A complaint about "important messages" from NCS affixed to some NGC submissions

[MarkFeld]

At the risk of upsetting NGC and/or NCS and/or certain posters here, I have decided to voice my personal objection to receiving so-called "important messages" from NCS affixed to some of the coins I receive back from NGC after grading.

 

Many of you are probably familiar with such messages, which say ".....has been evaluated by NCS and is a good candidate for conservation.....".

 

I have a couple of reasons for being opposed to this process:

 

1) I think it looks like (even if it is not) a conflict of interest, and that it could render some of NGC's grading less objective than it might otherwise be.

 

2) I think it encourages (rather than discourages) conservation of coins, many of which are perfectly original, very nice and attractive in their current state.

 

I realize that many submitters will disagree with me on this and would prefer to receive suggestions regarding which coins should be considered for conservation.

 

However, I feel that the (current) process is flawed and that if it is to continue, should be changed to ensure greater objectivity in the grading of non-conserved submissions. I also feel that the major grading companies should discourage (not encourage) the conservation of rare coins and penalize, rather than reward such.

 

I welcome your comments (and even your arguments) on this subject. I feel that it is a very important one for the hobby.

[truthteller]

When NGC sends a coin from grading with the sticker "candidate for conservation", they are, in essence, saying "your coin is ugly", which is a really good way of offending the owner. In addition, conservation is OK for some coins and NOT OK for many slabbed coins to which the sticker is applied. Unfortunately, NCS cannot guarantee what a coin will look like after conservation, so they are really playing with fire with the sticker recommendations.

 

 

 

TRUTH

[MarkFeld]

Truth, the process wouldn't bother me nearly as much if I didn't see many nice looking (original) coins receive the stickers. And, I'm not speaking only of coins I have received back - I am trying to be fair and objective about this.

[Tradedollarnut]

[TomB]

I agree with you 100%! Perhaps, if NGC is bent on doing this, they could include a box to be checked off on your submission invoice that allows NCS to make suggestions. Something like-

 

"By checking this box, you authorize NGC to allow NCS to view the coins listed in this submission and to allow NCS to suggest conservation of said coins, where appropriate."

[Hoot]

I also feel like this is not appropriate as practiced. If a recommendation is made, then it needs to be done more carefully, on a sheet of paper, and with a full explanation of why the evaluation is being made. As it is, all you get is a lousy sticker that says the coin is a candidate for conservation. Well, aren't there a hundred possible reasons for such? A solid explanation is necessary. If this is too much of a hassle, then I agree that the practice should cease.

 

Hoot

[toyonakataro]

I like TomB's idea....it will save some time for NGC too.

I personally would like to get as many opinions as I could from graders if I am to send coins to NGC....just want to know how graders think of my coins....it might depend on how much you know your coins.

[EVillageProwler]

I agree. I've always hated these stickers.

 

EVP

[bigd5]

I also don't like the "stickers", for all the reasons mentioned above.

 

One thing I don't agree with is that NCS is saying your coin is "ugly", and therefore could use conservation. I'm not sure if that's quite the way I take the message. Maybe it's an interpretation difference there.

 

The worst case of a misplaced sticker was a recently submitted Lexington commmem that came straight from the original box, had that greenish hue from sitting in the box for quite a while, and a killer original look, if you are into such things.

 

The coin comes back slabbed ms/65 with the "sticker" from NCS.

 

My first thought was "Are they for real?". You don't dip a coin like this, and my second thought was "are they telling me that if I allow NCS to dip this coin, it will come back a 6?"

 

I guess it's all a matter of opinions, and maybe the NCS crew is a bunch of untoned nickel and silver coin loving group.

[chinook]

I have 2 toners that came back with those stickers. A Norfolk Comm (66) with beautiful pastel colors and a proof Barber quarter (65) with a lovely golden tone. I would never in a million years risk these coins to "conservation". Their originalty would be completely destroyed.

 

I think novice collectors could fall for the "advice" and ruin many wonderful coins.

 

I have also taken the "advice" and had 2 coins upgrade after unsightly toning was removed.

 

Moral of the story.....be very careful.

[braddick]

Send in pretty coins to begin with and never worry about being offended by a sticker.

 

Just a thought.

[MarkFeld]

Send in pretty coins to begin with and never worry about being offended by a sticker

Pat, part of my point is that I have seen pretty coins receive the stickers.

[braddick]

Define "pretty".

 

Mark, I ask that, not so much to be a wiseguy (although that plays a tiny role in doing so...admittingly), but I truly believe the longer you collect the more you become intune and intrigued with the love of originality: Coins with their original skin, so to speak.

 

Unfortunately that is not what the budding collector is seeking and NCS is designed to offer this new breed of collector what it is they want. Currated/conditioned coins. Coins that have been lightened and the skin smoothed. This is what NCS does best and what better way to seek out business than YOUR submissions?

[michael]

i happen to agree with mark feld

 

 

 

 

 

michael

[DonHeath]

If a coin is destined to be conserved, I prefer NCS do it instead of the dealer/collector with a mason jar full of jewel luster and a Q-tip. Having said that, the stickers probably promote the conservation of market acceptable original coins. I think your point regarding grading is important. I also believe it's important to seperate moderns, and classic coins in my thoughts.

 

Luster is a huge component of grade, so it's easily apparent a coin with original toning that obscures or diminishes the luster is easier to put in a lesser holder than the same coin conserved if you value luster more than originality. Since many neophytes determine price based almost solely on the holder grade, there is a huge incentive to conserve these coins. This is especially true of coins with some cameo contrast that don't have the cameo designation. With modern pieces, the look conservation produces is acceptable to my eye. I am not surprised to see an untoned haze-free modern. Similarly, there are times when some classic coins are diminished by ugly or heavy toning/damaging toning. It makes sense that these coins would be conserved. I do not however expect to see a 19th century silver coin with a conserved look. Perhaps it's time for originality to be weighted the same way luster is for those coins, and for those coins with light market acceptable toning to be holdered at the grade they'd achieve if they were blast white. Mark, you suggested a grading penalty for conserved coins. I'm unsure whether it wouldn't make more sense to reward originality. I've seen plenty of 18th century coins graded AU with little or any luster. Ironically, Washington quarters from the 50's with mint set toning so heavy it's almost impossible to determine the quality of the surface seem to be heavily bonused for originality, with little luster evident. It's not an unheard of concept.

[John Maben]

OK, here is my two cents Mr. Feld;

 

1) There is no conflict of interest there in my opinion. In fact, those stickers could be attached to far more coins and make far more money for NCS in doing so but they are not because they are very selective in which ones get the sticker.

 

2) Of course it encourages conservation, and that is it's purpose! Conservation of some coins is NOT a bad thing, it is a GOOD thing.

 

"I also feel that the major grading companies should discourage (not encourage) the conservation of rare coins and penalize, rather than reward such."

 

 

Say what? Mark, I do have a great deal of respect for you and hold you in high regard as most if not all others do that I know, but what ARE you talking about? This is not a "random" or indiscriminant process! Many coins simply can be made better or need to be made better to insure longer-term preservation. Most coins should not be touched, agreed. I know for a fact, that NCS refuses to conserve a large number (maybe even the majority) of coins it receives.

 

Originality is great, but it is not the end all. I would rather have a properly conserved coin then an ugly one, or one that is threatened by environmental damage from contaminants. And realistically Mark, many, many, coins have been conserved by dealers (maybe you've done a few yourself?) and their results are generally not as good nor do they usually take measures to stabilize the coin to the extent possible.

 

John

[John Maben]

Why be offended by a sticker anyway? It's merely a suggestion.

 

John

[John Maben]

Mark,

 

Pretty coins have problems too. Also, sometimes a coin could be attractive and still benefit from conservation. An example might be a coin that receives a cameo designation but could be Ultra if conserved. It may look great the way it is, but it may look even better if conserved, and again, no one is forcing anyone to do anything here.

 

John

[BillJones]

I received a similar sticker on a Civil War token that NGC graded MS-66, R&B. I consigned it to the trashcan where it belonged.

 

How was NCS going to improve this token? Where they going to clean it and make it red? It that’s the plan, my response is “No thank you.” A perfectly original piece with 140 years of red-brown toning on it is perfectly fine by me.

 

NCS has its place and I have used their service. BUT not every coin or token should be fooled with to make it more "marketable." Some of us believe that shined up coins and tokens are not as attractive as ORIGINAL coins and tokens.

[Tradedollarnut]

Pretty coins have problems too. Also, sometimes a coin could be attractive and still benefit from conservation. An example might be a coin that receives a cameo designation but could be Ultra if conserved.

 

If I may be so bold as to put words into Mark's mouth, perhaps this statement is exactly the problem he has with the whole thing. Pretty cameos turned into white ultracameos because of a whim of the marketplace.

 

It may look great the way it is, but it may look even better if conserved, and again, no one is forcing anyone to do anything here.

 

I guess it's a matter of opinion as to whether the end product looks better. In the instance you describe, my opinion is that it does not. And no, no one is forced to do it, but the odds go up of it happening when an expert in the field stickers a coin. And that's a shame.

[MarkFeld]

John, private message sent - I don't want to get into a big argument with you in public, even if it would liven up the place a bit.

 

PS - I am not against conservation, per se. However, it has gotten way out of hand and many perfectly fine (ugly AND pretty, problem-free) coins have been permanently ruined as a result (edited to add: in the opinion of some, at least).

[John Maben]

Bill,

 

NCS can not change the color of a copper coin, IE: they will not make a BN coin RB, or a RB, red. Most likely the token had dirt or other residues that if removed would have resulted in a more lustrous coin.

 

John

[John Maben]

TDN,

 

Ultimately, the owner will decide. As you know, toning and haze often obscures the ultra. You and Mr Feld and many others may prefer that your coins be graded cameo in this case with no sticker.

 

Also, lets not forget that if a submitter is ever unsure of why a coin got a sticker, they can always send it to NCS and request they explain it before they do any conservation.

 

John

[John Maben]

OK, Mark fair enough. I'll check out your PM, but before I do remember this is all just a matter of opinion, and opinions, even among us experts do vary!

 

John

[DirtyGoldMan]

I agree completely with Mark. I like a little dirt with my coins.

 

 

(recent acquisition, posted across the street, but good example of originality)

[Leothelion]

I agree with John and Mark! If a coin has been graded and lost a point because of some dirt, pvc, haze or whatever you want to call it and a trip to NCS would not alter the coin's originality but would only remove the problem then I say why not? Suggesting that a coin gets dipped everytime it's conserved is obsurd! Hey that rhymed!

 

Leo

 

Spelling corrections will be conserved this afternoon!

[BillJones]

Bill,

 

NCS can not change the color of a copper coin, IE: they will not make a BN coin RB, or a RB, red. Most likely the token had dirt or other residues that if removed would have resulted in a more lustrous coin.

 

John

 

A major token dealer who has sent in a lot material to NCS commented to me that he thought they had "ruined the appearance of the pieces," his words. Even when you are only lifting dirt, you are taking chances, especially with copper. And quite often it's best to leave well enough alone.

 

NCS, like all business, needs revenue to survive. In my view they have become too agressive in their marketing, and the results are that we are seeing are too much dipping and cleaning.

[John Maben]

Leo,

 

Yes. The majority of what NCS does is in fact, subtle. Also, I think those that may have a bad taste for NCS are not looking at the BIG picture, may be drawing conclusions based on assumptions, and may be lacking enough information to really have an "informed" opinion. There will always be some coins that you may not like the results, but I believe by far the results they get are very good.

 

John

[Tradedollarnut]

Also, I think those that may have a bad taste for NCS are not looking at the BIG picture, draw conclusions based on assumptions, and are lacking enough information to really have an "informed" opinion.

 

I strongly disagree. Respectfully, you haven't been out there in the retail world long enough recently to 'see the big picture'. Haven't you heard the jokes yet on the bourse floor about all the shiney gold? PM me if you like and I'll give you my three specific examples, including how much money I lost, in each instance I used NCS.

 

IMO, NCS the way it is currently utilized is the foremost danger to the NGC brandname. Call me stupid if you wish. Say I have my head up someone's rear if you wish. But don't you think something's wrong if a dealer is willing to start a thread on NGC's own chatroom concerning the subject? Where there's smoke there's fire...

[John Maben]

TDN,

 

Let's agree to disagree, but I won't call you stupid! PM sent.

 

John