ATS and the normal NGC bashing!!

[FishyOne]

The Stacks auction has two different images for the same coin and they don't appear to be the same coin!

 

Check the different images

 

Here are the two obverse images side-by-side.

 

[bsshog40]

It looks like the same coin to me. I think there is just a major lighting difference between the pics. I'm seeing the same little nics here and there on both coins just a little more subdued on the lighter pic.

[Hard Times]

Look in the field above Star 11 and below Ms. Liberty's hair - identical blemish in the field in each image.

 

Best, HT

[bochiman]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

 

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

 

This, sadly, is why I said there were "koolaide drinkers" here as well. It is part of the norm for folks to jump on a bandwagon and trash on PCGS coins/grading/forum members any time someone says "oooohhh....'they' are bashing NGC coins".....

 

 

[FishyOne]

It looks like the same coin to me. I think there is just a major lighting difference between the pics. I'm seeing the same little nics here and there on both coins just a little more subdued on the lighter pic.

 

I agree but the rim at 12:00 obverse looks quite a bit different.

[bsshog40]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

 

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

 

This, sadly, is why I said there were "koolaide drinkers" here as well. It is part of the norm for folks to jump on a bandwagon and trash on PCGS coins/grading/forum members any time someone says "oooohhh....'they' are bashing NGC coins".....

 

Yep, there's no reason to have that mentality here when there's enough of it to go around ats. Besides a very few couple here and there, I feel this forum has always been more mature than others.

[bsshog40]

It looks like the same coin to me. I think there is just a major lighting difference between the pics. I'm seeing the same little nics here and there on both coins just a little more subdued on the lighter pic.

 

I agree but the rim at 12:00 obverse looks quite a bit different.

It still looks like lighting to me. The darker one is casting more shadows on the rim compared to the lighter one. I still believe it is the same coin. Too many marks on it that compare in each pic.

[EVillageProwler]

Has anyone contacted NGC about this coin?

[$ilverHawk]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

 

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

 

This, sadly, is why I said there were "koolaide drinkers" here as well. It is part of the norm for folks to jump on a bandwagon and trash on PCGS coins/grading/forum members any time someone says "oooohhh....'they' are bashing NGC coins".....

 

Yep, there's no reason to have that mentality here when there's enough of it to go around ats. Besides a very few couple here and there, I feel this forum has always been more mature than others.

 

It is very evident that NGC erred on the grading of this coin. That being said, the statements quoted by posters ATS, are a bit over the top. NGC makes errors and PCGS makes errors in grading. There are numerous examples by both TPG's that demonstrate grading errors.

 

The Stacks pics are very clear. Why would Stacks allow this coin to be offered on their site as MS68 when it is clearly not MS68?

 

Several years ago, I placed a Morgan date set for sale with Heritage. One of the slabbed coins was called into question and Heritage withdrew the lot. I don't see why Stacks wouldn't withdraw this lot due to a questionable grade.

 

Carl

[Mozin]

PCGS and NGC seem to grade quite closely on many coin series. I only wish this was the case on most all the coins series. Bust series coins are way off.

[DaveG]

I haven't read all four pages of this thread (and barely skimmed a page or two of the thread ATS), so I don't know if any of the really skilled graders have commented, but all I can say is:

 

 

"Friends don't let friends grade from images."

[bsshog40]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

 

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

 

This, sadly, is why I said there were "koolaide drinkers" here as well. It is part of the norm for folks to jump on a bandwagon and trash on PCGS coins/grading/forum members any time someone says "oooohhh....'they' are bashing NGC coins".....

 

Yep, there's no reason to have that mentality here when there's enough of it to go around ats. Besides a very few couple here and there, I feel this forum has always been more mature than others.

 

It is very evident that NGC erred on the grading of this coin. That being said, the statements quoted by posters ATS, are a bit over the top. NGC makes errors and PCGS makes errors in grading. There are numerous examples by both TPG's that demonstrate grading errors.

 

The Stacks pics are very clear. Why would Stacks allow this coin to be offered on their site as MS68 when it is clearly not MS68?

 

Several years ago, I placed a Morgan date set for sale with Heritage. One of the slabbed coins was called into question and Heritage withdrew the lot. I don't see why Stacks wouldn't withdraw this lot due to a questionable grade.

 

Carl

 

This was posted ats from Stacks site.

 

Stack’s Bowers is not responsible for the grades assigned by independent grading services, and makes no warranty or representation regarding such grades. Bidder further acknowledges and agrees that grades assigned by Stack’s Bowers and lot descriptions are based solely upon an examination of the coins and are intended to note any perceived characteristics. However, coin grading and descriptions are subjective. Stack’s Bowers does not warrant the accuracy of such grading or descriptions.

 

a. COINS LISTED IN THIS CATALOG GRADED BY PCGS, NGC OR ANACS CACHET, OR ANY OTHER THIRD PARTY GRADING SERVICE OR EXAMINED BY THE BUYER PRIOR TO THE AUCTION SALE MAY NOT BE RETURNED FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER BY ANY BUYER, EXCEPT FOR CLAIMS RELATED TO AUTHENTICITY.

 

e. Grading or condition of rare coins may have a material effect on the value of the item(s) purchased, and the opinion of others (including independent grading services) may differ with the independent grading services opinion or interpretation of Stack’s Bowers. Stack’s Bowers shall not be bound by any prior, or subsequent opinion, determination or certification by any

[$ilverHawk]

Got it. Stacks takes the position that although they know a coin they are auctioning is not properly graded, they will not take a numismatic, professional stance and withdraw the coin from auction.

 

I say this because anyone that is on the staff of Stacks, upon viewing this coin, would know that the grade assigned is in error.

 

Yes, I'm sure that many auction venues have hundreds of coins that are listed, and it is quite an issue to insure that the coins as listed are truly the grade as assigned by the TPG.

 

In this particular instance, Stacks has failed the collecting community.

 

Carl

[mikew148]

"Friends don't let friends grade from images."

 

I would disagree with this as a blanket statement. I would modify it to say "friends don't let friends grade from poor images".

 

I have posted many Morgan Dollars in the "can you spare a grade" forum and the members here are routinely within a point, one way or the other.

 

This coin is imaged well enough that a novice could see that a grade of 68 is well off the mark. 66 would be generous IMO

[jom]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

 

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

I think you know this already but putting a toned coin in a slab doesn't mean it isn't AT...it means to PCGS (or NGC) it's Market Acceptable.

 

On a side note: I had the PCGS grader that taught us at the last grading class I went to (103) tell me straight to my face he thought PCGS was grading way too many ASEs that HE thought were "AT". "I wish we would quit doing that..." (to paraphrase)...kind of funny to hear that...

 

jom

[Coindude]

And now there's NGC love!!

 

Nicest Morgan Dollar I've ever seen

[Kurtdog]

And now there's NGC love!!

 

Nicest Morgan Dollar I've ever seen

The die is a tad "past it" (i.e., there's some die wear on that one), and the "work" (i.e., the polish lines) is imminently visible. Actually, that gives it an extra dimension of "shine" that, a lot of the time, is quite attractive. It's otherwise a very high grade gem, there's little question about it. I see one guy in that thread inquired whether it would "cross" at MS69, and another inquired whether it would make it into a newer NGC holder at that grade. For my money, it's a MS69. The strike, a market grading factor, is "all there," too. This coin is everything NGC said it is, in my humble opinion.

 

[jpcienkus]

And now there's NGC love!!

 

Nicest Morgan Dollar I've ever seen

 

I wouldn't call the thread actual "love", more of okay, maybe they aren't so bad kinda thread. You still had the few, "yeah, but would it cross" folks.

[Coindude]

And now there's NGC love!!

Nicest Morgan Dollar I've ever seen

I wouldn't call the thread actual "love", more of okay, maybe they aren't so bad kinda thread. You still had the few, "yeah, but would it cross" folks.

Joe, for ATS that's love!!

[EVillageProwler]

That's not a positive thread about NGC or the coin. It's a negative thread about the seller and the price of a coin.

 

I think you need to consider the possibility that over there, folks just like to bash. It's a bash-fest, warranted or not. I think they may love PCGS slightly more than they respect NGC over there, but the real emotion is one of bashing.

 

Like moths to a flame... when they bash XXX (e.g., NGC), it's because they feel compelled to do so -- not because they actually like bashing NGC specifically.

 

In that latest thread, that Morgan is a well-known piece. The seller is really angling for a greater fool. It'll never cross to PCGS not because it isn't deserving of that lofty grade at PCGS but rather because of politics.

 

EVP

 

PS Yes, some folks ATS will bash a specific XXX out of ignorance, thus causing a pile-on effect, but that is not the norm.

[WoodenJefferson]

It would at first seem that 'TRUST' is being eliminated in this hobby and other hobbies as well. If you do not trust the company that is performing the service, you should not be dealing with them. If you do not trust your dealer or auction house, then you should not be doing business with them either. This model could be factual or it could be perceived as such through others shared experiences but most times never first hand.

 

The 'mob mentality' is not that far off the mark, because they see that those who go against the grain also get despised and are driven from the land. They do not want to be despised, so they go with the flow and join the throngs of others.

 

Independent thinking on the internet is becoming a rare form of communication, a dying breed so to speak. There will always be the nay-sayers with just about every topic, most times it makes the valid points that much easier to make.

 

I don't know if the coin in question is a 68 or 67 or even a 66...I trust that opinion on that little label inside to steer me in the general direction and then you go from there.

 

Accurate grading from an image is a fools game.

 

[TonerGuy]

Post any toned ASE in a PCGS slab and you will probably be posting a AT coin...

 

I hope you don't really believe that because, if you do, that is a really ignorant statement to make. To believe that statement, you would have to believe that practically any toning is to be considered AT.

 

There are PLENTY of toned SAEs that aren't AT....in any holder.

 

I think you know this already but putting a toned coin in a slab doesn't mean it isn't AT...it means to PCGS (or NGC) it's Market Acceptable.

 

On a side note: I had the PCGS grader that taught us at the last grading class I went to (103) tell me straight to my face he thought PCGS was grading way too many ASEs that HE thought were "AT". "I wish we would quit doing that..." (to paraphrase)...kind of funny to hear that...

 

jom

 

Exactly....

 

I didnt say every toned ASE in PCGS plastic is AT. I said there's a likelihood it is. And to back up what the PCGS grader said - I had a discussion with someone @ NGC (I cant remember who exactly) about a year ago and he told me they wont grade toned ASEs anymore because of the issues with QT/AT.

 

Im sure a few will slip through though. Is it ignorant for NGC not to grade toned ASEs as a whole - sure - but it is their right to make that business decision.

 

That business decision left the entire toned ASE market to PCGS. And obviously PCGS is grading and encapsulating toned ASEs that are even questionable to their own graders, if you believe what jom says. Personally I do believe what jom posted based not only his reputation as a forum member but also what I have seen with my own eyes when examining toned ASEs in PCGS plastic.

 

If you want to consider me ignorant about toning... that is your prerogative.

[MJ]

FWIW----Just last week there was a CAC bash fest here on a borderline coin. ATS doesn't hold a stranglehold on bashing.

 

Buy the coin for what it is and not the holder and magically all is right in the world

 

MJ

[Coindude]

Testify Brother!

[RWB]

There was a Twilight Zone episode where all persons accused of high crimes were tried before the public on TV. Legal arguments and evidence were presented and adjusted to fit between commercial breaks. The viewers decided guilt or innocence at the end of a prime-time program. Some trials continued for weeks – like “reality” shows.

 

Those convicted of a capital offense were executed during “Family Hour.” The size of the potential audience and sales of advertising time determined the mode of execution.

 

As Plato complained, there is very little separation between the mindless mob and democracy.

 

[MarkFeld]

Got it. Stacks takes the position that although they know a coin they are auctioning is not properly graded, they will not take a numismatic, professional stance and withdraw the coin from auction.

 

I say this because anyone that is on the staff of Stacks, upon viewing this coin, would know that the grade assigned is in error.

 

Yes, I'm sure that many auction venues have hundreds of coins that are listed, and it is quite an issue to insure that the coins as listed are truly the grade as assigned by the TPG.

 

In this particular instance, Stacks has failed the collecting community.

 

Carl

 

Do you think a seller or auction house should decline to offer a certified coin for sale each and every time they believe the grade is inaccurate? If so, what makes their opinion better then that of the grading company? If not, upon what basis should they decide whether to refuse to offer a given coin for sale?

 

I have seen many examples where one or more persons opined that a coin was obviously mis-graded, while others (who happened to be experts) strongly disagreed.

 

At the very least, you are being unrealistic in expecting anyone to "insure that the coins as listed are truly the grade as assigned by the TPG". In part, because there is no way to determine that.

[Hard Times]

FWIW----Just last week there was a CAC bash fest here on a borderline coin. ATS doesn't hold a stranglehold on bashing.

 

Buy the coin for what it is and not the holder and magically all is right in the world

 

MJ

 

There have been several recent threads discussing CAC grading, I would not call them 'CAC bash fests' but lively discussions about the inconsistencies of the makers of the greenie beanie - which of these discussoins are you referring to?

 

Best, HT

[Kurtdog]

Plato complained, there is very little separation between the mindless mob and democracy.

Plato did more than complain. He's credited with The Republic, about that very weakness of pure democracy.

[WingedLiberty1]

I am just an amateur collector (hobbyist) so take this with a grain of salt ... but this is my observation/experience over the past 4 years

 

1. I have gotten burned more often on NGC graded coins. One in particular was a proof buffalo nickel that I paid $2500 for that I later found out from PCGS was tooled. That being said I guess it possible that PCGS was wrong about the tooling -- so it's mostly the word of one company against the word of another. But after that, I vowed to never buy a really expensive (say over $1,000) NGC graded coin. A friend of mine had a similar experience, but with a $7000+ coin. So it's made me shy away from very expensive NGC graded coins.

 

2. My crossing experience is that most of the time an NGC graded coin will drop a grade when going from NGC to PCGS -- typically with copper. This happens even after cracking out where there is no politics involved. However sometimes NGC coins upgrade when going from NGC to PCGS .. so there is no hard and fast rule. I would say about 50% drop a grade, 35% stay the same grade, and 15% go up a grade when going from NGC to PCGS. I had an NGC PF67BN cross to PCGS at PCGS PR65BN (two grade drop, wow). I thought that maybe it was politics, so I decided to crack the coin out and submit it raw thinking maybe PCGS would bump it back up and it came back a 2nd time as PR65BN. So there is a case of a coin dropping 2 whole grades going from NGC to PCGS. The coin did have beautiful color, and my experience is that NGC will often bump a coin up if it's got nice color. I also have a Morgan Dollar in an NGC MS67star slab, that PCGS DNC'd twice. There was such a big price difference between 67 and 66, I decided to sell the coin in the NGC 67 slab.

 

3. NGC seems to bump coins up a grade if they have really eye appealing color, PCGS almost seems to downgrade coins for color (seemingly at times). NGC seems to be more lenient in accepting color as natural. However that being said I think that PCGS is VERY VERY VERY INCONSISTENT in what they will accept as natural or market acceptable. Changing what they will grade (colorwise) on an almost weekly basis. I am sure if I cracked out some colorful PCGS graded coins and sent them in today, over half would come back QC. And if I cracked out some PCGS QC coins and sent them in next week, over half would come back graded. I think this inconsistency is a real problem and makes me lose confidence in their opinion on color. It's seems to be too fluid. Maybe the issue here is QC actually stands for "Questionable Color", I suppose that means they dont know if it's NT or AT, only that they question it. Maybe one day they think a coin is 55% questionable so they assign a Gen-QC grade ... then if you crack and resubmit and get another grading team --- perhaps that team might think it's only 40% questionable (less than 1/2 way) and assign a grade.

 

4. PCGS's customer service and their attitude in general is pretty bad. They don't appear to me to care about their customer base at all. I think NGC is nicer and has better customer service (at least that's been my experience).

 

5. My biggest complaint with NGC, other than getting burned a few times on very expensive coins where tooling was missed -- is they don't offer an out of the slab photo service to the high level that PCGS does. Phil Arnold and the PCGS TrueView service is probably the primary reason I became interested in coins again after a 30 year layoff. If NGC offered a similar high quality out of the slab photo service and if they cleaned up their identification of problem coins they might have stood a chance in the competition between PCGS and NGC (in my eyes). I also really like PCGS's registry more than NGC's registry ... and I like PCGS's CoinFacts.

 

Bottom line is I think that both NGC and PCGS are lacking in various ways. But I do like PCGS's TrueView photo service and their registry and CoinFacts. And I feel slightly more confident (but not much more) with grades from PCGS vs NGC. I wish both services were more consistent and error-free -- however we are dealing with human opinions and those will change over time (and perhaps even change depending on what the graders had for lunch).

 

Sadly if I took the same coin and kept cracking it out and submitting it raw to both services, I would get grades all over the map (from Genuine to perhaps as much as a 2 point swing in grades). It kind of makes you think twice when you start to think about pony-ing up for a grade rarity. Which probably is not a great idea anyway.

 

A final benefit of PCGS is I think the coins sell faster and for higher prices -- however with the PCGS grade drop, maybe it's a bit of a wash.

 

Here is my example of a 2 grade drop from NGC to PCGS ... (more typical is a 1 grade drop)

 

 

Is this coin really a 67 ? Or really a 65? Who knows. Lets' split the difference and call it a 66 (funny no service ever assigned that middle ground 66 grade though). Luckily for this coin the value is not dependent on the grade, but for some coins the difference in price between a 65 and a 67 can be enormous (like matte proof lincolns, for example).

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

I am just an amateur collector (hobbyist) so take this with a grain of salt ... but this is my observation over the past 4 years

 

1. I have gotten burned more often on NGC graded coins. One in particular was a proof buffalo nickel that I paid $2500 for that I later found out from PCGS was tooled. That being said I guess it possible that PCGS was wrong about the tooling -- so it's mostly the word of one company against the word of another. But after that, I vowed to never buy a really expensive (say over $1,000) NGC graded coin. A friend of mine had a similar experience, but with a $7000+ coin. So it's made me shy away from very expensive NGC graded coins.

 

2. My crossing experience is that most of the time an NGC graded coin will drop a grade when going from NGC to PCGS -- typically with copper. This happens even after cracking out where there is no politics involved. However sometimes NGC coins upgrade when going from NGC to PCGS .. so there is no hard and fast rule. I would say about 50% drop a grade, 35% stay the same grade, and 15% go up a grade when going from NGC to PCGS. I had an NGC PF67BN cross to PCGS at PCGS PR65BN (two grade drop, wow). I thought that maybe it was politics, so I decided to crack the coin out and submit it raw thinking maybe PCGS would bump it back up and it came back a 2nd time as PR65BN. So there is a case of a coin dropping 2 whole grades going from NGC to PCGS. The coin did have beautiful color, and my experience is that NGC will often bump a coin up if it's got nice color. I also have a Morgan Dollar in an NGC MS67star slab, that PCGS DNC'd twice. There was such a big price difference between 67 and 66, I decided to sell the coin in the NGC 67 slab.

 

3. NGC seems to bump coins up a grade if they have really eye appealing color, PCGS almost seems to downgrade coins for color (seemingly at times). NGC seems to be more lenient in accepting color as natural. However that being said I think that PCGS is VERY VERY VERY INCONSISTENT in what they will accept as natural or market acceptable. Changing what they will grade (colorwise) on an almost weekly basis. I am sure if I cracked out some colorful PCGS graded coins and sent them in today, over half would come back QC. And if I cracked out some PCGS QC coins and sent them in next week, over half would come back graded. I think this inconsistency is a real problem and makes me lose confidence in their opinion on color. It's seems to be too fluid. Maybe the issue here is QC actually stands for "Questionable Color", I suppose that means they dont know if it's NT or AT, only that they question it. Maybe one day they think a coin is 55% questionable so they assign a Gen-QC grade ... then if you crack and resubmit and get another grading team --- perhaps that team might think it's only 40% questionable (less than 1/2 way) and assign a grade.

 

4. PCGS's customer service and their attitude in general really sucks. They dont appear to care about their customer base at all. I think NGC is nicer and has better customer service (at least that's been my experience).

 

5. My biggest complaint with NGC, other than getting burned a few times on very expensive coins where tooling was missed -- is they dont offer an out of the slab photo service to the high level that PCGS does. Phil Arnold and the PCGS TrueView service is probably the primary reason I became interested in coins again after a 30 year layoff. If NGC offered a similar high quality out of the slab photo service and if they cleaned up their identification of problem coins they might have stood a chance in the competition between PCGS and NGC (in my eyes). I also really like PCGS's registry more than NGC's registry ... and I like PCGS's CoinFacts.

 

Bottom line is I think that both NGC and PCGS suck in various ways. But I do like PCGS's TrueView photo service and their registry and CoinFacts. And I feel "slightly" more confident (but not much more) with grades from PCGS vs NGC. I wish both services were more consistent and error-free -- however we are dealing with human opinions and those will change over time (and perhaps even change depending on what the graders had for lunch).

 

Sadly if I took the same coin and kept cracking it out and submitting it raw to both services, I would get grades all over the map (from Genuine to perhaps as much as a 2 point swing in grades). It kind of makes you think twice when you start to think about pony-ing up for a grade rarity. Which probably is not a great idea anyway.

 

A final benefit of PCGS is I think the coins sell faster and for higher prices -- however with the PCGS grade drop, maybe it's a bit of a wash.

 

Here is my example of a 2 grade drop from NGC to PCGS ... (more typical is a 1 grade drop)

 

 

Is this coin really a 67 ? Or really a 65? Who knows. Lets' split the difference and call it a 66 (funny no service ever assigned that middle ground 66 grade though). Luckily for this coin the value is not dependent on the grade, but for some coins the difference in price between a 65 and a 67 can be enormous (like matte proof lincolns, for example).

 

 

 

A couple of points in reply to your paragraphs 1 and 3 above:

 

1) And I have seen NGC details graded coins end up being graded as problem-free by PCGS. It goes both ways.

 

3) My impression is that PCGS is as likely as NGC is to bump a coin's grade due to especially attractive color.