I didn't put a minimum grade requirement on my coins either because I had already cracked them and/or I didn't care if they dropped a point or two because the price difference wasn't that substantial in those grades... unlike some coins where even one grade point could mean a tremendous price difference.
Ok, could someone who knows about the CDN Certified Coin Market Indicator (tm) box explain where I am off -track. I read the description as comparing the various certified coin bid levels to CDN "sight unseen" bid levels across 10 U.S Coin series. Based on the CDN bids at 100%. The August 14th gives the % as PCGS 76.68% NGC 76.68% ANACS 56.55% ICG 66.23% Now I interpret this as saying that sight unseen , dealer bid for a certified coin by PCGS is worth on the average to the dealer 76.68% of the seen value. Thus dealer confidence is based on that figure. If this is true, then PCGS and NCG are in a virtual tie ( over the series used) in preceived value. , ICG is in 3rd place and ANACS 4th, and then less for the other TPG. Is this a more valid measurement of TPG value than anecdotal observations from those who may be seeing less slabbed coins buy/sell across their hands? I really am not sure if I am interpreting the feature right. Jim
But have you also cracked out PCGS coins and submitted them to NGC? My point is that results like you posted don't prove anything about the grading standards of the two companies. Additionally, I would bet that there are many PCGS coins, which if cracked out of their holders and submitted to PCGS again, would grade lower, just as the NGC crossover coins did.
Good point Mark, I haven't done so with gold as was brought up here, but with a Barber Half I had that was cracked from a PCGS MS62 I sent it to NGC and they said MS61... later PCGS called it an MS62 again. So in that one case, NGC graded it tougher. And yes, the price difference in that one grade for this coin was worth the resubmissions. I also had one classic commem that PCGS originally graded MS64 but NGC called it MS62. Not a huge price difference on that one so I sold it as an NGC MS62. But even submitting to the same service there can be variation in grades, that's likely why each offers regrade services. So while it's true that my very limited experience doesn't paint a clear picture of the overall grading standards of each company, it has definitely caused me to take a much closer look at the coin than just the grade on the holder, especially for AU58 gold (for both NGC and PCGS coins). Which is probably something I should have been doing from the start!!!!
Most likely true , but Mark if I can pick your brain , at the Central States show I endeded up buying a raw late date Liberty half eagle at what the dealer called MS-62 , I and a couple others think it may go a couple points higher , would you send it to NGC or PCGS . and do you think the tpgs in general are harder on gold than silver . rzage
Sorry, but that tells me you are way too conservative in your grading of those coins. It's one thing if you thought that NGC MS61's deserved AU58's, but it's another, entirely for you to say they didn't deserve AU50's.
T$, You kinda mixed up what I said. PCGS is tougher on Jefferson's with respect to numerical grade. In fact, they are almost a whole point more conservative than NGC. However, NGC is definitely tougher with respect to the FS designation, as they are with most designations. The combination of these two factors makes pricing registry Jefferson's very difficult. Generally speaking, I think there are some other series like Jefferson's where PCGS is more conservative than NGC. For series that the TPG's share similar grading standards, I find very little separates the two except the koolaid that is served on the PCGS forum and the exclusivity of the PCGS registry. Personally, I prefer the look of the NGC slab and think that rainbow toned coins contrast better against the white background of the NGC insert. I also like NGC's attempt to recognize superior eye appeal with the star designation although I wish it's application was more consistent.
I probably am conservative in my grading , as I was taught the old fashioned way that any wear means AU , now I read that the routinely give MS to coins with slight wear or rub , as to the AU 50 grade I probably shouldn't of said that as I was trying to make a point , and by doing so I wasn't giving out true information . rzage
My decision regarding which company to submit it to would depend partially on the look of the coin. Generally speaking, I think PCGS tends to favor bright, lustrous gold coins more than slightly subdued and/or natural looking one. But it probably doesn't make much difference, anyway. No, I don't think the TPG's are harder on gold coins than on silver ones. If anything, I think they tend to be more lenient/easier on larger generic gold type coins.
Okay, thank you for clarification, I knew I had something about my statement mixed up, and I was waiting for you to fix it up for me.. I will take your word, as I do not deal with jeffersons, and still think they are ugly
I think that PCGS grades, overall, more conservative for most series. But there are many nice coins you can find in NGC holders too...so buy the coin not the holder. Here's one coin that I would love to own if I had the cash for it at the time...sold on the PCGS boards for $1690. It really looks high end AU to low MS to me. I think PCGS was too conservative on this one. it's only AU55
I like NGC, it is just a personal thing. I still buy a few PCGS coins but most of the time it is just NGC coins.
How about one like this. Unusual toning, high grade, but not a top pop. Still a nice inclusion to a registry set. After all, it resided in my registry set at one time.
If I was being 100% honest with you, I would rather have that as a prize then the Washington quarters offered. (Even though those are nice too)
I think it is accurately graded, luster is a bit muted and the high points have a bit of Rub. At least this is what I get from the photo's. It is definitely a PQ coin for the grade.
