Would you consider changes to the grading scales? AU 63, etc?

Selling prices are set by what people want to pay. There is no system that will be able to match price to grade perfectly. It's debatable if having a continuous system will change much. Sure it might help convince the greysheet/price guide buyer to pay more because the slab number is now higher, but what it will do among most collectors is hard to predict. Some might rebel completely (drastic changes can easily cause even the most ardent supporters to move away from the product). Others will still bid the same amount or less (feeling that the new system doesn't mean much or even feeling that the coins are now maxed out).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I posted this PCGS AU58+ CAC half cent in the CAC or no CAC thread and as I recall, nobody thought it was worthy of a bean (A or B). So, my guess is that many people wouldn't consider it among the best of the best for circulated coins, even though it has been graded 58+ with a bean.

 

There will always be mistakes, questionable grades, or even properly graded but less attractive coins. Would you like that coin any more in an AU 63 slab?
My guess would be that coin wouldn't appeal to many of us regardless of the number on the holder (or the grading system used).

 

I think this puts the demand back into the collectors hand.
It really isn't what the dealers and TPG's want to have happen

 

Can you please clarify what exactly puts the demand back into the collector's hand?
Creating a new system with AU 63 or keeping it as-is?

 

AU has been accommodated with many XF's, just like MS has many AU intruders. I think a simple standard is the resolve. A hard cut off, square the line between grades.
Wait, that shouldn't slow submissions, toning clouds the ambiguity.
It is much harder to decide a grade when the toning hides otherwise
in your face wear and contact.

 

Don't believe everything you read. Many myself included would believe a PCGS 58+ CAC over a bunch of random internet posters every time.

Look at the coin sale. Most people clearly showed the forum was wrong which is common of most forums if not any

You get a lot of people that respond that really don't know and if nothing else a lot of people that really don't know the picture style of an auction place

 

What is drastic about something that minimally changes anything but just makes more sense? Even if you say it's dumb, what is drastic about it? I explained it a bunch already

 

Changing a definition is drastic. Eliminating the standard that wear equals AU and replacing it with some examples of wear can now get the same numeric grade as uncirculated is a big change. Even if it does not change thousands of grades, it still is a fundamental reimagining of the grading system.

 

I would love a more fluid grading scale but at the same time I dont want to resubmit all my coins and try to get everyine to agree on which standard is better. Its like pounds and kilagrams. Both measure wieght but are prefered by different people.

 

Oftentimes there is already a significant price jump from 55 to 58 in a lot of classic US series. Much more than from 50 to 53 or 55. Then we add the plus grades, CAC stickers and so on and there is even more differentiation. Even within those categories there is different pricing for eye appeal. I don’t see the benefit in further complicating the system.

 

Which I have no problem with. A minuscule percentage would be impacted and it would correct a fundamental flaw

It really doesn't change very much and would be a minor change. No one needs to resubmit everything if it happened, it doesn't turn grading upside down, it would be a minor change at best