I am curious as to how many people believe in the use of Market Grading. I see market grading as a way for the big corporations to overgrade coins and yet have them accepted by the hobby. The standards or requirements needed to meet a grade should never be lowered. My humble opinion.
I Just Want to Get What I Paid For! As a collector I want first to find what I'm looking for then get the best buy and feel good about the money spent and not feel ripped off. If purchasing graded coins (from the reputible companies) ensures I get at least the grade I want, then the service is well provided. It's companies like NTC and SGS that undermine the standards. I love the coins I've collected that I can handle "with gloves" and also display in any way "I" see fit. Slabbed coins some how leave me with a little bit of a non-accessable feeling with the coin. I love MS coins and if PCGS or NGC say they are MS65 I tend to agree when I see the coin. I may not have their expertise at grading but I'm learning. When this system of grading is explodited for the sake of a profit then all bets are off and it's again up to the collector to know coins well enough to not get ripped off in the long run.
Market grading isn't something new so there isn't any reason why someone shouldn't use it. Where I'm learning grading still and love to learn it "hands on" I'll learn more of the new market grading then I would have if I just read a book... Speedy
Any grader people are human, I see and find ALOT of undergraded and overgraded coins in slabs. I buy the coin to what I feel makes the grade, and wheel & deal then with the seller or dealer.Iam not real familiar with this market gradeing thing you speak of?, maybe its just the average grade in bulk deals???
Market grading has been with us for almost 30 yrs - I doubt it is going to change any time soon. ALL of the grading companies practice it, so does the vast majority of dealers and collectors. For your own purposes you can grade a coin any way you like. But when it comes to the buying and selling of them, if you don't understand the system in use by the majority of the numismatic community - you'll be lost.
Market I agree with Walter, As far as third party grading goes I thought it was great when it first started. I had collected in the late 80's and 90's but I stoped for a long time as the dealers at the shows I went to at the time really sickened me by the altered non slabbed stuff they were selling. Now I consider myself more educated and buy like Walter said, if I feel the price is fair and I am not getting ripped off then I feel good about the purchase. This goes for high and low end coins. I try to stick to low end for most of my collections because I feel then that the market is not getting the best of me. As for slabbed coins I have a few dealers that are very fairly priced whom I buy from. JMO Tony
I can remember when a person would send coins to ANACS and when graded and returned, you'd have a photo of the two sides of the coin. The coin was in a flip with the pictures. Guess I'm old school and don't feel standards should be lowered to push a coin to a higher grade.
So do many others, including me. But there is a huge difference between believing in something and understanding it. You have to live in the world as it exists - not as you want it to be. Of course that doesn't mean that you can't try to change it.
graded coins i don't like slab coins. i don't buy it. i don't believe them. buy direct from the u.s. mint. you got first hand owner, new and brilliant, encapsulated, with sleeves, boxes and certificate, issued price, select the design that you like, and its current issued. remember, you are only a collector. not investor. no intention to sell them. not thinking of making money.
Example... Hope I don't offend anyone with my posts to these boards. I like to make new/young collectors research and become award of important information before they buy the first coin. Here are three MS64 Franklins... same year... same grading service... "Buy The COIN, Not The Slab" are words to live by in this hobby.
BC - I've gotta ask a favor here. Would you please explain the significance of, or what you mean by, the comments at the top of each picture.
After thinking about this pretty carefully, what I believe in and practice could probably be called "wallet grading," instead of market grading or even technical grading. I know approximately what I'm willing to pay for a relatively small group of coins I'm interested in owning, in approximately the condition I'm interested in acquiring. When a coin has a large jump in price in its stated grade from the previous grade, I'll pass or look for an example of the next lower grade. My personal opinion is that collectors are too willing to pay up for relatively slight improvements in condition. I'm not sure how wallet grading compares to market grading.
MARKET - means this coin is not a true MS64 according to the ANA Standards or my standards. I don't own and would never buy or sell a coin like this. GOOD - means this coin will go MS64 and I would have no problem in backing a sell of this coin. TRUE - means this coin meets the ANA Grading Standards as well as my standards for a full MS64 coin and I would be happy to own this coin. I have many MS64's and MS65's with and without Full Bell Lines which would meet this standard. Point is... they book the same but in no way do they technically grade the same.
I have higher standards for grading coins and it's not possible for me to accept any less. I don't believe a coin can Grade MS64 with nicks on the cheek of Franklin or on a Morgan and a coin can not Grade MS65 with multiple marks in the fields, ETC. If the market graded Franklin above was raw, I would sell it as MS60 at the current value.
BC - First of all, please understand that my comments are not just directed towards you. In my opinion you brought up a very important point with your illustrations and it is one that many do not understand. Interesting, you imply that you follow the ANA Grading Standards - but even going all the way back to the 3rd edition in 1987 (which I believe was the first time that the grade of MS64 was recognized) the standard for MS64 states - "Contact Marks: May have light scattered marks, a few may be in prime focal areas." In later editions, even more contact marks are permitted for the MS64 standard. Be that as it may, I can easily see why all three of those coins were assigned the grade of MS64. Even with the limited pictures you posted it is obvious that the coins each have different qualities and detractions which is why they were all graded the same. You see, there is more to the grade of a coin than just the amount and severity of the marks it bears. The grade is also based on luster, quality of strike and eye appeal - it is an aggregate scoring system. For example, the first coin you picture and label as Market - this coin has by far the best strike of the group. It also appears to have superior luster. It is for these reasons that the coin was graded as MS64. If the coin had fewer marks or no marks in the prime focal areas, it would likely have been graded as MS65. The second coin labeled as Good - this coin is weakly struck and has subdued luster. True, it has fewer marks - and for this reason it has been graded as MS64. The third coin labeled as True has the weakest srtrike of the group and also the poorest luster. It appears to have been struck with badly worn dies and thus has less eye appeal. But the coin is largely mark free and thus graded as MS64. The coins may not measure up according to your personal standards, but I believe all of these coins are graded accurately according to the standards set forth in the ANA Grading Guide - at least based on what I can see of them. Each was assigned that grade for different reasons, based on its own idividual merits and detractions. That is something that many find so confusing when it comes to grading. For example, they do not understand how one coin can have fewer marks than another and yet grade the same. But you have to consider the other qualities of the coin as well. If all of the other qualities are equal - then the coin with fewer marks will grade higher, and justly so. But if those other qualities are not equal - then the grade assigned must be adjusted accordingly. This is how it is possible to have 3 coins that appear so different and yet be graded the same.
The ANA adopted the Sheldon Scale prior to any published books. Even prior to the First Edition of the Official ANA Grading Standards in 1977. In 1986/87 is when the PUBLIC became more away of this scale due to PCGS and NGC being born. I use the ANA Grading Standards as a guide only. I do know that I need to rethink my standards as far as coins I sell. No wonder a lot of past buyers were happy when they submitted coins purchased from me and received a higher grade than I sold it for. At least I started an interesting topic. And, I'm going to start another one now.
I hate, and I mean HATE, the present grading system of coins. I also hate slabbed coins. I'm from way, way back when you looked in a Red Book and saw G, F, U and P for all coins. When I was a kid that's all there was and I'm to old to change. I put all my coins in Whitman Classic Albums so what good is it for me to buy a slabbed coin. When I have I just cut them open and put the coin in the album where it was ment to be. I've been collecting for well over 50 years and if all my coins were in slabs, I'd need a building the size of my house to put them all in. Unfortunately we all must change with times and fighting the present grading system is futile so I do go by it when at coin shows. But I still walk away from tables with all slabbed coins. I know it pays to buy valuable coins in slabs knowing it is real and not counterfeited but I think some of us are really getting nutty when I see coins from the 1990's and up already slabbed. AHHHH for the good old days when life was simple.