Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;AncientJoe, post: 3879345, member: 44357&quot;]These are apples to oranges though, and I think this is an important distinction that deserves to be clarified as I&#039;ve seen you post about it a number of times.</p><p><br /></p><p>NGC and other companies generally have a consistent standard that they apply - it doesn&#039;t mean they&#039;re overgrading or that auction houses are under grading coins and an auction house isn&#039;t better if it describes coins with lower grades than what a third party grader gives them.</p><p><br /></p><p>If an auction house were started tomorrow and graded every coin &quot;Worse than Poor&quot; and these coins then were graded MS69+*, that doesn&#039;t mean the auction house is superior to one that described them as Mint State.</p><p><br /></p><p>Similarly, NGC will often call a coin AU if it retains luster when other companies might call it VF. You just have to know what an NGC grade means relative to NGC grades. NGC AU doesn&#039;t mean a fraction of a grade away from FDC: there can be quite a chasm of a difference, as is the case in the NGSA vs MDC Faustinas here, considering style, luster, grade, centering, strike, etc. There is too much nuance to distill down into a single number.</p><p><br /></p><p>CNG calling something EF that is later described as MS doesn&#039;t mean anything except for the fact that CNG/Kunker/others don&#039;t bother with micro-grading coins like third party graders.</p><p><br /></p><p>Ultimately, just look at the coin and compare it to other examples. I can honestly say I don&#039;t care what auction houses describe as the grade, outside of the marks/scratches/tooling that they indicate.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in