DGS TPG Service

[me0505]

Not sure if this has been posted already, if so, my apologies.

 

As compared to NGC and PCGS, how do all of you rate the "new" DGS (David Lawrence Rare Coins) grading service.

 

Please comment on any aspect of theirs as compared to the other top tier services (i.e. prices, actual grades, etc...). I know there has been mention of DLRC under cutting prices on consignment, but that aside, your feel for the slabs.

 

I'll plant a seed....if PCGS goes belly up, will they slide into the top 2 spots?

[physics-fan3.14]

I think they are too new really. They haven't been around or graded enough to make a good opinion. Being linked to DLRC, they have a good foundation, but there is a world of difference between knowledgeable and reputable dealer and reputable, solid grading company.

[coinman1794]

Dominion Grading Service has been putting out a lot of conservatively graded coins. This is good for buyers and not for submitters. But, the majority of their submission thus far seem to be problem coins. Grading these could taint their brand over time if they become associated mostly with slabbing problem coins, even though all problems are labeled.

 

More importantly, their decision, announced this week, to certify "reproductions and copies" is just bazzar.

 

http://www.stellacoinnews.com/?p=1863

 

 

[me0505]

Hmmmm....we will consider a copy? WTF. I thought TPG was to "ensure" a real, to grade ( varies per TPG) rating? If they consider a copy/replica, to me, that is blaahhhh...unless it is CLEARLY stated on the slab. Why can't they just say they will slab REAL coins?

 

My dumb worth.

[michael]

i vote that ALL GRADING SERVICES ARE CRAPPY

 

but pcgs and ngc are the least crappiest and most market acceptable as of today tomorrow might be a different story but i will buy any holder as long as the coin is all there and priced right of course!!

 

but then again i need to make sure that if i see a coin it meets my standards in the pcgs and ngc holders and 95+% of waht i see in pcgs and ngc holders do not meet my standards

 

so if i am buying a coin i buy it as it is raw in any holder but of course if the coin is all there for me then pcgs and ngc holder is just a bonus as the current market makes a coin more market acceptable and love liquid if in a pcgs ngc holder

[michael]

and any coin i would ever consider buying in any holder or no holder or even in a pcgs ngc holder

 

i ask myself this

 

if i break this coin out of the holder it is currently in; is the coin worth raw at least as much or more than in the current holder?/ if the answer is yes then i will consider the coin to buy if not the coin is a pass

[michael]

so as you can see i rarely if ever buy any coins anymore

[me0505]

From those posts Mike, you are screwed (i.e. not buying) lately.

 

Seriously though, that answer is great....an honest, to the point thought!

[James_OldeTowne]

There is too much suspicion of "conflict of interest" associated with DGS for them to be taken seriously. As far as I am concerned, they are self-slabbers, and I don't care that they use a special serial number for self-slabbed coins.

[MunkyMan95]

There is too much suspicion of "conflict of interest" associated with DGS for them to be taken seriously. As far as I am concerned, they are self-slabbers, and I don't care that they use a special serial number for self-slabbed coins.

 

Somewhat like David Hall only selling PCGS-graded coins, no?

[kryptonitecomics]

Never used the service.....the few coins I have seen in their holders looked accurately graded but I do ageee that slabbing your own coins as a dealer is a conflict of interest in some ways

[Conder101]

DGS said they will encapsulate the Gallery Mint pieces, not that they will certify them and they say they will not grade them. The Gallery Mint pieces are true quality pieces and they do have a collector base for them. What is wrong with the idea of preserving them? Especially if properly identified as to exactly what they are?

[James_OldeTowne]

There is too much suspicion of "conflict of interest" associated with DGS for them to be taken seriously. As far as I am concerned, they are self-slabbers, and I don't care that they use a special serial number for self-slabbed coins.

 

Somewhat like David Hall only selling PCGS-graded coins, no?

 

I think DavidHall started selling coins well after PCGS was established. David Lawrence is selling DGS long before it's an established grading service.

[MikeInFL]

James, If they are both selling coins graded by the companies they own (or run), what's the difference?...Mike

 

p.s. FWIW, I agree it is a huge conflict of interest -- but to me the chronology doesn't make any difference.

[Houston Investor]

They are non entity, not even one of the big 4.

 

Would not waste my money on their material.

 

[123cents]

I think they are great for crack outs and submitting them to PCGS or NGC.

[James_OldeTowne]

James, If they are both selling coins graded by the companies they own (or run), what's the difference?...Mike

 

p.s. FWIW, I agree it is a huge conflict of interest -- but to me the chronology doesn't make any difference.

 

I'll use a hypothetical. Suppose XGS, owned by John Doe has been grading coins for ten years, and earned a lot of respect. Then, John Doe begins selling coins graded by XGS. Would I suspect a conflict of interest? Perhaps, but only at a mild level at worst. XGS already established themselves, and it is plain that John isn't trying to push their coins to establish their reputation.

 

But DGS has been grading for two days, then DL-coins starts selling or pushing them. Here, the alarms go off. They are pushing something that does not have a previously established reputation, and probably doing so for the intent to establish it.

[DirtyGoldMan]

There is too much suspicion of "conflict of interest" associated with DGS for them to be taken seriously. As far as I am concerned, they are self-slabbers, and I don't care that they use a special serial number for self-slabbed coins.

 

I agree with James, and while I have nothing against them, I also have no use for them. I cannot imagine a scenario where it would benefit me to send coins to them for grading.

[Conder101]

I think DavidHall started selling coins well after PCGS was established

David Hall was selling coins before and after PCGS was established, I don't know about during its early establishment period.

[MikeInFL]

James, If they are both selling coins graded by the companies they own (or run), what's the difference?...Mike

 

p.s. FWIW, I agree it is a huge conflict of interest -- but to me the chronology doesn't make any difference.

 

I'll use a hypothetical. Suppose XGS, owned by John Doe has been grading coins for ten years, and earned a lot of respect. Then, John Doe begins selling coins graded by XGS. Would I suspect a conflict of interest? Perhaps, but only at a mild level at worst. XGS already established themselves, and it is plain that John isn't trying to push their coins to establish their reputation.

 

But DGS has been grading for two days, then DL-coins starts selling or pushing them. Here, the alarms go off. They are pushing something that does not have a previously established reputation, and probably doing so for the intent to establish it.

 

To me at least, the conflict of interest is exactly the same in your examples -- you just have more history to work with in the first case.

 

That said, I'd like to think that I would judge both by their actions, not my perception of their possible conflict.

[James_OldeTowne]

To me at least, the conflict of interest is exactly the same in your examples -- you just have more history to work with in the first case.

 

That said, I'd like to think that I would judge both by their actions, not my perception of their possible conflict.

 

Mike, let me try to state it more sensibly. PCGS' reputation was already established well before DavidHall was selling PCGS coins. Their reputation was not enhanced because DavidHall started exclusively selling them, since it was already solid years prior. The PCGS reputation would be there whether or not DavidHallRareCoins came along.

 

DavidLawrence hopes to create and establish DGS' reputation by selling such coins. The reputability isn't already there.

 

I am not saying there is an absence of conflict of interest in either case, just that it is more blatant in the DGS scenario.

 

Conder, I believe DavidHall was selling UNcertified coins for some time before they started selling certified coins. (I could well be wrong.)

[coinman1794]

James, the reputation comes from seeing the finished product. I'm not convinced that it matters how long the company was grading before they started selling, because the finished product is the measurement. That said, I personally don't think ANY independant grading service should be tied to coin sales, period. There is no way to avoid the conflict of interest.

 

 

[coinman1794]

Granted, I've had enough poor grading results to know that the graders sometimes have a conflict of DIS-interest, and they tend to loose touch with the reality of certain coin issues in favor of an easy, lowball grade.

 

 

 

 

[Conder101]

Conder, I believe DavidHall was selling UNcertified coins for some time before they started selling certified coins. (I could well be wrong.)

Well considering the only significant service in existence before he started PCGS was ANACS, and he probably was selling those, it would have been hard for him to be selling slabbed certified coins before his company began producing what are generally considered to be the first slabbed certified coins. But once his company produced them, he sold them.

[michael]

[World Colonial]

I see no benefit to at least sending coins in to them for grading. If the coin is not graded but just authenticated, are they any better than NCS? If it does grade, I would consider them less marketable than either NGC or PCGS though I have not actually seen any of the coins they have graded and do not know what prices they bring. But in any event, they are unlikely to grade any coins that I want to buy.