Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;NPCoin, post: 627333, member: 5629&quot;]You do not know me, and I do not know you. But I have watched your threads at Collectors Society for almost too long to count on two hands now. One thing I have always noticed is that you have a habit of underestimating the average collector, as well as view them as the average investor.</p><p><br /></p><p>Do not confuse a collector with an investor. If there is one thing a collector knows, it is what they like and what they dislike. This is the most important thing...the collector&#039;s opinion. And it does not matter if that opinion is &quot;right&quot; or &quot;wrong&quot; in your own opinion...the collector is the absolute expert in things about himself. Thus, the collector is the only one who will be able to determine what is &quot;nice&quot; or &quot;not nice&quot; to them.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Interestingly, there are different standards used out there. In fact, many seasoned collectors and numismatists have their own set of standards they grade by. This in no way means they &quot;misgrade&quot; coins. Is DGS going to grade the same as PCGS? Absolutely not. They use two differing sets of standards. Does that mean that one or the other &quot;misgrades&quot;. No, not necessarily.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, they may skew from their own standard, and in that would certainly &quot;misgrade&quot;. However, you already know that grading is subjective. That does not mean that grading is subjective so long as it is the same grade you or I would give the coin. That means that there are aspects within grading that would skew our views of the same coin to the extent that it <b>is</b> possible for our two grades for the same coin to be different! That is what subjectiveness is all about, and why some TPGs grade by quorum.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, to call an MS coin circulated because of rub and not circulation, or to call a circulated coin MS simply because it has great luster, yet exhibits circulation on the high points, is what may be considered &quot;misgrading&quot;.&nbsp; But, many times when that term is used, I have noticed it is usually, &quot;it&#039;s 64..no it&#039;s not, it&#039;s 63...oh, you misgraded it!&quot; kind of scenario. By the context you used it here, I would have to assume that is exactly the scenario you are using it for.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>But, when you say things like, &quot;I taught the advanced grading class...and saw how dozens...(mis)graded...&quot; has that certain &quot;incompetent morons&quot; ring to it. May not be what you intended, but it <i>could</i> come off to some that way.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Consider the flip side of the argument in the possibility that coins given a sticker that are owned and subsequently sold by companies who share a CAC principle. Now, consider these companies make hundreds or thousands more per coin because of said sticker. The secondary affects would be the money maker.</p><p><br /></p><p>I personally believe it is the simple possibility, regardless of actuality, that brings much of the anti-CAC sentiment. There are a lot to be said for simple possibilities.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in