Would you consider changes to the grading scales? AU 63, etc?

Wouldn't the greatest beneficiary of changing the grading system be theTPGs? Think of all the coins that would be resubmitted.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I will say that once the TPG's started accepting one type of wear, they opened themselves up to a judgement call of "what kind of wear is it". That's like opening pandora's box.
Cabinet friction
Stacking
one time in a pocket
album slides
One of these type of things has happened with most every coin in our collections. Does that make it an acceptible form of wear?
If you say yes, I don't blame you. I want that coin I bought for MS money to be graded MS.
But in all reality it is still a form of wear under the definition.

MS grades were designed to eliminate any confusion of discernable wear. That is what AU is for.

What we are really talking about here is the the appearance of rub on the high points, more than a luster break or a ding from another coin, It is a dull or lifeless appearance.
My point is as soon as the line is blurred. It creates confusion as to what is acceptable wear and what isn't.
I would rather see an coin be graded for what it is. Not for it's value. The market controls that. And if that means dealers asking 63 64 and 65 money for them, then so be it.
So, just because the the value doesn't drop evenly from grade to grade. The TPS need to call them what they aren't?

What should be done is a break down of the AU grade especially AU55 thru AU58+. This would remove all the BS of "is this a slider?". I also think the market would thrive with stricter guidelines and a little less subjectivity.

 

I think it all comes down to protecting the dealers (my apologies if I ding anyone with this) from having to explain why they are asking MS-63 value for a coin with a slab grade of AU-58. After all, the customer says, my Red Book/Greysheet/whatever says an AU-58 is only worth XXX not YYY.

 

A label isn't stopping dealers from asking what they want or giving you a lecture about how they know more than the TPGs etc.

 

The TPGs would benefit and so would sellers that get the first wave of upgrades (after a while I would imagine prices would fall if too many coins end up in higher slabs).

 

There is some truth to that as there are people that will just buy the label. However, I think enough people understand that the quality and eye appeal of coins isn't completely tied to the number on the holder. We do see plenty of evidence via auction results where a lower grade will sell for more than a higher grade. Plus, no matter what grading system is used, there will be buyers that think something is over-priced.

 

Yes, my point exactly. But as you point out, nothing is absolute. All markets are made up of a multitude of different characteristics. The issue is always what do the producers of a product think maximizes the benefit to them.

 

1-100 would be dumb to burn down the farm and start over. Making it a continuous scale though would be a minor chance where 1-53 no impact, 64ish-70 no impact. You'd have 58s and maybe a few 55 get resubmitted and 55 would even be being adventurous.

Very little would change in the overall picture there would just be an actually logical system of looking at the whole coin and having a continuous system. If people wanna be dumb and think everything will upgrade thats their right and they do that anyways.

 

I have always advocated getting rid of all descriptors and have all grades numerical. The original sin of US numismatics was to split the world of coins into circulated and uncirculated, guaranteeing horrible coins will outgrade very nice ones. Get rid of it all, and grade 1-70 based upon amount of detail on the coin regardless of source.

 

I don't like 1-100 either.
While there might not be a ton of impact if this only touches the 55-63 grades, there will still be issues. There might be wider spreads between old and new holders (old being the "true" way). Or there might be distrust in older holders and those would need to be sent back in to confirm the new ways. Also, the one change could lead people/dealers/TPGs to want to do the same with the XF/AU line and other close ranges.

 

That already exists though, there's the it's much better crowd and also the cam dcams that a number wouldn't stand up today. It wouldn't be new for changes to happen.

 

I think we should remove dealers out of this as many will always push the next higher regardless. I don't think theres as much of a difference from 58/58+ to MS grades as XF to AU, some may and fair enough.

 

True that exists today. It would be nice to find a way to correct those old errors before creating new divides (although it's not really feasible). And I'm guessing you mean more of the pl/dmpl that don't stand up today vs cam/dcam (those are a bit more complex as coins weren't designated cam/dcam until the 90s vs pl/dmpl was used right away for Morgans).

 

For sure. I know a lot dislike me, my only real point is as I am sure you know there are many things today that are much harder than in the past. I don't have an answer for the divide either, I just think we would all be better off looking at it from a neutral position and get rid of the idea that older was always better. I'm a nobody, but have submitted enough to know there are things much harder to get today than before

 

Let's be real here the TPG's were collectors and dealers and influential in the market. The actual graders are also collectors and dealers.

It's pretty unavoidable to try to have experts and credibility without having people in the game. The only question is, is it really impartial or when a grader actually sees a MS68 or 69 and top pop is MS67 do they go out of their way to find reasons to make the 68 or 69 a MS67... or MS66 if they happen to be holding a MS67 in top pop they don't want the value screwed with...


I really don't believe it's anymore "impartial" than walking into a coin store with you MS66 self graded coin and the dealer invariably telling you it's MS63 for a host or reasons or even claiming rub and it's an AU.

We also can't say the TPGs don't cater to home shopping and the even bigger online ripoff sellers out there with special "hoard" or "xxx collection" labels solely for marking up items above their actual values. We know this happens also.

Buy the coin not the slab and you really can't go wrong, but this requires you to know what you are doing.
All TPG has done is made it harder for novice to get ripped off with a fake coin or getting ripped off with cleaned/tooled/polished coins but that's about it.

Any scale changes, change nothing for that.
"Sight unseen buys" I guess only really exist with CAC stickers slabs ( which is an A,B,C system within the 70 scale) and then among the novice collectors that think they can trust the grading companies opinions 100% when it's very clear to anyone that's been around a while they really cater to their big submitters and will do basically anything for money.. as long as its not total fraud and within reason of course.

But I guess the topic is "would you consider changes to the grading scale to make it more fluid", not "do you think the tpgs have it screwed up".
The scale works when used as intended.
It doesn't need modifications to devalue or increase the value coins, it's the users of the grading scales that caused it to malfunction and be abused and changing the scale won't change human nature to bend the rules or change the scale as they see fit.

 

Am in favor of adding Au-58 and Ms-63.
No other changes ....

 

If is Au-58, it can't have 65 surfaces. It has wear

 

SOME AU-58's (esp. + or CAC) definitely do look very good and Mint State money....others look like the number indicates relative to the low-60's: just OK.

 

There is a "BETA" A.I. program being worked on as we speak.It might take the human factor out of grading ( no matter what # system we use) It is being developed with the COINHELPU site. The computer learns and eventually no human that didn't get up on the right side of the bed dinging a coin for some imaginary reason.

 

My understanding is that there are 3 graders for both NGC and PCGS.... so 1 individual who might have a financial interest in a certain grade for a certain coin should not be able to determine the grade solely.