Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;cladking, post: 8184930, member: 68&quot;]I despise the new grading.&nbsp; It&#039;s not really &quot;grading&quot; at all but rather is a &quot;pricing&quot; scheme.&nbsp; The process today overemphasizes the value and demand for coins and underemphasizes desirability and rarity of coins.&nbsp; The process weights demand above all else and disguises the rarity of very desirable coins.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Modern clads are all scarce or rare in Gem condition but this is simply unknown because there is only enough demand to push up the price of the 20 or 30 best coins of each date.&nbsp; Everyone assumes that lower grades exist in abundance so nobody wants to collect them.&nbsp; Collecting things like beautiful pristine Gem 1968 cents would very quickly show this is a rare coin.&nbsp; Of course hundreds wouyd come out of the woodwork if there were much of a premium but in the old days there were hundreds&nbsp; of thousands, millions even,&nbsp; of collectors for a &#039;49-S Lincoln and tens of thousands might want a nice Gem example.</p><p><br /></p><p>I suppose this is my primary problem with current &quot;grading&quot;; it entrenches the status quo.&nbsp; Many still seek the &#039;49-S but everyone still believes the &#039;68 is common.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Ideally we should have &quot;grading&quot; rather than pricing.&nbsp; Each coin should be rated on each of its attributes and this should be the grade.&nbsp; The grading services would simply change into &quot;pricing services&quot; which they already are.[/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