Grading Submission Rant Part 2

[MBA101]

Now here is a coin that I reeeaaalllly think is top notch for the grade. Was in an ANACS 40 holder. Came back in a NGC 35 holder. Now, it wouldn't chaff me too much but take into account other coins that I own, and this coin should be considered a high end 40, but not quite 45, judging by other '45's that I have. And then there is the current identical die pairing at heritage right now that is a 40, which if my coin is a 35, it should be a 30. The coin has decent luster for a circulated bustie, but it is muted under heavy toning.

 

My 1813 O-110

 

 

The awful dipped Heritage coin. How is the above coin a lower grade than this?

 

 

I think these to sets of pics make my point, and maybe later I will post a few other coins just to emphasize that something just doesn't add up...

[MarkFeld]

Now here is a coin that I reeeaaalllly think is top notch for the grade. Was in an ANACS 40 holder. Came back in a NGC 35 holder. Now, it wouldn't chaff me too much but take into account other coins that I own, and this coin should be considered a high end 40, but not quite 45, judging by other '45's that I have. And then there is the current identical die pairing at heritage right now that is a 40, which if my coin is a 35, it should be a 30. The coin has decent luster for a circulated bustie, but it is muted under heavy toning.

 

My 1813 O-110

 

 

The awful dipped Heritage coin. How is the above coin a lower grade than this?

 

 

I think these to sets of pics make my point, and maybe later I will post a few other coins just to emphasize that something just doesn't add up...

Actually, something adds up perfectly - in many cases grading is to a large extent subjective and inconsistent.

[IGWT]

That's a wicked clash!

 

I've enjoyed both of your threads on TPG grading of Capped Bust Halves. I don't have enough experience with the series to offer a much commentary, but I certainly agree that your piece is more attractive and looks to be the same technical grade as the ugly (imho) dipped Heritage piece. I don't think I've ever seen a circulated coin that was improved by dipping.

 

Like you, in my series of choice, I have likes and dislikes that I take into account when I grade a coin. I have no doubt that I weigh certain of those factors differently than the TPGs. As Mike wrote in your other thread, it's not so much a matter of inconsistency as a matter of different standards, which doesn't seem to bother me any more.

[MBA101]

Something just came to me....would this thread be allowed ATS if it were involving PCGS?

[BillJones]

I have not submitted anything to NGC in a while, but what I understand from other dealers, they have tightened their standards. I have been disappointed with some of my NGC submissions, but I've gotten some "gifts" too. I just wish all of the services could be a bit more consistent and more willing to listen to their customers. I agree that the second coin you pictured (the dipped bright one) is over graded as an EF coin. The luster might give it an EF claim, but the scrubbed up look to it leaves it not worth EF money.

 

As for your coin, I would have graded it VF-35 too, but I’m more conservative than some people. The coin has some wear in the hair, but the cincher for me is the obvious rub on the cheek and bust areas. Using classic standards, it’s hard to call a coin with that on it EF, and that flatness can not be attributed to a weak strike.

[123cents]

I think you would probably do better cracking them out and submitting them raw.

[MBA101]

It was...

[MikeKing]

that was brave.

 

lovely coin, nice stretched out stars from the worn die. nice clash.

 

edited to add:

 

Mark, I hate to say it, but I have to agree with you.

 

But I will also say, according to the Mike grading scale, I do takes points off for strike, but I also limit how much to take off based on the particular die marriage for a coin, and THIS coin is made of a die marriage of clashed and worn dies. Actually, for thie Overton number, it is rather WELL STRUCK and should be credited as such.

 

The bottom line is that with Busties (I can't comment about other kinds of coins) the TPGs simply cannot grade them, and to expect an appropriate grade on a bustie is an unreasonable expectation. Unfortunately, most collectors and dealers will look at the grade and determine it's value, which is not good for you when your coin is in an under-graded holder at the time you want to sell it.

 

For all this hooplah about the CAC, will they use their brains and figure out when a bustie is UNDER GRADED by a TPG? Or will they fall into the same dictatorial hallucination and just add to the misery?

 

Huff Huff...I'm so glad I got that off my chest!

[123cents]

That's very disturbing. I have some CBH's to crossover myself. I think I will just try PCGS.

[MBA101]

This is the most frustrating thin...the fact that I need to re-submit to try and get a grade that makes me more happy so that I can sell at a level that more suits the coin. And this coin does deserve a slightly better price than the average bustie...

[MikeKing]

when you sell it, sell it through Sheridan Downey, or a dealer who recognizes what it is worth.

 

[MBA101]

Yup... I agree. In the meantime, buying from Sheridan is a top priority...

[James_OldeTowne]

Cool, I just sold an 1813 110 within the past couple of weeks! My coin was a hair better than the top one, and I called it EF-45. I would grade these coins EF-40 or higher, and VF-30 or higher, respectively, and agree with your comments.

[chinook]

I think the above coin could grade 35 on Monday, 40 on Tuesday, 35 on Wednesday, 40 on Thursday, and 35 on Friday.

 

Just time your submissions so it is graded on a Tuesday or Thursday.

[Keleum]

You bring up an interesting point about the CAC. I wonder if the introduction of market makers for busties, will have a completely different impact on collecting, that we're thinking.

 

We assume the CAC would do something like 35-A, and 40-C, and equalize the price/grade. But the CAC is a business, and these makers are constrained only by what people will buy. The bustie market maker is better off introducing a grade for the originality of the skin/tone, not just a sub-grade.

[MarkFeld]

As for CAC........... Really getting the grade right is not something interests them.

 

Top

Bill, I'm surprised and disappointed that you would make such a comment, especially BEFORE you have seen what they are going to be doing.

[BillJones]

As for CAC........... Really getting the grade right is not something interests them.

 

Top

Bill, I'm surprised and disappointed that you would make such a comment, especially BEFORE you have seen what they are going to be doing.

 

I'm sorry Mark, but I've had VERY BAD experiences with the company that is THE ring leader of that group and the individual who provides that company with finaical backing. Whatever they do, the coins will have to go through a number of hands before I'll get any benefit from that outfit if there is any benefit at all.

 

And, yes, there is no way that those people are going to "fix" things for coins that have gotten lower grades than the items deserved. Those who get hammered with grades that are too low will continue have to take their financial lumps or crack the coins out and try again. CAC is not going to do anything about that except play crack-out artist like everyone else.

 

CAC looks like nothing but a new trade association to me. They are looking for a way to set themselves apart from other dealers without starting a new grading company. I can't blame them for avoiding the new grading company. In the present market becoming a leading NEW service is impossible from a marketing perspective..

[MarkFeld]

As for CAC........... Really getting the grade right is not something interests them.

 

Top

Bill, I'm surprised and disappointed that you would make such a comment, especially BEFORE you have seen what they are going to be doing.

 

I'm sorry Mark, but I've had VERY BAD experiences with the company that is THE ring leader of that group and the individual who provides that company with finaical backing. Whatever they do, the coins will have to go through a number of hands before I'll get any benefit from that outfit if there is any benefit at all.

 

And, yes, there is no way that those people are going to "fix" things for coins that have gotten lower grades than the items deserved. Those who get hammered with grades that are too low will continue have to take their financial lumps or crack the coins out and try again. CAC is not going to do anything about that except play crack-out artist like everyone else.

 

CAC looks like nothing but a new trade association to me. They are looking for a way to set themselves apart from other dealers without starting a new grading company. I can't blame them for avoiding the new grading company. In the present market becoming a leading NEW service is impossible from a marketing perspective..

Bill, Legend is not going to be evaluating the coins for purposes of determining which ones will receive stickers. And since I doubt you know CAC's founder or his intentions well, if at all, in my view your comment amounted to an unfair and cheap shot. I will leave it at that and apologize to the forum for my off topic posts to this thread.

[Tradedollarnut]

Bill's just mad cuz I don't let him get away with his mean spirited and silly statements without calling him on them ...

 

Of course, he's never had any interaction with me whatsoever in any capacity other than that - which simply goes to show he's prejudiced against Legend and never misses a chance to rail on them.

 

Once you recognize that fact, his inane comments are pretty much harmless.