TonerGuy

I have been thinking about your position on precision grading, TonerGuy? If you name is indicative of what you like to collect, perhaps you have been burned on some toner purchases.

 

I stay away from paying big premiums for the toned coins that the toner guys like. There are a lot of pitfalls in that market, not the least of which is figuring out exactly what given look is really worth. There is no way standardize the price toners in any way. Every piece is different. Some are attractive to some collectors; some are not.

 

Toning can hide problems. It can hide wear and marks, and coin doctors have used it for years to conceal whizzing, polishing and repairs.

 

If this is your real motivation for advocating a 100 point grading system and use of decimal graded, I think you are looking at the wrong solution. It takes years of experience and good eye to do well in the beautifully toned coin market. I'll admit that I can spot them, but I can't price them. I also known that when I'm looking at the purchase of toned coin that I've got to be careful. Toning can hide lots of sins.

Nope. I dont really sell what I buy so I cant say Ive been burnt. And the few coins that I was forced to sell because of a divorce years ago actually made money thanks to Mark Feld.

Im a collector. I collect, not sell. To be honest, very rarely has a toner I submitted not made it into a PCGS or NGC slab and almost never have I had a coin bought as a MS come back as AU. And for the most part, most of my collection was purchased raw and submitted to a TPG by me (66%+). Thats part of the thrill of the hunt. For me getting a * from NGC is the icing on the cake and I have made numerous stars across many different series over the past 10+ yrs.

Remember it was you who started this thread, not me. I merely posted a very short comment in another thread (which was mostly tongue in cheek at the time) but thanks to you, this thread was started. And since you did I decided to reply and work on my "theoretical" approach to more precise grading.

Honestly, my collecting has little or nothing to do with the grade. Sometimes prices on toners are pegged to the grade, but more often than not they are tied to the actual color on the coin. I dont always agree with the price not being adjusted based on the grade to a certain degree and thus I pass on coins that I would like to own but are just too over priced. I dont mind paying single digit and even low 2 digit premiums for toners. But when someone has a coin that is 20-30x the price of a non-toned example, I pass.

As for CAC, I have never submitted a coin to them, nor will I. I dont look for CAC coins to purchase and I dont care about + grades. I do care about * designations though - please see above and my other thread about that. I dont care if the coin is in NGC, PCGS or ANACs plastic and I might even buy an IGC coin every now and then.

I dont have a dog in this hunt, nor will I ever, but then again that allows me to think logically about a situation as opposed to someone that has stated you dont want to spend thousands more on regrades. I get that. I wouldnt want to spend that money if I were you. I wouldnt want to need a CAC sticker to sell a coin. That sucks. I feel for you.

So really this is nothing personal for me. Rather it is merely observations that I have seen over the past 15-20 yrs of being involved with this hobby/industry. Ive seen grading the graders and + grades and FBL, FT, FB, FS, FH and whatever designation you can come up with just as more ways to precisely grade as well as a way for TPGs to get more money.

So therefore to think this TPG strategy will end is myopic. Market forces are pushing that issue, not me. And once all the good to great coins are graded TPGs are going to have to come up with a new plan to create more revenue... I merely submit to you and this board that either a 100 pt system (less likely) or a .00 grading system will be next in line (more likely).

Bill - nice way to continue to avoid my hypothetical question...

Please, as a former dealer, price the coin in the example I gave that you quoted by avoided... I would really like to know how an old time dealer would price such a coin.

And we can move off the 100 pt system, I changed it up and now Im onto just the .00 system... evolving ideas...

As for grading, I can grade Peace $ in my sleep. Other coins, not so much. Thats not really my concern since I know how to grade what I collect.

coinman - well market grading as to go. Its too subjective and thats kinda of my point with my discussion in this thread, all grading is too subjective - Im trying to remove some of that as well the subjectivity of the pricing.

So no one has really answered my question about + grades and CAC... it seems as though everyone here loves JA and CAC and thinks that having a little green/gold bean on your slab is just the bees knees. Isnt CAC really just another way to quantify without using numbers the same idea that I presented except that in his system he's using 1/3rds (A, B and C). And really what does a + grade mean ? Is that mean a MS65+ is not quite an MS66 but its nicer then a MS65 ? But how much nicer ?

I am also curious as to what you think the technical differences might be between a MS65.76 and a MS65.75 or even a MS65.6? How do you articulate those into standards so that they are consistently applied across the board?

Im not a grader therefore I am not trained to answer your question with specificity. That is left for the experts, no differently then they can articulate the difference between a MS64 and an MS65. Thats what they do.

However I am a consumer of the current system and I think its broken. Which of course is only my opinion but that opinion is based on the fact that we now have to have + grades and other companies like CAC grading the graders and being more precise when it comes to grades.

If the system worked just fine then there would be no need to add those into the mix. While you are entitled to your opinion, I believe that the use of + grades and CAC like companies seems to support my position as a consumer that the current grading scale is not accurate enough for the market. Market forces have taken us from "Good, VG, Fine, VF, EF, AU and Unc" to the Sheldon scale. Forgetting the 100 pt system and just focusing in on decimal grading to the 100th place, (.00) thats where the market is now moving the industry to.

It really is just a matter of time... There is nothing "unworkable" about my theory. It fits well into the current system, its easy for the TPGs to adopt and its provides an accurate baseline pricing model. When you have huge increases in prices for the next grade up and there is a recognition in the industry that there are + coins and A,B, C coins for the grade, there must be some way to accurately price such coins other the subjective opinion of the person selling the coin.

Im not in love with a 100 pt system but after 70 yrs the Sheldon scale is showing its age and inaccuracies.

If it was the best we could do then there really wouldnt be a need a for + grades and CAC.

Here's your quote...

The reason it was accepted then was that that "word scale" (Good, VG, Fine, VF, EF, AU and Unc.) was being abused by creative dealers to confuse the issue. The numbers made things clearer, at least for those who knew how to grade.

If you cant see the same situation is happening now with + and A,B, C coins then there is no convincing you.

Perhaps its my lack of ability to grade or my inability to understand what an MS65+ gold CAC "grade" means. Is that a MS66 ? An MS67 coin ? Or is it just a really nice MS65 ? What should be the price on that coin ?

However I could much better understand a grade like MS 65.76. If you dont want to go to a 100 pt scale how about just going to hundredth decimal place ? It would certainly allow for more precise pricing. If an MS65 coin is $100 and an MS66 coin is $250 an MS65.76 coin would be $214 (take $150 the difference between the two grades and divide by .76) So an MS65.40 coin would be $160.

See rather simple and surprisingly accurate. As a retired dealer, please price the MS65+ gold CAC coin for me (using MS65 @ $100 and MS66 @ $250 and @ MS67 at $500)

But of course a more confusing scale only benefits the seller not the buyer.

Its really not the difficult to use decimals and keep your beloved 70 pt system though. As I said in the other thread, let the graders give obverse and reverse grades down to the .00 and then average all 6 grades. Then at least you truly then have a consensus grade as opposed to needing a finalizer approve every single grade.

It will speed up grading times and basically do away with grading the graders as well as increase the accuracy of pricing. Wasnt this the idea behind the reason for TPGs in the first place ? Accuracy and fluidity in the market, trust and consumer confidence ?

I am somewhat intrigued that my comment caused a thread to be started in regards to it....

And while I appreciate your post, I am not really sure that it makes a compelling argument as to why the 70 pt system is the best other than, well its been that way for 70 years so we shouldnt change it.

And while yes I agree that a change to a 100 pt system would enrich the TPGs I dont see too many on this board, PCGS's board, CoinTalk or any other forum talking about no longer submitting coins or sending already graded coins to CAC for even yet more precise grading opinions. Arent + grades, * designations, truview, the sniffer, security logos and all the other add-ons, upgrades and changes just a way for TPGs to get you to resubmit ?

If it doesnt fit you must resubmit...

But really what does all of those marketing add-ons and gimmicks really add to the industry as a whole ? Mostly more money for the TPGs. We have as an industry/hobby accepted TPGs, TPG's rates for grading and long wait times to get coins back from them.

Would a change to a 100 pt scale really be that different ? I didnt say that the 70 pt system should be immediately abolished. That would never happen. But over time, out-dated obsolete systems are often replaced with better more precise systems. It is the nature of evolution. Unless you are talking about the government, then it seems antiquated ways rule the day.

I dont think anyone can actually argue that the Sheldon scale is the best that we have and it can never be improved upon. If someone can, please do. I would like to hear that argument. Please also tell NGC and PCGS to abolish their + grades since they are obviously not necessary and left CAC know that their A,B, C system is a failure as well.

Will there be growing pains with a new system, of course. As Im sure there was growing pains 70 yrs ago when the Sheldon scale came into existence. But somehow people still collected coins, people still sold coins and the sun rose the next and continues to rise even to this day.

And while yes, grading is an art and not a science, thats not a reason to stop trying to improve on it.

Assuming a show promoter has any interest in improving the knowledge of collectors, what things could be done that would develop more interest among collectors and dealers attending a show.

 

 

Conduct the seminars before the bourse opens. Perhaps 2-3 days of seminars and then the show. I am sure some shows do this already but I dont think Long Beach does which is the show I have the most experience with.

Have NGC/PCGS/ANACS teach courses on their grading and designations specifics and how to spot problem coins. Perhaps having breakout sessions with a grader for individual popular series. While the ANA does a great job teaching grading I would like to hear from the individual companies what they look for and what they like and dont like in grading room.

Christmas Miracles do happen ! I believe !!!!

Good luck !