NGC vs PCGS Jeff Step Grading

[spy88]

I tried to go back and find where someone (I think it was Greg) posted a response regarding a submitters Jeffs. He wanted them to come back FS but did not and was it you Greg? that came back with the post that NGC requires 6 steps for the FS designation while PCGS only requires 5 for it.

 

This is news to me as I have yet to submit any Jeffs for grading (am waiting for a major purchase to finalize first). Can someone out there (hoot, Greg, John?) verify that indeed, NGC requires all 6 steps for FS rating and is this regardless of year? There are some years that there are no 6 steppers available, such as the early 50's and early 60's. Does this mean that a 5 step 1952-D would not be designated FS by NGC for lacking the 6th step? And how picky are they about the steps themselves? Can they have minor nicks or hits (and still be unbroken) and get a FS?

 

I have seen ANACS, NTC and PCGS FS Jeffs marked FS but it has been awhile, so do not remember exactly what the step condition was. I do remember that NTC's FS stinks unless you get up to their 67/68 grade and even then, may have hits and be broken.

 

Does anyone have exact criteria for a FS rating to Jeffs from NGC? Thought of asking them myself, but wished to hear from members who would know the answer to these questions for all to read.

 

Thanks!

 

David

[MAULEMALL]

I tried to go back and find where someone (I think it was Greg) posted a response regarding a submitters Jeffs. He wanted them to come back FS but did not and was it you Greg? that came back with the post that NGC requires 6 steps for the FS designation while PCGS only requires 5 for it.

 

This is news to me as I have yet to submit any Jeffs for grading (yet). Can someone out there (hoot, Greg, John?) verify that indeed, NGC requires all 6 steps for FS rating and is this regardless of year? There are some years that there are no 6 steppers available, such as the early 50's and early 60's. Does this mean that a 5 step 1952-D would not be designated FS by NGC for lacking the 6th step? And how picky are they about the steps themselves? Can they have minor nicks or hits (and still be unbroken) and get a FS?

 

I have seen ANACS, NTC and PCGS FS Jeffs marked FS but it has been awhile, so do not remember exactly what the step condition was. I do remember that NTC's FS stinks unless you get up to their 67/68 grade and even then, may have hits and be broken.

 

Does anyone have exact criteria for a FS rating to Jeffs from NGC? Thought of asking them myself, but wished to hear from members who would know the answer to these questions for all to read.

 

Thanks!

 

David

David ,Greg is correct.5.5 don't get it at NGC.

[Hoot]

David - NGC is quite picky about the FS designation. They require 6 full steps, although I have seen a couple where the 6th step was on the weak side, but nevertheless complete. This is regardless of date/mint. They will sometimes not give the FS designation when there are nicks on the steps, even when the nicks do not break or bridge steps. They are picky about bridges between steps, but will allow partial bridges as long as the ridges of the steps are complete.

 

I have tried to encourage Jefferson Full Step Nickel Club members to write Rick Montgomery and urge NGC to adopt a service where the step count can be listed on the insert, much like SEGS where the step count is listed by quarters. Pay a couple/few extra bucks and you could have the step count listed for a coin. That way, 5-5-5-5 or better step coins from NGC could be included in the registry, similarly to PCGS coins (which may be 5 or better steps for FS designation). I don't know what the response has been from the Jefferson FSNC, but so far, NGC won't provide the service.

 

Hoot

[spy88]

They require 6 full steps, although I have seen a couple where the 6th step was on the weak side, but nevertheless complete. This is regardless of date/mint.

 

Mark, in other words, a 5 stepper is not a full stepper according to NGC standards?

 

I suppose it is a good thing (as picky as I am about full steps), but it sure throws out a lot of my Jeffs I would like NGC-slabbed @ FS!! Guess PCGS will get them!

 

Pay a couple/few extra bucks and you could have the step count listed for a coin. That way, 5-5-5-5 or better step coins from NGC could be included in the registry, similarly to PCGS coins (which may be 5 or better steps for FS designation).

 

This would definitely be the way to go and I have always questioned why this is not done as a matter of grade/condition consideration. Shouldn't need to pay more for the 5-5-5-5 (or combo of 5/6) label, but if NGC would do it that way, I guess I would pay the extra $ for the 7 typewriter keys to print it and the 1 minute for a grader to verify it. But if NGC only gives the FS rating to 6 steppers, there is no reason for this service IMO unless the owner of the Jeff wants the combo of whatever mix of 5's and 6's the steps are at on the label for what?, resale? advertising? registry?

 

Then it seems, you get into...is a 6-5-6-6 more valued (money and points)then a 6-5-5-6, or a 5-6-6-6, etc? Is this a likely scenerio or would it not matter, so long as it was some combination of 5 and 6? If it does make a difference, how would you rate the value/points for the 12 variations of step counts available between 5-5-5-5 and 6-6-6-6?

 

As much as I would like to see the step count on the label, I can also see where the market for the variations could get confusing, not to mention the pop reports.

From NGC's point of view, it would be easy enough to do the label but a can of worms after that IMO. Just trying to see the other side of the issue and talk it out loud. Comments?

[Hoot]

First, I don't think that the population reports would be affected much. NGC has long (how long?) counted 6 steps as FS, so any new 6-6-6-6 steppers would just go in that bin. As for the rest, they might start a new category in their pops for 5-5-5-5 steps or better and if it's less than that, then it simply goes in with the rest of the coins for date/mint. With electronic information, this is a trivial matter.

 

As for market value, I would not even think about it. Today, PCGS graded FS nickels still sell for slightly more than an NGC FS nickel of equivalent grade, even though the PCGS graded coin could be 5-5-5-5 or 6-6-6-6 or anything in between. So, this is not a matter of market reference, rather a service for the collecting community. And if some people will pay for it and some won't, then fine. NGC could still give their FS designation to 6 step coins.

 

Fanatics for the Jefferson nickel series (like you and I) may simply like to have the quick visual reference on the label for the step count. And it does not have to be for 5-5-5-5 or better coins! I have a 1939-D MS66 that is 6-4-4-6, and one heck of a pretty coin. I'd simply like to have the step formula on the label - so shoot me. If I were to pay NGC 2 to 5 bucks for that service, then that's my business. Will it improve the value of the coin? I doubt it, but someone looking to buy sight-unseen may prefer that coin to one where there's doubt about any steps.

 

The point is for collector's preference and all else come second. As for the registry, they could open things up a bit and accept any NGC coins as FS that had a step count of 5-5-5-5 or better. This would place all coins inthe Jefferson nickel registry on a par for the strike designation, which is trivial compared to the grade, IMO.

 

Hoot

[spy88]

First off, let me say I am with you on this 100% Mark. My preference would be to have any step count noted on the label also, regardless of count---from 0-0-0-0 to 6-6-6-6, being the fanatic I am. But let me play "devils advocate" here for a moment.

 

Will it improve the value of the coin? I doubt it,

 

Lets say NGC does start putting step counts on their labels. Lets say somewhere in the future, you run across two NGC graded 1945-S MS67 up for sale. One has a step count of 6-5-5-6 and one has a step count of 6-6-5-6. Granted, neither one merits a FS rating from NGC, being less then 6 across. Do you personally think they should sell for the same amount or should the second one merit a premium? If you are the potential buyer, is it a consideration? Do you see this as a possible scenerio or is the difference inconsequencial? Do you see the potential for different valuations and registry points, as a fanatic of the series? If you are building a set for registry, which of the above would you want in it? All serious Jeff collectors know bridging can occur under any/all of the 4 pillars, but most often under the second and/or the third. Would a bridged 5-6-6-6 be better to own then a bridged 6-5-6-6 or a 6-6-6-5? Am I just being too anal and technical about it all or can you see this as a situation that might arise in the future? Could it boil down to something as simple as personal preference? If, and I say if prices start changing to fit step counts, pop reports will of necessity, have to make room for them, depending on the count and prices realized.

 

someone looking to buy sight-unseen may prefer that coin to one where there's doubt about any steps.

Absolutely! Granted.

 

As for the registry, they could open things up a bit and accept any NGC coins as FS that had a step count of 5-5-5-5 or better. This would place all coins in the Jefferson nickel registry on a par [ with PCGS? ] for the strike designation,

Again---granted.

 

Remember, I want the step counts there too! And for the same reasons as you have stated. Just looking out aways into the unknown for repercussions that I envision playing some roll in the addition of step counts to the labels.

 

P.S. Any word back from FSNC regarding your request for info on the Schlag die trial? (From current PORTICO ed.)

 

[michael]

a great informative thread i learned

lots on here

 

you got me interested

 

michael

 

 

[Hoot]

"Am I just being too anal and technical about it all..."

 

Yes.

 

"...or can you see this as a situation that might arise in the future?

 

Perhaps, but only among the VERY WORST die hards! . I think that full step collectors can have the tightest anuses in the universe. But when it comes down to quarter step counts, I'm not so sure that most people don't drop out of the race. Thus, demand may not be able to exert the kind of market pressure that you're implying. Maybe I'm wrong , but I just don't think that the action of placing step counts on inserts will create a market (except for NGC). I think that anything less than 6-6-6-6 steps simply has equivalent value (down to 5-5-5-5).

 

"Could it boil down to something as simple as personal preference?"

 

I look for a maximum step count, but I look for other things as well. To me, a sharp and eye appealing coin with 5-5-5-5 steps is more attractive for my collection than a somewhat mushy or ill-defined 6-6-6-6 step coin. Personally, I look for coins that have great definition in Jefferson's hair and in the windows and doors and angles of Monticello. I like coins with sharp definition of each device, including letters and mint mark. I prefer coins with character of fields and natural skin or toning. Conversely, I really like a white and contrasty PL Jefferson, especially from pre-1965, but also for business strikes up through 1989. (Those are tough to find without tons of abrasions).

 

I have passed more than once on a coin of lesser grade and lesser step count for a coin with more character and eye appeal. I'll continue to do this, step count or not. So, for me, the step count is a matter of somewhat sublime interest and otherwise simple information.

 

I know that I'm just a small fish in a big sea, but I just don't think that step counts will cause the market for Jeffs to go insane. Just you and me.

 

"Any word back from FSNC regarding your request for info on the Schlag die trial? (From current PORTICO ed.)"

 

No, and I'm none too pleased. I personally think that when a citizen writes a government official, they deserve some form of response, even if it's just, "Uh, I dunno." I will pursue the inquiry again soon. I hope others will as well.

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

One other thing - I just don't get why NGC resists the idea of step counts on inserts. If it's a matter of adding a check box to the submission form, e.g. [ ] count steps?, then I suppose there's some paper cost there, at least initially. Beyond that, it's trivial. Then, we collectors who care will check the box (and I think that there will be many collectors who will - FSNC is 500 or so members strong), and NGC will take our money, and list the step count to be placed on the label. What's the difference between doing this and providing an attribution service (other than this is easier)? I just don't get it. There's no compormise of integrity and service is improved - what more can a company want?

 

Hoot

[spy88]

Let me first preface this post by admitting to being one of those

among the VERY WORST die hards!

regarding steps and step counts and some of my best work is attributed to being anal about it. But as narrow as that is regarding what I want when I buy or look for in a Jeff, I also include outstanding strike of the devices, clear fields, original luster, etc. While you look for these attributes in a Jeff first , and steps secondary or not at all a factor, I do just the opposite. Am I limiting my choices for purchases by doing it this way? Probably. But for me, starting with a Jeff that has 5-5-5-5 and then looking at strike, fields, luster, I have a collection with that one thing in common to all my Jeffs. This means that I have Jeffs in MS63 with FS (5-5-5-5 or better) to start with, then look to upgrade the condition rather then the other way around. This is just my personal preference for my collection. I do have many Jeffs without FS in my collection and I consider them to be excellent representatives of stong strike, full hair, free of nicks and hits, well-defined pillars, windows, dome, great luster, clean fields, etc. but they do not go into my FS book. And I do have quite a few "holes" to fill in the FS book that would otherwise contain a specimen. As a side note, I was a FS Jeff collector before a MS Jeff collector before knowing of and my eventual meeting with the "source" holder of FS's for my perusal. Said meet is still scheduled for the 28th here in Vegas, and he has indicated I will have over 600 Jeffs to look over. Will PM you regarding this when done here.

 

Regardless of how we go about collecting Jeffs, we both must scrutinize the coin with a loupe to find what we are looking for. A general overall impression of a coins eye appeal and condition can be made without one, but to find and define the characteristics of strike in the hair, Monticello and steps, we must go to a loupe.

 

Gotta go to a drs appt now--will finish when I get back. I'm back.

Nasty cold has set in, probably picked up from some tourist or local that passed it on at the tables! No work for me tonight and maybe tomorrow at the expense of between $350 and $450 for both days. I AM PI**ED OFF!

 

As I was saying, a loupe to define strike and steps is a necessity for Jeffs, which is why the TPGCs consider them to be among the hardest to grade and most time-consuming. Quote from DH when I asked him about why he hated grading Jeffs---"They are a pain in the butt...". This may be why NGC is reticent to include step counts for every Jeff that crosses their grading tables and I can sympathize with them. But if it were offered as an extra fee service, I cannot find reasons for them not to do it, or at least consider it.

 

It would be very nice if NGC were to address this issue openly and discuss their reluctance to add the step count to the label. If we were privy to the way they see the issue, we may learn of a/other factor(s) that they would have to adjust for to accommodate the labeling. At this point in time though, I for one (and I think you also), do not understand their staunch position against it.

 

I for one, will be looking to slab quite a few of mine this year. Unless NGC includes the option to add step counts to the label, at least half will have to go to PCGS to get the FS rating. I would much prefer they all go to NGC, but will not wait forever for the wheels to turn forward instead of standing still, if you know what I mean. Once they are in a PCGS holder, I would be hard-pressed to rationalize crack out and re-submit to NGC (expense and time) should they offer this service after the fact.

[jtwax-migration]

Gota love this thread eh!

 

In regards to which Jeffs do or do not carry 6 steps (and I think it was you Dave that requested it) I added a section on my site that tells just that. You can view it here:

 

Variety Nickels Price Guide (with 6 step availability)

 

Which brings to question if NGC does not recognize a less-than 5.5 step count then would it not be an impossible task to assemble a FS collection in their slabs?

 

In regards to the latest Portico, I am working on some answers for your Schlag Die Trial question and hope to answer them in the next issue.

 

Regards,

[spy88]

Thanks, Jason for the heads-up on your forum. Will copy it out today!

 

Which brings to question if NGC does not recognize a less-than 5.5 step count then would it not be an impossible task to assemble a FS collection in their slabs?

 

I think this is one of the reasons why hoot is so interested in getting NGC to put any step count on the label. I agree with you that it makes it impossible to assemble a NGC MS FS Jeff set, and this forces you to have some PCGS slabs for a FS registry. In fact, it may require you to have more PCGS then NGC holders. I am with hoot on this all the way. I really wish NGC would option the step count on the label. They could still reserve the FS for 6-6-6-6, but with anything under that, they would at least be letting the owner/seller know at a glance, what the step count is. Even though you can look at them for yourself, it is not the same as having it on the label.

 

In regards to the latest Portico, I am working on some answers for your Schlag Die Trial question and hope to answer them in the next issue.

 

Hoot will be glad to hear this!

 

Thanks again, Jason!!

 

[Hoot]

Thanks for all the support David - now write Rick Montgomery! (He invited it!)

 

"In regards to the latest Portico, I am working on some answers for your Schlag Die Trial question and hope to answer them in the next issue."

 

I hope your luck is better than mine, Jason. So far, our "government for the people" has not given me answer one.

 

BTW, nice article in the Portico on the die varieties of the reverse of 1970 and 1971 nickels!

 

Hoot

[spy88]

BTW, nice article in the Portico on the die varieties of the reverse of 1970 and 1971 nickels!

Seconded!

 

now write Rick Montgomery! (He invited it!)

Yes, SIR!!!

[spy88]

In regards to which Jeffs do or do not carry 6 steps

 

Jason,

Is this the same as the step availability chart that you have for 1971 to present or does your "available in 6 steps" chart for 1938 to present supercede it? Would think you could do away with the former as the latter covers those years not in the former. JMHO

 

David

[jtwax-migration]

 

I hope your luck is better than mine, Jason. So far, our "government for the people" has not given me answer one.

 

 

Well Mark, here are a couple answers that I recieved from Mike Byers and Fred Weinberg, respectivly, which aren't really answers at all. I forwarded them your letter and this is what they had to say...

 

Hi Jason. Several people feel that John Sinnock designed this unique 5c die trial. PCGS and most experts disagree with that assertion and feel that Felix Schlag designed it. At this time I don't have any more info for you, but am conducting my own research as well. Thanks for the email.

 

 

Hi Jason,

 

Thanks for the email.

 

The writer has an interesting view, and I don't know if he is right or not;

It didn't run across my mind that the piece might be from J.R. Sinnock.........

 

BTW, nice article in the Portico on the die varieties of the reverse of 1970 and 1971 nickels!

 

Hoot

 

Thanks!

 

Regards,

[jtwax-migration]

 

Is this the same as the step availability chart that you have for 1971 to present or does your "available in 6 steps" chart for 1938 to present supercede it? Would think you could do away with the former as the latter covers those years not in the former. JMHO

 

David

 

Personally I like the availability chart because it tells you how "rare" a 6-step nickel is, but needs to be updated to include all the years of the series. I did find a couple of discrepencies in the two and have corrected them.

 

Regards,

 

 

[Hoot]

Jason - Thanks for contacting Beyers and Weinberg. I got the same answer from Beyers, I think to the letter. He and Holsman-Fore are the only people I've contacted. I'm sending my letter out again this week, including to my Senator and Representative. I still hold only dim hope, but I'd like to get at least a dim-witted response.

 

Several people feel that John Sinnock designed this unique 5c die trial. PCGS and most experts disagree with that assertion and feel that Felix Schlag designed it.

 

I just love evasive answers! Who are these so-called experts, and why aren't they talking? This is the type of answer that can get my ire. Besides, isn't this just deflecting the question that's been fired at PCGS? I'm afraid that at this time, Mr. Beyers has an investment to protect. Grrr.

 

At this time I don't have any more info for you, but am conducting my own research as well. Thanks for the email.

 

Let me paraphrase: "I don't know squat, so please go away."

 

Sorry for the sarcasm but I was always taught to say "I don't know" when I don't know. In science, pretentious knowledge is the shortest route to defamation.

 

At least Weinberg is willing to say he does not know. That I can respect.

 

Thanks again Jason.

 

Hoot

 

[Hoot]

uspatterns.com has very little to say about the piece, indicating the general lack of knowledge: http://www.uspatterns.com/uspatterns/ja19381p3625.html

 

Hoot

[spy88]

Mark---Jason, I have always seen the slabbed PCGS Reverse Die Trial on front page of FSNC. Never REALLY looked at it til the other day. I was wondering if there is any design on the obverse. Can't really tell from what I see there, but looks to be void of design. Is this true?

 

Just makes me think that if Schlag had done it, he would also have had a design in mind for the obverse as well. I find it hard to believe he would not have put it with the reverse design on the same planchet. JMHO

[Leothelion]

Wouldn't it be interesting to hear from the Schlag relatives concerning this matter. They most likely still have his works. I know a dealer who has close ties to them but will they find this worthwhile to respond to?

Hopefully, more later, soon!

 

Leo

[Hoot]

I've contacted a close friend of Schlag's (now deceased) widow. He had privelidge to most of Schlag's personal papers, letters, drafts of coin and medal designs, etc. He has no recollection of encountering anything refering to a die trial.

 

Hoot

[Leothelion]

I discussed the matter with my dealer and he did not know but thought that most of Schlag"s work is documented somewhere, possibly with the ANA.

No intentions were suggested to contact the Schlag family.

The ANA, ANACS, once helped me identify a whatever you want to call it, see attachment. The ANA might be your best bet.

 

Leo

[Hoot]

Thanks Leo. I've seen the piece that you have in an old magazine clipping (Coin World, issue ??, 1998). It's Franz Karel Heida's submission to the contest for the new Jefferson nickel of 1938. Nice piece you have there. Who struck it?

 

I have contacted the ANA and they have done a full literature search for me. They sent me everything they had on hand at the library but nothing indicates a Schlag trial strike. So the search continues...

 

I would like to access the National Archives and see if photos exists for all of the original artwork submitted to the contest. Lots of work to do.

 

Hoot

[Leothelion]

Thanks Leo. I've seen the piece that you have in an old magazine clipping (Coin World, issue ??, 1998). It's Franz Karel Heida's submission to the contest for the new Jefferson nickel of 1938. Nice piece you have there. Who struck it?

 

I have contacted the ANA and they have done a full literature search for me. They sent me everything they had on hand at the library but nothing indicates a Schlag trial strike. So the search continues...

 

I would like to access the National Archives and see if photos exists for all of the original artwork submitted to the contest. Lots of work to do.

 

Hoot

 

No, I don't have that piece. When I found out ANACS would not certify it, I passed on the $35 novelty trinket. The guy actually talked himself down to $20 but I didn't want the thing. As the story goes, if I can remember, someone acquired the plaster molds and made them. Europe rings a bell where it may have originated.

I think they're made out of silver and that's about what they're worth.

And yes, I"ve heard of them selling for as much as $400.

 

Leo