Never say never...

MrEureka · April 6, 2010 6:02AM

March 18, 2003

November 17, 2004

September 19, 2005

Funny how times change.

dizzyfoxx · April 6, 2010 6:10AM

Hilarious!

UncleJoe · April 6, 2010 6:12AM

The market must have spoken!

Joe.

QuarterCollector · April 6, 2010 6:13AM

Priceless

ricko · April 6, 2010 6:14AM

It's all about the money. Cheers, RickO

MidLifeCrisis · April 6, 2010 6:17AM

The hobby was very different back then.

llafoe · April 6, 2010 6:17AM

I agree with Mr. Hall's earlier assesments... 11 MS grades are enough and are probably too much! I don't think the market has spoken... I think the Board of Directors have spoken. Let's hope they didn't make the wrong decision.

CarsonCityGold · April 6, 2010 6:19AM

Where does he say "Never"?

<< That said, we are looking at the concept >>

<< That said, we listen to the market place and I don't see a lot of evidence that the market place wants a star designation. >>

The market spoke and they listened. I still don't see where he said "Never".

dizzyfoxx · April 6, 2010 6:35AM

IMHO, after the dust settles and the smoke clears, I think it's just another gimmick. Having said that, I do hope it catches on and becomes a bonified asset to the coin hobby. If it works, it can only help the coin hobby.

nycounsel · April 6, 2010 6:37AM

so will mottled brown toning be treated as "original, attractive patina" or will it get a "birdsh*t" designation?

ColonialCoinUnion · April 6, 2010 6:39AM

<< Where does he say "Never"?

<< That said, we are looking at the concept >>

<< That said, we listen to the market place and I don't see a lot of evidence that the market place wants a star designation. >>

The market spoke and they listened. I still don't see where he said "Never". >>

I agree with CarsonCityGold.

Sonorandesertrat · April 6, 2010 6:46AM

Fifteen years from now, will we be looking slabs with +#@! designations in addition to numerical ones? This is where we're going.
The level of manipulation in numismatics never ceases to astonish me.

coinlieutenant · April 6, 2010 6:52AM

POTM nomination...maybe POTY.

coinguy1 · April 6, 2010 7:09AM

<< POTM nomination...maybe POTY. >>

I disagree. As others have already pointed out, the thread title and premise do not match what David Hall said. So, while it might sound good, it doesn't pass the accuracy test.

dizzyfoxx · April 6, 2010 7:16AM

<< 

<< POTM nomination...maybe POTY. >>

I disagree. As others have already pointed out, the thread title and premise do not match what David Hall said. So, while it might sound good, it doesn't pass the accuracy test. >>

HRH quote: "I can make a strong argument that this change would screw up the market more than it would help it."

I'd say saying "never" in the thread title and the general premise is easily interpreted based on comments like this. Arguing otherwise is arguing semantics IMO.

coinguy1 · April 6, 2010 7:22AM

<< 

<< 

<< POTM nomination...maybe POTY. >>

I disagree. As others have already pointed out, the thread title and premise do not match what David Hall said. So, while it might sound good, it doesn't pass the accuracy test. >>

HRH quote: "I can make a strong argument that this change would screw up the market more than it would help it."

I'd say saying "never" in the thread title and the general premise is easily interpreted based on comments like this. Arguing otherwise is arguing semantics IMO.

>>

It's hardly semantics. You omitted the following two quotes, which are a far cry from saying "never" :

"That said, we are looking at the concept" and " That said, we listen to the market place and I don't see a lot of evidence that the market place wants a star designation. "

MikeInFL · April 6, 2010 7:26AM

That's odd. I never saw the word "never" in any of those posts from HRH.

dizzyfoxx · April 6, 2010 7:26AM

Pot-ay-toe, pot-o-tto. JMHO.

MrEureka · April 6, 2010 7:50AM

Sorry some people don't like the thread title, but nowhere did I say that HRH said "never". Nor would I care if he did. "Never say never" is just a phrase I used to convey that events sometimes unfold in seemingly unlikely and unforeseen ways. And if you can't live with that, you can post the next thread.

dizzyfoxx · April 6, 2010 8:31AM

<< Sorry some people don't like the thread title, but nowhere did I say that HRH said "never". Nor would I care if he did. "Never say never" is just a phrase I used to convey that events sometimes unfold in seemingly unlikely and unforeseen ways. And if you can't live with that, you can post the next thread. >>

Well stated. I think some decipher things so darn literally that it makes for humorous reading.

StubbyMcNumbthumbs · April 6, 2010 9:28AM

Yet more evidence of how grading standards and attitudes towards grading have changed, and keep changing, ... and will keep on changing.

All the while, claims of "consistency" and "unwavering standards" sound more like broken campaign promises than mission statements and company mottos.

roadrunner · April 6, 2010 9:51AM

11 MS grades were always enough. Unfortunately there has been some overlap over the past 20 years that has helped to blur those lines.

roadrunner

DonWillis · April 6, 2010 10:00AM

Very clever, Mr. Eureka. I think this is funny. How times change! Actually this was the first question DH addressed during Q&A at our presentation on March 25.

There is one giant factor that has changed since these earlier comments were made: technology.

We now have technology that can capture and save all the nuances which uniquely identify each coin. This helps us recognize coins that have been altered and consistently grade all coins at these more refined increments.

It's not "all about the money". PCGS may actually be discouraging a lot of submissions from the guys that used to send coins in repeatedly. And, just to keep things in perspective, collectors may send coins in under the new program, but collectors account for a very small percentage of PCGS submissions. The guys with the largest submissions will have to change thier business model based on the new program.

When I first joined the company I must have been asked several dozen times "Don, when will PCGS put PQ on their holders". We didn't want to simply identify PQ coins. That's kind of an emotional, eye appeal, kind of designation. We wanted something bigger and better. We wanted to identify coins that had above average or better eye appeal and also all the characteristics of an extremely highend coin for the grade. That's what + is all about.

If you guys think about it, I believe you will realize the biggest benefactors of Secure Plus will be collectors. How many collectors have you known (maybe yourself) who have carefully put together a collection over the years, studing the series, hand selecting every coin as one of the choicest examples of the date, only to be offered "bid" or something similar when it came time to sell? Now with Secure Plus collectors can have their coins graded, possibly receiving some + grades, and with new market values established for + grades, they can realize the full market value of their collection.

We did this because we think it will be good for the hobby, and because it's the right thing to do.

MrEureka · April 6, 2010 10:34AM

We now have technology that can capture and save all the nuances which uniquely identify each coin. This helps us recognize coins that have been altered and consistently grade all coins at these more refined increments.

Don - I understand how the new technology will help you recognize coins that have been altered, and I understand how it will help you grade more consistently. But the technology won't help you increase (edited to say "precision"). And without precision, consistency isn't quite as important. BTW, I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm all for the "Plus" if the graders can deliver on the promise. I'm just not yet convinced that they can.

coindeuce · April 6, 2010 11:45AM

I seriously wonder if the new technology would have saved the diamond grading business for CLCT. Whatever happened there?

fcloud · April 6, 2010 11:57AM

Progress is understandable. Things do change over time.

ocon4008 · April 6, 2010 12:04PM

<<There is one giant factor that has changed since these earlier comments were made: technology.>>

Amen sir. I think people need to realize that the remote sensing technology is still very young, and new applications such as "Secure Plus" are just the beginning. The price of the "superb" rare coin is getting to the point that the buyer will want the certification of the coin engraved in granite. If your reputation and profits depend on said guarantee I would think you would invest millions in this technology to protect your business. BTW, it will help the hobby as well.

Coinosaurus · April 6, 2010 12:40PM

This reminds me of when I took the ANA grading class many moons ago and the principal of one the big two grading services flatly stated that they would never use the 70 grade, how 70s didn't exist, etc.

Baley · April 6, 2010 1:21PM

If you guys think about it, I believe you will realize the biggest benefactors of Secure Plus will be collectors. How many collectors have you known (maybe yourself) who have carefully put together a collection over the years, studing the series, hand selecting every coin as one of the choicest examples of the date, only to be offered "bid" or something similar when it came time to sell? Now with Secure Plus collectors can have their coins graded, possibly receiving some + grades, and with new market values established for + grades, they can realize the full market value of their collection.

We did this because we think it will be good for the hobby, and because it's the right thing to do.

Absolutely!

Very well said

I see this as one more levelling of the playing field (the first being the slab in the first place) of the age old problem of dealers offering low prices for your "low end" coins and selling them as "PQ for the grade", especially when the spread for a single point is large, and when some of the previously complained-about "inconsistencies" were precisely because a given coin was, for example, a 64.5 and would alternate between 64 and 65 on repeated submissions, or for another example, two different coins with the 64 better than the 65, graded at different times.

slabs caused an uproar, stickers caused an uproar, and so did this.

we'll get used to it and learn to like it, I'll bet

Never say never...

Comments

Leave a Comment