Is it really possible that only PCGS and NGC get it right?

Have you ever stopped to ask yourself the question: How is it possible that the very experienced numistmatists at both Anacs and ICG routinely get it wrong? Or do they?
Their slabs are treated virtually as raw. I don't get it. I know, I know, someone will say it's about the different "standards" utilized and developed by the top two. But, are they not all supposed to grade by the official ANA Grading Standards?
When I look at the credentials of the managing principals at Anacs and Icg, I for one feel like their grades should be proper. What gives? Do they grade accurately for the grade but forget to add ultra conservative developed standards employed as part of the top tiers business plan? Does the official ANA grading standards really have anything to do with assigned grade on each TPG?
Or is it something more sinister? A media monopoly? A carefully planned snubbing. Somebody help me here!

Cross over successes and failures. Please post. I'd love to here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you're familiar with the history between these two companies, ANACS & ICG, you might understand why the current business models have a tough row to hoe when it comes to gaining the respect of the numismatic public.

Chris

 

There is not a single company anywhere in the world that does not make mistakes. All four TPG's have experts on board but that does mean they are perfect. And there will always be a following for all of them. Somewhere along the line ICG fell behind the rest of the pack, why is anyone's guess, maybe just a bad choice in not keeping current with modern trends. In order to compete profitably they all must maintain standards or go out of business. This also goes for the only two recognized comic graders, CGX & PGX. I seriously doubt it is some sort of conspiracy. Crossovers can be simply anyone's desire to get a better grade and it does not always work in their favor. I find ANAC's to be superb with errors and varieties and I've never had a problem. I do not use PCGS as I do not want to be involved in memberships or trusting my coins with a dealer who I don't do business with, that's my choice though. I'll admit that NGC & PCGS end up easier to sell come the time but that's just the way the boat rocks right now. Everything is subject to change and so this might if these business models are not kept tight.

 

Bottom line people? Learn to grade and get a second set of eyes to back you up. Can't go wrong there......

 

I have several ANACS slabs and have sent out many coins to them. I am happy with the results and the grading.
In my opinion they get a bad rap for mainly two reasons:
1. Snobs who turn up their noses.
2. Significant discrimination.

 

Take any three identical coins of the same grade, one in an ANACS slab, one in an NGC slab and one in a PCGS slab and list them on eBay at different periods of time so as not to affect the bidding. Which coin do you think will receive the lowest bid?

The majority of the time, you will find the ANACS slab in 3rd place. So, you want us to believe that the majority of the collecting public on eBay is nothing more than a bunch of discriminating snobs? Give me a break!

Chris

 

I've had anacs coins go to pcgs and come back with higher grades. One went 53-58 another 62-64. The 53 was a 53 in my opinion. But I've bought and cracked out just as many anacs coins that didn't grade usually to cleaning or altered surfaces or toning. Personally I'd trust them if in hand but tough to buy sight unseen. Same with icg. And newer anacs holders are fugly

 

I reject coins in everyone's holders. Nobody gets it right all the time.

 

Agree. I think lately ngc is better then pcgs. But they both screw up. I've seen plenty of bad problem over graded or just crappy coins in both holders

 

Each service has standards that they try to follow and many feel they have changed over the years. Those standards may be different from one service to the next and may not follow ANA standards.
To make it even more fun, we all have our own standards that may have changed over time. We each have to decide if we agree with the grade on the holder.

 

I have seen coins graded by NGC and PCGS that I thought were either undergraded or overgraded and a few that were down right idiotic. No, they don't always get it right. But when it comes time to sell, my observation is they get the best prices. So, I suppose I go with the flow.

Did ANACS and ICG fall out of favor because they did something that displeased many collectors in terms of reliability or have they simply been out-marketed by the top two? (I suspect that may be part of the case).

At any rate, it appears to be something of a chicken-and-the-egg scenario.

 

Nope. There is no one over them forcing them to grade to ANA standards. Each of them has their own set of standards that they use for grading.

Take three coins withthe same grade but make the ANACS coin a little better than the other two and usually it will STILL get the lowest bid. Why? Grading service bias, and the general lower marketablity of ANACS coins caused by that bias.

Part of the problem was they were late out of the starting gate. Although ANACS began before PCGS and NGC, they didn't embrace slabbing almost three years after NGC was founded. ICG was even later at eleven years. So they were way behind trying to capture a piece of the market when they started , and neither one could match the market funding of the top two. Then the shake up ANACS and ICG had in Dec of 2007 didn't help. When you're the two chimps in the room with the two 800 pound gorillas, it doesn't help to beat each other up.

 

Words of wisdom!

 

Green has a habit of doing that.

 

Learn to grade for yourself , funny thing is I'd buy a ms 64-66 in anacs and be happy paying a lot less then norm

 

Classic advice buy the coin not the holder

 

James, I think you just reached the first plateau. If it's occurring to your critical mind it's all just marketing nonsense, there's no question, you're there. Congratulations on a job well done.

 

With ANACS it's fairly easy to explain - they went through a period of multiple owners each with lower standards than the last. It didn't take the market that long to figure it out and adjust pricing accordingly. Tightening standards after you've loosened them doesn't work - people don't get the grades they expect and they complain. So they loosen again. So which set of standards were applied?

Once you taint a brand, it's very, very hard to ever recover.