How on Earth could PCGS have graded this coin problem free?!!!

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That's pretty good evidence if you ask me as I read all of this from the sidelines.

 

Try NEN:

https://www.northeastcoin.com/index.jsp

 

So the hypothesis that they changed grading standards is based on the changes seen here. I also assume it's also based on comparisons of graded coins in-hand (before and after 2004)?

The real question is why... I'm sure we can always assume a nefarious motivation, but is that really it? Wouldn't grading standards change for another reason? Perhaps the huge influx of business?

 

Looks great! Thanks!

 

The PCGS data definitely piqued my curiosity, so I pulled out my calculator and did some math.

During the 2 year period the overall population of certified coins increased by 39%. I was interested to see which grades accounted the most for this increase. Here are the 2-year increases broken down by specific grades:
MS63 - 14%
MS64 - 21%
MS65 - 25%
MS66 - 38%
MS67 - 96%

Although the higher grades do show a greater increase, even the MS65 and MS66 grades had a smaller percentage increase than the overall population of certified coins.

It really gets interesting in MS and PF69 grades which increased 363% for PF69 and 25,450% (!!!) for MS69. So in 2005 were there really over 1 million PF69 and 600,000 MS69 classic coins or did PCGS misstate their data in the second report? If there are that many "monster graded" classics out there I'd sure like to see some of them.

Also, there is an "other" category which I assume covers details, genuine and lowball (G6 and below) coins. This category increased by over 400K which accounts for over 20% of the increase in overall certified population.

Another 68% of that overall increase (approximately 1.5 million coins) can be accounted for by the newly graded PF69 and MS69 coins.

This goes to show that we can't always take data at face value. If the data is telling us something completely impossible, i.e. that 1.5 million MS and PF69 classic coins were graded in a 2 year period, then there has to be a simpler explanation. Either PCGS forgot to subtract out the moderns from their second report or their definition of "moderns" is extremely narrow.

 

Okay, so based on this there are 661,496 pre-1965 U.S. coins graded MS69 by PCGS. Out of curiosity I looked in the Heritage archive for all MS69 U.S. coins dated 1800 to 1964 that have been sold on their site to date, and found only 63 items (all TPG's, not just PCGS). I know that Heritage is not the only venue where such coins are sold but they must have sold more than 0.01% of them.

Therefore I am still convinced that something is up with this data...

When it comes to coins I'm just a guy sitting on the sidelines but data analysis is a big part of what I do for a living.

 

The numbers are absolutely incorrect. First, they don't even add correctly. Look at the 2006 numbers for MS69. This is how they read:

1,211 (Copper) + 1,743 (Nickel) + 106,349 (Silver) + 106,921 (Gold) = 661,496

Funny, my calculator yields 216,224

But beyond that, do you really not have the ability to look at the numbers in that book and understand that they do in fact include modern coins? I don't have access to PCGS population reports but I do have access to NGC census. According to the numbers in the book you showed, in 2006, PCGS had graded 106,921 classic (pre 1964) gold coins MS69, and a whopping 4,325 MS70

Wanna know what the current (2014) NGC populations are for classic gold?

NGC MS69 Gold Coins: 16
NGC MS70 Gold Coins: 0

What about Nickel coins. The 2006 PCGS population for pre 1964 nickel coins is 1,743 for MS69 and 89 for MS70.

Wanna know what the current (2014) NGC populations are for classic Nickel?

NGC MS69 Nickel Coins: 0
NGC MS69 Nickel Coins: 0

You have professed that you will always admit when you are wrong. Well here is your chance to be a man of your word.

 

Your explanation depends upon ignoring what is plainly obvious: that the numbers do actually include moderns despite the verbiage to the contrary at the top of the page. Here is my explanation. When you look at the data from an objective perspective and in its entirety, it shows that there was very little change at all in grades from 2003 to 2006.



I have input all of the data for the mint state ranges into a spread sheet. The top portion shows the data from the PCGS reports for 2003, 2006, and the variance between the two years. The second section shows the data as a percentage of total for 2003, 2006, and the increase/decrease from 2003 to 2006. And by looking at those increases/decreases it is easy to see that increase in MS69 grades is caused by the inclusion of modern coins since that grade is basically non existent in classic (pre 1964) coinage. However, if we remove the coins graded MS68-MS70 and recalculate, we get a much better approximation of the actual changes in grades over the years. I say "approximation" because there still are moderns included in the grades below MS68 which skew the numbers to the high end. That said, if we look at the bottom section we see that the single biggest variance from 2003 to 2006 was a 2.47% increase in gold coins graded MS64. If we review the overall increases/decreases there is nothing about the data that indicates that PCGS loosened their grading standards.

Now you can ignore the data (that you provided) and continue to believe what you have invented in your mind, or you can open your eyes and mind to the fact that you have been wrong about this subject for a very long time.

Do you see that one of the biggest increases as a % of total from 2003 to 2006 exists in copper coins graded G8-VF35 with an increase of 1.43%? You don't see me telling you that it equates to PCGS tightening their grading standards do you? That is because it doesn't mean that at all. It simply indicates that from 2003 to 2006, the % of circulated copper coins submitted to PCGS was significantly higher than it was from 1986 to 2003.

 

"Now you can ignore the data (that you provided) and continue to believe what you have invented in your mind, or you can open your eyes and mind to the fact that you have been wrong about this subject for a very long time. "


Some people are married to their Fundemental beliefs and will refuse to acknowledge anything that proves otherwise. There is even a term for this. Religion. The belief without proof.

I've been wrong many times in life and have been wrong and admitted it here. But all I would expect is either silence or denial.

 

Yeah, I like spreadsheets, too. If done well, spreadsheets can explain data much better than simple, raw numbers. Especially when "change over time" is involved.

I kind of wondered if the huge increase in business must have had something to do with the increasing numbers in the Grade categories. It seems that I've got my answer.

 

You can either ignore it and go back to looking at shiny green stickers, or you can show a backbone, dive in and pick a side. So far, I've only seen you argue a point when someone is holding your hand. Try picking a side. Just an idea. Better than sitting on the fence, a lot.

 

Peanuts, that's what a varying opinion of 1 to 2 points is. The only reason I'm curious as to the facts in these grading topics on CT, is because we have a know-it-all who won't let up and he's downgrading coins by 4, 5, even 9 grade points over TPG grades, claiming that everyone else's problem is not understanding his point of view on the matter. Let's see how this all turns out...

 

There is only so much BS you can take, before you start to question the shepherd and his flock. Depending on the level of BS, sometimes even the flock comes up with a few questions.

 

I have an MS66 Washington quarter and I think NGC has it priced at around $90, I paid $12. There is a sucker born every minute.

 

Are you sure about that? Did you consult GDJMSP before claiming it's scientific?

 

I guess one question we can ask ourselves is, regardless of whether or not the standards were actually "loosened", does any reasonable explanation exist for allowing one individual to claim that almost all coins graded today are somehow only AU?