Why are grades so different even among the same graders?

Pop reports in absolute numbers mean nothing. Many coins are counted multiple times from crack outs and many coins are in multiple pop reports as well. Pop reports will always continue to climb and a greater percentage of coins are graded and as time passes from people that still crack them out or try for upgraded and crossovers ect.

False that 90 percent upgraded. Most have the same grade assuming that you were talking about a period when the current grades were being used excluding the pluses. Some upgraded for sure but not 90 percent.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

..to get a little back to OP... It sounds like he is having a difficult time discerning between wear/bag damage, or possibly mistaking weakness of strike for circulation. It's also possible he is simply misinterpreting photographs.

Coins graded MS60 don't tend to be pretty. However, they are usually indefinitely uncirculated (that tends to be the one nice thing you can say about coins in this grade- I've heard 'beat with axe' to describe them). There is often debate over AU58~MS63, MS64~MS65, 62-63 etc. There isn't usually much argument between AU50 and MS60. ...besides finding coins that are graded 4-5 grades higher than expected in top grading company slabs, although not unheard of, is extremely rare. If it were happening to the degree we are trying to be lead, this board would be flush with threads pointing it out.

Are you using a circular light? ...your pictures are much better than many we see (and a large percentage of ebay sellers) already. It just helps to position two lights, one at 10' and one at 2' o'clock for best lighting. When the light is coming from opposite directions, it makes it very difficult to assess.

Which coins are you comparing them to on the ebays?

 

I understand later strikes vs. new strikes at the Mint.

I am the OP, and I am very comfortable grading my coins.

I've looked at more than 20,000 Morgan coins. I now look at 1000 Morgans coins and pick 10.

I represent the buy side (hobby buying) and not the sell side (people selling for profit). I've meet many guys in the last 30 years, and I'd say that most are honest.

 

I’d call the first 58 and the second 55. I had a 21 peace I’d bought years before I had at 50 that came back st 63. I didn’t see enough luster to call it uncirculated either. Though the strike was typically weak

 

While I completely agree that grading standards have loosened over the years...I’d imagine there is a significant error built into these numbers due to crackouts and coins regrading at the same grade.

I almost feel like population reports are pretty useless...even the printed historical ones.

 

I completely agree that grade loosening has occurred and is occurring. Again, I just don't have a ton of faith in the pop reports. But, as you said, there are several other indicators which when added together make it clear.

 

Populations going up is not a reflection of grading standards. They’re always going to go up, not every coin of that grade has been graded already unless you’re talking about true rarities. This is especially true when you’re talking about population reports from the early years of grading when it was no where near as accepted or standard as it is today

 

Now you know why CAC came into existence.

 

Somehow I don't think another company with their own unique grading standards has really helped that much.

 

It’s helped what stickers especially on the high end, but certainly has hurt the value of a lot of those too

 

I think it helps those that don't know much about grading to have a bit of security that something is a good example of the grade displayed on the slab. So it you are buying a MS65, you aren't getting a low grade coin that would probably be a MS64 any other day.

 

So is there a problem with grade inflation?

 

But if the grading standards keeps changing and they are calling coins “good for the grade” they have to change their standards too. It’s the same problem.

 

The market doesn’t seem to think so. If there was more money to be made in keeping the standard consistent...the TPGs would.

You’d have to think at some point this bubble is gonna burst.

 

Gradeflation has always been an issue. And for super high-end coins, they will bump the grade up just to get it in their holder. I saw one of the 1913 V Nickels at auction in 2001. It was in a PCGS PR66 holder, but was so washed out from cleaning it would be lucky to be called PR63. No matter. I think now it resides in an NGC PR67 holder. The real reason that prices go down on some coins is because they have watered down the grades.

 

As an avid CAC collector, who has watched the TPG grading system erode over the years, I believe you'll find that CAC has on the "average" been far more consistent than NGC and PCGS. People who have complained about CAC fail to realize that CAC grades to the average/above grade specific coin standard of the TPG being evaluated in applying their "green bean". The "gold bean" generally indicates possibly a significantly undergraded coin for the average specific coin standard of that TPG.

You can personally determine the truth by using eBay photos as a basis.

JMHO

 

But that's sorta my point...they grade to the "average/above grade specific coin standard of the TPG." I have no problem with CAC...and I think what they are trying to do is bring a stabilizing force to the TPGs...the problem is the target keeps moving. An MS65 today from PCGS is far different than it was in 1995. So which standard does CAC use? If we continue to see grade inflation occur...which standard will they use in 2030? Will coins with a green bean from today be "better" than a green bean then (sorta like how the OGH PCGS is viewed by many).

Because CAC is relying on the TPGs grading...which is constantly changing for the looser...they will have to do the same thing.