Featured Market Grading vs. Technical Grading

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Are you trying to sell me something? Kidding, I'll find a link...

 

this is exactly what i was trying to say. if you have a ms 64 with good toning to bring it market up to 65 many people then represent the coin not as market graded but as technically 65 and then want a bonus premium.

i get that toned is a subspecialty of collecting and not for the faint of heart but this issue because a serious roadblock with many people misunderstanding that they don't have a technical 64 with market to 65 but a 65 that also has toning.

 

Like any new business, they were reacting to what they considered mistakes. You make it sound like they purposefully changed standards simply to cater to the uninformed. Your point makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can lost the fancy rhetoric and explain exactly what you mean by the following statement and how allowing for eye appeal accomplishes what you are talking about.

"Why? Because their initial expectation was that absolute grading standards would deal with the iniquities of sellers grading their own coins. Unfortunately, they discovered late in the game that those who did not fully appreciate the positive / negative attributes of coins outside the norm for a given technical grade needed some help."

So what you are saying is that an ugly technically graded MS66 is worth less money than one that is untoned or attractively toned. Yet you are upset that TPGs have addressed the issue by lowering the grade of the coin and subsequently the value of the coin. It seems that you would prefer to be able to fleece those not in a position to judge a coin on all it's merits because only some of the coins attributes were actually considered in the technical grading process. Congratulations, you have successfully made the case for why market grading is necessary.

The overwhelming number of coins graded by the TPGs are not influenced by eye appeal and are graded by the exact considerations that you listed: strike, luster, and surface preservation.

While I don't like the practice of multiple grade bumps for eye appeal, the number of coins that I see getting more than a 1 grade bump is extremely small. There is no way that such a small number of coins could cause someone to think that the tables have been turned on their grading skills. That is nothing more than hyperbole.

Agreed

Agreed , though I wouldn't characterize it as paying one's dues. Nobody told me there were mandatory requirements (aka dues) to become a coin collector.

It would seem to me that investors learned their lessons about graded coins in 1990 after the collapse. You can't have it both ways Mike. If the investors have returned without any knowledge, and it is the "less skilled buyers generally bathe in overgraded, overpriced and misrepresented coins before they acquire the skills necessary to avoid those pitfalls" then they are most likely going to infuse cash into the market. IMO, that is a good thing; they are similar to a fish at a poker table.

Furthermore, when you say "less less afraid of buying technically graded coins having some unrecognized downside," again it sounds as though you are bitter because you have lost an avenue in which to use your more advanced knowledge to gain a financial advantage over those without such knowledge. From a collector standpoint, this was one of the primary goals of the TPGs, to level the playing field between dealer and collector.

I dont' even know how to respond to this. You simply want to exclude people (investors) from the coin market in order to accomplish an artificial deflation of prices across the board. While that may be great for children, everybody with a vested interest in the coin market would suffer financially. And you think this is good for the hobby? Seriously?

Are you really claiming that the simple addition of eye appeal to the grading equation has caused a mass influx of investors into the coin market? Where are they? I don't see prices skyrocketing! The TPG system of market grading is over 25 years old. It is stable and almost everybody has adjusted to the system without harboring feelings of resentment and injustice. Reverting back to technical grading or any other wholesale change in the grading standard at this point would be turning the tables on those who have learned how to grade using market grading.

 

The problem is not really market grading or whether or not the buyer is informed. The problem is that while market grading uses different standards than technical grading, it has commandeered the Sheldon scale without a notation to indicate which grading standard is being employed.

Since both technical and market grading are subjective, this creates a situation where even an informed buyer cannot be sure if the grade on the coin is intended to be a technical grade or a market grade taking into account eye appeal or minor problems. Just look how many threads we have had here where experienced numismatists debate how a coin got its grade and whether or not market grading was involved.

 

IIRC, the reason was because they intended third party grading to create a sight unseen marketplace. They learned very quickly that not including eye appeal in grading would make that goal unachievable. If you wanna claim that the sight unseen marketplace was intended to lure in investors, that I can believe.

If that is not the reason, why would you prefer a system of grading that allows those with knowledge to have a decided advantage over those without that knowledge?

Change isn't easy. I would expect that market grading received much resistance when it was created. But market grading and the TPGs have not only survived since the inception of market grading, to the point where market grading is widely accepted within the numismatic community. It has been over 25 years, disgruntled technical graders need to get over at this point.

I am not entirely opposed to fleecing. While you want the investors out, I want their money, especially those who don't do their homework.

I know that you are able to grade using both methods. We shall disagree about which method is best for the hobby. For the record, I don't think the survival of the rare coin market is in any trouble.

To the contrary, putting requirements on those who want to participate in the hobby is exclusionary. I welcome everyone, the experts, the idiots, and everyone in between.

This is the second time that you have mentioned "the survival" of the hobby. What makes you think that coin collecting is in trouble? You support reverting back to technical grading and even a major economic correction in order to stop what you consider to be something that threatens the viability of the hobby. In order to gain support from others, you first need to convince us that coin collecting is in serious danger. I just don't see it Mike. Everything looks just fine to me. And I know all about industry being in danger, as I worked in the casino business in Atlantic City.

Thanks for a stimulating debate, it was fun, good night!

 

I realize this may be a futile exercise, where I could write a treatise to answer what I consider a foolish question.

Man-kind has been able to establish societal standards long before the "cell phone", when there was an abundance of facilities (e.g. "coin shops"/"clubs") where groups met and commonly jointly discussed the various design characteristics and wear conditions of Numismatic items.

We even had books. In 1977 a compilation of the wear/condition characteristics of coins was published as the "standard" for an organization with an acronym A.N.A.. That book had drawn illustrations with arrows showing the features described for the wear conditions of specific types and coin grades.

I believe that published document would be the only "standard" allowed in a litigious action because the words match the drawings/illustrations. Many Photograde pictures don't equate to the grade standard definitions. Often a lower grade will have a picture of a coin with better condition than the next grade. These photos are believed to be very subjective. If the photo document can be shown inconsistent, it's believed that document would be null and void as an acceptable reference, deferring to the previous standard. That being the original standard with drawings and arrows to explain wear conditions for various coins.

JMHO

 

Very limited local range, compared to today's access, photo quality and quantity of resources.

Would you care to provide an example of these illustrations, which were used to maintain a much tighter grading standard, than the one we have today, with TPGs?

"...because the words match the drawings/illustrations"

I guess my inquiry has been definitively "null and voided" with great precision. Thanks for the input, I'll give it an appropriate share of consideration.

Did you have books on 8-track, too?

I can just imagine a customer not finding the grade he wants in a Texas shop, then comparing a coin of interest with a shop in Iowa. "Let me just run to the closest landline and ask if it looks the same as the standard drawing/illustration. It does, great, can I give you my credit card number over the telephone? Can't wait to show the guys at the coin club."

 

I believe we were still using crystal sets, abacus, slide rules, and "land lines" that actually allowed communication in rural areas without a recharger/battery. LOL

 

...and now, you have the ability to scan a page, upload it to this thread and show me the type of standard that the ANA drawings/illustrations have set, maintaining the tightest grading possible.

 

You wanna know how the coin club meeting can look today? Five guys with coin experience, helping one guy find that nice specific coin, using 5 large screen, high resolution cell phones, simultaneously, while viewing and showing him hundreds of high resolution images, of the grade that he can afford. They can use their experience and collective input to agree on which coin has the best luster, toning and eye-appeal for the price he's prepared to pay. Then they can send him a link to the one or three, that they all like best in his price range. All slabbed examples, of course. Did I mention the photos all being in color?

I can't wait to see those drawings and illustrations you mentioned. I'll read the words, too, promise.

 

Wisdom speaks. An example of a drawing or illustration will break your precious rules? They don't already have examples from the ANA standards on the internet? I'm pretty sure I've seen a few. I forgot, your generation likes to type, talk, but never back anything up with evidence. Why don't you promote your coin resume and experience a few more times...

https://www.desertcart.ae/products/...ion-grading-standards-for-united-states-coins

I really like the Walker images. Definitive.

 

Between the other forums laughing at you publicly and your big head over here (glorified moderator position equal in status to a Walmart Greeter, JMHO), there is very little room for me to show or say anything. Especially when almost every time, you sit on my posts with your "plethora of experience". You and some of your followers make it hard for people to participate, unless they share your up-to-date experience and collecting skills. Believe me, I try to get my point across, but, you always have to inflict your opinion on a topic and overwhelm everyone, to the point where they discontinue the argument, like @Morgandude11 just did. If you can't produce a credible argument, you fall back on the CT rule enforcement standards and your position.

Bottom line, the voice I wanted to hear further in this discussion, has now been silenced by your participation in yet another CT topic. Thanks.

 

Even if they "buy the book" first? Kidding, no need for an answer.

 

I'm still rather pleasantly surprised at the quality and quantity of slabbed and unslabbed precious metal US coins that I encounter at very reasonable prices. I credit the availability of inexpensive quality coins in slabs to TPG initiatives, submissions and accessibility. Compared to other world coin endeavors, it is really, truly a pleasant experience to dive into US coins.

Let's not forget, the scrutiny that has brought your cream to the top, is why we can now refer to the two best TPGs or the top four, while looking at a very long list of stepping stones that were not accepted as consistent enough... http://coinauctionshelp.com/page16.html