NGCX a new 10 point grading scale from NGC

Yes, of course I agree 100%. I mean, that's just basic arithmetic.

Has it been rejected by the market? It has been proposed several times in several ways, but as far I know nobody has really made an effort to bring it to market. It's always been an academic discussion, various ideas, and discussed as a "well, that might be a cool idea." This is the first time that a major player is actually implementing it.

Might be rejected... might be accepted. Who knows until we try it?

Yes. As NGC is implementing the 10 point scale, it is almost literally the exact same, just with different numbers.

What we really need is a completely new way of thinking about coins, grades, and descriptions!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Why? I totally fail to see why the current system — including the 70-point scale — needs to be canned.

 

I am here working on my book on 1922-D cents, but I think I will cogitate upon it for another day before commenting.

 

A bit of cogitation, rumination, and perspiration are imperative before a bit of postulation!

 

The 100 point has been overwhelmingly rejected with push back and threats to leave collecting by the majority anytime it gained steam. Other proposals to change the system have been rejected as well even ones by big names. Anyone saying this might be cool is in the minority as you can see from reactions on numerous platforms

Unless the graders are still just grading on the 70 scale with someone else doing the conversion it will change the grading having to think of different numbers. If that is what they're doing that just shows what a dumb gimmick this is. The ironic part about this is that if NGC really pushes this (I think it will go away just like the W for white labels) all they really did was help PCGS.

CAC will very likely pass NGC for US coins, that leaves the race for market share with world coins. Even as a limited rollout PCGS can now go to the international market that is still in the early stages of embracing grading which they eventually will embrace and say we have one grading scale unlike our competitor.

Never going to happen. The billions and billions and billions of value in the market would crash causing the majority to just leave collecting if the system was turned on its head. Theres no reason for a new system, one or two simple tweaks such as getting rid of the hard 58 line fixes the majority of problems. No system is ever going to be perfect anyways.

 

A lot of people said the same thing about that stupid damn green sticker when it was first announced, and look at it now.

 

And which sticker would that be?

 

Better still: break out wear, strike, luster, and color on separate scales. Why collapse everyone onto a number-line of decimals when you can use quaternions instead? Different collectors weigh these factors differently; with a four-axis grading system, they can just run a dot product against their own personal eigenvector, and presto, the weighting we've all been waiting for!

 

There aren't that many green stickers.

There was a lot of negative reaction to it when it was first announced. And now it is incredibly popular!

I'm not saying this grading scale change will be anything like that, of course. I'm just saying that, especially on internet forums, a big change or a new thing is very often met with a lot of negative feedback.

 

Which sticker would that be? It’s hard to have intelligent discussions when people won’t name what they’re talking about. Treating a company like you’re at Hogwarts and can’t say Voldemorts name just makes it seem like emotional responses

 

Now this... this I like. As you know, I've been trying to do this for a few years.

Strike, Luster, Eye Appeal, and Contact Marks (or wear, depending). Obverse and Reverse separated into individual scores. Give each side a score out of 5.

And give a few short descriptors of any unusual marks, problems, etc. (doesn't have to be more than 4/5 single words or short phrases).

This would truly be the most useful grading scale!

The problem is... the market would have absolutely no idea what to do with this, or how to value these. That's part of the problem that NGC Ancients has experienced. I absolutely love that they've broken the grade into strike and surface components. I wish they'd take it a step farther! But it seems that more of the ancients these days are just being given a generic, useless, and completely boring VF or EF or whatever.

 

Haha, I thought I was being subtle and clever and witty and such. I don't give a flying fig. CAC.

I'm not emotional about CAC as much as I used to be. I don't really care about them, don't go out of my way to search for them, have a whole lot of problems with them, strongly disagree with most of their philosophy and what they've done to the market, and how many people seem to revere anything with their magical sticker, how they foster elitism, how inconsistent and imperceptible many of their decisions are, and how they are really just a bunch of marketing BS... but a lot of people seem to like them.

But CAC got a lot of negative feedback when it first came out!

 

The problem NGC ancients has experienced is that ancient collectors hate grading and NGC doesn’t guarantee anything for ancients

Even with that they have still had success, but the simple fact is if a company isn’t even going to guarantee authenticity it’s really hard to get people to buy into the idea.

 

One quibble: I see eye appeal as a derived measure, not a primary one. As I said, different collectors weigh the various factors differently.

 

Fair point. The complete discussion is far more complex than I've boiled it down to.

In this context, I was referring specifically to how some of the NGC Ancients are given strike and surface scores with amplifying descriptors. But many of the more recent ones just have a simple VF (etc) score.

I was using it as an analogy for what I'd really like all coin grading to become, ideally.

 

Oh brother. I guess I'll get some good deals then.

 

I am more than quite sure that NGC will literally blow PCGS out of the water with this system on world coins. The whole world is on the metric system except a few and the educated part of that crowd is quite familiar with the 10 point system, even our currency is a ten point system. One of the hardest things for a new collector to learn is the Sheldon scale and how it is applied to coins and how monetary value relates to that scale. The statement that they will fail is an obtuse thought at best.

 

And that's fair. Eye appeal is absolutely subjective. 100%. In some grading scheme, you might even just rank that as "color" from "white" to "rainbow." However, I don't really like that because not all "rainbows" are created equally on coins. That's why having expert graders judging eye appeal, with examples and references to know what is considered "desirable" and what isn't, is important.

However... lets be honest. Eye appeal is currently a very important part of the market grading scale. Currently, it is hidden. Currently, a coin could be adjusted one, two, or (rarely) even more points up or down based solely on good or bad eye appeal.

Do you think that we could at least attempt a better scale by breaking that out and honestly calling the score (adjustment?) based on the eye appeal? I do.

 

It sounds like you have more of a problem with people that post about CAC than them. They aren’t fostering elitism. I have a guess who the issue is with but if you hated every company where you didn’t like every investor/person/people that talk about it there’s not a company on earth you could use aside from someone with a smoker on the side of the road.

Some certainly do overhype it, and some certainly trash it to even a greater extent the other way, but there’s no denying the grading expertise or the value of two companies over one.

Its really collectors that ultimately decide these things. Dealers hate having to have coins graded and/or go to CAC, it’s much easier and cheaper to sell it raw and hype it up. Don’t forget too that the sticker was never meant for all the coins that ended up getting submitted, they’ve been aggressively raising prices for quite sometime to try and stop getting low/lower value coins. Collectors wanting that are diving that part.

CAC certainly gets negative feedback, but it’s just not true to call them marketing BS. It’s also a very different situation than trying to redo the grading scale. CAC didn’t drastically switch the grading scale. Switching from 70 to 10 which is really 100 would be like football calling touchdowns 10 points, having both is even worse where it’s like on Thursdays it’s 10 points but goes back to 6 on Sunday

 

I always thought they didn’t necessary approach ancients the right way. 1-5 doesn’t necessary make much difference with 4 or 5. Also what are we going to weigh more for the final grade between the aspects?

Regardless of that though the economy and bulk just gives a letter grade and higher tiers give the break down. The pricing is a somewhat aggressive even with the increases we’ve seen in fees across the board.

I like the idea of it and think they have some good people, I do think they’ve fumbled the ball with the approach to it though and they need to at least guarantee authenticity otherwise there’s just not a point in paying that much