Tgp - Good And The Bad

[Exbrit 78]

I know many of you do not like TPG's, plastic tombs and all, but which TPG do you believe does the better job grading British coins? Neither - should not be an answer. Which TPG does the worst job grading? The Aussie's seem to prefer PCGS. This question also applies to the colonial (Imperial) mints in Australia, Canada, South Africa and India.

[Nick 325]

I know many of you do not like TPG's, plastic tombs and all, but which TPG do you believe does the better job grading British coins? Neither - should not be an answer. Which TPG does the worst job grading? The Aussie's seem to prefer PCGS. This question also applies to the colonial (Imperial) mints in Australia, Canada, South Africa and India.

CGS do the best job of grading British coins. If I had to choose between PCGS and NGC, it would have to be PCGS.

[Rob 3,000]

Neither cannot be an answer because there are more than 2 TPGs.

CGS do a better job than the US companies for British, just as you would expect the American ones to be better at their own. All make some fairly fundamental mistakes. NGC have produced a greater number of inconsistencies than PCGS, but have also slabbed a larger number of coins. I would still go PCGS in preference to NGC if that is the question you are asking. They could all do themselves a favour if they graded on the coin in question rather than pandering to celebrity status and being lenient when it comes to a hyped up collection. (That's consistency in grading for those who can't follow the above).

Edited January 18, 2014 by Rob

[Rob 3,000]

I know many of you do not like TPG's, plastic tombs and all, but which TPG do you believe does the better job grading British coins? Neither - should not be an answer. Which TPG does the worst job grading? The Aussie's seem to prefer PCGS. This question also applies to the colonial (Imperial) mints in Australia, Canada, South Africa and India.

CGS do the best job of grading British coins. If I had to choose between PCGS and NGC, it would have to be PCGS.

Snap.

[TomGoodheart 373]

To be honest I don't pay enough attention to them to say. For example there are a few late hammered coins recently up on ebay that have been slabbed by NGC. I have no idea quite what to make of the grades, so just ignore them! But then I don't really give much heed to dealers' grading either. A coin either looks good to me or it doesn't.

I'm assuming that they should make a better job of grading more modern stuff as it's more directly comparable to US coinage. But I still don't know quite how to compare across grading systems. I see now that, for US coins, you can get a + (which means a coin is at the high end of its grade) or a * (for eye appeal, which seems to mean how closely the toning resembles a part-sucked M&M). But I just don't see the point [sic] of a 70 point scale where really only a small part of the scale is used. And particularly if they're trying to subdivide that even further!

Which I guess is my way of saying that it's not so much TPGS I have a problem with. It's the fact that I just don't see enough of a correspondence between what US and UK dealers and collectors want from a coin or how they rate them. So if even if a TPGS were spot on with their assessment of a coin by US standards, I don't know how helpful that is to a UK buyer.

By that logic, despite CGS having the most experience with British coinage, their use of a completely different 100 point grading scale makes them as unhelpful as anyone else to me. Sorry. [/rant]

Edit: If I wanted to slab a coin to sell in the US it would be PCGS, on the basis that my impression is that they are better regarded. To my surprise ANACS does not appear to be top dog, despite their history. If that helps!

Edited January 18, 2014 by TomGoodheart

[Peckris 579]

I've been to CGS's website and heard from members here who've used them, so if I wanted a slabber, they'd be my choice. I've heard too many bad stories about NGC to place them anywhere but last. The bottom line though, is that I'd only use a TPG if they offered an authentication & grading service WITHOUT also entombing the coin.

[Accumulator 52]

To be honest I don't pay enough attention to them to say. For example there are a few late hammered coins recently up on ebay that have been slabbed by NGC. I have no idea quite what to make of the grades, so just ignore them! But then I don't really give much heed to dealers' grading either. A coin either looks good to me or it doesn't.

I'm assuming that they should make a better job of grading more modern stuff as it's more directly comparable to US coinage. But I still don't know quite how to compare across grading systems. I see now that, for US coins, you can get a + (which means a coin is at the high end of its grade) or a * (for eye appeal, which seems to mean how closely the toning resembles a part-sucked M&M). But I just don't see the point [sic] of a 70 point scale where really only a small part of the scale is used. And particularly if they're trying to subdivide that even further!

Which I guess is my way of saying that it's not so much TPGS I have a problem with. It's the fact that I just don't see enough of a correspondence between what US and UK dealers and collectors want from a coin or how they rate them. So if even if a TPGS were spot on with their assessment of a coin by US standards, I don't know how helpful that is to a UK buyer.

By that logic, despite CGS having the most experience with British coinage, their use of a completely different 100 point grading scale makes them as unhelpful as anyone else to me. Sorry. [/rant]

Edit: If I wanted to slab a coin to sell in the US it would be PCGS, on the basis that my impression is that they are better regarded. To my surprise ANACS does not appear to be top dog, despite their history. If that helps!

Although arguably a better system, I think this is really holding CGS back in the ever more international marketplace. They are just not remotely big enough to compete against the vast number of coins (GB included) graded to Sheldon by the other TPGs. There's no doubt that CGS are the better grader of GB coins, but they're becoming the Sony Betamax in the growing TPG market. For that reason alone I probably wouldn't use them. At the very least they could offer a 70/100 point option to submitters.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Accumulator

[TomGoodheart 373]

which TPG do you believe does the better job grading British coins? Which TPG does the worst job grading?

For me, the problem is that if we're talking about grading, then really the "best job" should surely be which company is most accurate in their assessment.

But since the majority of UK dealers still use the F/VF/EF system while US companies use Sheldon and CGS their own, I just don't know how to answer.

Potentially I could answer, if someone could provide definitive comparative table of the various grading systems, but there isn't one.

OK, there are tables of grade equivalents published by the TPGs themselves. But let's look at CGS grading. There seem to be 5 points (50-55) where the US grade (AU55) doesn't change at all. Then between 70 and 75 the US grades go from 60-61 to 62-63 and then between CGS 90-95 the US grades jump from MS66 to MS 68-69 which would be a decent price differential. And those are GCS' opinions. Presumably if you asked PCGS they might come up with something else (though I seem to remember that the US PCGS are all quite careful to avoid suggesting that the grades they assign to a coin might differ from someone else's!)

Sorry Exbrit, I should probably stay out of such discussions, particularly since I suspect I'd be incapable of telling an MS65 from an MS69. I guess I'm just in a pernickety mood!

Edited January 18, 2014 by TomGoodheart

[Rob 3,000]

As I've said before, the TPGs live in parallel universes. All have finest known allocated to their slabs without any reference or even vaguely mentioning that there might be others slabbed in a higher grade. They are only pushing their own product, and as such should be viewed like any other product/service which has merits or otherwise. eg. German cars are reliable, British ones not, and Fiats just fall apart - leaving aside the Lada which never required the theft part of TPT insurance. It's horses for courses. The simple answer as ever is to buy the coin using your eyes and not the opinion of someone who is driven by £s or $s.

[mhcoins 95]

From personal experiences I find pcgs better to grade milled gold and Ngc milled silver. Hammered coin shouldn't be slabbed or graded IMO . I have heard from a very reliable source NGC have 3 graders for all English coins from 1970 backwards and they aren't experience dealers of this type coin thus the inconsistencies.

Sadly CGS aren't established enough nor are they a worldwide recognised authority (I do use the word authority loosely). It's like ford bringing out a super car and trying to compete with a Ferrari. It will never win or come close. I feel it was an extremely poor decision on CGS's behalf not to stick with the same grading scale as Ngc and pcgs ie MS70 downwards rAther than UNc 80 and being more stringent with the grading.

[RLC35 288]

From personal experiences I find pcgs better to grade milled gold and Ngc milled silver. Hammered coin shouldn't be slabbed or graded IMO . I have heard from a very reliable source NGC have 3 graders for all English coins from 1970 backwards and they aren't experience dealers of this type coin thus the inconsistencies.

Sadly CGS aren't established enough nor are they a worldwide recognised authority (I do use the word authority loosely). It's like ford bringing out a super car and trying to compete with a Ferrari. It will never win or come close. I feel it was an extremely poor decision on CGS's behalf not to stick with the same grading scale as Ngc and pcgs ie MS70 downwards rAther than UNc 80 and being more stringent with the grading.

Correction...the Ford GT40 beat the Ferrari, and won 1-2-3 in 1966!LOL!

[VickySilver 775]

The current Ford GT40 not a slouch either!

I agree that the 100 point scale "innovation" did isolate CGS to some degree. Won't throw ICCS into the mix as that Canadian firm has not IMO graded a critical mass of coins. In former times, and I have a couple of coins in their holders (not slabs), they were fairly conservative in their allotted grades.

I agree with Rob's point that when a named provenance such as Newman is used, that the grading may be a bit slack and that also the price a bit "fancy" for that slackened grade as well. Caveat emptor!

[Exbrit 78]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

[Rob 3,000]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

A common grading scale is irrelevant if whatever is used is consistently applied. The failure to implement the latter is the reason for the scepticism

[Exbrit 78]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

A common grading scale is irrelevant if whatever is used is consistently applied. The failure to implement the latter is the reason for the scepticism

Agree - consistency is the key, but a common scale is also needed for ease of the collector.

[Rob 3,000]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

A common grading scale is irrelevant if whatever is used is consistently applied. The failure to implement the latter is the reason for the scepticism

Agree - consistency is the key, but a common scale is also needed for ease of the collector.

Not convinced. Do collectors really need to have their hands held to the n^thdegree? Somewhere along the line it is reasonable to expect people to utilise the mushy mess found between their earholes. I would view making a ready comparison between two scales to be no different to looking at a coin and assessing the grade by the viewer's standards. Again, it doesn't ,matter what he/she calls it. Their EF can be someone else's UNC and a third person's VF. If someone can't remember less than a dozen numbers for comparison, it doesn't say much about the interest they take in their hobby, particularly if helped by the addition of a traditional grade to the number. People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

It doesn't matter as long as any grading is consistent for each party and all expect to pay roughly the same amount. A greater problem is that people see what they want to see, call it want they want to have and as a consequence believe that the price paid validates their grading. Many inexperienced collectors overgrade for this reason - and pay through the nose for their ways. Many a Fine coin is presented as EF, and with the recent memory of a noble in Baldwins last year, a TPG AU can also be a good Fine.

Edited January 19, 2014 by Rob

[TomGoodheart 373]

People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

My concern is that the focus might (or probably has in some quarters) shift from the coin to the grade. So instead of people looking for a nicer coin, they seek a higher number.

This to me is the inherent problem with all TPGS. Whether one is better or not is to me, a moot point. Protection of coins, conservation, authentication? I have no problems with any of those.

But fuelling the 'number chasing' craze? They are all bad in that respect to my eyes and as Rob alludes, people need to learn to make up their own minds about a coin, instead of relying on someone else. IMHO.

.

Edited January 19, 2014 by TomGoodheart

[Rob 3,000]

People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

My concern is that the focus might (or probably has in some quarters) shift from the coin to the grade. So instead of people looking for a nicer coin, they seek a higher number.

This to me is the inherent problem with all TPGS. Whether one is better or not is to me, a moot point. They are still all bad in my eyes and as Rob alludes, people need to learn to make up their own minds about a coin instead of relying on someone else. IMHO.

No probably about it. You often see people on a US forum waxing lyrical because of the number applied, with the compliment applied for the grade assigned rather than the coin. Registry sets are to blame. People leave coins alone if their average slab score is in danger of being reduced. Weird eh? They collect slabs with the right number, which can mean that certain coins must be excluded on the grounds of grades available and it also effectively eliminates any possibility of assembling a collection for researching a series because they are stuck in plastic. e.g. I'm not sure what they would do if they wanted to get the best run of say Charles II halfcrowns given the best 1667/4 is only about a UK Fine or so.

[Exbrit 78]

People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

My concern is that the focus might (or probably has in some quarters) shift from the coin to the grade. So instead of people looking for a nicer coin, they seek a higher number.This to me is the inherent problem with all TPGS. Whether one is better or not is to me, a moot point. Protection of coins, conservation, authentication? I have no problems with any of those.But fuelling the 'number chasing' craze? They are all bad in that respect to my eyes and as Rob alludes, people need to learn to make up their own minds about a coin, instead of relying on someone else. IMHO..

I totally agree that chasing the number is a problem. everyone should learn to grade and judge each coin on it's own merits. I also agree that registry sets tend to attract buyers of the number and not the coin. My argument is for those who are unsure of their grading skills and enjoy the hobby by collecting already graded coins - a universal grading system would be beneficial - as long as consistency in grading applies.

[Rob 3,000]

People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

My concern is that the focus might (or probably has in some quarters) shift from the coin to the grade. So instead of people looking for a nicer coin, they seek a higher number.This to me is the inherent problem with all TPGS. Whether one is better or not is to me, a moot point. Protection of coins, conservation, authentication? I have no problems with any of those.But fuelling the 'number chasing' craze? They are all bad in that respect to my eyes and as Rob alludes, people need to learn to make up their own minds about a coin, instead of relying on someone else. IMHO..

I totally agree that chasing the number is a problem. everyone should learn to grade and judge each coin on it's own merits. I also agree that registry sets tend to attract buyers of the number and not the coin. My argument is for those who are unsure of their grading skills and enjoy the hobby by collecting already graded coins - a universal grading system would be beneficial - as long as consistency in grading applies.

I understand where you are coming from, but question the premise that there are many genuine collectors who are that unsure about their grading skills, yet are happy to spend hundred or even thousands on something they know nothing about. The idea that you can rely on an uncalibrated grader to accurately grade across both time and relative to their peers is a non-starter, so the ball is firmly in the court of the collector in my opinion. Why would anyone refuse to spend a tenner on a book which would clarify how to grade, yet spend many multiples on a coin. Frankly, I don't think it is too much to ask the uninitiated to become just slightly initiated. The genuine 'collector' who doesn't care or want to grade is an investor. Different rules apply at this point.

Would you walk into a shop and buy a suit simply because it said 38 chest, 34 leg etc without trying it on? I think not. You would see if it was right for you. A few rudimentary ground rules for collectors is therefore not asking too much.

[Exbrit 78]

People just need to apply a bit of intelligence instead of blindly relying on everyone else.

My concern is that the focus might (or probably has in some quarters) shift from the coin to the grade. So instead of people looking for a nicer coin, they seek a higher number.This to me is the inherent problem with all TPGS. Whether one is better or not is to me, a moot point. Protection of coins, conservation, authentication? I have no problems with any of those.But fuelling the 'number chasing' craze? They are all bad in that respect to my eyes and as Rob alludes, people need to learn to make up their own minds about a coin, instead of relying on someone else. IMHO..

I totally agree that chasing the number is a problem. everyone should learn to grade and judge each coin on it's own merits. I also agree that registry sets tend to attract buyers of the number and not the coin. My argument is for those who are unsure of their grading skills and enjoy the hobby by collecting already graded coins - a universal grading system would be beneficial - as long as consistency in grading applies.

I understand where you are coming from, but question the premise that there are many genuine collectors who are that unsure about their grading skills, yet are happy to spend hundred or even thousands on something they know nothing about. The idea that you can rely on an uncalibrated grader to accurately grade across both time and relative to their peers is a non-starter, so the ball is firmly in the court of the collector in my opinion. Why would anyone refuse to spend a tenner on a book which would clarify how to grade, yet spend many multiples on a coin. Frankly, I don't think it is too much to ask the uninitiated to become just slightly initiated. The genuine 'collector' who doesn't care or want to grade is an investor. Different rules apply at this point.

Would you walk into a shop and buy a suit simply because it said 38 chest, 34 leg etc without trying it on? I think not. You would see if it was right for you. A few rudimentary ground rules for collectors is therefore not asking too much.

Ah, now we move into a different - but closely related topic. What is a collector? Is he purely in it for the pursuit of completing or advancing his collection? Or is he in it not only to advance his collecting interests - but to benefit financially? Isn't every collector actually part collector and part investor?

[Garrett 76]

I enjoy coins for their historical interest and probably to a lesser extent their beauty.

I try to make good buys because I am still slightly competitive and the research I do before buying an expensive coin is interesting.

I am not out to profit, but is nice to know I should be able to get something for my coins if I am forced to sell them towards the pointy end of my life.

Not much interested in slabs or numbers in general. May be more interested if buying a heavily faked item.

Cheers Garrett

[VickySilver 775]

Rob, I always appreciate your input and also that you are rightly confident in your grading but perhaps there are other facets to this whole thing. As Ex- has said, not all collectors are as advanced or confident in their grading capability. So they may have a different perspective than you or I when it comes to a slabbed TPG product.

Perhaps even more important, if your coin were up for sale would you not want it to fetch the best price possible? And what of your heirs should they choose to dispose of your holdings?

And nowadays, one just might have to consider an elephant in the room - TPGs such as PCGS and a sale through Heritage, I would think?

I do agree that some of the micro-varieties are missed by these people, and sometimes they don't seem to know the difference between hairlines and die polish, but yet they do lend themselves to convertibility . Also, I need not remind you of the [probably] worse subjective grading demonstrated by some old fashioned dealers that even advertise prominently in Coin News (how about a certain J.W. as an example?).

[Gary D 76]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

Cooperation between TPGs would not make a good business model. A given TGP wants a collector to collect their slabs only, not a competitors. Slab collectors often crack coins out and resubmit to keep all the slabs in their collection from the same TPG, and doesn't the fure fly if it comes back with a lower number.

[Accumulator 52]

Good discussion. How long has CGS been around? I would assume not longer than PCGS. Why on earth would they go with a 100 point system? NGC has been around for a while and are expanding overseas. I would think a common rating scale and some cooperation between the TPGs would enhance business all around. Each having their own thiefdom may work well now - but in the long term for the hobby - a common grading scale is needed.

Cooperation between TPGs would not make a good business model. A given TGP wants a collector to collect their slabs only, not a competitors. Slab collectors often crack coins out and resubmit to keep all the slabs in their collection from the same TPG, and doesn't the fure fly if it comes back with a lower number.

If NGC and PCGS operated different grading scales there would be fierce competition to set the industry standard, but that isn't the case. The world of numismatics now has an accepted grading scale and the horse has bolted for CGS. They've scaled back their operation and no longer grade a significant number of coins. Even the separate section in London Coins auction (the same business, effectively) has been dropped. I do think it's a shame because I believe we need a UK grading house.

Despite the huge reservations of many (to an extent, myself included), the TPG market is here to stay. Heritage's newsletter, sent out yesterday, trumpets their biggest single week of numismatic sales $105 million. That is serious money - $105,000,000 in just one week! Virtually all of those coins were slabbed. Whether we like it or not, we can't ignore it.

Here's a link to their newsletter.