Safest holder?

[RobertB]

Has anyone else seen this link?

http://www.icgcoin.com/p001213.htm

It's a few years old, but caught my attention.

[gmarguli]

The test might be perfect or perfectly flawed. There are a lot of factors that have to be taken into account. The biggest is how/where you store your slabs.

 

I think the IS slab is overkill. Some people spend lots of money on it. If you store your coins properly you shouldn't have to worry about IS protection.

[MikeKing]

They don't mention exactly where the intercept sheild is in the holder, but it looks like there's a black background, and I'm assuming this is the intercept sheild 'gasket' they mention. So it looks like there's nothing in the plastic itself. OR is ther? They also mention that they have intercept sheild lining their boxes, but don't say if the study was done using an intercept sheild box. That all would change how you interpret the results.

[Wihlborg]

An interesting article for sure. I do believe that the Intercept Shield helps and switched over to the Intercept Shield albums a few years ago for my raw coins, but as for slabed coins I agree with Greg, if you store your slabs in a dry, stable environment you probably will not have any problem. Just don’t store your slabs in a hot humid attic or a cold damp basement!

 

By the way I liked the fact that NGC holders protected the coins better than the PCGS holders. It’s just one more reason for me to like the NGC holders better than any of the others!

 

John

 

[RobertB]

Another interesting point while I'm talking about ICG. According to the greysheet they are currently getting the highest average 'fetch' price for their graded coins? Any explanations anyone? I'm not well versed or learned on this subject.

 

And by the way, why doesn't ICG get the proper respect? First off, I think they're 10 times more consistent than PCGS. Granted, they may be considered liberal on their grading of moderns, especially proofs, but is that true? It that a correct statement, or are PCGS and NGC just too damn unneedingly conservative on the same coins. To be honest I don't see why it's so hard to have PF 66-70 coins from the 1950's thru 70's . It does NOT sound irrational to me. For the 'big two' to say that there are no ulta high grade proofs from the 50's and 60's sounds ridiculous to me. I have seen numerous specimens that were just as well made then as now, honestly.

 

Is there anyone else out there that believes PCGS and NGC are being too conservative on moderns? Be honest and seperate yourself from any current ultra high grade modern PCGS and NGC coins you have!!

[gmarguli]

Another interesting point while I'm talking about ICG. According to the greysheet they are currently getting the highest average 'fetch' price for their graded coins? Any explanations anyone? I'm not well versed or learned on this subject.

 

Where is this? My somewhat recent Greysheet shows ICG as being 3rd in average prices (PCGS #1, NGC #2), 3rd in low prices (NGC #1, PCGS #2), 3rd in high prices (NGC #1, PCGS #2).

 

 

And by the way, why doesn't ICG get the proper respect? First off, I think they're 10 times more consistent than PCGS. Granted, they may be considered liberal on their grading of moderns, especially proofs, but is that true?

 

PCGS is extremely inconsistent. You never know what grade you are going to get unless you have David Hall tap the graders on the shoulder and say "See what you can do with these". However, ICG isn't exactly great. They overgrade by a LOT, they are awful on circulated coins (some people like their circ grading and not their MS), I find their MS grading to be off by 2 points at least and frequently off by 3+ points. I've seen so many problem circ coins in their slabs I think people must give them a shot before shipping them off to ACG.

 

Their standard for PR/MS70 is a joke. I've seen a PR70 dime that had a big crust spot on the reverse. I saw an MS70 being hawked on TV which had a bag mark on it. Their standard for DCAM on the earlier coins is so lax that I'd bet a significant percentage of them wouldn't make regular CAM at NGC/PCGS.

 

 

 

Is there anyone else out there that believes PCGS and NGC are being too conservative on moderns? Be honest and seperate yourself from any current ultra high grade modern PCGS and NGC coins you have!!

 

No, I believe they are too liberal. When 95% of the coins are grading PR69 I think it is time to adjust the grading scale to separate the cream of that 95% from the rest. I'd be happy if the average grade assigned to modern proofs was PR67.

[sanmary]

When they (ICG) first began a couple of years ago, I thought "SWEET...a cast of well known and respected guys" right in my backyard. I live literally 15 minutes from ICG and could drop off and pick up coins without any postage and insurance. The harsh reality is that they DO overgrade quite a bit more than the others especially when it comes to eye-appeal. I see a lot of unpleasant looking coins for the grade in their holders. Maybe it's just me, but if I prefer to ship my coins and pay for that there must be a reason?? However to make a point on your original question, the IS is an insert and probably would be good for someone living in a humid climate such as the southeast. Here in Denver where the relative humidity is usually 15% to 20% they're not needed much.

[RobertB]

Another interesting point while I'm talking about ICG. According to the greysheet they are currently getting the highest average 'fetch' price for their graded coins? Any explanations anyone? I'm not well versed or learned on this subject.

 

Where is this? My somewhat recent Greysheet shows ICG as being 3rd in average prices (PCGS #1, NGC #2), 3rd in low prices (NGC #1, PCGS #2), 3rd in high prices (NGC #1, PCGS #2).

 

 

The Nov. 14 issue has the following averages:

 

ICG 87.77

PCGS 82.83

NGC 81.37

PCI 57.98

ANACS 55.35

 

ICG is also #1 for highest and #1(best) for lowest

I think it's sad for ANACS as well that PCI is averaging better, albeit 2 pts.?

 

[gmarguli]

The Nov. 14 issue has the following averages:

 

ICG 87.77

PCGS 82.83

NGC 81.37

PCI 57.98

ANACS 55.35

 

ICG is also #1 for highest and #1(best) for lowest

I think it's sad for ANACS as well that PCI is averaging better, albeit 2 pts.?

 

I don't know what universe CDN is on. ICG coins don't command anything close to NGC/PCGS/ANACS prices. PCI is a joke service along the lines of ACG and NTC.

 

It sure makes me wonder about the objectivity of CDN.

 

They also list INS and NCI which trade less frequently than 1804 silver dollars.

[Beijim]

And by the way, why doesn't ICG get the proper respect? First off, I think they're 10 times more consistent than PCGS. Granted, they may be considered liberal on their grading of moderns, especially proofs, but is that true?

 

Yes, it's true. I recently bought a 1996-S Proof Olympics Swimming 50c that was graded in an ICG slab as PR70 DCAM. The seller is reputable and one with whom I've done business previously.

 

Overall, the coin was nice. But if you looked closely, you'd see a big honking scratch extending across the obverse. It covered approximately half the coin's width. To be fair, it was thin and difficult to see without magnification unless you got the angle right. But it was there, and it was big.

 

To me, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing a grading service should see. I returned the coin and received a refund, but it was an interesting lesson in what ICG allows through at their very highest grade level.

 

Beijim

[EZ_E]

They also list INS and NCI which trade less frequently than 1804 silver dollars.

 

 

Aaah, Gregory, you a funny guy.

[Oldtrader3]

IMHO, CDN has always had a credibility problem, whether it be on coin pricing or on slab price comparisons. I think that they have a reporting bias towards a few dealers. Maybe all this comparison signifies is that ICG commands 87% of their lower pricing structure per marked grade for slabs. Figures don't lie but liers figure. I would have to see a comparison chart of absolute dollar, by service, for marked grade pricing before I put too much trust in these numbers.