MarkFeld

If they’re not broken, don’t break them.😉

I understand that. “Intermediate Collectors” and “State Quarter Collectors” in the same sentence doesn’t compute for me, however.

I certainly don’t think of “State Quarter collectors” as “Intermediate Collectors”.

It sounds like you made a wise pass. No need to stretch for a common coin.

The downward ride you mentioned is even more severe than that. Some MS62’s have sold for less than $200.

That sounds like more than a full time job for a moderator. And based on the way so many threads go, I doubt it would solve the problem, anyway.

If that’s the case, things were different when I graded at NGC (1991-1998). Yes, the volume of submissions was much smaller back then, but so was the number of graders. And we weren’t grading moderns at that time.

He founded PCGS. Whatever you think of PCGS or him, there’s no denying the huge influence he’s had on the hobby and the business.

There are a number of possibilities. It might have been tight grading the first time, loose grading the second time or a little bit of each. Maybe additional time spent evaluating the coins would have resulted in a different grade, but perhaps not. I doubt that inexperienced graders is the explanation, however.

Non-formed toes/fingers aren’t going to account for differences in grade very often. Your emphasizing strike too much. With respect to “rush- rush”, try picking up a coin and examining each side for 10 seconds. How rushed does that feel? If your answer is more than a little bit, try it a few more times with a few other coins. Then look at the same coins for as long as you want and see how much, if at all, your grade opinions change. I’m not saying that some coins don’t require 30 seconds or more. But a great many don’t.

It's not nearly as difficult as you seem to think. And in my opinion, "flowing hair details, finger details, Capitol details, toes details.." rarely make a difference in the grade. It's much more about surface quality and luster.

I, too, feel that GSA dollars are overrated. However, while all but a small number of dates are quite common, they're also the object of very heavy demand. A few other examples of easy to locate coins which enjoy high demand and thus higher prices than one might expect, are 1907 High Relief $20's, 1916-D dimes and 1909-S VDB cents.

Yes, it looks altered - note the difference in color between the (bright) edge and the surfaces of each side of the coin.

Probably silver Eagles.

You’re either making excuses or blind to your unwillingness or inability to set politics aside. Read the post which followed the title. It was about grading, not “Liberals who like to duck honest questions”.

Duplicate post deleted.

The line is (or at should be) easy, but it’s not always maintained. And it sounds to me as if upgrades from 69 to 70 occur more frequently than you think.

Stop with the politics. It’s unnecessary, off topic and not for this forum.

Other than to grade coins which are essentially identical and perfect, I don’t see how that would work. As you’ve already pointed out, there are an infinite number of possible unique combinations of flaws on coins. How do you program a computer to assess each individual coin (without human input in each instance) and then apply a standardized grade?

That’s perfectly understandable and sounds reasonable. As long as you don’t devote sub-par attention to the ordinary coins.

Lots of modern coins grade 69 one or more times, but 70 the next time. They’re not necessarily immune, either. And generally, they should be much easier to grade than classics.

Granted, there isn’t much of a price/value spread between MS62-63 Saints, or for that matter, other contiguous grades of different generic gold coins. But that shouldn’t render the idea of accurate grading for such coins, any less important. The potential attached value to any particular grade coin shouldn’t be an excuse for sloppy, thigh or lose grading.

I realize that your post was directed to Roger. However, while I think that the major grading companies do an excellent job overall, your “get it right” percentages seem way too high. If they were accurate, there wouldn’t be so many upgrades and such inconsistent results. And if you’re willing to allow 1-2 grade increment leeway, you’re ignoring a significant part of the supposed reason and potential benefit in grading. Additionally, that would pretty much make a mockery of plus grading.

I understand that. But I get the impression that even though none of the replies were particularly surprising, you were (still) disappointed or bothered by them. Tell me if I'm mistaken about that. I feel that you got what you should have expected, but that doesn't mean people don't care.

What could the answer be, other than the opinion of the person responding or his perception of what others think? ?