Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 2016251, member: 15309&quot;]I don&#039;t think that anybody disputes that there have been changes to the TPG grading standards over the years.&nbsp; But typically, it is characterized as a deliberate loosening of standards with regards to numerical grades.&nbsp; That is what I have a problem with.&nbsp; I have no problem admitting that adjustments to TPG market grading principles have resulted in higher grades for some coins. </p><p><br /></p><p>And some of these points are further examples of the TPGs responding to the market Like LostDutchman mentioned a few days ago.&nbsp; While NGC may have started with a requirement for 6 full steps for the FS (full step designation), PCGS only ever required 5 full steps.&nbsp; The market accepted that 5 full steps was adequate for the strike designation.&nbsp; NGC had no choice but to amend their standard to conform to the market lest risk loosing all Jefferson Nickel business to PCGS.&nbsp; And contrary to your accusation, that specific change in policy was published publicly by NGC in 2004.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=250" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=250" rel="nofollow">NGC DISTINGUISHES JEFFERSON NICKEL STEPS</a></p><p><br /></p><p>That said, I do think we have made a major breakthrough in our impasse regarding this topic.[/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