Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Leadfoot, post: 725307, member: 2972&quot;]The foundation, that I would argue, was last used in the 80&#039;s.&nbsp; So why should anyone care what the old standards are?</p><p><br /></p><p>The old standards were imperfect when it came time to price coins, and this shortcoming has been addressed in TPG/market grading.&nbsp; Heck, even the antiquated EAC takes these factors into consideration (by using sharpness/net grades and Scudzy/Avg/Choice modifiers).&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>And if grading is really a means to an end (i.e. pricing coins), why not go with a standard that does the best job of pricing coins (i.e. market/TPG) grading?</p><p><br /></p><p>Now one could argue that the newer standards are more subjective, and I would agree, but so is pricing/ranking coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>So why hold on to a grading standard that doesn&#039;t get us closer to the ultimate reason for grading -- to estimate the relative price/ranking of coins?</p><p><br /></p><p>Just wondering...Mike (who appreciates the precision of older grading standards, but thinks the newer standards better reflect market rank/price)[/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