Can someone who was around in 1977 put some color around Tom DeLorey’s decision to add intermediate
Longacre
Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
I was reading the QDB nickel book, and he provided some interesting information in the section called “Numbers Become Very Popular”. He writes,
“Then, during the crazy, hectic days of the 1960’s, the market became white hot. … As prices achieved high values and as hundreds of thousands of newcomers came into the field, there was an increasing demand for precision grading.”
In 1977, The Official ANA Grading Standards put an end to at least some of the confusion. Kenneth E. Bressett, using information contributed by many collectors and dealers, gave definitions for each of the numbers, with the definitions being different for each series or type. … In the Mint State category, the divisions of MS60, MS65, and MS70 were used. When Thomas K. DeLorey was hired by ANACS to start the commercial grading of coins for a fee, these were the divisions used. However, the market demanded additional levels, and DeLorey arbitrarily added MS63 and MS67. These levels were used for about six months, at which time John Jay Pittman, a member of the ANA board of directors, said that this could not be done, as the board had not approved. “I told them that they had better do so, and retroactively, and they did,” Delorey recalled.””
***********
Does anyone have any color behind this exchange between DeLorey and Pittman about grading levels? How big of a numismatic controversy was this? I can imagine the scene—one of the “suits” from the ANA board trying to put a young whipper-snapper in his place, and the young punk explaining to the old geezer that it was a new world of numismatics and he’d better get used to it. Was anyone around in 1977 to further explain how controversial this was?
“Then, during the crazy, hectic days of the 1960’s, the market became white hot. … As prices achieved high values and as hundreds of thousands of newcomers came into the field, there was an increasing demand for precision grading.”
In 1977, The Official ANA Grading Standards put an end to at least some of the confusion. Kenneth E. Bressett, using information contributed by many collectors and dealers, gave definitions for each of the numbers, with the definitions being different for each series or type. … In the Mint State category, the divisions of MS60, MS65, and MS70 were used. When Thomas K. DeLorey was hired by ANACS to start the commercial grading of coins for a fee, these were the divisions used. However, the market demanded additional levels, and DeLorey arbitrarily added MS63 and MS67. These levels were used for about six months, at which time John Jay Pittman, a member of the ANA board of directors, said that this could not be done, as the board had not approved. “I told them that they had better do so, and retroactively, and they did,” Delorey recalled.””
***********
Does anyone have any color behind this exchange between DeLorey and Pittman about grading levels? How big of a numismatic controversy was this? I can imagine the scene—one of the “suits” from the ANA board trying to put a young whipper-snapper in his place, and the young punk explaining to the old geezer that it was a new world of numismatics and he’d better get used to it. Was anyone around in 1977 to further explain how controversial this was?
Always took candy from strangers
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
0
Comments
Kidding!
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
TD
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
split grading going on. Not all gems were created equal and the nice
ones commanded a stiff premium at least in the case of Morgans. This
was perhaps even more pronounced at the lower end of the scale
where near gems (especially iff clean) could bring a premium to MS-60.
Of course in those days there was little interest in "color" and most
of the coins were dipped.
<< <i>Tom - In retrospect, was Pittman right to oppose the additional grades? >>
No, because their attitude was that because they had done the grading guide one way, that that was the right and only way to do it. Imagine sorting a BU bag of 1881-S dollare into different grades, if your only choices are MS-60, MS-65 and MS-70.
The options were to do it wrong, do it right or don't do it at all. I chose to do it right.
TD