This thread is kinda funny. The coins are still the same, and yet we lament the fact that they are all worth less now. Perhaps they were overgraded before and are now properly graded? Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. If I had coins I felt were improperly graded, I'd want them re-graded. Because I collect coins, not 'values' and I want them represented for how I believe them to be. Did the value go up or down? Well, obviously the perception of value did... for the kool aid folks and the ebay buyers, but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them. Honestly, I hope most (educated) buyers still look at the coin and pay based on thier evaluation of the grade of the coin, not purely on the plastic! And I still don't buy the PCGS vs NGC good and evil thing. If you look at all the big auction, there sure seems to be as many NGC coins selling for strong money as PCGS. The difference seems to be in the sight unseen or ebay spaces where less educated buyers buy based on the plastic and pay more for one versus the other. When buying big coins, I am sure that the buyers are not paying a premium for the plastic, but are buying the coin 100% of the time. If a collector prefers one holder over another, who cares if they cross to it. To me, its a waste of money, but I don't see any issue with it. I am 100% comfortable with ANACS, NGC, and PCGS if I want an encapsulated coin. They are all perfectly cabable of grading well, and at the end of the day, it should be about the coin, not the holder.
I say BS! Lets see some links to these crossovers. How about some before photos of the coins in the PCGS slabs and after photos in the NGC slabs.
You claim to be doing research on crossovers "It's nice to do comparisons." If you are comparing grading companies you obviously need photos for your records. These "comparisons" are costing you a lot money. I would think you would want to remember these costly downgrades.
<< <i>I say BS! Lets see some links to these crossovers. How about some before photos of the coins in the PCGS slabs and after photos in the NGC slabs.
You claim to be doing research on crossovers "It's nice to do comparisons." If you are comparing grading companies you obviously need photos for your records. These "comparisons" are costing you a lot money. I would think you would want to remember these costly downgrades.
Why would anyone assume this is SPAM? I don't see this as a ringing endorsement of NGC so much as proof that grading is and always will be subjective at some level, and that one should expect to see one point changes on occassion when crossing. Frankly, you could crack and resubmit to PCGS and get the same results as this cross. That is the game people! A game coin collectors are playing to their utmost... and then they wonder why someone comes along and says they are going to add a sticker to support the grade. Natural evolution of the game. The next absurd step in an already absurd game. Holdering a coin to protect it, authenticate it, and get a grade opinion is just fine. But it remains a grade OPINION! Haven't we all figured that out? The perceived value change is a joke, really, played on the collector who pays more for it after it has been upgraded, and perpetrated by the one who continually re-submits it.
Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade. If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe!
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade. If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
Which coin are you talking about?
The 1906 PR64 actually failed to cross twice before at PR64 at NGC, so I just crossed at any grade the third time around.
Actually, I can see where Bmarker is coming from. I personally tend to think the OP is on the level.
But certain of OP's answers do at least open the possibility of this being a hidden agenda thread.
For example, the OP's cool and calm demeanor in the face of some pretty heavy browbeating for his actions. That makes me wonder. Seems like most of us would be more reluctant to own up to such folly on the board.
One thing is for certain tho: This PROVES, once and for all, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that NGC grades tighter than PCGS!
"Wars are really ugly! They're dirty and they're cold. I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole." Mary
Actually, I can see where Bmarker is coming from. I personally tend to think the OP is on the level.
But certain of OP's answers do at least open the possibility of this being a hidden agenda thread.
For example, the OP's cool and calm demeanor in the face of some pretty heavy browbeating for his actions. That makes me wonder. Seems like most of us would be more reluctant to own up to such folly on the board.
One thing is for certain tho: This PROVES, once and for all, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that NGC grades tighter than PCGS! >>
Not true. only in certain situations. See my post of 10:39 today
It's funny with coins. Either a guy is a crook, a spammer, a fool or he sucks. So does anyone know how long these "freebies" are good for and can they crossover like giftcards ?
<< <i>It's funny with coins. Either a guy is a crook, a spammer, a fool or he sucks. So does anyone know how long these "freebies" are good for and can they crossover like giftcards ? >>
To clarify
it comes with the membership, just like the PCGS Platinum
And yet another link shows that the OP had a downgrade on another coin from NGC to PCGS...
I really don't see an agenda outside of pointing out what an uncertain game crossing is.
What is fun is watching the panic ridden responses of those that can not conceptualize crossing FROM PCGS to any other service. And folks wonder why the Kool Aid reference all the time? I have a lot of properly graded coins in various different holders. I'd never waste a cent crossing them as I have zero intention of selling them or playing that particular game.
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade. If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
Which coin are you talking about?
The 1906 PR64 actually failed to cross twice before at PR64 at NGC, so I just crossed at any grade the third time around. >>
This is what I don't get. The coin failed to cross twice! So then you cross at any grade. It looks like you were determined to lose 200 to 300 dollars. Why? If the story doesn't make sense.......What is one supposed to believe?
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic.
<< <i>Because I collect coins, not 'values' >>
Then maybe you are one of the few who doesn't care about dates and mintmarks...and of course, the ability to sell your coins at some, possibly unforseen, point in the future.
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact.
Positive BST transactions with: too many names to list! 36 at last count.
<< <i>unless the OP also believed the coin overgraded at the PCGS grade? And wanted an accurate grade? >>
If so he would have submitted it to cross at any grade the first time. >>
Fair enough. Can't answer that one. >>
Right.
The first and second times, it didn't cross because of "Hairlines". So I said "What the Heck" and crossed at any grade the third time.
I have noticed that on crossovers, there tends to be a greater emphasis on defects compared to positive attributes. That is perhaps one reason that "raw" submissions are perceived to have a better chance of a higher grade.
IMO, I would make my experiments less expensive. Take some modern stuff to test the waters of crossover-especially when taking PCGS coins to another service. You are not the first to do something like this to prove that not all is perfect in the numismatic world nor are they perfect in any other world. I applaud you for sharing this information but if you want to repeat this experiment in the future, do not use coins in PCGS slabs that will suffer a significant impact in value due to being downgraded such as the 2 proof coins you took it in the shorts on.
Charter member of CA, Coinaholics Anonymous-6/7/2003 Kewpie Doll award-10/29/2007 Successful BST transactions with Coinboy and Wondercoin.
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact. >>
I don't accept that fact. What I do accept is that based on people's perceptions, PCGS coins are generally worth more in the same grade.
I accept that some coins in PCGS holders sell for more, but generally reject this concept when it comes to high value properly graded coins. Look at big auction archives, and you will find that NGC seems to have an awful lot of big coins in their holders, selling for nice premiums, not discounts. Why? Well it seems simple: those that spend larger dollars on coins tend to buy the coin, not the holder, and pay the value the coin drives, not the holder. To truly think that the same coin graded the same in two different legit holders SHOULD be priced diferently strikes me as the worst kind of insanity. We do collect coins right? Holders are just chunks of plastic. How the heck can a holder change the value of a coin in reality? Perception... sure... sadly sometimes perception changes and price may follow, but that is really stupidity. That argument leads you to this statement: buy only non PCGS coins and sell only PCGS coins. But then... who will buy those PCGS coins, since they know the same trick... Gods this seems stupid to me.
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic.
<< <i>Because I collect coins, not 'values' >>
Then maybe you are one of the few who doesn't care about dates and mintmarks...and of course, the ability to sell your coins at some, possibly unforseen, point in the future.
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact. >>
I really can't argue with you because I think differently than you do. Of course I care about mint marks. That is just plain stupid. Mint marks are part of the coin, NOT THE PLASTIC. Yes, my coins have value, and I realize that. However, that value is not associative with the holder, but the COIN! Have we really all missed that point. Grade coins yourself, and pay what they are worth. Plastic gives an opinion... one that is sometimes flawed. If you look at a coin and think Nice MS63, would you pay MS65 money because the holder says it is? It seems you might based on the above. That is insane! When I see a coin in an NGC holder, I most certainly don't wonder why it is in a PCGS holder. Many people believe as strongly that NGC is the one grading properly, not PCGS. Go to their boards and read about it. Who is right? Who cares. I don't care. Great coins can sit in any legit holder (or, gasp... RAW). Yes, some people sell great coins raw. Do I worry about selling my coins? Nope. I don't I collect coins among other things. Some too obscure to ever resell. The collection goes to the kids, not as an asset, but as something of mine. They can throw them away, sell them, or keep them. That is their choice. Coins are not part of my inheritance or other financial plans. You know, coins were traded long before plastic came along. Amazingly, people had to look at the coin and evaluate it, and pay what it was worth. Still a good practice if you ask me.
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade. If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
I don't cross expecting a coin will jump a grade.
And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated.
I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying it's the way it is. We shouldn't be buying plastic, I agree with that. We should look at the coin and evaluate it solely on it's merit, but we both know that's not always how it goes. I'm just stating what most people know to be true. In a perfect world.....
Positive BST transactions with: too many names to list! 36 at last count.
Perception one; Those who "buy the coin and not the plastic" have greater collections than perception two; those who "buy the plastic and can't grade coins"!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying it's the way it is. We shouldn't be buying plastic, I agree with that. We should look at the coin and evaluate it solely on it's merit, but we both know that's not always how it goes. I'm just stating what most people know to be true. In a perfect world..... >>
Yeah, your right... but I still think it a form of insanity... or simply brilliant marketing. You take the SAME item and give it two different labels on the 'packaging' and with one label it is worth more than the other. That is a simple reality I can't abide by. It makes one think that only a crazy person would buy a PCGS coin versus spending their time buying those NGC and ANAC's values. I will not pay more for a PCGS coin versus another holder. If I found a coin I liked in an ANACS holder, I'd pay what it was worth, and it will never be crossed over. Never. Every coin that hits my collection comes off the market for my life, adn whomever wonders why they are all not in PCGS holders after I am dead can figure it out for themselves. They are in the holders they are in because they are properlly graded and I have no reason to change them. None.
Perception one; Those who "buy the coin and not the plastic" have greater collections than perception two; those who "buy the plastic and can't grade coins"!
Leo >>
Yes, but those who buy the plastic have bigger 'book value' apperantly. I'll stick with my nice collection in many different (okay, no NTC or SGS) holders All joking aside, it has nothing to do with greater collections... My point is that the collection has nothing to do with the holder. Most of the greatest collections were raw.
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade. If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
I don't cross expecting a coin will jump a grade.
And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated. >>
WOW! DUDE. You're in your own little universe. Does reality even fit in your little world? You send it to NGC 3 times, and let it cross at any grade, knowing that it would cross at a lower grade. So it crosses at a lower grade (losing about $350 in value) and you say QUOTE
"And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated."
TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic.
Positive BST transactions with: too many names to list! 36 at last count.
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
But the concept never really changed! The advent of plastic (and a guarantee) only ushered in the susceptable.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Actually, all you have to do to see the value of a pcgs slab over an ngc slab for a given high dollar coin is find that coin in the Heritage archives and compare realized prices. Prepare to have your eyes opened, tb.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Actually, all you have to do to see the value of a pcgs slab over an ngc slab for a given high dollar coin is find that coin in the Heritage archives and compare realized prices. Prepare to have your eyes opened, tb. >>
True but it's very likely the higher priced PCGS cert. coin was seen in person versus the bidding over the internet for a NGC!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
I suppose it is sort of an obvious statement... and the intent was only to say that great collections are, and always will be based on great coins. The plastic is secondary. The way of the world is to encapsulate... I'm guilty of that too. I prefer to find a coin in plastic, to protect the coin, and I like the way it looks. But, the value stays with the coin. I think that PCGS has been more consistent over the long term (I don't know about accurate, but I'll grant consistent) therefore that creates a comfort that drives higher prices in sight unseen. Many coins from those old time raw collections are in PCGS plastic, many in NGC, and they won't be crossed in many cases because it becomes irrelevant in cases of great rarity. Sight unseen is not a concept that applies to rarities. I think both grade about the same, with the exception of modern proofs which NGC seems to like to give 70's to and PCGS does not. I'd not spend money on a modern proof in either grade... I prefer actual rarity over conditional rarity, but I can see where in that instance, the NGC coin will sell for the price of a one grade down PCGS. However, in classics, I tend to not believe this is the same. I think that 10 coins graded 10 times by each firm would show about the same overall in terms of average grades assigned. AND still be the same coin irregardless of all that It certainly is a good topic to get up and grouse about!
and my other point with the raw comment is just about how far we have come. There are many people who don't believe you could create a world class collection without plastic to point out the right coins. Before plastic there were great collections, some of the greatest, assembled. Now those coins reside in plastic to be sure, but they were great coins long before the plastic told us so.
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic. >>
While looking at my safe deposit box (well, the coins inside it), I discovered I had one in a NGC slab. I really did not realize that for a while. Frankly, the slabs coins are in are just to me oversized novelty holders 99.99+% of the time. They're worth the same in PCGS plastic, or NGC plastic, or ANACS plastic, or ACG plastic (really!), or with an old ANACS certificate, or in PCGS plastic with a CAC sticker, or completely raw. Hell, in 99.99+% of the time, raw is better, for now you can know something about the edge of the coin. (Hint: the big two slabbers can be wrong about coin weights even when it matters, and can either miss or not bother describing a partial collar.)
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
You do know some as... err person like me will now ask you what percentage of the Garrett collection is now slabbed for you to back up this claim.
Comments
If a collector prefers one holder over another, who cares if they cross to it. To me, its a waste of money, but I don't see any issue with it. I am 100% comfortable with ANACS, NGC, and PCGS if I want an encapsulated coin. They are all perfectly cabable of grading well, and at the end of the day, it should be about the coin, not the holder.
<< <i>Oh no... could one service be tighter than another? Say it isn't so....
My thoughts exactly.
Unused NGC Freebies never used by KoolAid™ Drinker
I'll dig them up and give them away for my Ten THOUSANDTH post.
Nah, screw ebay, ... it ain't worth the listing fees, only the laugh.
It's so hard PCGS uses a third grader
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Lets see some links to these crossovers.
How about some before photos of the coins in the PCGS slabs and after photos in the NGC slabs.
You claim to be doing research on crossovers "It's nice to do comparisons."
If you are comparing grading companies you obviously need photos for your records. These "comparisons" are costing you a lot money. I would think you would want to remember these costly downgrades.
I'll call this thread exactly as I see it.
Spam for NGC.
<< <i>I say BS!
Lets see some links to these crossovers.
How about some before photos of the coins in the PCGS slabs and after photos in the NGC slabs.
You claim to be doing research on crossovers "It's nice to do comparisons."
If you are comparing grading companies you obviously need photos for your records. These "comparisons" are costing you a lot money. I would think you would want to remember these costly downgrades.
I'll call this thread exactly as I see it.
Spam for NGC.
>>
Example crossover attempt
Text
I will send the Pic of the NGC Version in PR63 when I get the package back.
Holdering a coin to protect it, authenticate it, and get a grade opinion is just fine. But it remains a grade OPINION! Haven't we all figured that out? The perceived value change is a joke, really, played on the collector who pays more for it after it has been upgraded, and perpetrated by the one who continually re-submits it.
<< <i>Is that the coin you bought and crossed over? >>
yes, it's the coin I bought, not from Heritage, but from another dealer. It had the same PCGS Cert Number, so I would surmise it's the same.
<< <i>Is that the coin you bought and crossed over? >>
Text
There.
Does this make you happier?
If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe!
to go on, "The king laughed, not because he wanted to (two), but because he had to (two)."
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade.
If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
Which coin are you talking about?
The 1906 PR64 actually failed to cross twice before at PR64 at NGC, so I just crossed at any grade the third time around.
<< <i>Why would anyone assume this is SPAM? >>
Actually, I can see where Bmarker is coming from. I personally tend to think the OP is on the level.
But certain of OP's answers do at least open the possibility of this being a hidden agenda thread.
For example, the OP's cool and calm demeanor in the face of some pretty heavy browbeating for his actions. That makes me wonder. Seems like most of us would be more reluctant to own up to such folly on the board.
One thing is for certain tho: This PROVES, once and for all, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that NGC grades tighter than PCGS!
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
<< <i>
<< <i>Why would anyone assume this is SPAM? >>
Actually, I can see where Bmarker is coming from. I personally tend to think the OP is on the level.
But certain of OP's answers do at least open the possibility of this being a hidden agenda thread.
For example, the OP's cool and calm demeanor in the face of some pretty heavy browbeating for his actions. That makes me wonder. Seems like most of us would be more reluctant to own up to such folly on the board.
One thing is for certain tho: This PROVES, once and for all, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that NGC grades tighter than PCGS! >>
Not true. only in certain situations. See my post of 10:39 today
So does anyone know how long these "freebies" are good for and can they crossover like giftcards ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>It's funny with coins. Either a guy is a crook, a spammer, a fool or he sucks.
So does anyone know how long these "freebies" are good for and can they crossover like giftcards ? >>
To clarify
it comes with the membership, just like the PCGS Platinum
And yet another link shows that the OP had a downgrade on another coin from NGC to PCGS...
I really don't see an agenda outside of pointing out what an uncertain game crossing is.
What is fun is watching the panic ridden responses of those that can not conceptualize crossing FROM PCGS to any other service. And folks wonder why the Kool Aid reference all the time? I have a lot of properly graded coins in various different holders. I'd never waste a cent crossing them as I have zero intention of selling them or playing that particular game.
<< <i>
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade.
If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
Which coin are you talking about?
The 1906 PR64 actually failed to cross twice before at PR64 at NGC, so I just crossed at any grade the third time around. >>
This is what I don't get. The coin failed to cross twice! So then you cross at any grade.
It looks like you were determined to lose 200 to 300 dollars. Why?
If the story doesn't make sense.......What is one supposed to believe?
<< <i>unless the OP also believed the coin overgraded at the PCGS grade? And wanted an accurate grade? >>
If so he would have submitted it to cross at any grade the first time.
<< <i>this .... does not surprise me.
K S >>
Of course it doesn't surprise you - you're the one who wrote most of them.
<< <i>
<< <i>unless the OP also believed the coin overgraded at the PCGS grade? And wanted an accurate grade? >>
If so he would have submitted it to cross at any grade the first time. >>
Fair enough.
Can't answer that one.
<< <i>As a next step, you can try to cross them to PCI. >>
LOL, well NGC seems to have exacted a pint and a half of blood from this fellow so why not give a service that even people like pharmer loves a whirl?
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>
<< <i>this .... does not surprise me.
K S >>
Of course it doesn't surprise you - you're the one who wrote most of them.
Not only is that funny, it is true
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
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic.
<< <i>Because I collect coins, not 'values' >>
Then maybe you are one of the few who doesn't care about dates and mintmarks...and of course, the ability to sell your coins at some, possibly unforseen, point in the future.
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>unless the OP also believed the coin overgraded at the PCGS grade? And wanted an accurate grade? >>
If so he would have submitted it to cross at any grade the first time. >>
Fair enough.
Can't answer that one. >>
Right.
The first and second times, it didn't cross because of "Hairlines". So I said "What the Heck" and crossed at any grade the third time.
I have noticed that on crossovers, there tends to be a greater emphasis on defects compared to positive attributes. That is perhaps one reason that "raw" submissions are perceived to have a better chance of a higher grade.
Kewpie Doll award-10/29/2007
Successful BST transactions with Coinboy and Wondercoin.
<< <i>
<< <i>this .... does not surprise me.
K S >>
Of course it doesn't surprise you - you're the one who wrote most of them.
& you read all of them!
K S
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact. >>
I don't accept that fact. What I do accept is that based on people's perceptions, PCGS coins are generally worth more in the same grade.
<< <i>I don't accept that fact. What I do accept is that based on people's perceptions, PCGS coins are generally worth more in the same grade. >>
Um....then you do accept that fact. The coins are the same, only the perceptions are different which is what creates the price difference.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't accept that fact. What I do accept is that based on people's perceptions, PCGS coins are generally worth more in the same grade. >>
Um....then you do accept that fact. The coins are the same, only the perceptions are different which is what creates the price difference. >>
Sigh. You can't argue with Homer J. Simpson.
We do collect coins right? Holders are just chunks of plastic. How the heck can a holder change the value of a coin in reality? Perception... sure... sadly sometimes perception changes and price may follow, but that is really stupidity. That argument leads you to this statement: buy only non PCGS coins and sell only PCGS coins. But then... who will buy those PCGS coins, since they know the same trick...
Gods this seems stupid to me.
[IMG]">1898 Proof Set
<< <i>
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic.
<< <i>Because I collect coins, not 'values' >>
Then maybe you are one of the few who doesn't care about dates and mintmarks...and of course, the ability to sell your coins at some, possibly unforseen, point in the future.
<< <i>but coins sell for what they sell for based on the coin when an educated buyer buys them >>
I'm an educated buyer and whenever I see a coin in an NGC holder I always wonder why it's not in a PCGS holder. That's the first thing that comes to my mind. I will inspect the coin, but more often than not I can find a reason it's not in a PCGS holder (and yes, I have bought nice coins in NGC holders).
I think many of us know this, but it's NOT Kool-aid to say that a coin in a PCGS holder is worth more than the same coin in an NGC holder. That's just fact. If anything, it's Kool-aid not to accept that fact. >>
I really can't argue with you because I think differently than you do. Of course I care about mint marks. That is just plain stupid. Mint marks are part of the coin, NOT THE PLASTIC. Yes, my coins have value, and I realize that. However, that value is not associative with the holder, but the COIN! Have we really all missed that point. Grade coins yourself, and pay what they are worth. Plastic gives an opinion... one that is sometimes flawed. If you look at a coin and think Nice MS63, would you pay MS65 money because the holder says it is? It seems you might based on the above. That is insane! When I see a coin in an NGC holder, I most certainly don't wonder why it is in a PCGS holder. Many people believe as strongly that NGC is the one grading properly, not PCGS. Go to their boards and read about it. Who is right? Who cares. I don't care. Great coins can sit in any legit holder (or, gasp... RAW). Yes, some people sell great coins raw.
Do I worry about selling my coins? Nope. I don't I collect coins among other things. Some too obscure to ever resell. The collection goes to the kids, not as an asset, but as something of mine. They can throw them away, sell them, or keep them. That is their choice. Coins are not part of my inheritance or other financial plans.
You know, coins were traded long before plastic came along. Amazingly, people had to look at the coin and evaluate it, and pay what it was worth. Still a good practice if you ask me.
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade.
If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
I don't cross expecting a coin will jump a grade.
And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated.
<< <i>What???? >>
Perception one; Those who "buy the coin and not the plastic" have greater collections than
perception two; those who "buy the plastic and can't grade coins"!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying it's the way it is. We shouldn't be buying plastic, I agree with that. We should look at the coin and evaluate it solely on it's merit, but we both know that's not always how it goes. I'm just stating what most people know to be true. In a perfect world..... >>
Yeah, your right... but I still think it a form of insanity... or simply brilliant marketing. You take the SAME item and give it two different labels on the 'packaging' and with one label it is worth more than the other. That is a simple reality I can't abide by. It makes one think that only a crazy person would buy a PCGS coin versus spending their time buying those NGC and ANAC's values. I will not pay more for a PCGS coin versus another holder. If I found a coin I liked in an ANACS holder, I'd pay what it was worth, and it will never be crossed over. Never. Every coin that hits my collection comes off the market for my life, adn whomever wonders why they are all not in PCGS holders after I am dead can figure it out for themselves. They are in the holders they are in because they are properlly graded and I have no reason to change them. None.
<< <i>
<< <i>What???? >>
Perception one; Those who "buy the coin and not the plastic" have greater collections than
perception two; those who "buy the plastic and can't grade coins"!
Leo >>
Yes, but those who buy the plastic have bigger 'book value' apperantly.
I'll stick with my nice collection in many different (okay, no NTC or SGS) holders
All joking aside, it has nothing to do with greater collections...
My point is that the collection has nothing to do with the holder. Most of the greatest collections were raw.
<< <i>
<< <i>Very nice coin. I can only assume you tried to cross it thinking it would jump a grade.
If I tried what you did and got the same results, my wife would set my head of fire and try to beat it out with a golf shoe! >>
I don't cross expecting a coin will jump a grade.
And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated. >>
WOW! DUDE. You're in your own little universe. Does reality even fit in your little world?
You send it to NGC 3 times, and let it cross at any grade, knowing that it would cross at a lower grade.
So it crosses at a lower grade (losing about $350 in value) and you say QUOTE
"And even if it did jump a grade, I would send it back to PCGS to have it re-evaluated."
You sir are nuts. A COMPLETE and TOTAL NUT!
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
But the concept never really changed! The advent of plastic (and a guarantee) only ushered in the susceptable.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Actually, all you have to do to see the value of a pcgs slab over an ngc slab for a given high dollar coin is find that coin in the Heritage archives and compare realized prices. Prepare to have your eyes opened, tb. >>
True but it's very likely the higher priced PCGS cert. coin was seen in person versus the bidding over the internet for a NGC!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
I suppose it is sort of an obvious statement... and the intent was only to say that great collections are, and always will be based on great coins. The plastic is secondary. The way of the world is to encapsulate... I'm guilty of that too. I prefer to find a coin in plastic, to protect the coin, and I like the way it looks. But, the value stays with the coin. I think that PCGS has been more consistent over the long term (I don't know about accurate, but I'll grant consistent) therefore that creates a comfort that drives higher prices in sight unseen. Many coins from those old time raw collections are in PCGS plastic, many in NGC, and they won't be crossed in many cases because it becomes irrelevant in cases of great rarity. Sight unseen is not a concept that applies to rarities.
I think both grade about the same, with the exception of modern proofs which NGC seems to like to give 70's to and PCGS does not. I'd not spend money on a modern proof in either grade... I prefer actual rarity over conditional rarity, but I can see where in that instance, the NGC coin will sell for the price of a one grade down PCGS. However, in classics, I tend to not believe this is the same. I think that 10 coins graded 10 times by each firm would show about the same overall in terms of average grades assigned. AND still be the same coin irregardless of all that
It certainly is a good topic to get up and grouse about!
and my other point with the raw comment is just about how far we have come. There are many people who don't believe you could create a world class collection without plastic to point out the right coins. Before plastic there were great collections, some of the greatest, assembled. Now those coins reside in plastic to be sure, but they were great coins long before the plastic told us so.
<< <i>
<< <i>Perhaps this is one of those 'dealer vs collector' things, but the plastic should not be that relevant to a collector. >>
That's not unlike saying the date and mintmark shouldn't be that relative to a collector. Collectors care about value, despite what they might say. They have to pay for the coin originally, so where that money is going matters....and where that money goes has much to do with the plastic. >>
While looking at my safe deposit box (well, the coins inside it), I discovered I had one in a NGC slab. I really did not realize that for a while. Frankly, the slabs coins are in are just to me oversized novelty holders 99.99+% of the time. They're worth the same in PCGS plastic, or NGC plastic, or ANACS plastic, or ACG plastic (really!), or with an old ANACS certificate, or in PCGS plastic with a CAC sticker, or completely raw. Hell, in 99.99+% of the time, raw is better, for now you can know something about the edge of the coin. (Hint: the big two slabbers can be wrong about coin weights even when it matters, and can either miss or not bother describing a partial collar.)
Ed. S.
(EJS)
<< <i>TonedBuff, I like you. I think you speak intelligently about this subject and I'm sure many others, but this: "Most of the greatest collections were raw." I don't get. Of course the greatest collections were raw. They existed before TPGs and those great collections, now broken up, mostly exist in TPG plastic. >>
You do know some as... err person like me will now ask you what percentage of the Garrett collection is now slabbed for you to back up this claim.
Ed. S.
(EJS)