Historic Pricing - U.S. Coins

It's fairly simple really and I've explained it numerous times in past posts, it's because '86 was a, check that, the pivotal year for two reasons. The primary reason was because that's when the ANA completely changed the grading system, they went from technical grading to market grading. And they also added a lot of grading numbers that had never been used before.

In '77 when the 1st ANA grading system was published there were only 3 MS grades - MS60, MS65, and MS70. Then, in 1980 they changed things a bit and added MS63 and MS67 - but they still used the technical grading system. Then, in 1986 they completely changed things. They created the market grading system which used a new set of grading criteria that had never been used before. And because of the new system, literally overnight coins that had previously been graded as MS65 were now graded as MS63. All by itself this caused a huge upset in the pricing structure and values of coins of a given grade. Coins that had previously been graded as MS65 lost a good bit of their value. And coins that were now graded MS65 gained a good bit of value because they had previously been graded as 67s.

But that wasn't all they did, they also added all the intermediate grades that had never been used before MS61, 62, 64, 66, 68, and 69, as well as all the previously unused circulated grades. This also contributed to a different pricing structure and changed values for just about everything.

The bottom line in all this is that during the specific time you're talking about - '85 and '86 - what was a 65 in '85 was no longer a 65 in '86. But the price record charts don't tell you anything about that - they just show the numbers. But once it's explained it all makes sense.

It had nothing to do with people knowing PCGS was coming, but you're right they did know they were coming. But in '86 when PCGS did come along nobody had any idea that NGC was coming, because some of the same people that founded PCGS didn't like what PCGS was doing when they refused to follow the new ANA grading standards (they thought they were too strict) in that 1st year after they opened their doors for business; so they left PCGS and started NGC up in '87.

 

The new grading system adopted in '86 was tougher, more strict, than the system that was in use in '85. In '86 all MS coins were downgraded by 2 points, across the board. BUT, you also have to remember that there were grades added in '86 that didn't even exist in '85 ! Same kind of thing happened with the circ grades, coins were downgraded and grades were added. These two things - downgrades and added grades - are what throws the price table your using askew because none of that is accounted for in the price table.

To really see what happened with prices you would have to have to have two different price tables, one that ended in say mid '86 and one that ended at the end of '86. In other words you'd need 1 price table for the old grading standard and a second price table for the new grading standard. But even then you really wouldn't be able to compare the two price tables to each other because they were both based on different things, and the 2nd table would encompass more grades than the 1st table did.

When I said this -

What I was trying to tell you is that's why the price table you're looking at doesn't make sense ! An it can't make sense, won't ever make sense, because it's trying to account for 2 completely different things in 1 table.

The thing that does make sense, is that once you know and understand what happened, then you understand why the price table does not make sense !

 

That said, parts of the price table will make sense. The price changes from '76 to '85 are valid. The price changes from '87 to '15 are valid. But you cannot compare these two groups of prices to each other because each is pricing different things !

Now do ya understand ?

 

No, absolutely not ! And I've been saying the same thing all along.

Go back to the very first post I made in this thread -

Now if coins that were 65s under the old grading system, suddenly became 63s under the new grading system - and it wasn't just those graded 65 that got downgraded it was all previously graded coins that got downgraded, I merely used 65 as an example - then how in the world could the new grading system be considered as being more liberal, more lenient ? Rather obviously it couldn't.

But I think I understand why you're confused. I think it's because, like a whole lot of other people, you don't understand what market grading really is. And, you "think", again like a whole lot of other people, that market grading is more liberal, more lenient, than technical grading.

But that is not the case at all, the exact opposite is true ! Back when the market grading system was first created it was tougher, more strict than the pre-existing technical grading system was. Which is why all the coins got downgraded literally overnight when the market grading system was adopted in '86 !

No, from '77 through mid '86 technical grading is what was used.

Things didn't tighten in '85 and '86, things tightened in '86 and '87. But you got the right idea. And yes, 2004 is when the TPGs loosened the market grading standards they had been using since '86-'87.

But 2004 wasn't the only time the TPGs loosened their grading standards, they loosened them even more after that, and then loosened them even more than the 2nd time after that ! Today, TPG grading standards are but a pale shadow of what they were from '86-'87 through 2003.

Think of it like this with 10 being high (tough) and 1 being low (loose). From '86-'87 TPG grading standards were a 10. In 2004 they dropped to an 8.5, after that to 7.5, and after that to 6.5, maybe even a 6.

 

I only used the numbers (8.5 etc) for purposes of illustration, to get across the idea I was trying to express in other words. And I can't give you a number for pre-'87 because it would be comparing apples to oranges. You simply cannot compare the two grading systems to each other because they are completely different things. When the market grading system was invented they took all the grading criteria that had been being used by technical grading, and then added several more grading criteria that had never been used before. In effect they doubled the number of individual grading criteria.

The history of coin grading goes like this. It was in the late 1890s that collectors first started discussing coin grading seriously. But it took until 1948 when Sheldon wrote his work on grading large cents, but his work was for large cents only ! It could not be used on any other coins ! Then, it was not until 1958 that Brown and Dunn came along and wrote the very first book on coin grading, and that system was for all coins.

Then in the early 1970s ANACS came along and that's when technical grading first began being developed. That was actually done by another forum member, Insider. Then, in 1977 the ANA published their first book of coin grading standards, which was also technical grading. But it was different than the standards that had been being used by the early ANACS. The ANA continued to use technical grading until 1986 when they created the market grading system, their book containing the grading criteria for that system was published the following year in 1987. Since then there have been several more editions of the ANA book published, but the specific grading criteria for each coin has stayed the same in all editions since 1987 - with 2 minor exceptions in the 6th edition published in 2005. Those exceptions to 2 coins and only 2 coins, Indian Head Cents ans Buffalo Nickels, and only in 1 grade for each of those 2 coins. All other grading criteria for individual grades, even for those 2 coins, stayed exactly the same as they always been. Then in 2013 the ANA published their 7th edition, but every grading criteria in that edition stayed the same as those in the 2005 edition.

Along the way, PCGS published the first edition of their grading book in 1997. They published the 2nd edition of their book in 2004. But the grading criteria used in each one, such as they are, are NOT the same. Their standards were loosened in the 2004 book. That said, PCGS no longer even follows the grading standards in their own 2004 book ! The standards they use today are much looser than what they were then ! And if you read the book and look at the coins they grade today it's patently obvious that is the case.

And it must also be noted that the TPGs have never used the ANA grading standards. Every TPG has always used their own, unique, set of grading standards. And of all the TPGs, PCGS is the only one that has ever published any grading standards at all.

Of all the different grading standards that have ever been used none of them can be compared to each other because they are all different.

 

Goldfinger - if I may make a suggestion. Get yourself copies of the Brown and Dunn book, all editions of the ANA books, and both editions of the PCGS books - then sit down and read and study them, compare them all to each other.

Your eyes will be opened in a way that they have never been opened before

 

My point is that ya need all of the ANA books to get the full benefit, 1st edition through 7th edition.