I would like to know ANYTHING about how PCGS and NGC determine grades for so many different world coins. The ANA has its own grading standards, with very specific wear pattern information to determine circulated grades for US coins, for example. I've heard that the TPGs have their OWN standards for grading coins (different from ANA) for US coins. So how do they apply grading standards to World Coins? In the same way? Do the TPGs create their own grading standards for each coin(?) and keep the grading standards a "house secret" that is only accessible to their World Coin graders? OR maybe this is just wrong: Perhaps those grading svengalis just dope-eye them and use their grading knowledge to assign a grade?
To my knowledge there are no books from other countries similar to the ANA grading book for US coins. But they most definitely do grade coins in other countries. For the most part, I never seen any country be different anyway, they grade them very much like we used to here in the US before the advent of the ANA book. In other words, instead of a numerical system they use an adjectival system. Such as - G, VG, F, VF, XF, AU, BU, and Proof, with exemplifiers added when needed, eg: Good VF, Very Good VF, etc etc. The TPGs however pretty much grade coins from other countries just like they do US coins, using the same system, grading criteria, and definitions. In other words, a coin is a coin, regardless of where it's from. That said, because of their lack of familiarity with the coinage of other countries it has been my experience that the TPGs over-grade and under-grade a whole lot more often than they do with US coins. They also get the authentication wrong a whole lot more often, by several times more often than they do with US coins. And yes, I am saying they slab counterfeits and fakes as genuine coins because they do not know how to identify the fakes and counterfeits. Again, due to their lack of familiarity and knowledge.
Thanks for your response, and I kind of suspected that's how it was done. However, it seems that, in a way, they kind of don't use the same grading criteria as US coins: Perhaps the TPGs assigning grades to world coins at the Mint State-level isn't too problematic for me, but the Grading of a Lincoln wheat cent in circulated condition requires knowing what wear-patterns happen on specific parts of that particular coin, and to what extent, for example. With circulated World Coins, the TPGs are grading coins that they don't have a "common narrative" on, like there has been for US coins. I'm thinking of the evolution of grading since Dr. William H. Sheldon introduced his 70-point scale in 1949, if not before. So, I guess the TPGs just determine a coin's high points, and roughly where the worst place would be for a mark or a scratch? Don't the graders have conversations among themselves about this, just for consistency sake? I have that Beth Deisher book, Making the Grade, and I'm thinking of the color-coding that she uses there. Or maybe there are just too many world coins out there! Perhaps the graders have been doing this work so long that they have created among themselves a level of "art" of grading that approaches Buddahood that doesn't need much discussion. But at the same time, I am actually impressed with the TPGs graders consistency with the uncirculated coins that I collect, esp. S. Korea.
No they don't discuss it. Each grader assigns his own grade and passes the coin on to the next grader. Then a finalizer looks at the coin. If he agrees with the assigned grade then that's what it is. Or, he can assign his own grade and move the coin out. Or, he can send it back to the graders saying do it again.
Even with American coins I wonder how they differentiate a MS65 and a MS66, so for foreign coins, G, VG, F, etc. seems to make more sense.
Why ? When you add in the exemplifiers the adjectival system is no different than the numerical system - it's just letters vs numbers. For example, we use XF40 & XF45, they XF and Good XF - no difference. The adjectival system is what we used 40-50 years ago. But it was decided that it would be less cumbersome, less confusing, and more practical to switch to using numbers instead of letters.
Tpg use the ANA standards on all coins. Ngc has been a better Tpg grade wise on world coins I have submitted .that is my2c
jello NGC has said many times that they use their own standards. No TPG, not 1 of them, uses ANA standards.
You said it, not me. " they XF and Good XF " "we use XF40 & XF45", and what about XF41, XF42, XF43 and XF44?
Won't happen, I've German coins between 30 and 60 IMHO and in the states and in Euro. it will grade all over the books.. good luck.
They are not used by anybody, never have been. Given that, what about them ? I guess I'm asking - what's your point in even mentioning them ?
OP, I agree with Doug of course. Grading a coin, especially a circulated coin, should be the first thing a coin collector learns. I might have been 10 or 12 and you could stick any coin, any age, from anywhere in the world, in front of me and I could grade it if I knew what an uncirculated piece looked like. Grading circulated coins is not rocket science, its pretty dang easy. It just takes practice, lots and lots of practice with thousands of coins. After a while the difference between a VG and F, on any coin, you will see in half a second. XF/AU/BU only get complicated in the whole "weak strike", "worn dies", crud, which I have always disagreed with, so I moved on to ancients who do not practice such grading fallacies/shenanigans/hokum.
I have a lot of German coins graded by NGC, and I have to say they have been very consistent in their grading. I have multiples of the same coins (denomination, year, mintmark, etc.) and I have been pleased with the grades over time. There have only been 2 instances I can think of where I thought a coin should have graded higher based on other similar coins I had seen in the marketplace. And even at that, it was AU55 vs. AU58 or the like. Should the top 3 TPGs all get together and agree on a standard, then publish that standard like ANA for US coins?
They would never do that, since then there is a basis of a lawsuit for misgraded coins. If they make up their own standards, then their default answer is, "that coin in our opinion is an XF 40 according to OUR grading scale". This is exactly the reason they refuse to use the ANA grading scale, it actually would hold them accountable to something.
Even if not litigation, their guarantees. If they are only ever "responsible" for the grade they give a coin according to their own grading scale, then how is that grade guarantee worth anything? Can't they always just say, "that is an XF40 according to us". Its a silly little circle that I am shocked how little anyone ever discusses. It basically invalidates any kind of guarantee of a grade from any TPG, because all were smart enough to NOT use ANA standards, but make up their own, (which they can change at will).
I didn't know that. Since there are grades from MS60 to MS70, is there differentiation for each stage (11 grades)? Enquiring minds want to know.
