Do you think grading standards have gotten looser over the years ?

This question is in regards to standards across the board and all third party graders but more specifically to PCGS slabs and the OGH Gen !.2 (1986-1989 ), Gen 2.1 and 2.2
Gen 3.0 and 3.1 (1990-1998) and Gen 4.4 1998-2002 )

In other words would you expect coins in the OGH holders to go up or down ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think you're questioning if OGH holders were under graded back then.
Maybe as the technology for better glasses improved so did accurate grading.
Rumblings about OGH slabs being under graded is possible.

 

Yes, "across the board" and across time. IMO, looser standards equate to more verbiage and more grades. I have the 1962 Brown & Dunn somewhere. I could jam it into my back pocket. It was very tight but it went in. Know of any current grading guides that you can squeeze into your back pocket?

 

TPGs exist only to make money, I only use them for authentication. The grades are in general a joke and have never been consistent over time.

 

I think you'd have to ask this question about specific TPGs and specific time periods. For example PCGS I know purged their entire coin facts imagery because it demonstrated grade inflation, and now it seems they've gone overboard assigning Details grades because they don't want to take risks with their guarantee (or whatever the reasoning is) and have tightened up. ANACS I think also went through a period of overgrading and now they're a point tighter than the other two. To me the "old holders" thing is yet another fad pumping up prices. I can understand the niche of collecting various slab iterations, but not from the standpoint of some perception that they're "undergraded" relative to some other perception of "grade inflation." Why on earth would you pay more for a coin that's more accurately graded?

 

GDJMSP has definitively stated -- and Insider and other veterans have I believed backed him up on the timeline(s) -- that grading standards got noticeably looser about 2000 or so.

I believe we might even have some threads discussing that from pre-Covid.

It would depend on the coin, too.

 

With CACG now on record as taking coins that were as high as MS-65 and giving them DETAILS or AU grades.....I think we are in a pretty good environment right now for grading.

We need to see how it shakes out, but it appears CACG is closer to technical grading than modified market grading. A single demerit like rub or friction on a single high point gets you knocked down whereas that wasn't the situation in the past, even with CAC stickering.

 

Sure, but only because they come up on my phone.

 

How techie.

 

The standards did get looser but CAC helped to bring them back a bit.

 

Agreed standards did get looser. It will be interesting to see what CAC does in the long run with coin grading. Speculation I heard from some others - CAC green stickers are much harder to get now that they are grading coins. Maybe they prefer you use their grading services. I really kind of do not worry about that - I really do not care about the holder, the green bean, the grader - just the coin inside. I will freely admit sometimes I bid a little more for a really nice coin that has the little green bean. I also admit that sometimes I see a coin (pick any grader) and wonder what the heck were they thinking - and what might they know that I do not.

 

Well if the trend is anything like paper currency the answer has to be yes, and though technology has gotten better the standards of grading has become less strict if you compare grades OGH and the blur ones they have now you can notice that right away as i have many examples and though i dont consider myself an expert
on everything, i do know what to look for.

 

That seem,s logical, and you also have to look at the resale or trading value as well,
before CAC started slabbing there own coins 'The green bean" meant something special, but not so much now days, not much of a premium on the resale side either ;(

 

I

Way to many grading companies

 

Yes, no, maybe, perhaps, let me think about it.

 

You'd really hope that they didn't get looser or tighter, but more accurate. But all grading opinions are just that: opinions. I'll let the market decide how much that is worth lol.

The only graded coins I own are ones I submitted for grading myself, and I did so for storage and protection reasons, not because I cared what grade someone said they were. The main reason I even consider buying graded coins is if they're commonly faked, for assurances about the authenticity, not the grade.

 

You asked if grading standards have loosened from a time when coin grading was in its infancy in the 80's and 90's, so I had to say yes. But I have been submitting coins for the last 20 years and I haven't seen a discernable difference, at least in my chosen series. If anything, NGC has severely tightened its standard on what qualifies as a full step Jefferson Nickel in the last 5 years.

 

Basically, 3 high-end grading companies plus some niche smaller firms that have good quality people, notwithstanding low market share of high-end coins.

 

most of us know about the top 2 PCGS and NGC who would you consider the number 3 ? i am a PCGS guy exclusively, no other TPG camps out in my safe
i do not have a problem with NGC other then i dont like there holders as they are very bulky plus the fact that PCGS graded coins sell for and demand higher premiums.

 

I think PCGS and NGC are 1 and 1A for domestic coins. NGC leads in foreign/world coins.

CACG has made a very strong entrance but until we see how the market share shakes out....and/or until some prestigious coins or collections are housed in CACG holders....we don't know if they will become the new Gold Standard for domestic U.S. coins, replacing the PCGS holder + CAC sticker.