The use of the NGC Star designation needs to be reevaluated

[lehigh96]

Shane, If we all agree that eye appeal is subjective, why, precisely, does NGC's opinion matter? At least to me, it's about the coin, not how much I can sell it for, not how many registry points it is worth, and not the grade on the holder. While nobody likes to be told their coins aren't as nice as they think they are, I'm just wondering why it bothers you so much -- it's just a difference in opinion on something that's extremely subjective to begin with...Mike

 

I can't answer that.......but I know it bugs the blank out of me.....probably becuase I see so many ho hum coins with the star and it's so tough for me to run across real knockouts raw........I don't want to shell out the multiples for star designated coins with the great eye appeal....I would just like to be able to make some myself via submissions. Have I been able to...yes.......do I feel like I haven't gotten hosed on many more that should have......yes I do

 

 

Shane, I agree that if you had to go into the general marketplace and buy the "Star" coins, it would cost quite a bit more. Your comment about seeing so many "ho-hum" coins with the designation makes me wonder when those particualr coins were graded. Since, as you have already stated, these coins are selling for considerably more now, don't you think that NGC would naturally make it harder to earn this coveted award? After all, if it were easy to obtain, I would think that values would drop.

 

Chris

 

Chris,

 

You make a very valid point. Look at this Jefferson Nickel that was awarded the star designation shortly after the designation was created. There is no way that this coin would be considered for the star designation today.

 

 

The coin is a little more attractive than my photo makes it appear, but no way does it deserve a star. Oh well, I guess I will have to live with the extra 238 registry points.

[MarkFeld]

Shane, If we all agree that eye appeal is subjective, why, precisely, does NGC's opinion matter? At least to me, it's about the coin, not how much I can sell it for, not how many registry points it is worth, and not the grade on the holder. While nobody likes to be told their coins aren't as nice as they think they are, I'm just wondering why it bothers you so much -- it's just a difference in opinion on something that's extremely subjective to begin with...Mike

 

I can't answer that.......but I know it bugs the blank out of me.....probably becuase I see so many ho hum coins with the star and it's so tough for me to run across real knockouts raw........I don't want to shell out the multiples for star designated coins with the great eye appeal....I would just like to be able to make some myself via submissions. Have I been able to...yes.......do I feel like I haven't gotten hosed on many more that should have......yes I do

 

OK, Shane, here's some good news for you. If NGC is failing to award stars to many of your coins which you feel deserve them, they must be doing the same with respect to other submitters, as well. If you believe it's happening only to you, you are obviously paranoid, so there is no need to read further

 

In case you are still reading, however ..... Rather than fretting over having to pay too much for coins which have already received stars, why not concentrate on paying too little for the ones that should have received them, but didn't? The subjectivity and inconsistency clearly present many opportunities for those who wish to avail themselves of them.

[kryptonitecomics]

It's not just me....other have complained and will continue too.....all the points brought up are valid ....I do think the changed what they are looking for at some point......I do think they might be more critical of super nice coins that come super nice......I do believe that luster in combination with color should be a key requirement....and I also agree that splotchy toning is usually going to get past over.

 

 

Yes Paul I did read it (thumbs u

[Coin]

I guess everyone knows that I am about totally confused as to the Star designation requirements for awarding of the 'coveted' star , as per previous posts in other OPs postings on the subject .

 

I am offering another confusing point of view on the subject now. Please straighten me out , anyone with the correct answer as per NGC guidelines , but isn't the star designation also meant for coins that grade at one level , but due to some extremely minor issue , would have graded higher ...but because of that one little issue the grade was held back?

 

Example:

 

1956 D 25C .....should grade MS67 , one grader gave it MS67 .....Second grader gave it MS67 ......finalizer kicks it back to MS66 *(star) due to over-looked slight tilted hub on reverse which caused poor striking of outer half of letters in 'quarter dollar' at the bottom( or whatever a grader at NGC ,today ,would call a big enough fault to drop a coin one grade point)....or if you do not like the example ....substitute PROOF quarter with DCAM OBV / borderline CAM/DCAM reverse . The example coin would deserve a higher grade , but is kept back by one tiny little thing .

This is regardless of Toning there or not .

 

Another example would be a coin with a GREAT strike , but so-so luster on Reverse , but wowzer luster on the Obverse.

 

Is that still so ?

[MarkFeld]

but isn't the star designation also meant for coins that grade at one level , but due to some extremely minor issue , would have graded higher ...but because of that one little issue the grade was held back?

Not to my understanding, it isn't. That sounds more like a "PQ" designation, as opposed to a star for extra eye-appeal.

[TomB]

I might be the only one on this site that thinks this way, but I actually do not like the star designation at all in the manner that NGC uses it for coins. Additionally, I am one of those folks who would balk at paying even an extra cent for a coin that received the star designation.

[MarkFeld]

I might be the only one on this site that thinks this way, but I actually do not like the star designation at all in the manner that NGC uses it for coins. Additionally, I am one of those folks who would balk at paying even an extra cent for a coin that received the star designation.

Tom, for the star coins that you really like, my guess is that in many cases you'd pay the same price for them even without a star. So, in essence, you wouldn't be paying an extra cent for them due to the star.

[TomB]

I might be the only one on this site that thinks this way, but I actually do not like the star designation at all in the manner that NGC uses it for coins. Additionally, I am one of those folks who would balk at paying even an extra cent for a coin that received the star designation.

Tom, for the star coins that you really like, my guess is that in many cases you'd pay the same price for them even without a star. So, in essence, you wouldn't be paying an extra cent for them due to the star.

That's exactly my point, Mark. I buy the coin based upon the value I give to the coin and not based upon the TPG-assigned grade, the presence or absence of a designation or a sticker. This means that I might pay an apparently fabulous premium in relation to what a guide might declare as a value and that I also might walk away from a possible acquisition that others would think to be a bargain. I'm fairly disciplined with respect to my numismatic purchases, but will pay for qualities that I value.

 

The extension of this, of course, is that for purchases the NGC star designation is useless to someone like me and also that the CAC sticker is useless, too. This does not preclude, however, the submission of coins to the non-invasive CAC procedure in the event that I think the market might make these coins somewhat more liquid or valuable.

[braddick]

(If you had too...) Would you blindly purchase a dozen of a certain coin graded NGC at MS67 or, for the same price, a dozen of the same type/date of coins graded MS67*?

 

If you go with the 12 STAR coins then you have awarded (blindly) value to that NGC rating.

[TomB]

(If you had too...) Would you blindly purchase a dozen of a certain coin graded NGC at MS67 or, for the same price, a dozen of the same type/date of coins graded MS67*?

 

If you go with the 12 STAR coins then you have awarded (blindly) value to that NGC rating.

I can imagine that scenario no more than I can imagine walking on the moon.

[MarkFeld]

(If you had too...) Would you blindly purchase a dozen of a certain coin graded NGC at MS67 or, for the same price, a dozen of the same type/date of coins graded MS67*?

 

If you go with the 12 STAR coins then you have awarded (blindly) value to that NGC rating.

I can imagine that scenario no more than I can imagine walking on the moon.

Tom, how quickly you forget. Here is that picture I shot of you only last week

 

 

 

[TomB]

D'oh!

[IGWT]

Tom, how quickly you forget. Here is that picture I shot of you only last week

 

 

 

 

Sound stage at Long Beach.

 

I don't see the purpose of the star in any sight-seen transaction.

[PCcoins]

(If you had too...) Would you blindly purchase a dozen of a certain coin graded NGC at MS67 or, for the same price, a dozen of the same type/date of coins graded MS67*?

 

If you go with the 12 STAR coins then you have awarded (blindly) value to that NGC rating.

 

I would definitely buy the *star coins, if they are the same price. The coins ngc stars for the most part are very appealing. There are some exceptions to the rules but I enjoy the Stars.

[lehigh96]

I might be the only one on this site that thinks this way, but I actually do not like the star designation at all in the manner that NGC uses it for coins. Additionally, I am one of those folks who would balk at paying even an extra cent for a coin that received the star designation.

Tom, for the star coins that you really like, my guess is that in many cases you'd pay the same price for them even without a star. So, in essence, you wouldn't be paying an extra cent for them due to the star.

That's exactly my point, Mark. I buy the coin based upon the value I give to the coin and not based upon the TPG-assigned grade, the presence or absence of a designation or a sticker. This means that I might pay an apparently fabulous premium in relation to what a guide might declare as a value and that I also might walk away from a possible acquisition that others would think to be a bargain. I'm fairly disciplined with respect to my numismatic purchases, but will pay for qualities that I value.

 

The extension of this, of course, is that for purchases the NGC star designation is useless to someone like me and also that the CAC sticker is useless, too. This does not preclude, however, the submission of coins to the non-invasive CAC procedure in the event that I think the market might make these coins somewhat more liquid or valuable.

 

I would agree that I don't pay more because the coin has a star designation. I make my determination of the coins values based upon my opinion of the coin's merits and I will routinely pay significant premiums with relation to price guides for rainbow toned coins no matter what the star status is on the holder. However, the star designation coins are given a huge bonus in the registry and it is this point bonus that allows me to stay competitive in the registry.

 

I know this will open up a can of beans, but I believe that it is possible to seek out quality eye appealing coins while attempting to compete in the registry. It is in this regard that NGC's apparent inconsistency with the star designation affects me. I understand that there are other forum members who abhor the competitive nature of the registry and wish that the point system didn't exist. I am not one of those collectors. I like the registry, I like the point system, I like to compete, and I would like a level playing field which IMO is not possible with the current level of inconsistency regarding the star designation.

[TomB]

I might be the only one on this site that thinks this way, but I actually do not like the star designation at all in the manner that NGC uses it for coins. Additionally, I am one of those folks who would balk at paying even an extra cent for a coin that received the star designation.

Tom, for the star coins that you really like, my guess is that in many cases you'd pay the same price for them even without a star. So, in essence, you wouldn't be paying an extra cent for them due to the star.

That's exactly my point, Mark. I buy the coin based upon the value I give to the coin and not based upon the TPG-assigned grade, the presence or absence of a designation or a sticker. This means that I might pay an apparently fabulous premium in relation to what a guide might declare as a value and that I also might walk away from a possible acquisition that others would think to be a bargain. I'm fairly disciplined with respect to my numismatic purchases, but will pay for qualities that I value.

 

The extension of this, of course, is that for purchases the NGC star designation is useless to someone like me and also that the CAC sticker is useless, too. This does not preclude, however, the submission of coins to the non-invasive CAC procedure in the event that I think the market might make these coins somewhat more liquid or valuable.

 

I would agree that I don't pay more because the coin has a star designation. I make my determination of the coins values based upon my opinion of the coin's merits and I will routinely pay significant premiums with relation to price guides for rainbow toned coins no matter what the star status is on the holder. However, the star designation coins are given a huge bonus in the registry and it is this point bonus that allows me to stay competitive in the registry.

 

I know this will open up a can of beans, but I believe that it is possible to seek out quality eye appealing coins while attempting to compete in the registry. It is in this regard that NGC's apparent inconsistency with the star designation affects me. I understand that there are other forum members who abhor the competitive nature of the registry and wish that the point system didn't exist. I am not one of those collectors. I like the registry, I like the point system, I like to compete, and I would like a level playing field which IMO is not possible with the current level of inconsistency regarding the star designation.

Your post is well thought out and contains quite a bit of internal logic that is difficult to fault. I, too, have a registry set that is in a competitive listing and I also attempt to find coins with superior eye appeal that are technically exceptional for the grade. In my case, however, I realize that my budget and my niche (complete US type set) will not allow me to be a serious competitor regarding points, but I still enjoy building my set and sharing it, just as you enjoy these tasks, too. (thumbs u