are there "cracking ethics"?

[BODIN]

.... or maybe "cracking-responsibility" is a better choice of words

 

In other words, when we crack coins out and have them either regraded or sent to another TPG, at any given point (before, during, after), should you let the service know what you did. In other words, I read all the time(as I'm sure you do to), when it comes to rarities, that the population number is suspected much lower than the population because of crackout-regrades.

 

ie: 1892 Columbian Expo 50c MS67 pop 28/0(NGC) but lets say 7 have been resubmitted. so the pop is actually 21. Does any of this make sense?

 

Same thing for crossovers. Do you let them know that your coins are no longer in their holders so as to lower the population and keep the gem rarities......well, rare?

[coinman_23885]

I don't see it as "cracking ethics" per se, but I think it is a good idea for collectors of low population, high grade coins in general where the population report may significantly impact the value. Simply mail the tags with a letter back to the original company (after the coin is returned in its new holder of course), and it is my understanding that the population reports will be updated.

[WoodenJefferson]

PCGS offered a 50¢ bounty on each cracked out label returned to customer service so the population reports could be adjusted.

 

(well, at least they did at one time)

 

Incentive is a good way to help police the pop reports, I really don't think most crack out artists really care one way or the other, they are profit driven.

[Walkerfan]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

[BODIN]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

I'm really speaking more in the case of low pop coins not the higher volume ones..... like early gold or LC half cents.

[Walkerfan]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

I'm really speaking more in the case of low pop coins not the higher volume ones..... like early gold or LC half cents.

 

In that case, I guess it's a good idea.......no sense in making it worse than it already is.

[jom]

PCGS offered a 50¢ bounty on each cracked out label returned to customer service so the population reports could be adjusted.

 

(well, at least they did at one time)

 

Yeah, they really went "out of their way" to keep their reports as accurate as possible. Boy, that 50C was a real incentive, eh? Then they STOPPED the practice.

 

And yet they continue to use the pop reports as some sort of know-all-end-all of rarity status. Too funny.

 

jom

[Walkerfan]

PCGS offered a 50¢ bounty on each cracked out label returned to customer service so the population reports could be adjusted.

 

(well, at least they did at one time)

 

Yeah, they really went "out of their way" to keep their reports as accurate as possible. Boy, that 50C was a real incentive, eh? Then they STOPPED the practice.

 

And yet they continue to use the pop reports as some sort of know-all-end-all of rarity status. Too funny.

 

jom

 

I was thinking the same thing after postage your net proceeds would be $.06 cents. Even not including postage; it's not much incentive at all.

[coinman_23885]

 

I was thinking the same thing after postage your net proceeds would be $.06 cents. Even not including postage; it's not much incentive at all.

 

The incentive comes when your coin is really a pop 6/0 in MS67 and you submit it 10 times in hopes of a MS68 grade (hypothetical of course); when you fail to report the crack-outs the population reports are inflated and the value of your coin suffers.

[Walkerfan]

 

I was thinking the same thing after postage your net proceeds would be $.06 cents. Even not including postage; it's not much incentive at all.

 

The incentive comes when your coin is really a pop 6/0 in MS67 and you submit it 10 times in hopes of a MS68 grade (hypothetical of course); when you fail to report the crack-outs the population reports are inflated and the value of your coin suffers.

 

Well stated and true.

[Schatzy]

I owed 3 PCGS coins were the pop was 10 graded at the DCAM level.

I cracked all 3 of them and send them to NGC.

I returned the labels to PCGS almost a year ago and the pop still hasn't changed.

 

 

 

I however still return all of my labels.

[PerryHall]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

[BillJones]

I don’t think that a person who cracks out a coin is under any obligation to inform the grading service of its previous grade. Why have that possibly influence the grade assigned? I’ve had coins get body bags from one service and receive a grade at the other one. I’ve had this go both ways. In none of those instances did I think the body bags were justified. So why should I be obliged to tell the second grading service that the first one body bagged the coin?

 

The point about sending in tags so that the population reports can be adjusted is a good one, but it’s too late in the game to make much of a difference. One coin that I do know something about problems with the population report numbers is the 1854-D Three Dollar Gold Piece. One dealer told me about a piece that he knew which had been submitted six times in an effort to get it into a Mint State holder. The coin came back constantly as an AU which inflated the AU numbers. I also know of a couple of instances were 1854-D coins were submitted three times. As you can see there is a good chance that the number of AU graded coins for that issue is overstated. The 1854-D Three Dollar piece does have a higher than normal survival ratio for a coin with a mintage of 1,120, but the population reports might be overstating that situation.

 

[Buffalo Head]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

 

'FUBAR" One of the Machine shops I worked at there was a guy we called "FUBAR" because he would screw every job up he touched. Funny I remembered that when I heard this word....

[braddick]

Why don't the Services have a check-box on the submission form that allows the grading service to keep the insert on cross-overs? I know I'd check that box as really, once the coins are returned the other inserts are pretty useless to me.

 

If someone feels otherwise, simply check the box that allows for their return to the submitter as it already is now.

[coinman_23885]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

 

I looked up the acronym "FUBAR" and have found numerous possible meanings. Could you tell me what this means in the context of the post above by posting here (or if the acronym is meant to obscure certain language) or by PM?

[physics-fan3.14]

I'm pretty sure the TPG's do report crossovers to each other. I'd heard that somewhere in the past.

[jackson64]

Are there cracking ethics??

 

Yes, thou shalt not scratch the coin ..........( or drop it once it's liberated-or hold it in greasy hands..etc etc)

[PerryHall]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

 

I looked up the acronym "FUBAR" and have found numerous possible meanings. Could you tell me what this means in the context of the post above by posting here (or if the acronym is meant to obscure certain language) or by PM?

 

FUBAR = Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition

[jom]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

 

I looked up the acronym "FUBAR" and have found numerous possible meanings. Could you tell me what this means in the context of the post above by posting here (or if the acronym is meant to obscure certain language) or by PM?

 

FUBAR = Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition

 

Amazingly, although I had no idea what the acronym meant at first, I was able to figure that out...usually I'm pretty bad at that....except my version had a somewhat different first word.

 

jom

[BODIN]

I owed 3 PCGS coins were the pop was 10 graded at the DCAM level.

I cracked all 3 of them and send them to NGC.

I returned the labels to PCGS almost a year ago and the pop still hasn't changed.

 

This is exactly why I asked this question in the first place. I'm surprised to hear(PCGS) that they didn't make adjustments. Seems to me that low populations are pretty important.

[cpm9ball]

At this point, it really wouldn't matter, b/c the numbers have been skewed, so badly, over the years that they will never be very accurate, anyway.

 

How could you adjust for the ones that have alreadly not been reported.

 

Exactly!!! The military acronym FUBAR comes to mind when I think of the pop reports.

 

I looked up the acronym "FUBAR" and have found numerous possible meanings. Could you tell me what this means in the context of the post above by posting here (or if the acronym is meant to obscure certain language) or by PM?

 

FUBAR = Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition

 

It's much the same as SNAFU....Situation Normal All Fouled Up (or some other word that begins with an "F").

 

Chris

[BODIN]

The point about sending in tags so that the population reports can be adjusted is a good one, but it’s too late in the game to make much of a difference. One coin that I do know something about problems with the population report numbers is the 1854-D Three Dollar Gold Piece. One dealer told me about a piece that he knew which had been submitted six times in an effort to get it into a Mint State holder. The coin came back constantly as an AU which inflated the AU numbers. I also know of a couple of instances were 1854-D coins were submitted three times. As you can see there is a good chance that the number of AU graded coins for that issue is overstated. The 1854-D Three Dollar piece does have a higher than normal survival ratio for a coin with a mintage of 1,120, but the population reports might be overstating that situation.

 

Again, this is why I asked about "cracking responsibility". Thanks Bill. So interesting.

[PerryHall]

Now that we have established that the pop reports are inaccurate and overstate the population of many rarities, is there any way to make a new pop report with people reporting to the major grading companies what slabs they have or are collectors too secretive?

[jom]

Now that we have established that the pop reports are inaccurate and overstate the population of many rarities, is there any way to make a new pop report with people reporting to the major grading companies what slabs they have or are collectors too secretive?

 

I don't know it is possible but I do know that the JRCS (John Reich) regularly has census surveys they do on the coinage they cover (DB and CB stuff). This IS a way of doing it although I'm uncertain how effective it could be...

 

It seems you almost have to have a "club" of collectors to do this...people who are interested in specific series etc.

 

I'd could be fun though....

 

jom

[e1cnr]

the turn-around time now at PCGS for pop adjustments due to insert returns is now roughly 432 days - not including weekends, holidays, and all major shows (and monthly trips to Europe)

[PerryHall]

the turn-around time now at PCGS for pop adjustments due to insert returns is now roughly 432 days - not including weekends, holidays, and all major shows (and monthly trips to Europe)

 

I'm less concerned with the slow pop adjustments and more concerned with the thousands of slab labels that were tossed rather than sent back to the grading services over the last 25 years.

[Conder101]

Even then since the participation in the census is voluntary usually the best thing they can do for the rarities is to definitively lower them when there are more more coins reported than their assigned rarity level allows.

[coinman_23885]

Now that we have established that the pop reports are inaccurate and overstate the population of many rarities, is there any way to make a new pop report with people reporting to the major grading companies what slabs they have or are collectors too secretive?

 

Isn't this sort of what the CAC population reports will be in 2-3 years (at least for "A" and "B" coins)?

[Walkerfan]

Now that we have established that the pop reports are inaccurate and overstate the population of many rarities, is there any way to make a new pop report with people reporting to the major grading companies what slabs they have or are collectors too secretive?

 

Isn't this sort of what the CAC population reports will be in 2-3 years (at least for "A" and "B" coins)?

 

The numbers will keep inflating but the proportions will remain the same. So, the rare dates will always be in their small, top percentages, so, in that respect, they will still be accurate, unless someone discovers a long lost bank roll...... I have heard rumors like that for YEARS but they have NEVER come to fruition.