Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 1446447, member: 112&quot;]Where is it written Paul that I have to prove everything I say, but you don&#039;t ever have to prove anything you say ? And that just because you say it, that I am wrong and you are right ?</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>You did huh ? And how exactly did you do that ? I don&#039;t recall any evidence presented by you. At least I presented evidence, you have presented nothing except your personal claims that the reason for the sudden increase is due to an increase in submissions. So where is your evidence that submissions increased that much Paul ? </p><p><br /></p><p>Do you actually have any idea of what historical submission numbers are Paul ? I do - do you ? Back around 2002 NGC and PCGS each were grading about 100,000 coins a month. By around 2004, it was about the same. By around 2007 NGC was grading about 150,000 a month, and PCGS was grading about 100,000 a month. NGC&#039;s increase in submission numbers occurred gradually over that period of time. And you want to confirm those numbers - go read back issues of Coin World and Numismatic News. Or, ask Conder. I think he&#039;ll confirm that the numbers I mentioned are fairly close.</p><p><br /></p><p>So you tell me how with no increase in submission numbers, and assuming that the grading standards did not change - that there was such a huge increase in those grade populations.</p><p><br /></p><p>And it might be worth noting that these modern coins that you think don&#039;t really matter in determining if the TPGs changed their grading standards, because they are &quot;modern&quot; coins; well those modern coins make up about 50%, or more, of all the coins graded by the TPGs.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Paul I can give you the pop numbers, in grades down to AU50, for every date for Bust halves back in 2003. And that is for every individual variety of Bust halves. PM me an email and I&#039;ll send it you in a spread sheet. It&#039;s too big to post here.</p><p><br /></p><p>And no Paul, I didn&#039;t try and skew the data by only presenting a few examples. I merely presented a few representative examples since I didn&#039;t want to type for a week. </p><p><br /></p><p>The evidence I have presented speaks for itself Paul. But you go right in ahead making claims, and saying that you have debunked my theory - without your having presented any evidence at all.[/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