Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="ToughCOINS, post: 2066132, member: 20480"]I respect your opinion, while at the same time differing. Third party grading was the brainchild of Alan Hagar, the founder of ACCUGRADE.  While that was third party grading for all other sellers who submitted their coins to him for grading, it was actually first party grading when he was assigning grades to his own coins . . . PCGS, and later NGC started grading technically, and "evolved" into market grading afterward.  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.    Thus the introduction of market grading, which helps the helpless, but often confuses those adept at technical grading.  So which is better?  After all, the market had better all settle on one system, or the confusion will not go away. If I have to choose between having a significant portion of the best coins being soaked up by the intentionally ignorant, and most coins being far more available and affordable to the masses, I choose the latter. For those of you who would rather have a market eventually built on fewer participants and less affordable coins, I think time is your enemy.[/QUOTE]