IGS grading service?

Well...

CACG thinks the world of themselves.

PCGS and NGC were fighting for #1 with PCGS generally seen as "better" for US and NGC "better" for World.

ANACS was #3 (now #4)

ICG was #4 (now #5)

Both ANACS and ICG are less expensive to have coins graded. And both recognize more varieties and errors.

ICG is the only company intentionally encapsulating counterfeit coins in their "educational slabs" (bright yellow label).


(If by better you mean higher price for the same coin)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes, their grades are respectable, Dan. The perception is the others are better, but that’s where the marketing factors into it. And that translates generally to higher prices, too, but then that’s the bang they get for their marketing buck.

 

There you go again.....

 

When you walk through a junk yard, a Mercedes or a BMW blend in with the cheaper models!

 

I had two icg graded buffalo nickels and cracked them out to send to NGC.

The Type 1 graded MS63 at ICG then MS62 at NGC.

The Type 2 graded MS66 at ICG and at NGC as well.

I've also owned several worlds coins encapsulated by NGC that I thought were graded very well.

 

There is certainly a difference for a specific coin, vs. the general trends of large groups of coins.

You also need to take into account the shifts over time (despite what the TPGs claim).

And even specific series. One TPG may be a lot harder on, say later date Buffalo nickels where the strikes basically suck, than another TPG.

 

As an outsider who has no interest in US coins, it is difficult for me to understand the American obsession with slabbing in general, but also that after the 40 years or so the TPGs have been operating, there is still so much debate about which TPG is better for which type of coin. Surely, in a world of grading, consistency is paramount and if they are still all grading to the same Sheldon scale then the TPG shouldn't matter, nor indeed should the grades vary from one grading event to the next time the coin is submitted in the hope of an 'upgrade'.

All I see is a triumph of marketing over education and a majority collector base that has been brainwashed into believing that the TPGs somehow have knowledge that a collector could only aspire to.

The idea of a grade meaning you can sell a coin unseen might work well for US coinage and is great if you can have confidence the coin has been identified correctly in the first place, which a US TPGs should do as it is their bread and butter. But in the case of British coinage which I collect, the first thing I do is check they have identified it correctly because I have limited confidence in their ability to recognise anything that deviates from the basic type. I would never buy blind and never pay a premium for a label. In their favour, I will say that over 80% of the slabs I have purchased were correctly attributed, and the percentage for all slabs is obviously higher because I actively seek out things people have missed, but they do still get an awful lot wrong. Given the cost of submission, I would at least expect the description to be right even if I disagreed with the grade.

 

CACG was added to eBay's accepted grading service list approximately 3 months ago.

 

I won't quote @robp message, just point out that it's hard for usn 'mericans to identify coins with legends written in foreign languages like the one all y'all use.

 

Also: finally found an IGS coin to add here:

 

Welcome back, haven't seen you in a while.

 

I cherrypicked a 1964 D type c quarter in an ICG slab some time ago. It was graded MS67. I sent it in the NGC last year to have it graded and attributed. It came back an MS63. Big downgrade.

 

I have saved quite a bit of money purchasing icg coins.
Some people think if it's not PCGS or NGC it's junk. I don't get it.

 

I think a coin in an ICG or ANACS slab is a lot better than raw. However, I would be nervous buying any coin in those slabs costing more than a few hundred dollars. Old white ANACS, preferably with 6 digit serial numbers, would be my only exception.

When I see a high value coin in an ICG or yellow ANACS, I find myself wondering why it isn’t in a top tier slab. My concern is less with the numerical grade than with the potential for it having been given a details grade at PCGS or NGC and later straight graded at a lower tier service. Another concern would be a numerical grade for which there is a large price difference in the next point or two down.

I think they are fine for lower priced coins though. The lower grading fees make it cost effective to have those coins graded, and when buying online it’s nice to have that extra assurance. I’ve had terrible luck with raw coins on eBay.

 

I think you give the 'upper' tier services too much credit. They aren't averse to grading repaired or altered coins. Money is money. I can't comment on the 'lower' tier services as I haven't seen enough samples to make a statistically valid argument, but I can give examples for both the top 2.

 

I don’t dispute that at all. But when dealing with a 4 figure coin, whatever issues the top two missed or deemed “market acceptable” are more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes time to sell. Or, worst case, PCGS or NGC will buy it back.

 

I was actually thinking of not only 4, but 5 & 6 figure examples too.

My point is that you shouldn't sell to the market the idea you are the guardians who will ensure innocent collectors aren't taken for a ride by the unscrupulous passing off damaged/altered coins, then promptly give an impaired item a straight grade because it is worth a lot of money. That's called hypocrisy. In the case of one piece, we aren't talking about something obscure, but something that has been documented many times over a century or two.

So, if it's good enough for NGC & PCGS to slab impaired coins, then giving some 'lower' tier graders credence would be in order. The two top graders are where they are primarily through marketing.

As always, buy the coin, not the label (unless you just want to maximise the average grade of a registry set)

 

If I’m paying that much money for a coin, I want the coin and a label. Even if the top two are where they are mainly because of marketing, it doesn’t change the fact that when a high value coin is in a lower tier slab, people are going to wonder why.

 

That's because too many people have been conditioned to think that way that it appears to have become a sacred cow that cannot be questioned, or even discussed.

What are your views on the two paragraphs you didn't quote?

 

We've examples of that right here, you're right, I've seen it.