Grading? Why bother?

Same answer different day! You have any new material? Or another statement about how PCGS is your BFF?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Do you honestly believe your grading skill is equal to or greater than PCGS? How about NGC? How about CAC?

 

I have read this same argument from you in many threads. It is the same old thing.
I don't trust their grades, I check them the same as I would the other 2 top TPG's, buy the coin and not the slab.
That goes for CAC also.

 

Why won’t you answer a simple question? Do you believe your grading skill is equal to or better than PCGS? NGC? CAC?

 

You don't have the requisite knowledge to follow that silly mantra. I have no idea what your specialty is, but for you to pretend that your grading skills are superior to those of NGC, PCGS, and CAC in every US coin series is a level of hubris that I have not encountered on a coin forum, not even from Doug.

You like to characterize both baseball21 and myself as slaves to the TPGs, but in reality, we are simply coin collectors who know our limitations.

 

The TPGs never used technical grading, they always used market grading. You expect us to believe that you are an expert grader but seem not to understand the difference between technical grading and market grading.

 

This is not about what level I grade at, it is simply the fact that Market Grading has zero boundaries. Bottom line a coin should have the same grade no matter who grades it. If you call yourself a top tier grading company then standards should always be the same. . If they say a coin is X grade then every time it should come back as the same X grade. This so called shuffling of their feet to create a better Market for their coins is old.

This in no way makes them good graders. It makes them Easy, and for no better words "They have no spine".

PS I used to believe both PCGS and NGC were the best of the four,
Throw in CAC and it screams Collusion.

If you can't see the Marketing involved?
Then I am done with the conversation.​

 

In fact, that is what this is all about. If you don't have the same grading skill as the graders at the TPGs, then you don't have the requisite knowledge to conclude that their assigned grade is wrong. Nobody is saying you can't apply your own standard to TPG graded coins and buy what you want. I think we all do that. And it is good to question the grade of a coin if you don't agree with it, and even better to refuse to buy it at that grade level. All I am saying is that the "buy the coin not the slab" mantra is financially dangerous for 99% of the coin collecting public.

Your next comment is telling, you say "Market Grading has zero boundaries". That simply isn't true. The concept of market grading is designed to view a coin holistically. There are boundaries, but there are also grey areas. Your problem is the same as Doug's, you both want to use an antiquated system of grading that employs grade limiting scenarios which reduces many fantastic coins to widgets. A clear example of this is Saint Gaudens Double Eagles. Almost every single mint state example has high point wear. In the method that you prefer, all of these coins would be graded the same, AU58. The TPGs recognize that this wear is not from circulation, rather from roll friction, and they grade these coins across a mint state spectrum of grades ranging from MS60-MS67. I have had this same argument with Doug years ago, if you like I can find the thread and provide a link.

As for the top tier grading companies and accuracy, you have a point, but that is where the subjectivity in grading comes in. You say the coin should come back the same grade EVERY TIME. You aren't going to like this, but I'm going to say it anyway.

A TPG can grade the same coin two different grades on two different occasions and be correct both times.

They don't change their grading standards to boost submissions. There is inherent subjectivity in grading. Often times that subjectivity can create a range of acceptable grades for the coin, and that range can be a half grade or more. Lets say you have a Morgan Dollar that you think is MS65, and then I ask you to rank that MS65 Morgan Dollar vs all the other MS65 Morgans you have seen from that date/mm by giving it a decimal grade. You respond with a grade of MS65.4 which is perfectly reasonable. Now I look at that same coin and agree that the surfaces are midrange for the MS65 grade but the coin has what I would consider premium gem luster so I grade the coin MS65.8. That Morgan Dollar now has a grading range of 65.4-65.8. And no matter how many times you submit this Morgan Dollar, it is going to come back MS65. But what if the range was 65.8-66.2? When the grading range spans two different grades, then the coin will eventually be graded MS66 if you get two graders who both weight luster more than surfaces.

That is the cause of gradeflation, not a deliberate change in grading standards to boost resubmissions. That said, PCGS started the Secure Plus service to combat gradeflation by using laser scanners & computers to map the coin in an attempt to catch people resubmitting the same coin over and over again. I don't happen to know the effectiveness of their system, but I applaud the effort to be consistent.

It is extremely cynical to believe that the TPGs publicly decry gradeflation, take steps to combat it, yet at the same time rely on it to generate revenue. And the entire purpose of CAC was to combat TPG gradeflation by making a market for the high end coins for the grade by separating the wheat from the chaff.

 

Absolutely correct.

I would also add though that the problem is really the limitation of slabs only having one grade instead of a range when appropriate. How many times have you seen a coin where you think "this is a borderline 64/65"? Sometimes that coin will grade 64 and sometimes 65. Both grades are correct. The introduction of + grades helps with this, but there are still plenty of coins that cannot consistently resolve to one grade no matter who is looking at it, due to competing attributes of the coin.

 

I think computer analysis would do no grading at all. You can measure the reflectivity of a coin; that goes to luster. You can measure the wear of a coin. You can count and identify bag marks, die clashes, etc. Given these objective measures, you should be able to determine what is important to you when considering buying a coin. There is no grading at all, just your own subjective opinion of what you like. But the measurements would not change, and you still get to argue about what makes a coin worth the price for it.

I really began thinking about this when I read Q. David Bowers talking about computer analysis of coins.

 

PCGS just graded that cent VF-25. So who’s right? NGC? PCGS? Neither? Your argument is on eggshells right now, so tread carefully.

 

Not at all, I was just applying the same standards you have advocated for when
"grading" it. I've been clear that I don't agree with most of your complaints and I am glad they don't follow what you and many others want them to do grading wise.

 

Nice “excuse”. Care to elaborate on these “standards”?

Being wrong never felt so good, did it?

 

Please explain to us how you slam PCGS for straight grading problem coins and then refer to one of those same coins to refute NGC’s net grade, simply because the PCGS grade aligns with your grade?

You think the coin in question is problem free and deserves a VF grade based on the wear pattern; PCGS agrees with you. Both Baseball21 & NGC think the coin has a surface problem that doesn’t warrant a details grade but does deserve a net grade.

I’m not sure how you are claiming victory here.

 

It is problem-free. Here are some pictures better showing the color:

 

That's really what I was getting at. I don't actually have a problem with either the PCGS or NGC grade on that one, I would probably be in the middle of the two personally but 20 or 25 is kind of arguing semantics a lot.

That said though net grading should be okay or it shouldn't. Deep hits and holes ect can either be okay or not. I just don't like seeing coins get slammed for being graded one way but when it comes to a personal coin they're supposed to grade it another way.

 

Show me examples where I gave a details grade for marks similar to those on my coin.

You are making so many assumptions about my standards. I have slammed my own coins for getting a straight grade when they were clearly “details” coins.

 

While I agree with you, all the coins I collect are available in the mint state ranges, and since I don't run into this type of market grading, I tend to care less about it.