I guess not so much avoid as be wary....the years when the grading standards supposedly were more lax. I guess that would include the Bubble Years of 1988-1991. Does it pay to 'pay up' for certain slabs, like the original Green PCGS ? Do any of you feel that a rating in that slab is almost assuredly rock-solid for the grade, almost like having the CAC sticker without it ? Any other slabs/years pretty conservatively graded, either from PCGS or NCG ? Conversely, any years/slabs you certainly avoid ?
As a GENERAL rule: Not anymore... Anything that was in the market place from those years has pretty much been cracked out. That's why you see a lot fewer of the older holders than the number of coins graded would lead you to expect. HOWEVER, if it's fresh material - it's been in somebodies collection unseen by the market for 20, 30 years - it could be an upgrade candidate... But how do you really know - "trust me, I'm an honest eBay seller"... So the old advice holds: Buy the coin not the holder.
There are grading services that I would avoid, but grading eras are fine. The noted era of 1988-1991 was more strict than most, so the original theory is shot. Also, there are plenty of strong coins for the grade in old green holders, but the lowest hanging fruit has been mostly picked.
I thought during The Bubble that the standards slipped as a flood of inexperienced graders came on board at PCGS/NGC....was it later than, mid-1990's ?
The standards at PCGS and NGC have been fairly consistent throughout their entire existence. There was no "flood of inexperienced graders" - and that's the reason that these 2 have stayed on top. You can take a sampling of coins graded in any era, and you'll find a few that are undergraded, a few that are overgraded, a few with problems, but the majority of them will be accurate. There are certain eras that have a reputation for being more strict - and while that may have been true a while ago, I would argue that the majority of the undergraded coins in these slabs have already been upgraded if possible. That's a lot of money left sitting on the table, and you have to wager that in the 25 years since then, someone has tried if they thought there was a chance. For that reason, I feel like some of these slabs (like the infamous Old Green Holder) now actually have a higher percentage of *overgraded* coins.
But if you took at random 10 Saint-Gaudens DEs or 10 Morgan SDs from the first few years of the TPG's existence and then 10 random from the post-Bubble Years or whenever they were 'looser', I will bet that experts or graders today would agree more with the 10 randoms from the 1st batch than the 2nd.
Agreed, I thought even the Big Two had a few years where they were a bit slack. Excellent point, I agree. Overgraded ??? I would say 'fine for the grade' but just because the undergradeds 'graduated' when resubmitted I don't think the bulk of the remainder are necessarily overgraded. Numerically, yes, since the population lost the highest-quality I guess you can say if it was on average correctly graded then I guess you could imply in the aggregate they are now undergraded. But I would also think that any MS-65 Saint or Morgan in an OGH is more likely to be SOLID for the grade than a similarly-graded coin in later years. Even though, again, the population for the Saints/Morgans in the OGH lost its creme de la creme.
I disagree, and there have been enormous variations. When the services started, both were fairly conservative (but even that has some exceptions as coins were also net graded to prevent body bags - see e.g. Capped Bust Half Dollars and old cleanings). The services then became very loose for a while (post OGH/Fatty holders) and began to tighten up again in response to CAC. And in regards to designations, the standards have absolutely changed. The PL and DPL/DMPL standards of the older holders was much looser than it was today, and I know of several that have been downgraded. You could argue that this was just a change in standards, but it also goes to the heart of the issue here. Also, on cameo designations, NGC went through a very loose period but has since tightened up so that it is on par with PCGS.
While I have no doubt that a high percentage of the upgrade candidates have already been back for upgrades, there are still hoards of fresh material that come to the market from time to time.
I'm sorry but I'm trying to figure out what you mean in that sentence by "rating." If you're using the term synonymously with "grade," then, yes, I guess one could say, those grades, for the most part, are pretty sure; at least, from a technical or condition standpoint.
