Cgs Rejects/coins Not Worth Paying To Grade

[Benny who 6]

i agree with what they say about the inconsistency of the grading too ive seen some of the first graded coins that they have done to be quite low for being graded at 80's and such (if my grading opinion is worth much )

from this i think i have managed to do a u turn convince myself not to send any more off unless they are higher value ones:)

I think these two are a fair enough example of inconsistency 3711 and 12559.

I don't mind the slabs,however I think I would be the same,if the slab costs more than the coin,it would probably be as nice in a shop bought holder,and the money could go on the next new addition.

[rpeddie 119]

perfect example of what i am talking about

funny how i started this out looking for help on a next lot being sent away but now i am totally put off by the idea

[Paulus 1,942]

i agree with what they say about the inconsistency of the grading too ive seen some of the first graded coins that they have done to be quite low for being graded at 80's and such (if my grading opinion is worth much )

from this i think i have managed to do a u turn convince myself not to send any more off unless they are higher value ones:)

I think these two are a fair enough example of inconsistency 3711 and 12559.

I don't mind the slabs,however I think I would be the same,if the slab costs more than the coin,it would probably be as nice in a shop bought holder,and the money could go on the next new addition.

Very good example, to suggest that 3711 is a 78 is a little silly (from the photos) and it is clearly inferior to 12559 although both are graded the same by CGS. There may well be significant photographic differences that need to be taken into account, but here are the reverses for ease of comparison:

3711:

12559:

It is almost as if in the early days they were learning to grade like a novice collector, and hadn't yet acquired a copy of 'The Standard Guide to Grading British Coins' !

Edited September 20, 2013 by Paulus

[Nick 325]

and I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong (Nick?)), to score 90 or above it has to be a Proof, which is pretty flawed seeing as Proof is not in and of itself a grade

Just had a quick scan of the CGS population report and there are some non-proofs with scores of 90+, but not that many.

[Paulus 1,942]

and I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong (Nick?)), to score 90 or above it has to be a Proof, which is pretty flawed seeing as Proof is not in and of itself a grade

Just had a quick scan of the CGS population report and there are some non-proofs with scores of 90+, but not that many.

Thanks Nick, that's what I thought, also the fact that they use Proof coins as benchmark coins (where available) both impressed and generated some confusion for me!

[Peter 615]

We have discussed this before but a proof is struck from a specially prepared die.

The early strikes on the circulation coins in theory should be superior and possible to reach 99 to 100.

If 82 represents a choice unc coin.

Where are the 18 points lost?

[Paulus 1,942]

We have discussed this before but a proof is struck from a specially prepared die.

The early strikes on the circulation coins in theory should be superior and possible to reach 99 to 100.

If 82 represents a choice unc coin.

Where are the 18 points lost?

My point entirely Peter!

[rpeddie 119]

would love to see the boxes that are being ticked off for what is losing these coins the 18 points.

ive always wondered too is why is there no 100 coin on their site? highest ive seen is 96 or so whats the point of it even going up to 100?

[azda 973]

would love to see the boxes that are being ticked off for what is losing these coins the 18 points.

ive always wondered too is why is there no 100 coin on their site? highest ive seen is 96 or so whats the point of it even going up to 100?

There is no point in the 100 scale because 100 will never be reached, if it is reached and a better coin comes along, then what?

[Paulus 1,942]

There are plenty of 70s on the Sheldon scale, doesn't the same principal apply there?

[Rob 2,998]

There are plenty of 70s on the Sheldon scale, doesn't the same principal apply there?

To all intents and purpose there are also plenty of 71s, 72s and possibly higher based on the Sheldon or any other scale. The minute you assign a number to anything it is supposed to represent a particular coin's qualities. The collector then looks at several similarly graded coins and decides which one is the better. This one or that one has less/more nicks, wear, bagmarks etc. All of the numbers assigned are a reflection of the mood of the grader(s) on that particular day.

That a coin can be repeatedly submitted and be slabbed in wildly differing grades on each occasion is testament to the failings of the system, as any firmly grounded grading scale would not have the scope to assign a subjective grade. As a Sheldon 70 or CGS 100 is supposed to be perfection, it should not be impossible for any scale to have examples with the top grade, even though I've heard it said that CGS will never give a coin 100. There are many examples in MS70 meaning that all should be identical in terms of grading assessment. Any scale must have the parameters defined with individual grades having their own criteria. This is where subjectivity comes in, as, with the exception of perfect or totally flat coins, all are in an intermediate state of preservation which is contentious in absolute number grading.

I quite agree with rpeddie's query about the missing 18 points, after all, an assessment should have been made and the results documented in order to lose them. I suspect that this would be deemed to be releasing trade secrets, as the TPGs purport to have knowledge over and above 'non-professionals'. Once their criteria are known, anyone could grade which is not good for their business models.

[TomGoodheart 373]

There are plenty of 70s on the Sheldon scale, doesn't the same principal apply there?

Ah, but the principle doesn't factor in emotion or subjectivity. With the Sheldon, you see people saying that an NGCS 70 is better than an NGC 70 and so on. It's not an absolute science.

And I can understand what Dave is saying. Once you have slabbed your 'best ever' then you're stuck with it, even if (somehow) a better coin turns up.

If we were talking about computers using lasers to assess exactly how many molecules of silver had been knocked off, or how many microns flatter the nose on a 1935 crown had become between the day it was struck and today, you could have an absolute scale.

But this is some guys sitting at a table, no? So things like uncertainty and subjectiveness and just how pretty a coin looks 'in the hand' can sneak in to the whole process!

Edit. [Doh. Or I could have just said "What Rob said" ]

Edited September 21, 2013 by TomGoodheart

[Nick 325]

We have discussed this before but a proof is struck from a specially prepared die.

The early strikes on the circulation coins in theory should be superior and possible to reach 99 to 100.

If 82 represents a choice unc coin.

Where are the 18 points lost?

My point entirely Peter!

I think that because of the methods used to strike proofs, with specially prepared dies and blanks and often multiple strikes, a high grade proof should be able to obtain a higher number than an equally high grade circulation coin. The strike should be sharper, the rim and the edge should be crisper and the fields should be more reflective. If these qualities are part of the assessment then it would help to explain why circulation coins max out at around 90-92 and proof coins can achieve nearer to 100.

[Peckris 579]

i agree with what they say about the inconsistency of the grading too ive seen some of the first graded coins that they have done to be quite low for being graded at 80's and such (if my grading opinion is worth much )

from this i think i have managed to do a u turn convince myself not to send any more off unless they are higher value ones:)

I think these two are a fair enough example of inconsistency 3711 and 12559.

I don't mind the slabs,however I think I would be the same,if the slab costs more than the coin,it would probably be as nice in a shop bought holder,and the money could go on the next new addition.

Very good example, to suggest that 3711 is a 78 is a little silly (from the photos) and it is clearly inferior to 12559 although both are graded the same by CGS. There may well be significant photographic differences that need to be taken into account, but here are the reverses for ease of comparison:

3711:

12559:

It is almost as if in the early days they were learning to grade like a novice collector, and hadn't yet acquired a copy of 'The Standard Guide to Grading British Coins' !

[rant] Bloody Photobucket! The pictures are the same size as here and despite the presence of a magnifying glass with a + inside, there's no way to zoom in. That's why I hate it so much, it's SO counter-intuitive to use. [/rant]

Anyway, I'm not so sure the first is "clearly inferior" to the second? The attractive toning serves to emphasize any slight rubbing that may be present, while the untoned example conceals it. But just looking at two places : St George's right pec, and the dragon's haunch, I can see what seems to be slight flattening on the second which isn't present on the first. So I'd conclude that grading those two isn't as easy a comparison as you might think. (And even though I can't zoom in on the pictures, they are already at least twice lifesize).

[Nick 325]

Very good example, to suggest that 3711 is a 78 is a little silly (from the photos) and it is clearly inferior to 12559 although both are graded the same by CGS. There may well be significant photographic differences that need to be taken into account, but here are the reverses for ease of comparison:

[rant] Bloody Photobucket! The pictures are the same size as here and despite the presence of a magnifying glass with a + inside, there's no way to zoom in. That's why I hate it so much, it's SO counter-intuitive to use. [/rant]

Anyway, I'm not so sure the first is "clearly inferior" to the second? The attractive toning serves to emphasize any slight rubbing that may be present, while the untoned example conceals it. But just looking at two places : St George's right pec, and the dragon's haunch, I can see what seems to be slight flattening on the second which isn't present on the first. So I'd conclude that grading those two isn't as easy a comparison as you might think. (And even though I can't zoom in on the pictures, they are already at least twice lifesize).

I don't think that the CGS photographs are any good to start with. No two of them are taken using the same setup, making them useless for comparison purposes.

[Benny who 6]

perfect example of what i am talking about

funny how i started this out looking for help on a next lot being sent away but now i am totally put off by the idea

I would not be totally put off,all the slab houses are the same,I have found quite a few mistakes by NGC and PCGS,and I would have to agree that human factors come into the grading more than they would let on.

Would the same coin get the same grade before a good night or on the day after?

CGS are by far the best for grading British coins in my opinion,and although not everyone will agree comand a slight better figure from the raw if selling on sites such as Ebay.

[RLC35 288]

perfect example of what i am talking about

funny how i started this out looking for help on a next lot being sent away but now i am totally put off by the idea

I would not be totally put off,all the slab houses are the same,I have found quite a few mistakes by NGC and PCGS,and I would have to agree that human factors come into the grading more than they would let on.

Would the same coin get the same grade before a good night or on the day after?

CGS are by far the best for grading British coins in my opinion,and although not everyone will agree comand a slight better figure from the raw if selling on sites such as Ebay.

I agree with you Benny. CGS is the best at grading British coins, and a slabbed coin from them (for British coins) would mean more to me than a slabbed coin from PCGS or NGC. The latter do a good job with USA coins, but leave a lot to be desired with British coins. I think NGC and PCGS both need one of Derek's grading books!......Ha,Ha!

[azda 973]

I'd also agree Benny, but to sell a British coin in a worldwide market it would have to be in an American slab, although i will Stick by what i say, if its a rare coin such as a 1905 halfcrown or a Northumberland, i'd only go to CGS

[Coinery 926]

To quote Declan, 'oh dearie me!'

I'm beginning to sense I've read this all before!

[azda 973]

Yup we have been here and done it Stuart, but the New Kids on the block have'nt. Could you imagine if he'd bought from Platt or John Blyth? Educate the masses Stuart

[Coinery 926]

Yup we have been here and done it Stuart, but the New Kids on the block have'nt. Could you imagine if he'd bought from Platt or John Blyth? Educate the masses Stuart

Ready the horses, at the morning dew we ride out!

[Benny who 6]

I think if the coins are going to America,say through Heritage keep the Ngc graded British coins asis,if going through a British company CGS would by the best way forward.

Take a look at the 1817 shilling at present on Ebay a new variety UIN 24639,this more than likely wouldn't have gotten as much attention had it been slab free.

[Benny who 6]

perfect example of what i am talking about

funny how i started this out looking for help on a next lot being sent away but now i am totally put off by the idea

I would not be totally put off,all the slab houses are the same,I have found quite a few mistakes by NGC and PCGS,and I would have to agree that human factors come into the grading more than they would let on.

Would the same coin get the same grade before a good night or on the day after?

CGS are by far the best for grading British coins in my opinion,and although not everyone will agree comand a slight better figure from the raw if selling on sites such as Ebay.

I agree with you Benny. CGS is the best at grading British coins, and a slabbed coin from them (for British coins) would mean more to me than a slabbed coin from PCGS or NGC. The latter do a good job with USA coins, but leave a lot to be desired with British coins. I think NGC and PCGS both need one of Derek's grading books!......Ha,Ha!

I'd also agree Benny, but to sell a British coin in a worldwide market it would have to be in an American slab, although i will Stick by what i say, if its a rare coin such as a 1905 halfcrown or a Northumberland, i'd only go to CGS

Sorry chaps this was supposed to reply to the previous post that I wrote

Mental note hit multiquote before adding a reply.

[PWA 1967 1,840]

On 9/20/2013 at 7:05 PM, rpeddie said:

yea they still charge the full amount even if rejected (had 3 wreath crowns i graded as mentioned in earlier topic all charged at £23 each and told they are forgeries)

Wow that was grading money well spent 

Hope the person you bought them off got told.

Sorry to bring an old thread up as not seen this one before.

In this case hat off CGS 

[Peter 615]

Not money well spent Pete.If you don't know your subject don't buy them.