Dont read this if you have not slabbed a cgs coin

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Hi having used c.g.s i would you use them again .The people on the forum who have used them would you do so again.What benefits do you think you got , alternatively how could they improve ?.

[Rob 3,002]

I haven't slabbed a coin with them, but couldn't resist the temptation to look, despite your instructions.

I would like to congratulate them on providing the easiest slab to open of all the TPGs, thus reducing the risk of damage to the coin.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Well thats one good reason rob. Will put it in the tick box

[Paulus 1,942]

I haven't slabbed a coin with them, but couldn't resist the temptation to look, despite your instructions.

I would like to congratulate them on providing the easiest slab to open of all the TPGs, thus reducing the risk of damage to the coin.

[Peckris 579]

I haven't slabbed a coin with them, but couldn't resist the temptation to look, despite your instructions.

Me too. So now I'm sitting on the Naughty Step. Wearing a plastic case of course

[Rob 3,002]

I haven't slabbed a coin with them, but couldn't resist the temptation to look, despite your instructions.

Me too. So now I'm sitting on the Naughty Step. Wearing a plastic case of course

I would have thought plastic mac to be more appropriate. I can think of quite a few naughty steps across the world where you would be very popular with this attire.

[Gary1000 41]

I slabbed a coin to sell and I don't think it made a jot of difference to what I got. So overall not impressed with the hype.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

The coin in question gary i made a bid on ebay ,The coins i send i dont give them any details ,.I want an independent view not a realised value at auction,especially with few comparables.Some have been slabbed in the past and taken out by the dealer ,some come from auctions.I have an opinion that certain coins are better with the provenance but i can keep the relevant receipts ,tickets etc.

[azda 973]

I've used them but would only use them again IF the coin in question was a Northumberland shilling or a Viccy Gothic crown. Their £30 90 day turnaround is their problem. I can send coins to NGC in America and get them back quicker. Last year they raised their prices amd also their turnaround, not a very good business model if its going to cost more for a lengthier wait.

The other problem i have with them is their conflict of interest with Londoncoins, these 2 should'nt be hand in hand

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Hi azda good comments.

Although i have not waited much more than a month , you have three different graders to look at the coins who are not working for c.g.s full time.I may be wrong but feel the coins are taken on a rotary basis.Such as one week birmingham and two weeks later wakefield.This is because they don t employ the graders full time and means the time delay keeps the costs down .Although just my opinion.to pay £14-£24 seems to to be worth the money. Was looking at any bad experiences people have had after reading previous posts.The free data base to me. and i dont have your knowledge can sometimes be invaluable.The conflict with london coins can surely only make a small difference as the top BU price although sometimes questionable can surely only be determined by spink

[Peter 615]

I did see a raw 1865 1/4d in a LC auction

.Beautiful lustred coin with an unfortunate nasty edge bump.

It ended up in a CGS slab and the bump was covered up.

Like Dave I would only get a Gothic florin or a Northumberland shilling graded as insurance.

The replicas of these are brilliant.We have had threads and debates on these on this forum.

Who are the three graders?

I presume 3 dealers.I ask this because some dealers I would never buy from.

[Peckris 579]

The other problem i have with them is their conflict of interest with Londoncoins, these 2 should'nt be hand in hand

It's not so much a conflict of interest, as they're the same people! In other words Stephen Lockett et al.

[RLC35 288]

The other problem i have with them is their conflict of interest with Londoncoins, these 2 should'nt be hand in hand

It's not so much a conflict of interest, as they're the same people! In other words Stephen Lockett et al.

Since CGS is grading the coin, which in turn determines what valuation category the coin will reside in, then that same party owns or controls the Auction (or sale)...then that condition creates a sale that is not "arms length" in nature! If a sale is not "arms length"...the sale has a conflict of interest! It is the same way in Real Estate Sales. The American Housing market went South as a result of this same condition, when the Banks also owned the Appraisal Company (conflict if interest) that valuated the residence for sale. As a result U.S. Government backed loans now must go through a middle man, between the Bank and the Appraisal Company, Called a AMC (appraisal Management Company). The AMC provides a buffer, or independent Party between the Buyer and Seller. I don't think this buffer exists at CGS and London Auctions.

[Peckris 579]

The other problem i have with them is their conflict of interest with Londoncoins, these 2 should'nt be hand in hand

It's not so much a conflict of interest, as they're the same people! In other words Stephen Lockett et al.

Since CGS is grading the coin, which in turn determines what valuation category the coin will reside in, then that same party owns or controls the Auction (or sale)...then that condition creates a sale that is not "arms length" in nature! If a sale is not "arms length"...the sale has a conflict of interest! It is the same way in Real Estate Sales. The American Housing market went South as a result of this same condition, when the Banks also owned the Appraisal Company (conflict if interest) that valuated the residence for sale. As a result U.S. Government backed loans now must go through a middle man, between the Bank and the Appraisal Company, Called a AMC (appraisal Management Company). The AMC provides a buffer, or independent Party between the Buyer and Seller. I don't think this buffer exists at CGS and London Auctions.

That's more or less what I was saying. In other words, "they're the same people" and should make that known to all and sundry. In a way though, it's not a conflict of interest to them - only to outsiders, and as I say, that relationship should be clear and transparent.

[sound 25]

I see it slightly differently, unless I have misunderstood. There is only a conflict of interest if they don't declare it, which they do, a bit like MP's.

When I determine what I think the value of a coin should be, I first look at Rob's website, consider what Azda said he paid fot it, then ask Peck what the value should be.

Armed with that priceless information I can trawl through auctions archives etc and see what mistakes others have made with their purchases.

So when it comes to London coins estimates, CGS pricing and along with Spink's catalogue I'm in a position to studiously ignore them.

Simple really.

Mark

LOL

[damian1986 142]

The coin in question gary i made a bid on ebay ,The coins i send i dont give them any details ,.I want an independent view not a realised value at auction,especially with few comparables.Some have been slabbed in the past and taken out by the dealer ,some come from auctions.I have an opinion that certain coins are better with the provenance but i can keep the relevant receipts ,tickets etc.

The problem is that an independent view could be different from one day to the next so while you aren't wanting to bias their decision making there are no guarantees in any resultant analysis. This is why dealers are re-submitting an MS64 five times in the hope it comes back MS65. Probably often it does. It's all besides the point anyway..

And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.

I'm learning. Nowadays I'd much rather get "A couple of minor weak areas but well centred and full flan, good very fine" than CGS 50. Together with a decent picture it's then just a matter of taste and whether the funds are available. And thereafter I don't really care; I made a personal investment. I'm pie-in-the-sky hoping that someone will be around to show the same level of appreciation for the coin if I ever do decide to sell it, in lieu of a magic quantifier having been assigned, but then it's not unreasonable to assume that the market will be receptive to the thing-in-itself.

Incidentally starting a thread with "don't read this" ...

[Rob 3,002]

'And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.'

What we really need to do is get people to connect their brain with their eyes and heart, then there won't be any doubt that we are buying a coin that we like. I get the impression that a significant number of people are buying a coin that they have been told they will/must like. Not the same thing.

[sound 25]

'And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.'

What we really need to do is get people to connect their brain with their eyes and heart, then there won't be any doubt that we are buying a coin that we like. I get the impression that a significant number of people are buying a coin that they have been told they will/must like. Not the same thing.

Rob,

I get the brain, eyes and heart bit. But in fairness to CGS I don't think they have told us we must like it. Isn't the whole idea to present a consistent numerical grading system.

Now that's where I think it falls down in terms of eye appeal etc. For my liking it's just a little to clinical.

I would like to know do others think it's working? In other words are three graders or whatever achieving the consistency they are aiming for?

Mark

[Paulus 1,942]

Just to throw in another point, with some coins I find it difficult to assess the grade from the pics/scans alone (even if they are high resolution and good quality, you often only get 2 pics from a dealer or an auction catalogue). If you have the coin in hand you can tilt it to the light at various angles, which reveals different toning and, very often, highlights where the wear or any dings and scratches may be, which may not be evident in the supplied pics. And you can see the edge, which is often not pictured at all!

[Paulus 1,942]

'And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.'

What we really need to do is get people to connect their brain with their eyes and heart, then there won't be any doubt that we are buying a coin that we like. I get the impression that a significant number of people are buying a coin that they have been told they will/must like. Not the same thing.

Rob,

I get the brain, eyes and heart bit. But in fairness to CGS I don't think they have told us we must like it. Isn't the whole idea to present a consistent numerical grading system.

Now that's where I think it falls down in terms of eye appeal etc. For my liking it's just a little to clinical.

I would like to know do others think it's working? In other words are three graders or whatever achieving the consistency they are aiming for?

Mark

Mark

I visited CGS in Kent last year and they were very accommodating. One of their graders (who was not a dealer) spent 2 hours with me going through their grading process and answering my many questions. The detail is in the TPG... sub-forum. If anyone fancies doing the same I believe you would be welcomed, their 'benchmark' coins are a joy to hold/behold.

I have submitted around 50 coins to CGS over the last 2 years (I did say 70 the other day but I was wrong), mainly either for authentication or in the hope of realising a higher price when selling (which I believe I have, although it is impossible to be certain). The only coins I have bought slabbed are those that I have deemed to be under-priced for various reasons, including under-graded, mis-attributed, or rejected for too-harsh reasons.

With only 30-something thousand coins graded, their population reports are worthless for many years/denominations/varieties, but their database is a valuable resource (you don't have to have submitted a coin for grading to access this).

Their pics in the early years are poor (or their grading was lax, or both) but on the whole I have found them to be strict but consistent. Their invention of a 1-100 grading scale was/is a risky strategy, and they don't assign two-thirds of the available numbers to any coins they assess.

They have done me 2 massive favours over the years in rejecting expensive suspected fake coins I then could send back to the dealers/auction houses for a refund, without that backing I would have struggled.

I agree there is a real and present conflict of interest between CGS and their major shareholder London Coins, the conflict does not go away just because they declare it or the same people work for both businesses.

I have many more pros and cons comments from my experience with them, I think I know how and when to use them/buy/sell CGS coins, or not!

Edit - eye appeal and strike are both taken in to account in their grading process

Edited September 4, 2014 by Paulus

[damian1986 142]

'And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.'

What we really need to do is get people to connect their brain with their eyes and heart, then there won't be any doubt that we are buying a coin that we like. I get the impression that a significant number of people are buying a coin that they have been told they will/must like. Not the same thing.

Rob,

I get the brain, eyes and heart bit. But in fairness to CGS I don't think they have told us we must like it. Isn't the whole idea to present a consistent numerical grading system.

Now that's where I think it falls down in terms of eye appeal etc. For my liking it's just a little to clinical.

I would like to know do others think it's working? In other words are three graders or whatever achieving the consistency they are aiming for?

Mark

I was being sarcastic about Wings. The very existence of Wings is testament to the inadequacies of the TPGs in my opinion. I wouldn't buy a coin unless someone had stamped unc on it at one point, even though it could well be an ugly little thing with hairlines and allsorts. And I've bought slabbed coins pretty much on grade alone. Probably why I'm a bit of a cynical b* now. Technically Wings exist to validate the grade except there's this implicit "oh it's Wings so I'll buy it". It's all a bit impersonal. Putting coins that are 1000+ years old in a slab of plastic and then saying it's worth X is all a bit contrived for me. The rarities, the gems, yeah they're going to do even better in a slab but I do wonder if for many coins it's worth it.

What is the point of reference for these guys? Sheldon's original scale says that any 'mint state' coin should so absolutely no signs of wear, but there are tonnes of mint state coins showing wear. And I mentioned that people will continually re-submit coins to the TPGs in the hope it comes back higher, so they're obviously not that consistent.

Just to throw in another point, with some coins I find it difficult to assess the grade from the pics/scans alone (even if they are high resolution and good quality, you often only get 2 pics from a dealer or an auction catalogue). If you have the coin in hand you can tilt it to the light at various angles, which reveals different toning and, very often, highlights where the wear or any dings and scratches may be, which may not be evident in the supplied pics. And you can see the edge, which is often not pictured at all!

You can't beat a good description

I find some dealers will be honest in their descriptions, even if the photo doesn't reveal faults they may still mention them. Not always the case though, although if the coin actually makes it past CGS (I'm sure lots do) they aren't going to tell you that it looks a bit shit in hand or has an unsightly edge knock they they felt didn't detract.

[Paulus 1,942]

The most honest descriptions from an on-line dealer web site in my experience come from our very own Rob, who I never hesitate to recommend and I have never been disappointed with any of my purchases from him! He just never "bigs" up a coin at all, simply accurately and consistently grades it, with good scans, and points out all the defects!

Sadly the same cannot be said for every coin dealer I have done business with.

[Paulus 1,942]

The most honest descriptions from an on-line dealer web site in my experience come from our very own Rob, who I never hesitate to recommend and I have never been disappointed with any of my purchases from him! He just never "bigs" up a coin at all, simply accurately and consistently attributes and grades it, with good scans, and points out all the defects! Just factual in the main - I remember laughing out loud at his description of an Anne shilling he had for sale as 'not unattractive!" Pretty much the opposite to the Estate Agent approach!

Sadly the same cannot be said for every coin dealer I have done business with.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Paulus

[Peter 615]

I can see a market for a platinum sticker. please note we would not sticker any CGS100 grades.

I would call my operation 'WITH WINGS'

Unbelievable.

[azda 973]

'And remember that all equally graded coins are not equal. What we really need is for CGS to form a relationship with WINGS so we can be sure that we're buying a coin we like. That CGS 85 just ain't doing it for me unless it's got a WINGS sticker on it mate. No.'

What we really need to do is get people to connect their brain with their eyes and heart, then there won't be any doubt that we are buying a coin that we like. I get the impression that a significant number of people are buying a coin that they have been told they will/must like. Not the same thing.

Rob,

I get the brain, eyes and heart bit. But in fairness to CGS I don't think they have told us we must like it. Isn't the whole idea to present a consistent numerical grading system.

Now that's where I think it falls down in terms of eye appeal etc. For my liking it's just a little to clinical.

I would like to know do others think it's working? In other words are three graders or whatever achieving the consistency they are aiming for?

Mark

Ahhhhh but, CGS are trying to dictate price. Look at their pop reports for a specific (anything really) high graded CGS coin, a Viccie for instance in say CGS 80+ grade, then check several auction house realised prices and a couple of book guide prices and see what you come back with

Edited September 4, 2014 by azda