Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 443722, member: 15309&quot;]You are making a whole bunch of assumptions without facts in order to prove a point that no matter how hard you try can easily be disputed.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>You stated that you had e-mails from graders who admitted that the assignment of an PF70 grade is arbitrary.&nbsp; I will state without a doubt that you don&#039;t have an e-mail from a PCGS or NGC grader since you refused to respond to my original comment on the subject.&nbsp; Maybe you misunderstood my original comment that if the grader was from another TPG then it was useless information.&nbsp; What that meant was that your attempt to discredit PCGS&#039;s grading performance by offering practices of a third world TPG was cheap and only hurts your own credibility.</p><p><br /></p><p>Please explain how almost 10,000 1977-S IKE&#039;s were submitted and only 13 were given a grade of PF70.&nbsp; The grading companies don&#039;t change their grading standards like underwear.&nbsp; They certainly have written standards for all of the assigned grades (including MS70) and the standards are followed and quality control is applied by the fact that multiple graders must view each coin.&nbsp; You are welcome to believe that if you resubmitted those 10,000 coins again that it would yield 100 PF70&#039;s, but you are wrong.&nbsp; PCGS will apply the same standard which they have been applying that originally resulted in a 0.1% of all 1977-S IKE&#039;s getting a PF70 grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>Do you have written proof that the TPG&#039;s created the concept of MS70 to be used only as a theoretical grade that is unreachable.&nbsp; If you do, I would love to see it.&nbsp; I think you conjured that up out of thin air.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I show you an example of an obvious difference between and MS69 &amp; MS70 and you respond by saying that the difference can&#039;t be humanly accessed.&nbsp; In addition, it is proposterous that multiple graders are going to miss the hit on that coin and give it an MS70.&nbsp; You then want to play my game by posting multiple photos of proof coins which I already stated can&#039;t be accurately graded via photos.</p><p><br /></p><p>The only thing in you entire post that makes any sense is the fact that people will send raw potential MS70 coins in the mail and expect them to arrive unharmed.&nbsp; However, once they are encapsulated, how do you expect them to get damaged.&nbsp; Toning doesn&#039;t affect the grade, mucus can be cleaned off the plastic, and I see know way for the surface to be touched.</p><p><br /></p><p>The price differential between a 69 and 70 is completely dependent upon the population.&nbsp; In the case of the 1993 Jefferson Commem the pop in MS69 is 3690/533.&nbsp; A ratio of 7 to 1 will not result in a huge premium for the 70 which in this case is about $100 more.&nbsp; However the 1977-S IKE in PF69 has a population of 9700/13.&nbsp; A ratio of 700 to 1 will and did result in a huge premium of $5,000.&nbsp; You might not like that a top pop coin with a population of 13 carries a $5K price tag but you will find that it is consistent with other coins with similar populations.</p><p><br /></p><p>Until you show a written correspondence from either PCGS or NGC that states they arbitrarily assign 70 grades that they know are not repeatable, I am going to ignore your comments about what graders know and admit to.&nbsp; The fact is that the modern submissions are a huge part of the PCGS and NGC business and if they were doing what you are saying they would be perpetrating fraud.</p><p><br /></p><p>Maybe I should buy a 1977-S IKE PF70, I did very well at the poker table last night.[/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