Was going through some of my Morgan collection today....

I started out a couple of years ago sending them to ANACS because they are so good with attribution for VAMS. As I was going through many of their graded coins I was scratching my head. Mind you, I have a lot of slabs from PCGS and NGC. I could not believe how they technically were so tough on grading, compared to the other two TPGS. Coins that might have been MS 62 or 63 getting 55 and 58s. Is it just me noticing that? I really think that's why you see so few ANACS coins in gem or higher. People are crossing them over to the other two TPGs. Thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My 1897 discovery Morgan sure looks better than the AU-58 they labeled it as, but they're the only TPG that will actually certify / verify a new VAM and add it to the catalog. They also labeled my California fractional gold as AU-58, but I guess I'm ok with that. It honestly shocked me that it didn't get details-cleaned because of the directional lines on it. I'm going to be biting my fingernails for a while now that CACG got my package because they're about as strict as it gets.

 

Just get your coin graded at your TPG of choice then send to VSS. I know it's nice to have the attribution on the front label of your graded slab, but PCGS and NGC are substandard when it comes to attribution, and they do not recognize/attribute anything but the major ones. I feel your pain when it comes to that. I looked at your possible discovery coin and didn't have enough knowledge to even comment on that thread.

 

I have always felt that ANACS was tough on Morgan’s. I’m working on a Morgan grading set of ANACS coins and it can be tough.

 

I have several that eventually I'll send to PCGS to cross over. It's not really worth it unless they are semi key dates. But yes, I 100% agree. If anecdotal evidence means anything, it's why you rarely see ANACs slabs in gem grade, they've mostly been sent there for crossover grading.

 

ANACS I feel was a little tough on my Canadian George VI coins as well. Maybe "tough" means accurate, and we're used to the other two being generous? I didn't get anything over MS63 and I thought a lot of my halves would easily get 64, like this 1949. The dollars all got 62 and I see tons of 63s in the other guys' slabs way more dinged up.

 

It's funny that a perfect example of what I said above popped up in my Heritage wish list this morning. ANACS graded my 1946 $1 on the right MS62. The Heritage coin on the left is PCGS MS63. I'm trying to be dispassionate but I think mine is arguably a better coin. So whose grade is correct?

Of course, if you want VAM designations on the slab you have to go with ANACS.

 

It may just be the lighting or photography, but I agree with you. The coin on the right is more pleasing to the eye with less baggage.