NGC Grading Class At CSNS

The really funny part is all of this stuff got discussed in the class... Tho it wasn't on the curriculum. There were a couple of people in our class that just kept bothering him about their coins... Wanting him to look at this and that... It was SUPER annoying... But in the downtime we did ask questions. Like I said in the beginning. The reason we went was not to learn to grade... But to learn how HE grades. I felt like these other people were just there for free opinions. John had a great amount of patience and I see why he is a very respected grader... Not to mention an all around good guy.

Even as an experienced dealer I learned a lot of things. I'm really glad we did it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So are you saying that certain dates are held to higher standards based on the overall quality of the coin or based on the market demand. For example if everyone wants a 1879-CC Morgan at MS65 and the grade would be ms64 do they bump up the grade just because that is what the market wants?

 

Not exactly. Common coins are just that... Common... There are lots of nice looking examples on the market.... It takes a really spectacular example to stand out.

When it comes to RARE coins... NGC and PCGS offer guarantees. This means if they mess up... They are on the hook for it. They tend, it seems to me, to be much pickier and harder on high end coins lately... But this has not always been the case. Markets for certain coins change... Interest comes and goes... Markets change...

 

So what you are saying is that they grade coins more vigorously the more rare they are rather then the overall quality of the coin that mintage year?

 

At this point in time... From the results of recent submissions... I feel this to be the case... But like I said... I don't feel as if this has always been the case. The Eliasburg coins come to mind. I feel like a large number of those coins were over graded.

 

What he is saying is there are certain coins in a series that are known to exist in a nicer quality than the average for the series. In Morgan Dollars, it is well known and documented that 1880-S and 1881-S (and to a certain degree 1882-S) coins are commonly seen with very nice strikes and surfaces. As a result, the quality of these coins is far above the average of other dates/MMs in the series. Because of that, these coins get graded a little harsher. They might give an 1881-S the grade of MS63 when another date/MM coin with the exact same strike and dings might get graded MS65.

 

So, what you're saying here (I think?) is that because the average condition of such coins is generally better than other date/mint combos, these coins can sometimes have stricter grading criteria?

Now, this is something that I didn't know. I thought that, for example, all wheat-ear Lincoln cents were graded according to the same criteria. Does this apply to circulated as well as MS?

 

An entire series of coins is not graded based on the exact same criteria. For example, Lincolns...do you think some of those really nicely struck dates in the 1910s should be graded on the same scale as the really poorly struck years of the 1920s? The answer is no, those coins were produced originally with very different features. I think depending on the coin...it depends on how this is enforced. For example, look at 1922 No D Lincoln cents. Many of those graded VF look like your average VG cent. It's because a lot of what is seen is due to the strike.

 

It would be pretty easy to make the argument that the answer to that question should be YES. One such argument would be that if you viewed a matched set of coins within a series all with the same grade that the coins should look alike.

 

Paul, I completely agree with you. I wish that's how it was...but unfortunately (IMHO), it's not. I personally don't see a problem with there being a ton more MS67 1881-S Morgans than 1892-O.

 

What are some good resources on this kind of "differing grading criteria"?

I'm thinking of Lincoln Cents, in particular.

 

I don't know of any actual sources other than taking classes like this and discussing it with the graders.

The only way you really learn it is by studying the series and inferring it based on what you see. If you know the characteristics of different years/MMs of the series, the grading tendencies will follow.

 

Looking at a lot of graded coins and noticing trends... They're really aren't any good resources.

 

Is a course I'd love to take I feel I'm decent tho a bit conservative but I'm sure I'd learn a lot and I'm always wanting to do that as to time it takes me less then 60 seconds to grade a coin and once I do often to make the purchase too

 

What all of this means, of course, is that grading is driven by trends at the TPG companies, is constantly evolving, and that there is no one standard.

As much of an art as a science.

 

They have to walk a fine line of providing a service and trying to minimize THEIR exposure. I feel that this is why they are so much harder on rarer coins these days.

 

You might be right...if they get it wrong and have to buy it back, it could be a huge hit.

 

Great thread and interesting read.

When you think about why a 81-S Morgan is more "harshly" graded than other dates/mm, think about this: you are judging (grading) the coin against the minting process for that particular date and mint. That's why it's important to know the nuances of each date and mint mark in a series.