Tgp - Good And The Bad

[TomGoodheart 373]

LOL I've asked Chris whether it might be possible to add a new subforum, where the various threads can be merged.

It might help people to join in, or ignore the topic, more easily!

[azda 973]

Agree mainly about consistency, opportunities for buying mis-attributed coins, opportunities for maximising returns when selling certain top grades, and perhaps CGS taking a big gamble with their own grading scale ...

This caught my eye on eBay today as an example of the ludicrous nomenclature and grading of some TPGs:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131092440983?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2648

So this is in some way almost uncirculated (AU55) is it??!! In what universe???

Jesus, the price of the postage is as ridiculous as the grade

[azda 973]

LOL I've asked Chris whether it might be possible to add a new subforum, where the various threads can be merged.

It might help people to join in, or ignore the topic, more easily!

I love the TPG threads I think the one where Bill Pugsley participated ran into 15 pages in a week

[azda 973]

What?

That emoticon means I'm just watching the "show"...watching everyone get their feathers ruffled by the (incessant and recurring) TPG argument. That's all.

Probably due to the inconsistancies of said TPGs. Personally what Ruffles my feathers is what happens when the coins are slabbed and the unrealistic prices asked on ebay and auction houses. I know i should'nt get involved because its not my money i'm wasting, perhaps its the TPGs who need educating as well as the collectors/fools that keep buying into these slab numbers.

Just my opinion........

[Rob 3,002]

It would be nice for a TPG to explain how the above AU coin can reasonably be slotted in between the following EF 1 over inverted 1 (top), and the uncirculated NS@H (bottom). And the one in the slab has been cleaned.

Your EF example is rather conservatively graded IMO Rob, but the point is well made.

Ok, so we call it good EF. AU can be broadly considered the same, just named differently. Where is the similarity in wear? Mine has slight wear to the high points on both sides. The slabbed coin has slight relief to the flan.

[azda 973]

It would be nice for a TPG to explain how the above AU coin can reasonably be slotted in between the following EF 1 over inverted 1 (top), and the uncirculated NS@H (bottom). And the one in the slab has been cleaned.

Your EF example is rather conservatively graded IMO Rob, but the point is well made.

Ok, so we call it good EF. AU can be broadly considered the same, just named differently. Where is the similarity in wear? Mine has slight wear to the high points on both sides. The slabbed coin has slight relief to the flan.

I would have called the slabbed ebay coin VF and i don't get paid to grade it either

[Paulus 1,942]

It would be nice for a TPG to explain how the above AU coin can reasonably be slotted in between the following EF 1 over inverted 1 (top), and the uncirculated NS@H (bottom). And the one in the slab has been cleaned.

Your EF example is rather conservatively graded IMO Rob, but the point is well made.

Ok, so we call it good EF. AU can be broadly considered the same, just named differently. Where is the similarity in wear? Mine has slight wear to the high points on both sides. The slabbed coin has slight relief to the flan.

[Rob 3,002]

It would be nice for a TPG to explain how the above AU coin can reasonably be slotted in between the following EF 1 over inverted 1 (top), and the uncirculated NS@H (bottom). And the one in the slab has been cleaned.

Your EF example is rather conservatively graded IMO Rob, but the point is well made.

Ok, so we call it good EF. AU can be broadly considered the same, just named differently. Where is the similarity in wear? Mine has slight wear to the high points on both sides. The slabbed coin has slight relief to the flan.

I would have called the slabbed ebay coin VF and i don't get paid to grade it either

It really does boil down to a different attribution of grades for a given condition, as mentioned before.

[azda 973]

I's love to see how the American TPGs grade coins in General, dös it have wear yes/no seems to be the answer with a final grade inbetween those two answers

[Peckris 579]

I'd say somewhere not much more than VF too Dave.

Interestingly I found this, on the Sheldon scale, in particular how Sheldon determined the method by which values are assigned to numerical grades :

"The condition census is 70-70-65-65-65-65. For the 65 coins, we apply rule number 10 which says to apply rule number 8 to the first 65, and rule number 9 to the other three, average the results, multiply by the numerical grade, and multiply that result by the basal value."

The writer adds, ironically but probably unnecessarily:

"Everybody got that?"

[azda 973]

This is an NGC "How we grade your coins" Video. Two things i noticed in this Video.

1 the 15 seconds it took to look over the coin and obviously give his grade

2 The grader is looking at the coin through a plastic slip

Comments

http://youtu.be/ePvVrv0sIeE

[azda 973]

Now this guy Speaks sense

Edited January 20, 2014 by azda

[azda 973]

Here is the ÜCGS grading video. What you may find here is at around 2m 13s is how they'll assign a grade and that the would include lustre, quality of toning and eye appeal which SHOULD not in my opinion have anything to do with a grade or wear of a coin.

Anyooooo here it is

[azda 973]

I'd say somewhere not much more than VF too Dave.

Interestingly I found this, on the Sheldon scale, in particular how Sheldon determined the method by which values are assigned to numerical grades :

"The condition census is 70-70-65-65-65-65. For the 65 coins, we apply rule number 10 which says to apply rule number 8 to the first 65, and rule number 9 to the other three, average the results, multiply by the numerical grade, and multiply that result by the basal value."

The writer adds, ironically but probably unnecessarily:

"Everybody got that?"

I's be interested to know of Sheldon said anything about eye appeal and colour when Adding the grade or of it was purely down to wear on the coin as to what number was assigned

[Peckris 579]

I'd say somewhere not much more than VF too Dave.

Interestingly I found this, on the Sheldon scale, in particular how Sheldon determined the method by which values are assigned to numerical grades :

"The condition census is 70-70-65-65-65-65. For the 65 coins, we apply rule number 10 which says to apply rule number 8 to the first 65, and rule number 9 to the other three, average the results, multiply by the numerical grade, and multiply that result by the basal value."

The writer adds, ironically but probably unnecessarily:

"Everybody got that?"

I's be interested to know of Sheldon said anything about eye appeal and colour when Adding the grade or of it was purely down to wear on the coin as to what number was assigned

I don't think so - but here's the link:

http://www.ebay.com/gds/The-Sheldon-Grading-System-Explained-/10000000176470343/g.html

[Peter 615]

Only in the US....Howdy Doody

[brg5658 111]

What?

That emoticon means I'm just watching the "show"...watching everyone get their feathers ruffled by the (incessant and recurring) TPG argument. That's all.

Probably due to the inconsistancies of said TPGs. Personally what Ruffles my feathers is what happens when the coins are slabbed and the unrealistic prices asked on ebay and auction houses. I know i should'nt get involved because its not my money i'm wasting, perhaps its the TPGs who need educating as well as the collectors/fools that keep buying into these slab numbers.

Just my opinion........

If you want to raise your blood pressure and be miserable, then trying to police places like eBay is a good start. I learned many years ago that people will ask what they want and other people will usually pay those asking prices. With regard to the TPGs, I think a lot of the issue is the attempt at taking on too many different types of coins. How is your grading of 21st Century African coins? How about your grading skills of 16th Century German Talers? 19th Century US coins? It's easy to recognize the discrepancies when one is very focused on their niche collecting realm (I'm not making excuses for the TPGs); but, I'm just saying it's pretty understandable that they get lost in the "world" of so many different coins.

NGC and PCGS are both quite consistent and well-respected for grading of USA coins. NGC has many years more experience than PCGS at grading significant numbers of non-USA coins. Despite the comments by many here, sight unseen, I would almost always have the non-USA coin graded by NGC than the equivalently graded PCGS coin. Both companies make mistakes on attributions, but so does every other TPG that exists. It's ultimately the responsibility of the collector and buyer to know what they are buying.

My most recent personal experience with an NGC graded coin was with my avatar-based coin. I purchased an Australian 1934-35 Centenary Florin on eBay in October, in an NGC MS62 graded holder. But, it was this holder and lowish grade that kept the coin affordable. After I received it, I confirmed what I had thought from the images that the coin was actually a specimen strike of the issue. I emailed Vince Verheyen (the guy who wrote the article on specimen and proof strikes for that coin), who confirmed that it was one of about 15 known specimen strikes (with the riders left nipple prominent/present). I purchased it for $503, Verheyen said he thought it would fetch around $8K to $10K in a well publicized Australian Auction. So, from my perception, knowledge is power -- and sometimes the lack of knowledge of the TPGs is to the benefit of educated/informed collectors.

Another experience I recently had was with the EPN world auction. There were three lots that I was interested in because of the type of token for sale, and because of the general "grade range" that I usually know I appreciate. NGC graded all three lots at AU58BN, MS63BN, and MS64BN. As the auction approached, Heritage posted better images of all of the lots in the sale. After viewing those pictures, I knew that 1) I didn't agree with any of the NGC grades assigned, and 2) I was no longer interested in the lots because they didn't meet my particular collecting quality. I didn't draft a strongly worded email to NGC to complain, I just looked at the coins, saw what they were, and I passed. There will be other coins that come along...

Take away message: Collect and buy what you like. Complaining about TPGs (particularly PCGS and NGC) is sort of like complaining about the weather. PCGS and NGC have graded approximately 60 million coins between the two companies. They have both been in business since the late 1980's. Like it or not, I'm pretty sure they are not going anywhere. You don't have to agree with them, but ignoring their presence in the market doesn't make them go away.

[brg5658 111]

Now this guy Speaks sense

Funny you quote this guy. He is one of the most skeazy and unrespected dealers in the USA market.

Maybe your opinions of him and his thoughts will change when viewing his website, with laughable asking prices (look at this one which SOLD!!!: http://www.randicoins.com/store/pc/SOLD-1948-P-FRANKLIN-NGC-MS-68-STAR-FBL-6p1147.htm).

Edited January 20, 2014 by brg5658

[Rob 3,002]

Without wishing to fill the screen and more with the stacked replies, I'd agree with all of that as would many here. As a rule, the main disagreements lie in the AU/low MS range where a fair proportion of the coins mentioned have an obvious amount of wear which is incompatible with uncirculated or nearly so status. Below that, as a rule of thumb you reduce the assigned by a grade to get approximate parity.

It is fairly consenual that they should be best for US coins, but buyers should be a little more circumspect when it comes to foreign coins because there are clear weaknesses in their competence. The 1787 shilling above certainly falls into that category. Very common in all grades except (UK) mint state.

Looking at the promotional videos above makes me think that the amount of time spent grading may not be a lot, and the cross checking even less. Obviously the really contentious ones are only a small percentage, but it must be indicative of the situation that yourself, myself and others look for the mistakes. If they weren't readily available, fewer people would look.

Things do work both ways. Just as you picked up a rare specimen, so I was able to pick up a unique(?) coin (F689), albeit to the detriment of NGC's population report for a P1983 (pop.1). Conversely, there was a 1 cent P2005 decimal pattern in the recent Spink NY sale which was in a NGC PF66 slab. Unfortunately it was also named to Norweb on the label which added value to US collectors, despite obviously not being the same coin as Norweb 685. Unless she had two examples and passed one on outside the sale, this attribution must be wrong. The end result was a hammer price of $2600 plus the juice (~£1700 all in) compared to the £1K less I paid for a 2 cents (also in a NGC PF66 slab) two years ago.

We'll never be happy.

[mhcoins 95]

Just a thought and to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, would it be possible that such an Auctioneer, as say Heritage, could possibly own a stake in NGC or PCGS ?

[brg5658 111]

Just a thought and to throw the cat amongst the pigeons, would it be possible that such an Auctioneer, as say Heritage, could possibly own a stake in NGC or PCGS ?

Heritage is a part owner of NGC.

PCGS is a publicly traded company under the umbrella of "Collectors Universe".

I don't see how either of those two pieces of information have anything to do with the ability of NGC and PCGS to grade coins to the liking of British collectors.

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, I agree with that. PCGS is a bit on the stick as David Hall, a principle in the firm, also sells PCGS coins though they are US coins.

No connection to Brit coins that I am aware of. One of the main graders at PCGS is/was (I do not have confirmation of his current status) Karl Stephens. I know that they seem to indicate that up to three graders look at a particular coin there but am unaware of any other graders.

[mhcoins 95]

Could it not mean that as consignees they get a more favourable outcome on any submitted coin than say mr jones from Ipswich ?

[Peter 615]

Don't mention Ipswich.

I'm in a deep depression following 3 defeats.

[brg5658 111]

Could it not mean that as consignees they get a more favourable outcome on any submitted coin than say mr jones from Ipswich ?

The vast majority of coins consigned to Heritage are already slabbed. And, a huge proportion of their auctioned coins are graded by PCGS. I think it would require quite a "conspiracy theory" mentality to make such a connection.