Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;vavet, post: 352519, member: 11630&quot;]While I disagree completely as to why the tpg&#039;s came into existance, I&#039;d like to back up a little to present the entire picture.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The 70 point grading system as we know it today was created for the ANA by coin dealer Abe Kosoff. Most of those who contributed to that effort reads like a who&#039;s who in the coin dealing business. It was that system that laid the groundwork for those who wanted to manipulate the grading standards. If you noticed, back in 1977, the ANA indicated that using all 11 grades in the MS range would result in miniscule differences that could not be consistantly determined. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Prior to third party grading the primary overgraders in the hobby were the national dealers, of which, many were the same dealers that started third party grading. The mom and pop stores had to rely on local repeat business so it was in their interest (in most cases) to play things straight. I base this on personal experience. My local dealers were not the problem, and the few mail orders that I placed ended up with coins being returned because of overgrading. Incidentally, the same problem exists today with many of the national advertisers.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Third party grading as we know it today did not come about because collectors &quot;demanded&quot; it. The fact is that the ANA already provided all those services years in advance of the creation of PCGS and NGC. Were it not for the lust for the almighty dollar by those who are only interested in playing the grading game, the ANA could more than likely still be handling the volume of coins that actually need to be examined for things other than grade. It was the grade chasers who created the volume that resulted in the sale on ANACS to Amos Press. Back in 1986, before the modern coin grading craze, there was basically a fixed supply of classic coins available to the market. Since the price of a coin is normally determined by supply and demand, and the supply is more or less fixed, the only way to increase prices was to &quot;create&quot; demand. Any significant increase in demand had to come from outside the Numismatic community and in order to &quot;create&quot; the illusion that a given coin was in fact as stated, the idea of third party grading by alleged professionals was also &quot;created&quot;. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Before I continue, I&#039;d like those who are reading this to consider how many of the 50,000 coins submitted to PCGS in it&#039;s first two months of operation were submitted by &quot;authorized dealers&quot; who were not the ones who were overgrading coins in the first place? How many of those authorized dealers was the leader of PCGS referring to when he sent a letter out stating that the jig was up with regard to selling overgraded coins to telemarketers some 5 years after PCGS was started? Why did PCGS agree to a determination that their services were not as advertised some 4 years after PCGS was started? Why was the leader of PCGS put on probation for questionable coin dealings around that same time? Are those actions consistant with a organization that has the collectors interest at heart???????????????? Give me a break!&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Third party grading was created in order to attract investment dollars thereby creating greater demand and therefore higher prices. Higher prices translates to greater profit for those in the business which is why the dealers were all for this new concept. It had nothing, no, make that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with collectors.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Although there has only been two tpg&#039;s that have been endorsed by the ANA, that was purely by chance. It wasn&#039;t that long ago that the ANA invited bids from somewhere around 11 grading outfits in hopes of upping the ante for their endorcement. We can only speculate as to who they might have endorced had someone been willing to pay the freight. As it turned out even the greedy tpg&#039;s wouldn&#039;t take part in the greed of the ANA and no bids were submitted. While I&#039;m on the subject, did you happen to notice that in the previous bidding war between PCGS and NGC, NGC&#039;s offer was about the same percentage over PCGS&#039; in cash, in submission slots and in volunteer hours as well. What are the chances of that happening with sealed bids?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Is it me or is there quite a bit of confusion in the minds of many in this thread as to what &quot;market grading&quot; really means? Having each tpg functioning under their own standards, or is it their own interpretation of what grading standards are supposed to be, isn&#039;t confusing? Having a 70 point grading system that even the alleged professionals can&#039;t consistantly function within isn&#039;t confusing? A full head SLQ doesn&#039;t necessarily have to have a &quot;full&quot; head in order to be called a full head. Nothing confusing there? </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The reason market grading survives is because most collectors that came into the hobby in recent years either havent put forth the effort to educate themselves, are confused by a dysfunctional grading system, are mezmerized by the tpg propaganda, or a combination of the three. One more possibility is that all the dealers are in sync and it&#039;s either pay the freight or go without.[/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