This question is in regards to standards across the board and all third party graders but more specifically to PCGS slabs and the OGH Gen !.2 (1986-1989 ), Gen 2.1 and 2.2 Gen 3.0 and 3.1 (1990-1998) and Gen 4.4 1998-2002 ) In other words would you expect coins in the OGH holders to go up or down ?
I think you're questioning if OGH holders were under graded back then. Maybe as the technology for better glasses improved so did accurate grading. Rumblings about OGH slabs being under graded is possible.
Yes, "across the board" and across time. IMO, looser standards equate to more verbiage and more grades. I have the 1962 Brown & Dunn somewhere. I could jam it into my back pocket. It was very tight but it went in. Know of any current grading guides that you can squeeze into your back pocket?
TPGs exist only to make money, I only use them for authentication. The grades are in general a joke and have never been consistent over time.
I think you'd have to ask this question about specific TPGs and specific time periods. For example PCGS I know purged their entire coin facts imagery because it demonstrated grade inflation, and now it seems they've gone overboard assigning Details grades because they don't want to take risks with their guarantee (or whatever the reasoning is) and have tightened up. ANACS I think also went through a period of overgrading and now they're a point tighter than the other two. To me the "old holders" thing is yet another fad pumping up prices. I can understand the niche of collecting various slab iterations, but not from the standpoint of some perception that they're "undergraded" relative to some other perception of "grade inflation." Why on earth would you pay more for a coin that's more accurately graded?
