ICG And HSN'S Mike Mezack Part Ways? "There are 3 Major Grading Services"

Then you may or may not be "rich", but you've proven you are really dumb. You were sold a bill of goods and now all you have left to do is try to unsuccessfully defend the bill of goods you were sold.

The only questions are:
1) touted by whom, and
2) was HE that stupid, or did he think YOU were?

Page 6, PREFACE, 7th edition, copyright 2013. Quote:
"The official ANA grading standards do not seek to influence or establish current grading practices, but to report, clarify and explain them. By reading and applying the ANA's standards, you will understand technical grading, [this last emphasis is mine] the foundation on which coin grading began, and today's real-world market grading practices."

Then, later on page 15:
"Who sets the definitions? The grades of coins are not God-given, nor are they scientific, nor are they immutable [for Doug's edification]. Perhaps like the English language, coin grades change based upon their use. Today, we have to consider what leading grading services such as ANACS, ICG, NGC, and PCGS do [Hmm, no ACG.], as well as what can be observed in offerings in auction sales, dealers' stocks, and coin shows. [remember when I wrote that was important?]

It may well happen that grading interpretations will shift some more in the future. In the meantime, your challenge is to keep abreast of changes as they occur [!!!!!], and to use this and other texts as a useful guide to concepts and basics."

END OF QUOTE:

Sounds pretty reserved to me. No claim of authoritativeness whatsoever from my reading of it. Buuuuuut, if you want to be captured by the cover title, that's YOUR call.

The most disappointing words in the 7th edition are at the top of page 2:
"Printed in China".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Are you saying that he said that the coins was crossed by PCGS/NGC without taking it out of the holder? Neither of them would give a coin a cert number in someone else's holder

 

I might want a clarification on the use of the word "cleaned". But if a guy with the moniker like "imrich" wants to hang his hat on an obsolete volume of a book that it itself says is "a useful guide to concepts and basics", that's his right, I guess.

 

That fact is why it was stated. I have both the ACG encapsulated coin, and the cross-over TPG certificate number/assignment. The ACG slab wasn't broken. I've seen similar past disdain with return comments from the
cross-over reviewer, but had never heard of this action.

 

Cross over from who. There’s no such thing as a cross over certificate from PCGS or NGC

 

Kurt, I believe to the contrary of your opinion/statement.

You Stated: "Everybody has admitted that since Day One."

You are arguing what both Doug and I have stated, by quoting from a document written 36 years after my reference: "The official ANA grading standards do not seek to influence or establish current grading practices"

Yes, I agree with you that it appears standards have evolved from technical to imaginary?

With your legal understandings I believe you know our beliefs are meaningless. But I believe the courts will generally accept as proper reference THE LAST COMPLETE PUBLISHED STANDARD which wasn't denied by an organization. An incomplete lesser standard is generally unacceptable.

Our discussions are believed futile/foolish. I won't try to dissuade you with believed facts, but anticipate an opportunity for you to convince others of importance that I'm "really dumb/stupid, etc.".

Good Luck, Rich

P.S. It may behoove you to locate a copy of my reference, which was stated within to be the resource, after numerous prior attempts, in eliminating the general subjectivity experienced for grading all U.S. coins before that date (1793 to present). It was stated to be a 4 year project in conjunction with the A.N.A., numerous knowledgeable experts and individuals to be the "Official ANA Grading System".

 

I don’t understand how the coin could possibly (technically) grade any higher.

You say that it has “ripping luster” and that makes it a very desirable coin, but you yourself admitted that it shows rub. That precludes Mint State.

Since I know that you abhor market grading, what do you propose? A grade between AU and MS?

I’m just trying to figure out how to serve you your cake and let you have it as well.

Personally, I’d buy the coin in a heartbeat and gladly own it over a nice MS-63 example, but I am expressing preference of the coin regardless of what you want to pidgeonhole it in for grade.

 

I've told you the facts, now you, as the supreme TPG authority LOL, tell me which of those 2 would have done that stated.

 

Totally. So totally jacked.

 

Neither would. That’s why I am asking you to clarify what you were saying. If someone convinced you they did well...

 

Patience, Son! In due time! It's believed much may be determined and objectively documented. You may be correct, and perhaps a proper individual to also be deposed for establishment of truths/facts. However, this isn't the time or place for proper procedures.

JMMHO

 

You Are Correct! And for my additions to the "Jacking", I sincerely apologize. I believe enough time/involvement has elapsed to provide the O.P. with an answer. Enough Said!!

 

No sir, it may behoove YOU to know the when there is a 7th edition of a volume, that kind of AUTOMATICALLY eviscerates volumes 1 through 6. The misguided and foolhardy ATTEMPT at minimizing subjectivity has been abandoned and relegated to the scrapheap of numismatic history. Want to litigate? Go for it!

 

No sir, you are dead wrong. You wound me deeply, sir. I abhor TECHNICAL grading with a passion you may not have experienced since the last time you forced Matt into an unwanted discussion of the latest modern issue. In fact, Mike, I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE MARKET GRADING, and I dismiss attempts to nostalgically hold onto TECHNICAL grading with a derisive snort and a dismissive wave of my hand.

 

SHsssshhhh - don't tell them that. You can get some steals on ICG and ANACs coins.

I like how my local shop does this - you can tell when they like the coin - no matter what holder it is in. The price. They definitely make it about the coin and not the holder. I was just there last week - asked about silver and they said they had some "other" graded silver in another case (I knew what he meant) and it was PCGS and NGC coins. Common low grade coins.

 

mikenoodle, posted: "Totally. So totally jacked."

Jacked for the better! IMO, this discussion is more useful than writing about HSN and what TPGS they are pushing.

As Baseball said,TDN has put it best with those how they're so rare they're not graded they're ranked. There is an excellent discussion of how this works on CU. The discussion is in the thread about the recent sale of an 1804 dollar. The author related how the grades of these coins increased and how, have no relationship to reality - just ranking.

V. Kurt Bellman, posted: Quote: "The official ANA grading standards do not seek to influence or establish current grading practices, but to report, clarify and explain them. By reading and applying the ANA's standards, you will understand technical grading, [this last emphasis is mine] the foundation on which coin grading began, and today's real-world market grading practices."

A little clarification is needed here. When you repeat something enough times folks believe it. Examples:

1. ANACS was first TPGS. Nope. The are the oldest and after decades of advertising they have finally corrected the record. I graded at the first TPGS.

2. ANACS and the grading guide uses technical grading. Nope!

You see, I was the sole person who came up with the "Technical Grading System" we used for internal records at ANACS in 1972. Later, it was used at the first TPGS - INSAB. This grading system was not influenced by time, rarity, value, or the condition of the market. It was based on my understanding of the strict Sheldon Grading System. After ANACS moved to CO, in spite of what they wrote or said, they had no clue nor did they used TRUE technical grading!

V. Kurt Bellman, posted: "No sir, it may behoove YOU to know the when there is a 7th edition of a volume, that kind of AUTOMATICALLY eviscerates volumes 1 through 6."

The 7th Edition is the only one that should be used as it has been updated for the better.

 

Just a small question: If all TPGs used the same grading system, what would be the difference between them?

 

I do not share your need for a written standard, really I don't. Why? Like everyone says about even the Red Book - by the time you get it, it's already obsolete. "The Market", such as it is, is its own wonderful amorphous ever changing standard, and that's quite good enough for me. Why? Because that's what determines what I'm going to pay or get paid, with the exception of new issues. In that case, I'm going to pay whatever obscene usurious rate they charge.