NGC or PCGS: The Ultimate Poll

No, you didn't read it correctly. He stated that before 2004 (that is what the word PRIOR means), they graded 85 percent or more correctly. I disagreed, saying that there has been no change in their percentage of correct grading. Why are you belaboring this debate endlessly? Are you getting your kicks arguing for the sake of arguing? I have already agreed to disagree, since I like PCGS and NGC; evidently you do not.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'll give you that, I didn't see the 2004 there. My bad!

Point out where I said I don't like either.

All I said was it's money wasted.

 

Hey, I remember when collectors and thousands of dealers used the B&D system and grading uncirculated pieces was as easy as Choice, A-1, Select, Gem. This thread has been an interesting read. ( despite some blindsided comments). For the record, I agree with Doug and disagree with Morgandude on his initial statement that came across as saying that one cannot accurately grade TPG encapsulated coins without having submitted coins to one or both of these top tier TPG's . I beg to differ. Moving ahead to where and what I think is a main issue with both these companies, is that many of us are seeing many many coins under their individual labels that seasoned collectors such as doug, see them disregarding their own standards and rightly so questioning their " Market Acceptable " policy. As for this poll, it has presented some interesting perceptions, but I decline to vote any of the choices. I have always kept my focus on the coin regardless of whether it was in a PCGS, NGC, ANACS, ICG or SEGS holder. If you would like to go over to the NGC Forums, there is a recent thread by Physics regarding a Franklin Half Dollar graded by NGC and approved by CAC. I think it's a good example of how they threw out their own grading standards. Good thread.

 

Its not lost on me at all Paul. I bash a few of aspects of TPG, the fact they use US grading standards and system for ancients, they have demonstrably loosened their grading standards, and they refuse to use a universal set of grading standards. See the similarity? It has to do with them NOT adhering their grades to accepted standards.

The truth is most people only slab to get a "grade". To me that is the least valuable part of slabbing. I love authentication. I like how they prevent some damaged coins from being certified. Both of these things can be tremendously good for a beginning collector especially. I have never said I was against that aspect of TPG, and in fact have many times told people only to buy certified examples of coins like the 16d dime and 14d cent.

IF the grade aspect of slabbing were removed, you would not really here a peep from me against slabbing if someone wished to pay for that protection. Its all of the problems associated with how they grade, how their system allows regrades, (therefor leading to a highest possible grade on a slab), etc that I protest about. Well, that and the opinion of TPG snobs who post here saying things like, "that might be a good coin if it were in a slab" and the like. Coin collecting was fine before TPG, and snobs who believe only a slabbed coin is worthy of collecting to me are just showing their ignorance.

Truth be told Paul, you actually surprised me yesterday when you asked WHY should anyone know how to grade the old fashioned way. Do you really believe everything that came before PCGS is irrelevant now? I guess I am just too fond of history, including US numismatic history, to ever believe that.

 

+1

 

100+ Agreed!

 

Perhaps for a knowledgeable collector like yourself it was fine. For the 95% that Doug was talking about that don't know how to grade, it certainly wasn't fine. Unscrupulous dealers would routinely buy coins from people telling them that they were AU and reselling them as GEM BU. Third party grading leveled the playing field whether you would like to admit it or not. Gradeflation and non unified grading standards are a very small price to pay for the stability that the TPG's have brought to the market. While authentication is extremely valuable for key dates and rare coins, the more common coins benefit much more from the grading aspect. The reason you don't like the grading aspect of the TPG's is simply because they don't employ YOUR grading standards.

And yes, I do believe that grading standards that pre-date the TPG's are irrelevant. And so do you! You have readily admitted on this forum that while you have the ability to predict a TPG grade, your assigned grade based on the application of ANA standards is usually one number grade less. That means that if you try to purchase a certified coin you will be offering MS64 money for MS65 graded coins and will never be able to make a purchase. Is it any wonder why you only buy raw US coins. The TPG standards have basically shut you out and locked the door. If that is not enough to convince you then try this: please read the holographic label on the reverse of an NGC slab. If people want to study the historical aspect of grading for enjoyment, that is fantastic, but it is not a requirement to become a proficient grader given the current numismatic environment.

 

I seriously believe they are the same but i personally think PCGS holders are cooler lol but i do believe they are both the standard in coin grading

 

I LOVE NGC HOLDER much more durable ang their grader I think much more trustable than the other one. My honest opinion.. I LOVE NGC than other one.........

 

well i get to send to them directly so i do like them to...just my honest opinon that i like the PCGS holders

 

First I never said it was necessary to become a grader in today's environment Paul, I said it was necessary in order to understand pricing, pop reports, and the literal tons of information there is about US coins before TPG skewed grades. Reading an AU exists of a coin does you no good if you don't know PCGS probably graded that coin a 63. Saying that historical information of this hobby is irrelevant is simply sad.

Regarding purchasing, you don't know me Paul. Do you know I own a PCGS flowing hair dollar? Its arrogant for you to infer my purchasing habits or ability based upon my thoughts on TPG. Did I ever say I refused to buy a slab if I wished to buy a US coin? No. I haven't even refused to buy an ancient in a slab, though I quickly destroy the slab as soon as I get home for ancients. Why are you so high and mighty smugly looking down at my perceived purchases of "raw" coins, (itself an insulting notion, most coins I own are not raw they are simply not entombed in plastic). You seriously are a poster child of arrogant slab collectors who believe anything not in plastic is inferior goods. Maybe this type of collecting works for you, maybe you truly get a warm fuzzy disdainfully viewing all collectors who own unworthy coins in their collections.

To each his own. I collect coins, not plastic, and refuse to accept the word of those who demonstrably are lying point blank to their customers on the grade of a MS63 that is proven to have wear. Its a lie, and a lie promulgated because of "the market" (read large submitters that pay TPG lots of money). At the end of the day, always remember TPG are there to make money from the large dealers, at the expense of collectors. Who eventually pays all of these fees? The collector.

Btw, they are not MY grading standards, its the ANA and this hobbies grading standards that have been trampled. If you wish to ignore that and allow for profit corporations dictate their proprietary standards to you as gospel then feel free. I simply ask you to not make fun of us who simply wish to retain the standards that have been in this hobby for a century or more.

 

Sad but true!

Let me give you some advice. Stop taking every little thing I say so damn personally. Absolutely nothing I said was arrogant or condescending. What I said was that you have relegated yourself to buying raw coins because you would be unwilling to buy a slabbed coin since they will all be overgraded by your standards. The seller of the slabbed coin is not going to sell you an MS65 coin at MS64 prices, so the only way for you to obtain a slabbed coin is to pay MS65 prices for what you grade by your standards as an MS64 coin. Now I am sure that on a rare occasion you are willing to pay the premium, but for the most part, your loyalty to the ANA standards will prevent you from being able to buy slabbed coins at commensurate prices. And remember, this all revolves around US coins, not ancients. They are a whole other ball game. And if I really am the "poster child of arrogant slab collectors who believe anything not in plastic is inferior goods" then please explain why I have 6 different Dansco collections!

And you call me arrogant and condescending! What do you call saying that you collect coins not plastic? Graciousness? It isn't a lie, "roll friction" is perfectly real. Just because you don't have the ability to see past black and white doesn't make you right and everybody else wrong. Market grading rules the day. You are the one on the outside looking in. It is your opinion that is in the minority. It has nothing to do with the submitters. It is all about the guy who collects Saint Gaudens double eagles. He wants his high grade uncirculated Saint with high point wear from "roll friction" to be graded MS65 not AU58 like the coin that actually did circulate briefly. It isn't a damned conspiracy to rip collectors off. That is what happened before the advent of the TPG's.

LOL, they are your grading standards. The ANA abandoned their own standards when the decided to designate a TPG as the official grading service of the ANA. A century or more? The ANA grading standards were first published in 1977. Furthermore, if you read the current version of the ANA standards they actually do allow for a coin with "roll friction" to be graded as a mint state coin.

Please answer this question: how do you determine if a coin shows traces high point wear?

 

AGREED again! This time is 200++

 

Well, first for high point friction I like to have the coin in hand and check for luster breaks. Then I look at the details at the high points, and check versus what should be there. Doing this you have to take die wear and strike into consideration. If there is a break, you check the reason, and if it appears scratched under light magnification, then it would be inferred it was bag scratches.

Btw, who ever said a word about money Paul? I collect for pleasure. I don't care what price guides say about supposed prices. Anyone who will only pay MS 65 money for a 65 will seriously be creating a collection of average coins. I have no problem paying "65 money" for a 64, or "63 money" for an AU55. I did not say a word about this, and it was your arrogance that stated I will be destined to collect "raw" coins, which by your connotation were problem, inferior coins. This was your condescension, inferring my collection was garbage Paul. I will stop taking it personally when you stop telling me what my collection will/has become.

I buy 5 figures a year of coins, have been for decades. I bet that if our two collections were side by side, some would prefer mine over yours, and vice versa. My collection is not relegated to 3rd world status by my view coins should be graded by historical standards.

Regarding grading, I was referring to historical grading we operated under for a century before ANA even published standards, then ANA standards. Also, I do not view the ANA as abandoning its standards by appointing a TPG for those who wish to use them. I wish they would have insisted ANA standards were used, another disagreement I have with the ANA.

Edit: Btw Peace Paul. I know I love a good debate, but am not taking this thread the wrong way or too personal. I hope you are not either brother.

 

See the sentence in bold. I bet that 95% of the collecting public would not pay MS65 money for an MS64 coin absent some extraordinary reason such as attractive toning. Again, you are a very unique collector. Not BETTER or WORSE, just different!

I am not interested in comparing the size or quality of our collections and my words were not meant to criticize you for collecting raw coins. I was trying to point out that your grading method would make all of the wonderful coins in slabs unavailable to you for monetary reasons. Since you have corrected me by informing me that monetary considerations are not an issue, then I say more power to ya. I just don't think many other collectors have the financial freedom to collect coins the way that you do.

With regards to high point wear, you look for a break in the luster. If you see a break you check the reason, just like the TPG's. They try to determine if the friction is caused by "roll friction" or by circulation wear. I submit to you that the term "circulation wear" is only necessary because one would treat it differently from non circulation wear. If you agree with that, then the current ANA grading standards support the market grading of coins that show "roll friction" in the MS grades.

Logic dictates that if an MS60 can't show any traces of "circulation wear" it can show traces of "non circulation wear" ie "roll friction".

I ain't mad at ya, I just don't want you to think that I am criticizing you, your coins, or your collecting method. I admire your principles, I just don't think it is suitable for most collectors and would warn them of the dangers. Just as you would and should warn them of the dangers of paying excessive premiums for toned coins. I wholly agree that engaging in the toned coin market is tantamount to swimming in the deep end of the numismatic pool.

 

This is an old thread that I took the time to read through today and felt I had to comment from a "newbie" position. First let me say I prefer NGC over PCGS only because I like the look and feel of the NGC slab better.

Having said that, I started my collection with an eye towards bullion and really never considered collecting from the numismatic perspective. The first coins (mostly ASEs) I first bought were all nice, uncirculated, but raw coins. And then I purchased my first graded coin - an MS69 $5 AGE. The quality of the coin was astounding. I bought it knowing very little about the TPGs and less than little about grading but the fact I had a "graded" coin spurred me on to learn more both about numismatics, in general, and the TPGs.

I look at the TPGs the same way as I look at a house appraiser. A house appraiser looks at my house and tells me what he/she thinks it worth (in the current market). I found out what the pros and cons are about my house compared to other houses in my area. The appraisers are supposedly objective (that's what I pay them for) and if I tell someone my house was appraised at $375K then they have a sense of what it's like.

Are they always right? No.

Will two different appraisers give the exact same valuation to my house? Most likely not.

Will they give me (and a potential buyer or lender) a sense of relative value? Absolutely!!

Does a buyer have to pay me a certain price based on that valuation? Absolutely NOT!

The TPGs serve a similar service. The grades give me a means of comparison and the price guides, however suspect, give me a sense of value. What the seller/buyer and I agree two can go anywhere from there.

 

From a photography stand point I see the new NGC slabs as the worst for scratches and even harder to remove the scratches.

 

Even the scratch resistant slabs?

 

Yeah, those seems to be worse at getting minor scratches. Then when you try to get rid of them it can get real ugly. I don't believe they are really scratch resistant.