NGC Registry - important changes

There is a LOT more to the hobby than grading. I'm old enough to remember the bad days before slabbing. The biggest service TPGs do is not grading; it's authenticating. In the bad old days, you had to be able to decide if that nice shiny seated liberty was real or not, which was a lot more important than whether it was AU or BU. A lot of folks who can do a great job of grading certain series would be fooled by a good struck counterfeit. They'd give a very accurate grade to the counterfeit though.

One of the scariest nights I had in the hobby is when a prominent dealer set down with a small group of us collectors and showed us his "dark" collection. They were all counterfeits. Some were crude casts and easy to identify. The best though were beyond our ability to distinguish from the real thing. He had to point out very small details to show the difference between real and fake.

I think many collectors are really good at grading because they have looked at thousands of slabs and in reality, have learned grading courtesy of TPGs. But few of these folks have looked at even a dozen good fakes. Without slabs, they would have to get an additional education to avoid spending real money on fake money.

ANACS photo-certificates were a step in the right direction, but I can remember certificates, especially black and whites, being sold without coins among dealers at shows. Send a coin in, get a certificate, find a cheaper coin that resembles the photo, sell the pair, send in the original coin for another certificate, repeat. Certificates alone had value. All you had to do is find a coin that resembled the photo but of lower grade than stated, then sell the pair. Slabs put an end to the practice.

Personally, I'm interested in grading along with other facets of numismatics, but not authenticating. But if someone is interested in varieties, history, etc. and in neither grading nor authenticating, they can rely on TPGs to lift a burden of concern. If they buy a NGC or PCGS coin with a green sticker at a price published in a popular guide, chances of a total rip-off are very small indeed.

Cal

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My thoughts exactly (as I have pointed out in orevious posts). There should be third-party authenticators, not graders.

I have a friend at a coin club that paid full AU-50 retail for an EF-40 1864 L IHC in and AU-50 NGC holder. My opinion on the coin and the slab was concurred by Bill Fivaz. But my firend didn't care; it was in an AU-50 holder. That is the pervasive mentality that is eating away at our hobby. Many, many collectors buy the slab and not the coin, and they choose to not learn how to grade. This is the TPG market base because these collectors are totally reliant on them.

 

Yes, I have read horror stories about the inconsistencies and deceptiveness of grading "back in the day," so I am not a totally-ignorant 19-year-old collector. (One example being a dealer buying at a grade level below the actual grade, and selling at a grade level higher than the actual grade.) These questionable grading practices are still used by dealers (I have seen many cleaned coins touted at AU+ at shows), however, TPGs have alleviated much of the stress in buying coins in the marketplace. For this reason, they will never go away.

But this still doesn't change the fact that one NEEDS to learn how to grade from him/herself if he/she is going to be collecting coins.

 

I think NGC is doing this just to stir the pot and take a slap at PCGS. I'm sure NGC thought this move over for some time. They lost many members when they changed the foreign registry.

 

As usual, I'll add some personal thoughts:

I was there also and IMO most of this statement is a fairytale myth. Were photo-certs traded w/o coins: YES. Problem is, you had to be practically BLIND not to be able to match a coin and its cert. BTW, the same type of ignorant, blind collectors are collecting coins today. They purchase the TPGS slabs that are cobbled up from crack-outs, glue seam and all.

Very true; yet it is more complicated than that. Consider this. Out of all the dealers & collectors around, how many are professional graders? Even fewer get to be professional finalizers. While I can teach anyone to grade coins "technically" in a short period of time, "Market grading" & acceptability is a long process governed by many, many things like a coin's value at the moment due to economic conditions. While I believe many of these factors screw it up for all of us, I don't make the rules. That's why coins like 1886-O, 1901-P, and 1884-S dollars that look just like an ordinary MS-63 are commercially graded as AU's!
Most collectors don't have time to learn "market" grading.

So, I'll up you and say 85% of the dealers and collectors couldn't grade themselves out of a paper bag! They are still in business or still can afford to collect BECAUSE of slabs.

That's the way it should be. Unfortunately/fortunately because of TPGS, dealers & collectors don't NEED to learn to grade and they are worse off for it.

 

I'm not sure of the magnitude of the problem, probably small, but it did exit. Most dealers back then, as now, were honest. I once observed dealers exchanging certificates and cash, but no coins. It's possible that the coins had already been exchanged or would be in the future.

Selling of certificates without coins was reported in the numismatic press at the time. I no longer have any of my Coin World or NN issues from the 70's and 80's, so can't produces the articles. However, Beth Deisher, longtime numismatic writer and editor of Coin World from 1986 to 2012, posted an article this year that stated, " Also, switching of ANACS photo grading certificates was eroding confidence in the market." URL for the article is https://cashinyourcoins-book.com/2016/08/grading-revolution-in-1986-changes-hobby/.

Some of the black and white certificates did require a loupe to check if they matched a coin, especially in mint state. Yep, if you did that, you could be pretty sure of a true match.

Cal

 

I enjoy the NGC registry and since I don't submit a lot of coins for grading I've kept my NGC membership in part because they allow PCGS as well as NGC coins in the registry. It's also a reason I have not joined PCGS. So, with this change, I will have to re-think continuing my membership next year. I've already paid for this year's renewal, but I may go to PCGS next year if it's going to be the same registry issue. How can I tell NGC about this perspective?

 

Question: "How can I tell NGC about this perspective?"

Swami Karnak's 's answer: "Perhaps you could write a letter (best), send an Email, or call (worst) NGC."

 

I brought this up in a topic on this forum a few weeks ago, but interest in it seemed rather muted. I have started working on this project a little, however. Perhaps now there will be enough interest to really get it rolling.

 

IMO, if you accept the four major services + SEGS and build a site + ads I believe it will take off - especially if you invite those on PCGS and NGC to post (massage their egos and tell them you wish the new members to have something "great" to shoot for).

BTW, can you guess my opinion of "Registry Sets?"

 

Completely agree, for people to try and claim otherwise is really almost ignoring that fact that grading is subjective and done by humans. Personal in the grading rooms have changed and every individual will apply company standards a bit differently. Even if someone had been in the grading room the entire time their standards would have certainly changed at least some over the 30 plus years. None of us will grade the exact same way in 10 years as we do now, nor would we grade the same way 40 years into the hobby as we did 20. The changes may not be drastic but the simple fact of seeing more and more coins and time passing our taste and opinions will change at least somewhat and no one is immune from those changes no matter how subtle they may be

I don't really think it is a bad thing though many others might, but to be it is just the nature of human processes with subjective aspects. Some of the changes a lot of people will like and some they won't, no different then anything else. I fully expect grading to be an evolving process as time goes on as it always has been.

 

baseball21 posted: "Completely agree, for people to try and claim otherwise is really almost ignoring that fact that grading is subjective and done by humans. Personal in the grading rooms have changed and every individual will apply company standards a bit differently."

NGC has had a core of graders since it began. The new guys learn from them. PCGS and the present ANACS staff probably have a similar core.

"Even if someone had been in the grading room the entire time their standards would have certainly changed at least some over the 30 plus years."

This is true but ideally the company policy causes the changes and the graders adopt. That's why the early slabs often contain under graded coins by today's looser standards.

"None of us will grade the exact same way in 10 years as we do now, nor would we grade the same way 40 years into the hobby as we did 20."

Speak for yourself. My personal grading HAS NOT CHANGED
one decimal point in almost fifty years. I have a TRUE STANDARD.

"The changes may not be drastic but the simple fact of seeing more and more coins and time passing our taste and opinions will change at least somewhat and no one is immune from those changes no matter how subtle they may be."

You have just posted for all to see ALMOST THE EXACT WORDING used by the owner of a major TPGS to explain the reason grading has "evolved" at his company. The grading changes the more they learn.

"I don't really think it is a bad thing though many others might, but to be it is just the nature of human processes with subjective aspects. Some of the changes a lot of people will like and some they won't, no different then anything else. I fully expect grading to be an evolving process as time goes on as it always has been." True.

 

Not that anyone cares ...I've been doing some thinking and should like to make a correction. My personal grading standards have changed after all BUT VIRTUALLY ONLY in the grades of VF on down. For example a 1916-D dime that has some rim starting (About Good) I'll now grade as Good - I guess to reflect its value.

I will argue with Doug about VG's jumping to VF's and other changes but I believe he is driving the point home that grades have changed a lot from the thirty to forty years ago.

One thing I have seen on Morgan dollars lately is that some coins with weak hairlines over the year (formerly 64's) are now being graded MS-65!

 

Did it! Thanks.

 

Pretty much the same situation as me except I have slightly more NGC than PCGS graded coins. I don't buy the holder and because I collect older, somewhat rare classic coins I can't choose the holder I get with the coin I want. If it was a major issue for a particular coin - perhaps one that might be worth more in one holder than another - I might send one in to try and switch, but for many of them there is no need and it isn't worth the effort, shipping and grading cost. I really thought that NGC had a competitive edge with this policy - makes no sense to me why they would want to give that up.

 

There are a few people interested in the same thing, posting on the NGC forums: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9647041

If you are interested, PM me your email address and I'll put you in contact with them, if possible.

It may be possible to make this happen, if enough of us get on board.

 

To me, grading is assigning a number to represent a specific state of preservation on a coin. "Market grading" is stupid, confusing to unaware buyers, unnecessary, and completely a sham. No matter what a number a coin is assigned, the market will dictate its value (with exception to coins graded 67+). If the coin is premium for the grade, then the wary collector will pay a premium for it. It does not need to be graded higher than it actually is. If MS63 1884 S dollars are selling for AU prices, then that is the new price point for an MS-63. There is no need to adjust the grading scale to compensate for a sagging market (assuming what you said is correct as it makes no sense).

It can be confusing and dangerous to new/ignorant collectors. Many, MANY AU-58 Capped Bust halves are "market graded" to MS-63 (for example) to signify that these premium AU-58's are worth $2000 instead of $800. But many dealers see the number, and market it as a premium MS-63 harping on the premium qualities that bumped it up from AU. Then the dealers market "grade" (read "price") this coin as an MS-64, yours for only $4000.

Let the market "market grade" technically correctly-graded coins and leave the TPGs out of it.

 

You are preaching to the choir. Grade the coin based on its condition of preservation and let the coin bring "what it is worth" in the coin market.

Ain't ever going to happen.

That's the way it was done in the 1970's at INSAB (first TPGS) and ANACS (second TPGS). INSAB was eventually put out of business (too conservative) and ANACS changed their standards to reflect the market. The failure of these two (at the time the only grading services) + NCI which came later was due to dealers with a vested interest that founded PCGS and later NGC who claim to put a value on coins for the industry. These guys were not concerned with the ACTUAL condition of preservation - only what it seemed to be. Over the years, what "seemed to be" has been a moving target.

As to dangerous for new collectors...unless you were a collector in the 1960's you have no idea of danger. Look, if the coin dealers, market makers, and TPGS say an AU Capped Bust half is MS-63, it is an MS-63 and trades at MS-63 price levels. No harm done.

One more thing, when all us conservative graders who know an AU coin when we see it are dead, the new generation will have grown up with and been taught that AU = 63 so no harm done. New standards will prevail.