% got MS70
NGC:
POP shows there are 62,360 - 2006 MS Buffs that have sought grading at NGC, of that 30,090 or 48.25% got MS70
///////////////////////////////////////////
If/when those numbers are widely disbursed, I would not like to
be trying to sell ANY NGC 70s. >>
I agree if you're looking at comparing one PCGS 70 to one NGC 70. The differences in pop from both a percentage and absolute numbers perspective is staggering. However, for large dealers that do bulk submissions, the more important numbers are the overall profit from selling a group of 69s and 70s. With NGC you'll get more 70s and the higher quantity may make up for a lower individual price when done in volume.
It is my contention that those who feel it necessary to post negative comments about 70s in general, should post those thoughts about buying an ngc 70 that has a premium over a pcgs 69. Now there a knowledgable person should find the arguement for the unreasonable overexpenditure for the 70 grade.
From the numbers below, one can see that most ngc 70s would be pcgs 69s, so to me at least, it seems clear that any premium for the ngc 70 over the pcgs 69 is where the "wasted money for the 70 premium" actually lies.
The reason more large marketers go to ngc for their 70s is so they can say that the coin is perfect, and graded by a top tier service. The error in judgement is accepted because ngc enjoys a "top tier status" label, in general. But this status is definately not deserved when it comes to 70s, and this should be noted. However, if the mass marketed ngc 70s make it into the hands of less knowledgable collectors, they probably will never know the difference until, unfortunately, they go to sell, when they will find that the premium that they have paid disappears.
The concerns I've seen seem to be that there is no long term track record for 70s holding high premiums, especially since many people cannot visually see differences between 69s and 70s. This is a valid concern simply because TPGs and registries are not very old so no track record exists. As long as purchasers of PCGS 70s at high premiums are aware of that, I think it's fine as people should be able to spend their money on what they want.
<< <i>The concerns I've seen seem to be that there is no long term track record for condition rarities holding high premiums when many people cannot visually see differences between 69s and 70s. >>
I agree to a point about the first part of this statement, and it depends on how long "long term" is. If "long term" is longer than the TPGs have been in existance, obviously this part of the comment is correct, but if we are talking about 5-10 years, then there is a track record to be readily seen. The second part of the statement, however, shouldn't be in the same sentence, in my opinion, (recognzing that "many people" was used) unless qualified by "I' can't see differences..." because there definately are people who have a very high degree of success submitting coins who absolutely do know, and who absolutely can see differences between 69s and 70s, and that is simply a fact.
ps. It should be also recognized that there are obviously premiums for every grade above the next grade below, and there are "many" people who can't see the differences between those grades either, however some premium to the next grade is, in general, always accepted. I don't know why, specifically, the 70 grade should be considered any different.
<< <i>
<< <i>The concerns I've seen seem to be that there is no long term track record for condition rarities holding high premiums when many people cannot visually see differences between 69s and 70s. >>
I agree to a point about the first part of this statement, and it depends on how long "long term" is. If "long term" is longer than the TPGs have been in existance, obviously this part of the comment is correct, but if we are talking about 5-10 years, then there is a track record to be readily seen. The second part of the statement, however, shouldn't be in the same sentence, in my opinion, (recognzing that "many people" was used) unless qualified by "I' can't see differences..." because there definately are people who have a very high degree of success submitting coins who absolutely do know, and who absolutely can see differences between 69s and 70s, and that is simply a fact. >>
I didn't qualify the statement with "I" because I wasn't referring to myself. I was referring to the people who post that here and at other forums. Regarding people who can distinguish between what PCGS will rate a 69 vs a 70, I also think it's important to consider whether this is can be done with the naked eye or requires magnification. If the people who can distinguish between a 69 and a 70 can do it with the naked eye, I think there is a stronger case for 70s retaining their premium than if magnification is required. Obviously, the premium may persist even if magnification is required to distinguish, as in the diamond market, but the case would be weaker.
The other very important aspect of this, IMO, is whether top TPGs can keep their reputations in light of the crack out game and the increasing prevalence of maxed out and over-graded coins. If people start to lose some confidence in TPGs because of an increasing number of over-graded coins, the premium for 70s may also be diminished.
Also, preliminarily, I think that those with experience determining a 69 from a seventy 70 can do so with or without magnification, and I wouldn't want to change the thread to a discussion about the use of magnification, but, then, I would say that if the magnification, if used at all, is greater that than used by the grading service, then I agree, but if magnification is used, and is equivelent to that used by the grading service, then magnification should be a moot point.
for a lower individual price when done in volume."
////////////////////////////////////////
It MUCH MORE than "makes up" for it.
NGC is clearly engaged in the poisoning of the newby market,
and making its highest-volume customers rich in the process.
"If you’ve been wondering where the 2007 proof gold Buffalo one-ounce coins are, well, I’ll tell you. They are tentatively due out from the Mint as of April 27. A production schedule change moved them from Feb. 5 release to the late April timing, we’re told. "---NN
<< <i>The crazy thing is if you take 100 69s,and 100 70s,crack them out,they all are alike.PLASTIC sells,no matter who has graded it.People think i am nuts for paying the same money for a one of a kind A+ Gem Rainbow Morgan.Go figure.
I feel the same way
I am not posting NEGATIVE PCGS, I am just pointing out the corelation between the staggering difference of the grading that is going on between the two companies over two coins and directly attributing this information to the REAL PCGS customer drop in the year over year reporting.
PCGS (Collectors) is paying the price in how it grades by business going elsewhere and a price in the Market by the way the shares are being shorted and sold off. (It is headed $9.)
No one would have ever thought that third party grading itself would come under such examination because of the opposite ends of the spectrum grading underway between the two largest players. The miserly eeking out of 70's at PCGS are just as harmful as the flood of 70's in Bulk at NGC.
How many graders (people) are we talking about between the (2) companies? 3-4 guys/gals each?
I say combine the two companies graders into a pool, and put the names in a hat and pick who goes where for 6 months and visa-versa. That will average it out.
I agree with this...like about 100%. It appeals to my way of thinking.
there definately are people who have a very high degree of success submitting coins who absolutely do know, and who absolutely can see differences between 69s and 70s, and that is simply a fact. It should be also recognized that there are obviously premiums for every grade above the next grade below, and there are "many" people who can't see the differences between those grades either, however some premium to the next grade is, in general, always accepted. I don't know why, specifically, the 70 grade should be considered any different.
Same poster...and this guy is sounding like a genius to me. I agree 100% again.
PCGS (Collectors) is paying the price in how it grades by business going elsewhere and a price in the Market by the way the shares are being shorted and sold off. (It is headed $9.) The miserly eeking out of 70's at PCGS are just as harmful as the flood of 70's in Bulk at NGC.
These comments by a different poster, however, I disagree with flatly. IMO the relative difficulty of getting a 70 @ PCGS does not portend the end of their reign as the #1 TPG. In fact I could make a pretty good case, that their reluctance to participate in the 'let's give 'em lots of 70's' free for all, actually solidifies their position and credibility as the #1 TPG. I think any call for them to 'loosen up' the top grade tier is misplaced. IMO, 1-2% of the pristine mint products earning 70's is about right as far as I am concerned.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
I knew it would happen.
Lou
ANA Life-Member
<< <i>You all say PCGS's grades are stricter, does that mean the MS/PR 70's are MS/PR 71's?
Lou >>
no, it means ngc 70`s are 69`s.
Lou
ANA Life-Member
<< <i>If you can tell the difference between most of the recent issues MS69/70's your amazing.
Lou >>
Its not hard, you just have to know what to look for, look for a perfect coin with perfect rims and rim definition. PERFECT