Thread ATS about "rampant gradeflation"

That is indeed the problem. Many refuse to believe that the TPG grading standards have changed at all.

Some say that there was a change, a loosening of standards during or immediately after the first year of the TPGs existence. That would translate into sometime in 1987. But from 1987 until 1997 or early 1998 the TPG grading standards remained the same. This covers the period of what is known as the "old green holders". The OGHs ended at that time. And it is accepted, market wide, that their was loosening of TPG grading standards when the OGHs ended. This is acknowledged by the fact that everybody accepted that the coins in the OGHs were or would be automatically upgraded if re-submitted. And of course it also includes the coins found in the early NGC slabs. But the strange thing is, even though the entire coin market accepts this as fact, they still refuse to acknowledge or openly say that the TPGs "loosened" their grading standards at this time.

After that, much of the market refuses to acknowledge that was any change in TPG grading standards at all. Yet other knowledgeable people claim the opposite, that there has indeed been a continuing loosening of grading standards. That there is still an ongoing loosening of grading standards. This idea is reinforced by the advent and huge success of CAC since 2007. But still much of the market refuses to acknowledge this.

All of that said, there has never been a period since the advent of the TPGs where their grading standards have tightened. Not ever. Though some will claim otherwise.

 

Well that's kind of the problem in a nutshell. The TPGs, and much of the marketplace, use value to determine the grade of a coin. When it should be obvious, even intuitive, that it should be the other way around. That the grade of a coin should help determine the value, but yet not solely establish that value. A big part of value are the esoteric aspects of a coin, and that can only be determined by the individual considering buying the coin. This of course is even proven by one simply observing the realized prices for a coin in any given grade. Identical coins of the exact same grade routinely sell for double, triple, even 10 times as much as another of the exact same grade.

Given that, how can it possibly be said that value determines grade ? But yet that is what most claim.

 

And that is exactly why they are not by the TPGs. They are a business, and the first and only goal of any business is to stay in business and be profitable. And they cannot do that without giving their customers what they want

Once you realize that, it should then become obvious that they have no interest in correctly or accurately grading coins for both cannot be achieved.

 

CBD the concept is pretty simple. A coin is designed a specific way, every little detail is supposed to be there, and there is not supposed to be anything else there but those details. The dies match that design exactly.

When the die is new, and for the beginning part of it's life, it produces coins that look exactly as they are supposed to look. Now of there is something wrong in the machinery, like maybe the strike pressure is set too low or the dies are set too far apart, then the coins that are produced do not look like they are supposed to look according to design because they are weakly struck.

Now I don't know of anybody who will argue that a weakly struck coin is the equal of a fully struck coin, assuming all other things are equal. The weakly struck coin simply cannot be graded as high as the fully struck example.

The same logic follows in all other things. A coin struck on a flawed panchet cannot be graded as high as a coin struck on a planchet of good quality. In fact some coins struck on flawed planchets cannot even be graded at all.

Therefore it must also follow that should the die become flawed by whatever then the coins struck by that flawed die cannot be equal to the coins the same die struck before it became flawed. If the die breaks and develops cracks then rather obviously the die is flawed, it is broken. If the die is scratched during the course of its normal use then the die is flawed. All dies are polished in the beginning, but have you ever seen die polish lines on a coin struck with new dies ? No. Why ? Because there are not supposed to be any die polish lines visible, they are all polished way when the polishing is done correctly. So if die polish lines are visible on the die and its subsequent coins then it is because the die was not re-polished correctly because somebody screwed up, thus the die is flawed.

These are all the very definitions of flaws, mistakes, screw ups. So can any coin struck with flawed dies be the equal of a coin struck with unflawed dies ? It's just basic common sense, they cannot be.

Now are there people (collectors) who wish that not to be so ? Rather obviously, you claim to be one yourself. So what do the TPGs do ? They give you what you want and they grade the flawed coins as if the flaws were not even there. That is their business, it is what they do. And people consciously choose to believe it does not matter because they don't want it to matter. They want their flawed coins graded just as high as the unflawed coins. In spite of the fact that plain, basic common sense says they cannot be.

 

Yeah these flaws are inherent to the process and I have no problem at all with grading such coins. But that doesn't answer the question - can 2 examples of the same coin equal in all ways except, one with the flaws and one without, be graded the same ?

Oh I have no problem agreeing that we humans are flawed. Or that we make mistakes all the time. But yet when we judge the quality of anything we make the things without flaws are always judged to be of higher quality than those with flaws. So why should coins be any different ?

I'm sorry but saying that coins are different flies in the face of all logic.