Have TPG'ers truly jumped the shark? (NN article)

Sorry, I know I am known for hating slabs, but I just read an article in the latest Numismatic News that blew me away. The article was about how to grade MS61 coins. The article, (I do not have it in front of me right now, so excuse any paraphrasing), stated that MS60 is never used as a grade now, that MS61-63 can have noticable wear, and that "older collectors need to suspend everything they know about coin grading to understand this article".

Wow. TPG'ers freely admit that worn coins will freely be slabbed as mint state. Isn't this fraud? I mean, if they did away with MS nomenclature, I could understand it, but to call a demonstrably circulated coin Mint State? I would think that on the very face this is fraudulent, as those two things are mutually exclusive, and have been for about as long as US coin collecting has been around. To me, this is about the biggest lie that has ever been foisted upon this hobby, and they are open about it.

I guess this is what you get when they can make up their own grades and have no one but themselves to account to for their lies. I usually hate lawyers, but I wish one would buy a circulated MS62 and get ticked off enough to take them to court. After being on this board and talking about US coins again I was considering getting back into US collecting, but if this truly is the state of the hobby I am so glad I didn't. What a sad, pathetic state grading is in now.

Chris

P.S. I know many will think this too harsh, but mint state is mint state, no two ways about it. Mint state always has had one absolute condition, NO CIRCULATION WEAR.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Where did the TPGs "admit" worn coins are graded as mint state ? I thought you were reading an article in Numismatic News.

 

Perhaps "hating slabs" is inappropriate. Isn't it better to admit that raw coins and slabs both have a time and a place, advantages and disadvantages ?

 

Why not just take them up on their guarantee ?

 

I thought the person who wrote the article was a grader or ex grader. If he isn't I apologize, but either way he is a recognized grading expert and freely admits that circulated coins nowadays are slabbed as mint state, its just "old" collectors need to adjust to that fact.

 

Their guarantee is simply to replace it with another 62, which could also be circulated since they are the final arbitor of what a 62 is nowadays. They have arbitrarily changed what mint state means nowadays.

 

NOW we're talkin' ! This is exactly what the hobby / industry should do.

I advocate getting rid of ALL grade descriptors, from Poor to MS*. Award a numerical grade, but not VG, XF, etc.

That way, a fabulous coin with micro-rub could take it's rightful place up in the 60s. A great AU coin is superior to a crummy MS coin, and should receive a higher numerical grade - and price.



* retain all other descriptors, such as Proof, PL, scratched, full strike, cleaned, etc.

 

He is ? I'm not sure that's so. Maybe, maybe not. What is the name ?

In any event, it's a person expressing an opinion, not TPGs confessing to crimes for which they should be sued.

 

Grading is subjective...not objective science.

Each TPG, from PCGS to SGS, has their own independent grading criteria for which they assign grades.

This also applies to individual collectors as well as the governing bodies of Numis. Clubs/organizations like the ANA standards and specialized collector clubs like EAC standards.

 

I read the same article yesterday. I'm pretty sure he's one of the guys who teaches grading at the ANA summer camp. Maybe his name is Fazzoli? I think that's right.

If a coin has been slabbed as an MS 62, or MS anything, I expect an uncirculated coin. Fazzoli wrote an article earlier this year which forwarded the argument that AU quarter eagles (incuse design) are routinely graded MS.

Grade inflation is one thing. To me, that's a 63 that's graded a 64. I can tolerate that. However, I always assume, in that situation, that the coin is UNC and I am mostly looking for bag marks, sharpness of strike, etc., to decide what grade of MS it is. In most series there is a pretty big price difference between AU 58 and MS 62/63. The TPG's better be careful. If I spend extra money for numismatic value based on the coin being an MS and its not an MS, I won't be very happy.

I'm a litigation attorney. Lawsuits are a last resort. I'm pretty sure it would be a standard fraud case and I agree that grading is, to some degree, subjective. However, wear is OBJECTIVE. At least it should be to PCGS and/or NGC.

 

100 point scale???????

 

But mint state is NOT an opinion, it is a provable fact. That is why my head was reeling. If the article talked about MS61 versus MS63, that is a grading opinion, asame as difference between VF and XF. However, to me its a provable fact a coin IS or IS NOT mint state, no "opinion" about it.

 

While I personally think that's best, that is way too much of a leap. It would throw the industry into chaos, as folks attempt to convert old "1 to 70 scale" to new "1 to 100" scale... almost like converting Fahrenheit to Celcius in one's head. All the books, magazines, Greysheet, etc. would require rework. What a mess.

Just simply drop the grade descriptor P, F, AG, VG,... MS. That's all. There are many advantages to this.

One thing is certain : any proposed change will be met with much resistance - and hysteria - from the Olde School.

 

If I am "olde school" like you were referring, I don't think so. Drop the term MS and anyone could do whatever they like. They have now, and that is oko since I do not use their services. However, to still use the term MS is inapproriate, misleading, and to me fraudulent. If they did as you say I would have never made this post.

 

Not all "sliders" come from White Castle.

Chris

 

"Mint State
The term corresponding to the numerical grades MS-60 through MS-70, used to denote a business strike coin that never has been in circulation. A Mint State coin can range from one that is covered with marks (MS-60) to a flawless example (MS-70)."


If we use this definition of "mint state"...the "opinion" is how the marks occurred.

Anything less than a "flawless" coin would have "marks" from circulation, bags, cabinets, rollers, etc....I believe it is subjective.

I would bet that large percentage of collectors could not draw the line between AU and MS

 

There's a lot of merit to this.

Many feel that Grading Lesson #1 is discerning 'twixt an MS coin and AU coin.

But even there, we do have some ambiguity. For instance, some people separate circulation wear from cabinet friction and album rub. Since the latter two did not come from circulation, some folks consider them uncirculated coins - which they are.

But they aren't Mint State coins.

When the industry switched from the term "Uncirculated" to "Mint State", the general consensus was the two terms are interchangeable. They aren't.

What's more, an MS60 coin isn't Mint State. it isn't in the same state as when it left the Mint. It's baggy, scratched, dinged, discolored, spotty, whatever. Most of that happened after it left the mint.

 

The term "fraudulent" is way too harsh and condemning. The TPGs didn't force these concepts or terms on us; they are a hobby standard (or pseudo-standard). The TPGs inherited the terms from the hobby, which has sloppy terminology.

The entire hobby / industry has an irrational grading scale. That's not the TPG's fault.

 

While I agree with you in principle, getting rid of the grading descriptors (AU, MS, etc), would also throw the coin world into chaos, since MS is a basal state.

Coins grading under your proposed scale as, say, an 63, with superior eye appeal, but minor rub, would equate to an AU-58 under the Sheldon scale, so the price guides would still be a mess.

Thus, I think we are stuck with the Sheldon scale for an eternity.

An easy fix to this dilemna would be to put a registry point premium on AU-58 coins over their MS-60 and MS-61 counterparts. Naturally, these coins would inflate in value, and the price guides would naturally match.

 

This illustrates a basic faux pas - confounding "uncirculated" with "mint state". This error originated in the hobby, not the TPGs. The TPGs inherited it.