I am not sure what that has to do with this poll since every coin shown was an 1883-CC. If the CC theory is true, all it does is explain why some of the coins shown that appear to be overgraded are MS66's.
I believe GD said that he felt that none of the coins were really MS66s at some point...that they were all overgraded a point or 2. So, that is one of the reasons. Plus, it was an interesting fact I had never considered.
With all due respect to Doug, he uses more stringent grading standards than all of them NGC, PCGS, and the CAC. IMO, coins 1, 2, and 4 are no brainer MS66's by NGC & PCGS standards. Those three would have been graded 66 regardless of the date or mint mark. The other two coins are debatable.
That wasn't always the case though Lehigh. Like you, I agree that the vast majority of NGC and PCGS coins are graded correctly. And if you were to go back through the older threads you'd see that the vast majority of the time I agreed with their grades. It used to be even that if you showed me a pic of a raw coin and then told me which one you were sending it to - I'd tell you what it would be graded. And I was right the vast majority of the time. But these past couple of years things have changed. I mean really changed. But I haven't. And in all honesty, it took me a while to admit to myself that the TPG's were slipping. I had always backed them, recommended them, still do of course, but not to the degree that I used to. And I don't really like to think of myself as being tough or extra strict on grading. I just think of myself as being honest on grading. Yeah, I follow the ANA standards when I give my own grades. And the ANA standards are tougher than those used by the TPG's - so that stands to reason. But I know how the TPG's grade too, or at least I used to. Today, I'd have to bump it a grade to be accurate. That's just the way it is.
the difference is that the shyster stock broker wasn't a founding member of Bloomburg's who continues to be held in extremely high regard in knowledgable financial circles and John Albanese was a founding member of PCGS and then a longtime partner and grader at NGC, who continues to be highly regarded as far as numismatic graders go. Your attempt to make CAC sound like some kind of 2-bit fly-by-night company with no respectability is completely incorrect.
They currently do this, however the tool on their website only tells if it has been approved, it does not tell you if it has been rejected.
So all 5 of my GSA CC dollars that I strictly graded as 62 and 63s might go to 64 , is there a difference in PCGS or NGC as to the more lenient , also 1 has a really nice PL surface and great strike , I always thought it showed off the bag marks more , how do they grade DPL CC Morgans , any differently . rzage:whistle::kewl:
Actually, in the real world the shyster tipster IS a Bloomburg founder. BTW - there is no economic theory that says the founder matters at all. the key distinction is Bloomburg gets paid to report news. The Shyster gets paid to disparage Bloomburg. If not, he's out of business. Ruben
Weren't MM and IB crooks convicted by a court of law? I think they are both convicted felons and are barred by the SEC. Isn't this getting a universe away from coin grading?
Not necessarily but maybe. It would depend on how good you are grading. Been discussed 1000 times - there are more than few who think that PCGS is stricter with their grading than NGC. Personally, I believe they are about the same in a general sense. But PCGS is much less consistent than NGC. Too often PCGS will over-grade and under-grade. In specific cases, like the special designations, NGC has much tougher standards than PCGS does. That is just a fact and not an opinion. For example, what you ask about - to get a DMPL designation NGC requires reflectivity at 6 to 8 inches. PCGS requires reflectivity at 4 to 6 inches. For a PL special designation NGC requires 4 to 6 inches while PCGS requires 2 to 4 inches.
Spock posted one of my CC morgans , I figured 62 he agreed , others had it as 64 to 66 I believe . Rusty
I'll have to find the thread , I have no way of posting coins yet unless I buy off the internet and use there pic . rzage:thumb:
I think one is and one isn't. My aunt worked for both. I understnad it seems a world away for coin grading but its really exactly the same. You have a product on a market of unknown value. Trading of that product requires clear and well distributed information to potential buyers. The evaluation of that information by individual buyers forms a market price at auction. The more accurate the information, the great the reliability of the market to determine true value. The more manipulated that information is, the more the market is warped. How that information is transmitted, produced, fact checked and presented affects the market. Ruben
Yeah, just do an advanced search of the entire forum using the key words of your choice and use spock1k as the user name.
