ANACS vs NGC

I guess it all depends on how bad you feel it is to make a mistake. I make them all of the time. Both in real life and in writing. Neither are huge faults to me. It shows that we're human.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Just for the record, the 2015 version (very little field) runs about 50% SP70 and nothing below SP69. The 2014, with much more field, has an EXTREMELY low SP70 rate, and even a few SP68's.

 

We all make mistakes all the time; however, there is a difference: I claim to be a professional numismatist. Mistakes can be very costly to my reputation and pocket. If I were to pay $$$$ for a coin and then find out it was a counterfeit, over graded, repaired, etc. What if I taught a grading class that 70's don't really exist as has been claimed many times in threads on various different forums. I expect the highest standards from my associates. Although we are human, if I don't meet my own expectations it feels horrible!

 

You wouldn't by some off chance be teaching next week, would you?

 

then you'd be wrong again... but there's no crime in it

 

Really? Now you got the faces and colors going...The way I personally view myself: ) cannot be wrong for me. We just have different standards and expectations.

No, I think Brian Silliman is doing a pre-show mini-seminar. I've been in several of his classrooms.

 

I'm used to the faces and colors... I don't usually pay them any attention anyway

If you need to be right for your own self-esteem, I suggest you love yourself a little more. It's really ok to be wrong.

 

Thanks. You just don't get it. My self-esteem is so high I come off as an obnoxious, stuck-up, know-it-all in many of my chosen fields. I love me.

I'm a very selfish only child and I hate most people! However, I can be a forgiving, giving, best friend. I've had two female psychiatrists date me just to learn what made me tick. Finally, I cannot stand "ex-perts" and I am in awe of the truly knowledgeable folks I learn from. A few are here on CT.

Therefore, I disagree with the modern, girly, snow-flake reasoning that "It's OK to be wrong." As in: "It's Ok I shot you, I didn't know the gun was loaded."

Now please, let's get back on the subject ANACS/NGC and I'll leave you or others with the last word about what's "right" or "wrong."

 

If there's anything that I know about you, Insider, it's this:

You have never let anyone have the last word.

As far as your name calling, (modern, girly, snow-flake) it doesn't phase me. I truly do love me.

Narcissism is never a good trait, but if that's the suit you want to wear... be my guest.

 

I can truly understand why 2 female psychiatrists would date or go out with you.
They most probably were working on their Master's or doctorates degrees and needed the perfect narcissistic specimen to write their thesis .
However I'm relatively sure being who you are ,you would find their expert opinions to be altered factuality.

 

And, because of this (and declining standards at PCGS & NGC), I'm picking up some great deals in ANACS holders. I'm talking about 69's in PCGS & NGC holders that are clearly 68's or less and 69's in ANACS holders that are close to 70's.

Based on what I'm seeing lately, it appears to be more a war between the top three tpg'ers for market share, than actual differences in grading. They all over grade at times and they all under grade at times. The moral, learn to grade, you can't trust a tpg'er all the time.

 

clearly, SQG, you have learned to buy the coin and not the holder.

 

Newsflash...over 95% of moderns are graded by eye. All TPGS are guilty of this. Is it any wonder 68 & 69 can look similar and many 70's are not!

 

Another reason not to pay a tpg'er for an opinion.

It may have been changed, but, PCGS once had a description of their grades on their website. The descriptions for 69 & 70 were something like this: 69 - no flaws visible to the naked eye, yet under 5x few flaws are found. 70 - no flaws under 5x. How can they meet their own standards without using a 5x? Take a look at their most recent graded coins, most 69's, have flaws visible to the naked eye = less than 69. Of course, I guess if your vision is flawed, you can't see the flaws with your naked eye. I wonder if graders are given vision tests.

 

It makes a big difference what the flaw is (mint made?) and where it is.
No one forces anyone to use a TPGS. The coins just sell better slabbed.

 

I learned in Orlando many things about TPG's.
1) Unless the MATERIAL ITSELF identifies the submitter, graders NEVER know. All this "it depends who you are" garbage is pure hokum.
2) Both NGC and PCGS use the two graders and a finalizer system. On high end material, at NGC, Mark Salzburg or Rick Montgomery are THEMSELVES the finalizers.
3) At PCGS, the second grader is blind to the first grader's grade, but the finalizer sees both. At NGC, the second grader sees the first grader's grade and the finalizer sees both.
4) 80% or more of the grade is determined with NO magnification. Swirling the coin under a single incandescent lamp is central to determining grade.
5) Magnification is mostly used to determine what the "something" is that caused a luster break during the swirl.
6) Graders, especially graders of modern coins, are supposed to handle 3,600 coins per day. Do the math. 8 seconds per coin.

 

It appears that you were at the Legacy Dinner... and...

7) NGC claims to average 12,000 coins a day.

 

And Brian Silliman's course. And yes, I was at the Legacy dinner, at the table with Dr. Ralph Ross and the gentleman in the motorized wheelchair, the table nearest the bar. Two fingers of Jack Daniels and a splash of water.

 

NGC has graded over 37 million coins, of which just under 25 million are U.S. coins.