With grading fees ranging from around $12 for bulk submissions to $600 and more for ultra-rarities at PCGS and similar charges at NGC, submitters often wonder if it makes any difference if they pay a higher fee to possibly get a better grade. The only way to know for sure would be if a submitter sent in the same coins on different tier levels to the TPG's. Has any one done a study like this?
From what I understand, it does not matter which tier you send your coins in. I am not aware of any study on this, however.
Many of the long-term dealers have interesting observations on this topic, but more anecdotal than anything. If a coin goes through grading faster (walkthrough) it is more likely to get the high end graders and more liberal finalizers IMO. Graders who do not make the service happy could be demoted to grading moderns--I'm not sure this happens regularly, but performance clearly affects standing among other graders.
Why is this your opinion ? Again, why would this be so ? For that matter, how could it even be known ?
Mainly conjecture. A different set of graders looks at the high-end coins than the lower-tier ones. It could only be proven if you were willing to spend a lot of money on various tiers and then see the corresponding grades for each. Probably harder to do these days with the new digital imaging. My guess is that "liner" coins, MS65.7 hoping for MS66, are the difference with getting the higher grades with more expensive tiers. It is not in the interest of any insider to reveal details of any lack of objectivity in grading ("a chip in the big game" don't ya know). But my guess is that there are variations in standards based on who is submitting--I hear this all the time, mainly from those who don't do a lot of submissions. On the other hand, dealers who I have heard complaining of the TPGs switching their submitted coins for those of lesser value are making laughable comments. "Well, lookie here. Joe Coin Shop just sent us some nice silver coins. Let's grab his submission fees and switch some low grade coins to make him unhappy". Yeah, sure.
As a submitter even if sledom now I would think that the grading services would want to make sure this did not happen. Even the preception of it happening would drive many submitters away in a heart beat. BTW on my first submission which was with the free grading voucher two of the four coins sent in graded MS70 and the other two were MS69. All were mint half ounce gold's still in there orginal cointains.
Well, that's the problem right there - conjecture. There is no evidence that what you are thinking is true. Nor is it true that different graders look at the expensive tier coins. The same graders look at all the coins. Your comments remind me of the stories and claims that you hear, and as you say you can hear them from dealers, that only those who submit large quantities of coins ever get the high grades. Meaning that the TPGs show favoritism to some submitters. But these stories are not true either, all they are is sour grapes. It is people looking for some excuse to blame the TPGs for the low grades when the real problem is that those who are submitting the coins can't grade correctly. You see, it's simply not possible for the claims you are making, or the claims of favoritism, to be even be true. That's because the graders have no idea who is submitting the coins that they look at, nor do they have any idea what grading tier the coins have been submitted under. The graders merely sit at their desk and grade the next box of coins that is handed to them. Each coin in the box is in a clear plastic flip with no identifying marks on that flip other than a bar code. So there can be no favoritism based on who the submitter is, nor can there be any favoritism based on the grading tier.
I have even heard this "theory" from seasoned PNG dealers. It is impossible to know one way or another unless there were an insider who gave illumination on the issue. To say that since the TPGs started there has been no lack of objectivity in grading is quite a stretch. I would guess that objectivity is good now but not absolute. For example: Some company submits 25 rare coins, every one of them is over $10K in value. The graders see them in sequence. Are you saying there is no effect of sequential coins one after another by association? Conversly, someone with a reputation for submitting problem, doctored, or lasered coins submits a number of those together, along with some nice, original, PQ coins. Are you saying that there is no "guilt by association"?
Anyone can infer whatever they want. But the fact remains that the graders have no idea who submitted the coins and they have no idea what tier the coins were submitted under. So it is impossible for those things to influence the grader's opinion. That is what I am saying.
I have a story... and I can attest that it is 100% true because it happened to me and my customer. As some of you know I am working on a very expensive collection with a customer of mine. While attending one of the many conventions I do my customer happened to come along and brought some of his coins with him. One of which I thought was an under graded 1796 quarter. The coin sat in a PCGS AU50 holder. The coin was clearly a nicer coin then an AU50. I happened to buy this coin from a certain former coin dealer who now happens to be one of the head honchos at PCGS. PCGS had announced at the show that they were going to have this certain person looking at coins at the show at their table at a certain time and giving free opinions. We ran the coin by the table in the holder... showed it to the certain person and he agreed that it should be an AU53. We walked it over and submitted it in the show walk through tier... and wham... it's in the AU53 holder. Did this certian someone have anything to do with this??? You be the judge.
Perhaps they did have something to do with it. But do you believe that it was because you were the one submitting it - favoritism to you in other words because of who you are ? Or do you believe that it was because you used the high priced grading teir - favoritism for pricing ? Or is it posisble that the coin was previously graded AU50, in an older holder, and that by todays standards the coin was bumped a graded - gradeflation ? I'd tend to go with the latter.