I have read that some TPGs used to grade 'stricter' as they do now. Can someone give examples when their coins were graded higher after re-submitting to the same company? Also I have a 1935-S San Diego half (ICG MS-63). If I ship it to NGC, they may probably downgrade it, correct?
A grade is a single data point in time and thus coins may not grade the same each time they are submitted. Depending upon what NGC thinks about your coin, they may refuse to cross it.
The obverse of this coin looks AU to me, but I'm having a hard time deciding how the reverse would grade. Chris
NGC will only cross PCGS slabs. Everything else is treated as a raw coin and cracked out (If you send it in slabbed you have to give permission for it tto be cracked out or they just return it.) That is a fairly recent ICG slab so the old "they graded them more conservatively back then" story would not apply.
What are you hoping to accomplish by crossing the coin over to NGC? The difference in price between an MS63 & MS65 San Diego Commemorative is not worth the cost of the submission. And there is absolutely no way that coin is premium gem. IMO, that coin was very fortunate to get the grade that it has. My advice is to leave it alone.
Actually I had two independent questions, sorry for not being clear in the first place: 1) examples of coins in old slabs that have been upgraded after re-submission 2) how would a TPG handle a coin from a competitor such as the one in the picture Reasons for re-submitting? Having all coins graded with the same grading standard. I know it doesn't make sense for this particular coin
Sorry, the quality of the picture is not very good. I have another San Diego half that has some light wear on the high points, but this one doesn't.
like lehigh said, there is little difference in price between au and ms64, it's not worth it unless you think it will grade ms65 or higher. there are many san diego coins in those grade, most people don't bother to submit them.
Conder 101 answered your question #2 in post #5. As for your first question, yes it is undisputed that coins have been upgraded upon re-submission - by all of the TPGs. And while it does happen with older slabs, it doesn't only happen with those that were graded years ago. There are many examples of coins being submitted, returned to the owner, and the owner then sending them in again almost immediately and having the coin be up-graded. But in most cases the coins were cracked out of their original slabs, both old and new, and then re-submitted to come back with a higher grade than before. Of course there were also times when they came back with a lower grade, or no even no grade at all. I think what you are asking for though is a specific example of when this happened - a coin in an older slab ending up being up-graded. In other words you want proof that it has happened. Well, I have no doubt there are people here who could give you that specific example but it would really serve no purpose because it's a well known fact that it is true. It has happened many, many, many times - and everybody knows it.
I've seen conder101's post and 'liked it' as it really was a good answer. With regards to the other question, I wanted to understand if this applies to all coins and grades. I doubt a coin graded AU-5x would return as an MS-60, because either there's wear or there isn't, right? So I guess most of the time a coin in let's say AU should stay in the AU range.
Actually, the divide between what is AU and MS is a highly debatable topic due to roll friction and coins will often upgrade from AU to MS. Please read the current thread linked below for an example. If you are really interested in a debate about roll friction, click on the link in post # 11 of the thread below. Enjoy! Chances of going from AU58 to MS63/4?
If you have Coinfacts, it isn't terribly hard to find examples of PCGS coins being broken out and successfully resubmitted for higher PCGS grades. I have noticed and pointed out to PCGS many examples where multiple photos and cert numbers of the same coin in differing grades showed up in Coinfacts. The redundant coins were deleted not long afterward. Still, there remain some examples where there are posted multiple photos and cert numbers of the same coin in the same grade, attesting to the number of times a coin would be resubmitted by some owners. There may even still be some in different grades, indicating the upgrade took place. I can recall one instance where there were nine (yes nine!) cert numbers and nine pair of images for the same coin . . . eight were at MS62 and one at MS63. With fewer than 25 total mint state coins in the pop report, most being MS62, and 8 of those being erroneously recorded, that MS62 was a glaring underrated coin. Just like for other underrated dates and grades, I went shopping for MS62 examples of that coin once I realized how skewed the pop report was . . . never did find one, but am still looking, so I'm not publicizing that date. At least a lot of the erroneous information on the site has been cleaned up. Not all of it, but it's certainly harder to find now than it once was. I imagine the same is probably true with NGC and Numismedia as well.
