Reholder and regrade are two different services. If the OP had sent his coin to be reholdered then they would have just put it into a new slab with the same grade/designation. If he had sent it in to be regraded (in the slab) then it would be cracked out and regraded and then when it is rready to be resealed if it has gone down in grade it is re-evaluated and if the lower grade is confirmed to be correct then the submitter is made whole via the grade guarantee, but if the original grade is acceptable it is corrected and placed into the same grade of holder it came out of. As for the OP's gripe, he needs to get over it. Clearly the coin isn't DMPL and he can't grade well enough to tell. The coin was likely overgraded in the holder and there is inherent risk in cracking a coin if you are a novice grader (heck, there is risk for the advanced grader) that the coin will downgrade, it is just one of the costs of the game.
Dear Arizona Jack, There is no "predisposition" involved, and it's not "bias". My distain and contempt is based on facts and I usually back my comments up with verifiable information. NGC's whole existance is "supposed" to be based on honesty and integrity. Their actions in the subject case is nothing short of pathetic IMO. If you disagree, lets hear your logic.
I cannot disagree Vavet, I think the whole thing reaks of funny business, and for NGC to lead on a submitter ( if they actually did ) stinks of rotten eggs....... Disgrundled buyers/bidders/submitters etc et al have a way of making a case very one sided, and we on the forums dont get the other sides take very often.
Dear vavet, Those comments are exactly why AJ said you had a "predispositioned bias" against TPG's. Please explain what they did wrong. They made no promises, and therefore broke none.
I disagree. First of all NGC's existance is about making money. They are like any other business, beholden to their stockholders to provide return on investment. To expect them to act any other way is silly. Additionally, I see nothing pathetic about the way they handled the case in question, in fact I think they went above and beyond to try to help their submitter. They had a submitter try to pull one over on them (he submitted a coin they'd previously graded and was telling them they got it wrong) but the coin didn't warrant the grade it had previously received so they downgraded it. The guy complained and their cusomer service person offered to have it looked at again (send it in with pics of the old holder, yada yada yada) at no cost, which was extremely generous of them. Upon further review the coin is still not acceptable as a DMPL, so it stayed in the PL holder (though with a free numerical upgrade for the submitter). If the submitter had actually known how to grade well enough to tell that the coin shouldn't be in a DMLP holder then he should have sent it in for downgrade review, but he not only didn't realize it was a downgrade, he actually thought it was an upgrade and he cracked it out. At that point he knowingly voided the grade guarantee, so even though NGC was extremely flexible with him and agreed to look at it a second time they could not be held to the guarantee anymore. I repeat, when novices crack coins for upgrades it is risky business and this guy just needs to count it as a learning experience and move on. The best in the game routinely lose money carcking coins, it is the nature of the beast, get over it and move on to the next coin. This isn't NGC's fault.
First off, a "predisposition" in the case of TPG's means an inclination in advance of their actions. "Bias" is a prejudice which is a preconceived or irrational hatred. My contention has evolved based on what has taken place with regard to TPG's. If it walks like a duck............. What NGC did that quite frankly stinks IMO was #1 inaccurate grading either when the coin was first slabbed or when it was slabbed the second time OR changed their grading standards between submissions, and #2 reslabbed the coin at a higher grade on the third submission simply because a slab cracker was having a hissyfit, and #3 griving the exact same coin three different grades. It's all right there in the OP's post on the C&PM board.
Silly? When I pay someone for their "professional services", I expect professional service, not an attempt to satify the stockholders.
I just reread OP on C&PM I'll go back to my original thought, crackout game is a risky biz. :headbang:
Yes, I noticed that as well. Chris is a babe magnet, always chatting it up with the gals whenever I see him at a show.
yeah this really beautiful girl (not from heritage) was starring at me too i was feeling really uncomfortable. i hate people noticing me at coin shows
The OP tried the crack out ploy and lost. Now he's singin' the blues. Cheer up. You've won this game many times before. Wait a few months and crack it out again if you want, or not. Bruce
The guy made more than one mistake - First of all he cracked the coin out of the original holder. There are two reasons people do this - 1 - The majority of submitters think that if they submit the coin in the holder that the TPG will be biased against the coin getting an upgrade. They think they stand a better chance of getting the upgrade if the coin is raw. 2 - The majority of people believe that standards back in the late '80s were tougher than they are now. So they think that any coin in an old holder will automatically get an upgrade if it is re-submitted. Number 1 is a mistake for a couple of reasons. First of all, by cracking out the coin you void any grade warranty the coin may have had if it were to be downgraded. It is doubly a mistake because the graders today could care less what the graders of 20 years ago had to say - they grade it the way they see it. And if the coin is already in a slab or raw makes no difference whatsoever. Number 2 is a mistake that all too many people tend to believe. Standards have not changed. The TPG's do not go through periods of tightening and loosening standards. Their grading sets haven't changed, they still have the same old coins in the same old holders. The last time that grading standards changed was in 1987. But what people tend to forget is that the standards were made tougher then, not easier. MS65 coins became MS63 coins virtually overnight. And NGC did not even come into existence until 1987 - after the change had happened. I will never understand why people always think that the TPG's have stricter standards this month and looser standards that month. They don't ! The standards remain the same - all the time. The only thing that changes is that people make mistakes grading their raw coins and when they send them in and the grade is different than what they thought it should be, it is inevitably the TPG that made the mistake. So the explanation is always that the TPG is grading tougher or looser now. They never even consider that it is they who made the mistake. Yes, TPG's do make mistakes. I'll be at the head of the line to be the first to say that. But the TPG's make far, far fewer mistakes than the people submitting the coins. And vavet, for once I will agree with you. NGC did so something wrong. At least if we are to believe the OP. For all we know it never happened that way. But if what he says is true, they did give the coin 3 grades - that was wrong. They should have left the coin alone and let the second grade stand. Instead, in an effort to make a disgruntled customer happy they bumped the coin a little. That was wrong - if it is true.
