ICG And HSN'S Mike Mezack Part Ways? "There are 3 Major Grading Services"

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl_KgPYhGBCD_5iHXu09wNg

That's the PCGS channel with their grading videos.

Also yes you have to have a ton of experience to walk right into the classic grading room as a new hire for the TPGs.

You can also ask @Insider he grades for ICG

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes, they have you cover the actual grade and assign your grade, and learn from your errors. That's pretty much the system. They have what are called "grading sets" to teach grading, from which the experts have jointly removed consensus overgrades and/or undergrades. You guys who need books to lean on really do overcomplicate this.

By the way, if you've ONLY seen "thousands of coins", you MIGHT make apprentice status. I'd aim for at least five figures, if not six. I believe you can NEVER learn proper grading without getting to major shows and auction lot viewing rooms. I tried learning without those experiences, and I never learned well. As soon as I started attending major national shows, I began to "get it". You have to travel.

Look, I do understand the "I'd rather buy more coins than a plane ticket and hotel rooms" mindset. That may be a great way to expand your collection's size, but not its quality, and CERTAINLY no way to increase your knowledge.

One thing I learned is just how completely MISERABLE especially a gold coin can be and still be an MS range coin, like MS63.

 

On another forum, I learned that the PCGS Grading sets were sold. I never saw a grading set anywhere I worked before. Anyone know if ANACS has such a set?

 

Imo ICG has more credibility than Mezack and HSN combined.

 

My guess would be no for most if not all series given the substantial investment it requires

 

Aw Mike, you're destroying a myth that has worked in my favor when I've found correctly, or under-graded coins which you may have handled. I've many high value Gold coins in my accumulation/collection that are graded by ICG, but were under-valued by the market.

I've even posted on this site, an example of high grade Gold coins of the same type/date/grade, but graded by the four different top tier TPG. To any objective viewer, the ICG coin had the premier grader.

Please continue your Fine efforts, and ignore the believed pretentiously ignorant, as I.

Rich

 

There really are only 2 types of grading companies - those with a personal/corporate interest in the final grade of the coin, and those who put a grade on a coin because in their opinion (right or wrong), the coin deserves that grade. Basement slabbers are the first type. As far as I'm aware, there are only 4 companies that fall into the second group, and that's what makes them different, and better for the collector and reseller.

ICG is a top 4 TPG.

And just like PCGS, NGC, and ANACS, they are preferred by their 'followers' (aka fan-boys') for different reasons. But to say that any of those 4 are not top TPG's is an ignorant statement, and seeing who it is that made that comment (which initiated this thread) is proof of that.

Every company in every industry has different secondary goals (primary goal is, and should be, profit), as well as outstanding employees, mediocre employees, and sub-par employees.

So your experience with any TPG will vary based on that TPG's corporate goals, as well as the individual who looked at your coin. That's also why coins change grades when crossed. Different corporate goals, and a different set of eyes, can easily give the same coin a different grade.

When you are looking at a coin graded from any of the Top 4, whether or not you agree with the grade (higher or lower), you know that it was graded with an honest opinion by the grader, and not because he/she had money riding on the grade.

 

...and remember that the graders represent the TPGS and not themselves. I for one do not like the long-established practice of grading sliders Mint State.

 

I do for the simple fact that I think the hard line from AU to MS was silly in the first place. It makes no sense to me to have a system where higher graded coins (60/61/62 even) can be inferior/vastly inferior to lower graded ones (58). I like that we are getting more of a fluid scale with that hard line eroding.

 

IMO, what should have happened ideally, is to grade sliders AU, and true MS coins Mint State as in the original Technical Grading System. Then, let the dealers price them. That way, any informed collector could see how a virtually mark-free, lustrous, AU could be worth more than an MS-63! It is a very simple concept to understand and to put into use.

I respect any professional who can look at an 1804 dollar worth several million that is graded MS-something and say to my face that the coin is obviously NOT MINT STATE by any stretch!

 

Some collectors certainly do realize that already. The problem with that system though is there's too many price guide buyers who would keep saying the MS sold for X so the AU should be worth less.

The market as a whole is kind of moving to that already with top notch lower grades out pricing higher graded sliders in a lot of areas, but I believe that grading will continue to move more towards a top to bottom system with the uncirculated line eventually being mostly removed at least for lower MS grades

TDN has put it best with those how they're so rare they're not graded they're ranked.

 

I know the ANA itself has MANY grading sets and they use them at the (usually pre-show) grading courses.

The MAJOR difference between "camps" is in the PCGS videos @baseball21 linked to upthread. Some people (mostly technical grading fans) will insist grading is "all about state of preservation", yet the PCGS videos claim it's roughly only 1/4. To me, strike and luster are AT LEAST as important, if not more so, and eye appeal is okay as a concept too, except that what some like, others don't. I "net grade out" all color premiums, and bid accordingly. If I get the lot, okay, but I will not pay extra for ANY color, and as the PCGS video states, NEVER EVER EVER for modern coins. I net grade them lower, MUCH lower.

 

I bet the ANA bought theirs FROM PCGS, come to think of it.

 

The answer to your query is obvious - rampant self-absorption.

 

Isn't the ANAs pretty old? I believe it was just in the last couple years PCGS sold theirs but I could be wrong and I want to say there is a G somewhere in the cert numbers marking them as such

 

My definition of a grading set is a group of coins from AG to high Mint State FOR EACH COIN SERIES. To the best of my knowledge, the ANA ha teaching Sets for the grading classes. I don't believe the sets are complete. AFAIK, the PCGS set was in their slabs. The ANA coins are in NGC's. Sure they could have had them reholdered.

As for buying the PCGS coins. The ANA is too cheap and nearsighted. AFAIK, they were given the chance to purchase A COMPLETE gold grading set of all denominations from G to MS-66 and turned it down. The owner had two sets of $3 gold. One was/still is (?) on display at a dealer's offices in NYC.

 

Thanks to all for a great and very informative conversation! It began with an observation made while watching Mike Mezack on HSN discuss major Third Party Graders and why he felt ICG was no longer in the mix. Happy it brought thought and debate and took the conversation to all TPG's and how they do what they do. Good, informative and educational content that went way beyond the way Mike Mezack is feeling today towards ICG. That too could change. Stay tuned!

Jeff

 

All this is right except the ANA teaching sets are about 2/3 PCGS and 1/3 NGC.

 

Money talks. Or helps Mezack talk, at least.