How do TPGs find graders?

Grading is subjective. In the 1960's I found there were fair graders and others. I was lucky to have Joe Gallo (Alexandria, VA) as one of the local dealers. You could take a coin from his stock and it was "correctly" graded for the times. His grading may even have been conservative. Another dealer in the area used toothpaste to clean EVERY coin in his cases! Because of Gallo, and the grading guides at the time, I was self taught. To get an idea of old time grading standards, take a look at the Sheldon Scale published in Penny Whimsy.

I didn't see much change through the 1970s. At ANACS (ONLY in DC for internal records) and at INSAB (grading opinions to submitters for free if they asked) grading was still very strict as we held the old "standard." The marketplace did not like it. Not much changed with the publication of the ANA's Grading Guide and the establishment of the second TPGS in Colorado.

The first big change I noticed came after the publication of the NCI grading guide. I got to read the pre-published galley and I can honestly say it screwed up my personal standards for a while because it explained how coins might be graded more "commercially." I recommend reading it as James Halperin has the reputation as one of the best graders in the country.

Things had really changed after about 1988 as the two newest TPGS began to loosen their standards. AU's were called MS because IN SOME COIN SERIES true MS coins by the old standards are VERY RARE! Gold gets the most leeway.

So, to answer your question...Gradeflation has been going on IN THE COMMERCIAL MARKET for decades. Any knowledgeable dealer or collector has seen it. All a collector needs to do is to GET WITH THE STATUS QUO and don't worry about it. All of us old timers with our pants in a knot that are raging about it will soon be dead!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

GoldFinger1969, posted: "We really need to hear from a spokesman or grader from the TPG at a big coin convention (like FUN) and explain their approach to grading standards, and market vs. technical grading."

AFAIK, technical grading is not practiced by anyone. At ONE TIME IN THE DISTANT PAST both systems were in conflict. Technical grading (as originally devised) lost. The only place that I know of where it is used is in grading classes by at least ONE teacher. Otherwise, it is just a term many collectors throw around.

GoldFinger1969, posted: "My own opinion is that the TPGs felt "squeezed" between the ANA grading standards, dealer community, professional coin collectors, etc. And at various points in time, they "change" to suit one or the other constituency."

Bingo! You have explained it extremely well!

* * * * *

 

GDJMSP, posted: "As I have also told you before, it's NOT a matter of technical grading vs market grading. Technical grading ceased to exist in 1986. NGC, PCGS, and ICG have never, ever, used technical grading. ANACS is the only TPG who ever used it. And even they stopped using technical grading in '86 - when the ANA invented market grading!

Just a few observations...

1. ANACS NEVER used true technical grading as they did not understand it and no one out there ever had it explained to them. What they did was "parrot" a name from its developers in DC and "parasite" some of the system's parameters. Actual technical grading continued to be used only at the first grading service - INSAB.

2. I think "invented" is a little misplaced. "Market grading" is just a term used to define the actual grading being done by folks who bought and sold coins. ANA used it to differentiate that standard from the one they published. Virtually NO ONE in the business (except some of the little fish dealers) EVER followed the ANA Grading standards. That's unfortunate.

I look at it this way. If a group set up a standard and everyone followed it, most of the "problems" associated with grading would disappear. Value, rarity, ownership, etc. WOULD NO LONGER MATTER!

 

Aren't things like LUSTER and STRIKE and other features taken into account ?

Even if the ANA Grading Standards say that they shouldn't be.....

 

I never thought of that....and now that I have, is this REALLY true ? Possible ?

I guess at some point in time the number of CLASSIC coins could dry up -- maybe the actual absolute number yearly has -- but with all the new stuff they grade, it's not like the TPGs would be forced out of business (and they also do non-coin stuff as we learned when CU got bought out).

So the only way to keep submissions coming in was to loosen grading standards. By doing that, all previously graded coins could be regraded - higher than they were before ! And what coin owner doesn't want that ???

Fascinating....thanks GD.

But what about NEW coins ? And non-coin stuff ?

I understand that mathematically the old/classic coins must at some point dry up but new coins are a big business too. Plus non-coin stuff.

 

That would be James Halperin of HA ?

Got it....so the initial TPG era of 1986-88 was associated with a loosening. GDJMSP focuses on 2004 as the (major) line of demarcation and has written extensively on that.

Well, don't die anytime soon because some of us appreciate the knowledge that Oldtimers like you and GDJMSP can give us.

Seriously, just like regular inflation has limits, doesn't gradeflation have limits which in theory should stabilize grading and the industry and coin hobby ? I mean, you will NOT see all coins in 30 years being moved up 2-4 grades. MS65 Saints will not be MS67's, let alone MS68's.

There IS alot of fluidity between the AU50's and the low-MS60's, I get that. There is an occasional MS64 or MS65 that somehow gets to MS66. I've posted the link for the infamous Franklin Gradeflation Thread over at CU (maybe there are other threads for other coins, if so, any links on Morgans or Saints would be appreciated) so I know that the bizarre CAN happen.

But these appear to be the outliers and there appear to be limits to how far gradeflation can go (thank god). But I do think that the grading system, while not exact, prevents massive fraud and a huge shift that is totally out of balance with reality.

At least I hope so.....

 

OK, now I know I must be lost and confused if a vet like you says I understand it.

Back to the drawing board.....

 

OK, thanks...I didn't get out my ANA Grading Standards book (bought on your suggestion, BTW ).

But if luster/strike and other aesthetic qualities can be incorporated into grading, doesn't that allow for minute wear and/or extra bag marks to be overlooked in assigning a grade ?

And...what do you do if you have a Saint or Morgan (big coins)....and the luster and overall quality on the coin is spectacular.....coin grades an MS66 or even MS67.....but it has the SLIGHTEST appearance of (what might be) wear on 1 single high-point ?

You can't grade that AU58, right ?

 

I meant coins in the MS60's.....that has to be very rare (did you see the Franklin Gradeflation Thread ?)....you start going above 2 grade improvements, it's going to be tough for ANYBODY to believe an MS63 is an MS67.

Even novice graders like me won't be fooled by a 3 or 4 grade jump in 60's. Below MS60, yeah, larger jumps are possible that could conceivabley fool the inexperienced.

 

Franklin Gradeflation Thread ? link?

 

Here you go, Insider, let me know your thoughts. Most of the key posts are on the first 2 pages so don't worry about reading everything:

https://forums.collectors.com/discu...nklins-is-why-i-stopped-collecting-the-series

Interesting, it appears alot of those posters have since been banned for whatever reasons.

 

or elevator or door men or record shops, or dj's all done by computer, or self

 

And it's hard to find a good blacksmith or wheelwright or even a decent typesetter anymore.

 

Nor shoe repairman......