Are grading services getting more or less harsh with their standards.

As one who has never submitted anything to be graded, I have no experience with any of the services, only what dealers and others have told/shown me. At some point I would like to submit certain coins though. I`m hearing and seeing mixed results with slabs that have come from the "big 3." I have seen an ASE with a nick on the shield that was graded MS-69. (NGC)

A dealer I know sent out a Morgan and 1928 Peace dollar that had somewhat unattractive toning....both came back as "questionable toning." Not gradable.
I have in my collection ASE`s that have been toned naturally and artificially, (that I did not do) and I can tell You that only an idiot would experiment on a 1928 Peace dollar (with at least AU details) regarding toning. Even a novice would of picked a much lesser coin to tone if they had not perfected their trickery. How do the tpg`s define questionable anyway? The term questionable states that it`s not definitive. If the tpg does not know for certain, does that make the coin guilty until proven innocent?

Some dealers have said that the tpg`s have gotten more strict regarding dmpl and pl, while others state the opposite. What do You all think about the tpg`s giving out plus grades? Are they becoming more common?

Just trying to get some feedback on what`s been happening as of late with the tpg`s. :smile

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Ummm - there are plenty of idiots out there who would experiment on any given coin. At the same time 20-30 years ago cleaning coins was acceptable. Other than that I believe the tpgs might be a little more strict on toning - but who knows re-submit them and they might grade. As for the plus or stars - I don't really worry about those I judge the coin and the price(or what I will pay) for myself. Some I think are worth a premium and some are not - my opinion only.

 

On the toning issue I think it's important to pay attention to the incentives of the TPGs. These coins when certified often have a premium of multiple times the value of the coin which combined with the imposibility of determing NT from AT as Doug point out sets up a perverse incentive. The TPGs can legitamently return NT coins as 'questionable color' knowing full well the coin will be resubmitted due to the huge premium given to graded toners. I believe the coin will eventually get graded, but the TPG will pick up a couple grading fees in the process.

Incentives matter, and it's my biggest complaint with the whole notion of TPGs as they currently exist. They were suppose to fix the problem of overgrading by unscrupulous dealers, but the fact of the matter is they have similiarly perverse incentives. Basically, the TPGs would put themselves out of business if they graded coins objectively and maintained those standards. They make money by grading coins, which except for modern coins, means eventually the number of ungraded coins will drop so low that they don't have much business. So when faced with holding their standards and going out of business, or loosening those standards over time so that previously graded coins are re-submitted for a potential upgrade which one do you think they did?

 

I've seen a lowering in standards in the last 5 years , probably because I'm seeing more coins . I've seen AU-50 -58 coins going MS and not just MS- 60 but 62-63 . It's gotten almost laughable with MS-64 coins by their own written standards getting 2 pt jumps regulary becaus of superior luster . When luster can negate hits in prime focal areas then you have to think what's next .

 

This is completely wrong. All of it, a bunch of bunk.

TPG's survive based on consistency, not incentives. You are accusing the TPG's of deliberately "Genuine" grading toned coins so that they can double/triple up on the grading fees because they know the coin will be resubmitted. What evidence do you have to support this ridiculous assertion? Furthermore, the TPG's could survive easily without ever grading another resubmission. The number of modern coins produced by the mint each year and the rapid expansion of grading within the world coin market is enough to keep them going indefinitely.

With respect to the cause of gradeflation, I refuse to enter into the tenth debate about the same subject with Doug. In short, he believes that the TPG's have changed their standards and I believe that gradeflation is caused by the inherent subjectivity of the grading process.

@Rusty, most people on the major forums who talk about the change in grading standards think that the standards actually tightened up again with the inception of the CAC which was about 5 years ago.

 

The luster thing has always bugged me! Nonetheless, we all know that luster dominates the TPG grade when you get to the gem level. I guess I'm a bit old school still, I think hits and other blemishes should rule the grade over luster. I've seen nearly perfect coins receive a 64/65 grade simply because the luster was not there.....BAH!

 

To the OP: The biggest change I've seen in the TPG's is how they are demanding a certain "look" to their slabbed coins. If any coin falls outside that, they will find a reason to reject it. I've seen many nice, natural coins rejected due to "questionable color" which (to me) is a generalized cop-out because they just don't want the coins in their slabs.....since they don't meet the standard "look".

 

The plus grading, is in reality a form of micro-grading. the coin is almost that, but most definitely this so we'll toss a + after the grade.

No matter what they come up with, how fine they micro-grade the coin, it's still, has been and always will be, nothing more than an opinion the collector pays for and has no more/less accuracy than a polygraph.

Until all the TPGs, subscribe to a set of universal standards of coin grading, it will always remain the same.

 

I can't say one way or another. I guess for those who go entirely by the opinion of the TPG and their grade, maybe it has or hasn't changed over the years. But, for those who grade for themselves and ignore secondary opinions, I can say there is no difference. I know it's a hard concept to swallow for many TPG fanatics, but that printed number means nothing if you know your coins. Learn to grade and it won't be an issue. If you don't, then maybe coin collecting isn't for you.
Guy

 

+1

 

Maybe the TPGs should refine a scientific way of determining with a high degree of certainty whether a coin is NT or AT. They expect the general collecting community to accept their grading as being 100% accurate, which many of us know it is not.

 

Paul , they could have , just that I'm not seeing it . For some good examples you should see or play rlms , guess the grade game . You'll see coins with marks in prime focal areas receiving 67s .
Granted PCGS is tighter and NGC is the worst of the two . But it happens quite regularly . Also If your referring to the PCGS forum , I wouldn't trust what is said about the tpgs as any person who says anything negative about PCGS is banned . Not my kind of forum .

 

This might well be impossible with artifacts, which is likely a great deal of the problem. There are always non-standardized aesthetic aspects to a collectable that are very hard to measure.

Mandy

 

Funny You should say that because a few years ago when I was starting to pick up graded silver dollars, I mainly knew silver bullion, nothing about numismatics. I would buy slabs and assume that the grade was always 100 percent dead on. But as I learned and read books like the Morgan guide book and the ANA grading standards, I started to see that the TPGs had some issues.

Fast forward to last week when I was in my favorite coin shop.....I was looking to pick up a graded Morgan in at least a MS64. I saw an MS65 that looked sub-par for the grade, and a MS64 that when compared to the 65 had fewer issues. Even the dealer agreed that the 65 was overgraded. I picked up the 64 and have no regrets. The old me would of just looked at the 65 Morgan and bought it without really scrutinizing it.

Now, I`m buying the coin for the coin and not the slab it might be in.

 

Exactly right, Doug. THere are still types of AT that are undetectable, and the reason that they are not detectable is that they are accelerated natural means, which technically is AT. However, the "baked potato," and the "Clorox coins" are extremely easy for most experienced collectors and TPGs to instantly spot--frequently, if it looks too vivid, and too perfect, with colors that are almost crayola bright--it is AT. Those are easy for TPGs to screen, and most of us old guys as well can also do so. As regards standards getting more lax/tougher, there are numerous threads on TPG standards and opinions as to their accuracy--just look them up. This is an all too frequent subject around here.

 

One of the reasons that I asked about this subject was because it seemed that the TPGs standards are constantly changing regarding certain coins. Last year a dealer was telling me that ANACS was way more strict with their standards, whereas this year I have heard that they are more lax. So for someone like me who has never submitted anything yet....I`m just trying to stay current, and this site is a good place to get some feedback from anyone who has submitted anything recently.

On a side note.....do the TPGs let the public know who is grading the coins on the "line" or not? I remember in the past when a more prominent figure like John Albanese left NGC, but that was because He was buying everything in site and starting CAC. If someone were to leave or get added on the staff, would We know?

 

That is fine if you are NEVER planning on selling your coins, but if you do, you are going to have a hard time getting MS 65 money for a coin you THINK is 65 and possibly paid 65 money (because you knew better) when it resides in a 64 holder.

Theory is just that, but the market is the reality.

Of course my point is moot if you just don't like money, but for the rest of us we get the concept just fine.