General Opinion - NGC Overgraded by a Full Point... ?

[jom]

My take

 

NGC and PCGS grade more similar the past few years then at any other time since inception. The problem lies that NGC in the opinion of many graded looser for an extended period of time in between. Hence they have more "over graded" coins out there. Or maybe it's just that PCGS has more under graded coins. Same difference. Remember PCGS and NGC do not grade to the exact same standards anyways and I think that's where a lot of folks get hung up at. Certainly the majority of coins would grade the same between services but……….

 

As for the full point thing, I don't buy into it as fact although in one of my series it happens a lot. ( Walkers at gem plus). Then again since the services have different standards to begin with so it is what it is. Certainly if you look at the pops and prices by grades in 66 and up you would see noticeable differences. Over the years I've learned to look at Wakers through both NGC and PGGS eyes.

 

At the end of the day if I see an aesthetically pleasing coin regardless of the holder or the grade I try to find a way to buy it. I think grading is over rated to begin with but one day I will probably sell a lot of coins so I have to be cognizant of the market.

 

Mark Salzberg is one heck of a guy and NGC is fortunate to have him.

 

MJ

 

 

That pretty much covers it. In some areas (like Bust Halves) NGC might be looser. On the other hand no one seems to care that NGC is tougher on many strike designations for example. Or that they kick the out of PCGS in the foreign/world coin area.

 

If NGC is looser than PCGS in Walkers then just pay less for NGC graded Walkers. What's the big deal? People make it out to be some crime but the fact is if NGC consistently "overgrades" then it should not be a problem. It is more important to be consistent than to be "tough" so to speak.

 

jom

[brg5658]

My take

 

NGC and PCGS grade more similar the past few years then at any other time since inception. The problem lies that NGC in the opinion of many graded looser for an extended period of time in between. Hence they have more "over graded" coins out there. Or maybe it's just that PCGS has more under graded coins. Same difference. Remember PCGS and NGC do not grade to the exact same standards anyways and I think that's where a lot of folks get hung up at. Certainly the majority of coins would grade the same between services but……….

 

As for the full point thing, I don't buy into it as fact although in one of my series it happens a lot. ( Walkers at gem plus). Then again since the services have different standards to begin with so it is what it is. Certainly if you look at the pops and prices by grades in 66 and up you would see noticeable differences. Over the years I've learned to look at Wakers through both NGC and PGGS eyes.

 

At the end of the day if I see an aesthetically pleasing coin regardless of the holder or the grade I try to find a way to buy it. I think grading is over rated to begin with but one day I will probably sell a lot of coins so I have to be cognizant of the market.

 

Mark Salzberg is one heck of a guy and NGC is fortunate to have him.

 

MJ

 

 

That pretty much covers it. In some areas (like Bust Halves) NGC might be looser. On the other hand no one seems to care that NGC is tougher on many strike designations for example. Or that they kick the out of PCGS in the foreign/world coin area.

 

If NGC is looser than PCGS in Walkers then just pay less for NGC graded Walkers. What's the big deal? People make it out to be some crime but the fact is if NGC consistently "overgrades" then it should not be a problem. It is more important to be consistent than to be "tough" so to speak.

 

jom

 

The thing is, there is no absolute "right" answer for a grade that is an opinion in the first place. So the concept of NGC "overgrading" always has to be stated in comparison to PCGS' "undergrading". My perception has been that NGC gets it right the first time, whereas PCGS undergrading encourages more revenue by continued resubmissions until 1) the grade is maxed out and 2) the service has milked the coin for all the submission fees they can.

 

[jom]

My take

 

NGC and PCGS grade more similar the past few years then at any other time since inception. The problem lies that NGC in the opinion of many graded looser for an extended period of time in between. Hence they have more "over graded" coins out there. Or maybe it's just that PCGS has more under graded coins. Same difference. Remember PCGS and NGC do not grade to the exact same standards anyways and I think that's where a lot of folks get hung up at. Certainly the majority of coins would grade the same between services but……….

 

As for the full point thing, I don't buy into it as fact although in one of my series it happens a lot. ( Walkers at gem plus). Then again since the services have different standards to begin with so it is what it is. Certainly if you look at the pops and prices by grades in 66 and up you would see noticeable differences. Over the years I've learned to look at Wakers through both NGC and PGGS eyes.

 

At the end of the day if I see an aesthetically pleasing coin regardless of the holder or the grade I try to find a way to buy it. I think grading is over rated to begin with but one day I will probably sell a lot of coins so I have to be cognizant of the market.

 

Mark Salzberg is one heck of a guy and NGC is fortunate to have him.

 

MJ

 

 

That pretty much covers it. In some areas (like Bust Halves) NGC might be looser. On the other hand no one seems to care that NGC is tougher on many strike designations for example. Or that they kick the out of PCGS in the foreign/world coin area.

 

If NGC is looser than PCGS in Walkers then just pay less for NGC graded Walkers. What's the big deal? People make it out to be some crime but the fact is if NGC consistently "overgrades" then it should not be a problem. It is more important to be consistent than to be "tough" so to speak.

 

jom

 

The thing is, there is no absolute "right" answer for a grade that is an opinion in the first place. So the concept of NGC "overgrading" always has to be stated in comparison to PCGS' "undergrading". My perception has been that NGC gets it right the first time, whereas PCGS undergrading encourages more revenue by continued resubmissions until 1) the grade is maxed out and 2) the service has milked the coin for all the submission fees they can.

 

Of course. The idea that something is over or under graded is relative anyway. The bottom line is what it's worth.

 

The subjectivity of coin grading makes this so. Subjectivity also makes this idea of precision grading (+ signs etc etc) all the more asinine. How can something that is inherently inaccurate due to the subjectivity be precise? That's like measuring the length of a car with a ruler that has 1/8 inch markers...only that the car is going by you at 80 MPH.

 

jom

[World Colonial]

This is another reason why I like toners over blast white coins. I am not so hung up on grade as I am color. I would much rather have eye appealing toned coins in MS60-63 grades than dazzling dripping with luster coins at the MS65-67 level.

 

I think it would be far more stressful in making sure I chose the "right" MS67 and that it was all there for the grade then choosing a baggy MS62 but with really pretty colors. I didnt need to take a course or read a book to determine what I liked in toning - eye of the beholder.

 

Then again the guy that spends the time learning to grade and buying the right MS67 will financially do very well later on and more than likely much better than me. Thank God I dont do this for the money.

 

I don't agree with the premiums that toned coins fetch in the current market in some instances but I agree with your point. Grading standards and preferences change over time. Collectors can decide for themselves what "look" they like best and if they are paying attention, generally have an idea of current market preferences. Except to those who get disproportionate satisfaction from accumulating a bunch of registry points, I don't see that paying large or exorbitant premiums for what are actually minimal differences in quality really adds much.

 

In South Africa, buyers (many who I think are "investors" and not real collectors at all) place a disproportionate emphasis on the grade. They seem to ignore what the coin in the holder looks like much of the time since they cannot even see the coin first befiore they buy it. I was recently explaining this concept to them that just because a coin has a higher grade doesn't necessarily mean that it's a "better" coin or that most collectors actually like it more. I believe this is less true of US coins since I presume that NGC and PCGS apply a US centric view of market grading but much less so for world.

[LogPotato]

I've cracked out a few NGC graded coins. Almost all of them came back from PCGS the same grade, or a grade or two higher. Maybe I just know how to pick them? Either way, it's pretty absurd and ridiculous to dismiss a coin by it's cladding. I'll buy quality coins in my series any way I can get them.

 

[TonerGuy]

I don't agree with the premiums that toned coins fetch in the current market...

 

May I ask why ? Are you speaking to all toned coins, some toned coins, a few toned coins ?

 

I think attractive to stunning toning makes a coin unique no different than surface condition or luster may. And thus based on its uniqueness requires a premium. Even coins with neutral toning also impart an idea of certain originality hence "original skin". I prefer original coins to dipped out coins.

 

The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining.

 

Its tiring to watch TPGs reward the doctoring of coins with higher grades.

[MarkFeld]

...The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining...

 

 

What about toned coins which are not damaged, but which are considered to be ugly to the large majority of those who view them? Why should they trade at a premium as opposed to a discount?

 

It's about supply and demand and there isn't much demand for ugly coins, even relative to dipped ones.

[TonerGuy]

...The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining...

 

 

What about toned coins which are not damaged, but which are considered to be ugly to the large majority of those who view them? Why should they trade at a premium as opposed to a discount?

 

It's about supply and demand and there isn't much demand for ugly coins, even relative to dipped ones.

 

Ugly, once again, is a matter of opinion.

 

Many moons and years ago you would outright mock my admiration and interest in toned Peace $. Often calling them ugly and uninteresting.

 

Those same Peace $ you mocked (and might I add helped me purchase) can 1) no longer be found on the open market and (2) cannot be purchased for the same price.

 

Ugly today can be beautiful, valued and prized tomorrow. Or vice-a-versa, for example Rubenesque women.

[MarkFeld]

...The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining...

 

 

What about toned coins which are not damaged, but which are considered to be ugly to the large majority of those who view them? Why should they trade at a premium as opposed to a discount?

 

It's about supply and demand and there isn't much demand for ugly coins, even relative to dipped ones.

 

Ugly, once again, is a matter of opinion.

 

Many moons and years ago you would outright mock my admiration and interest in toned Peace $. Often calling them ugly and uninteresting.

 

Those same Peace $ you mocked (and might I add helped me purchase) can 1) no longer be found on the open market and (2) cannot be purchased for the same price.

 

Ugly today can be beautiful, valued and prized tomorrow. Or vice-a-versa, for example Rubenesque women.

 

Yes, of course, ugly is a matter of opinion. But opinion is largely what drives prices.

 

And if a majority of viewers think a coin is ugly, it stands to reason that the coin would sell for a discount, rather than a premium. And I believe that is what happens in the real world, regardless of what you or I think of the coins.

[TonerGuy]

Yes, of course, ugly is a matter of opinion. But opinion is largely what drives prices.

 

And if a majority of viewers think a coin is ugly, it stands to reason that the coin would sell for a discount, rather than a premium. And I believe that is what happens in the real world, regardless of what you or I think of the coins.

 

You kinda missed my point. Ugly does drive price. But the standards of beauty change with the wind and the times.

 

I would like to see the market change in regards to blast white dipped (not dipped out) coins as being 1) ugly and 2) doctored. While they might have an inherently beauty that our monkey-like brains respond to instinctively (yay ! bright shiny discs) I would like to see that change over time and a more refined educated approach be taken towards understanding that we are just stewards of the coins we posses and that we should protect and conserve them for the ages, not dip them so I can make the next grade point up and increase my profit margin.

[World Colonial]

I don't agree with the premiums that toned coins fetch in the current market...

 

May I ask why ? Are you speaking to all toned coins, some toned coins, a few toned coins ?

 

I think attractive to stunning toning makes a coin unique no different than surface condition or luster may. And thus based on its uniqueness requires a premium. Even coins with neutral toning also impart an idea of certain originality hence "original skin". I prefer original coins to dipped out coins.

 

The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining.

 

Its tiring to watch TPGs reward the doctoring of coins with higher grades.

 

It was an overly board statement and I admit it. Generally, it depends upon the specific coin

 

In my prior posting history, I have gotton myself into "trouble" by not clarifying the context of my comments. A coin can be relatively overpriced in a financial sense or numismatically. Since I do not know the market dynamics for most coins or series (like everyone else), I usually (though not always) intend my comment to be interpreted in a relative numismatic sense based upon either my personal opinion and/or how I believe most collectors generally perceive different coins.

 

I don't care for dipped coins though I admit I am not always knowledgeable enough to identify one when I see it. Generally, I go by what I expect the coin to look like. In my series, I will almost always prefer a toned and "natural" pillar coin to one which is not toned because at 242+ years, its apparent that the coin should not look that way. With another one (South Africa Union), I am fine with either toned or untoned because I don't consider it unusual that a coin minted since 1923 cannot be "white" naturally.

 

With US coins since these are the only ones I know which carry substantial premiums for toning (except maybe in isolation), it is the amount of the premium that I disagree with. In general, I find the premiums on circulating moderns (proofs and circulation strikes), Morgan dollars (which seem to be among the most common) and some of the 20th century classic series to be the most overpriced.

 

With the 1983 proof set which is the subject of another thread, I don't see these coins as anywhere near being compelling enough to sell for $1300. Yes, I understand why they do, but there are an innumerable number of coins that are much better that can be bought for the same money or a lot less. On the other hand, a premium of maybe 50% for a capped bust half (as an example only) I would say not is excessive. I make the evaluation considering the significance of the coin to the price and what else the money can buy.

[Coinbuf]

I don't agree with the premiums that toned coins fetch in the current market...

 

May I ask why ? Are you speaking to all toned coins, some toned coins, a few toned coins ?

 

I think attractive to stunning toning makes a coin unique no different than surface condition or luster may. And thus based on its uniqueness requires a premium. Even coins with neutral toning also impart an idea of certain originality hence "original skin". I prefer original coins to dipped out coins.

 

The only toned coin in my opinion that shouldnt receive a premium over a non-toned blast white dipped coin is toning that damages the coin which the TPGs refer to environmental damage or even staining.

 

Its tiring to watch TPGs reward the doctoring of coins with higher grades.

 

I think that your blaming the wrong group, it's the buyers paying the crazy multiple premiums that reward and encourage the doctors not the TPG's This is related to the question I posed to you in the other thread. You, and others, are actively searching for toned coins that you find attractive or interesting and as a group toned coin buyers continue to pay more and more for these coins. Do you not think that the coin doctors do not see this as an opportunity to cash in? Of course the TPG's are cashing in on this current market wave too just as are dealers, but the doctors are hard at work because toned coin buyers are demanding their MA wares. At least that's how I see the modern, toned market as someone that is looking in and not a participant. As you are a participant in this market perhaps you can educate me on why (assuming I am incorrect) my view is incorrect.

[TonerGuy]

 

It was an overly board statement and I admit it. Generally, it depends upon the specific coin

 

In my prior posting history, I have gotton myself into "trouble" by not clarifying the context of my comments. A coin can be relatively overpriced in a financial sense or numismatically. Since I do not know the market dynamics for most coins or series (like everyone else), I usually (though not always) intend my comment to be interpreted in a relative numismatic sense based upon either my personal opinion and/or how I believe most collectors generally perceive different coins.

 

I don't care for dipped coins though I admit I am not always knowledgeable enough to identify one when I see it. Generally, I go by what I expect the coin to look like. In my series, I will almost always prefer a toned and "natural" pillar coin to one which is not toned because at 242+ years, its apparent that the coin should not look that way. With another one (South Africa Union), I am fine with either toned or untoned because I don't consider it unusual that a coin minted since 1923 cannot be "white" naturally.

 

With US coins since these are the only ones I know which carry substantial premiums for toning (except maybe in isolation), it is the amount of the premium that I disagree with. In general, I find the premiums on circulating moderns (proofs and circulation strikes), Morgan dollars (which seem to be among the most common) and some of the 20th century classic series to be the most overpriced.

 

With the 1983 proof set which is the subject of another thread, I don't see these coins as anywhere near being compelling enough to sell for $1300. Yes, I understand why they do, but there are an innumerable number of coins that are much better that can be bought for the same money or a lot less. On the other hand, a premium of maybe 50% for a capped bust half (as an example only) I would say not is excessive. I make the evaluation considering the significance of the coin to the price and what else the money can buy.

 

I think we agree on most points. Though, I do see foreign toners gaining steam and price over the last few years. There is currently a hoard of toned Canadian Dollars that in my opinion might be AT but are selling for $275+. And they are grabbing the attention of toned collectors not just foreign collectors. Shane has a toned coin from Norway up for auction right now that I bet will bring very strong money.

 

I think modern toners (like the 1983 proof set) can sell for the levels that they do because there is a uniqueness to them that you dont find in series such as Morgans or some of the classic 20th century coins.

 

I can honestly say without reservation that the 1983-S set was the most unique 1983 proof set I have ever seen. Matter of fact it was probably the most unique modern proof set I have ever seen. It is 1 of a kind. And that level of singularity as well as the desire for the purchaser to keep the set intact drove the bidding.

 

Was it worth $1300 ? Sure if you like to own unique one of kind collectibles.

 

 

[TonerGuy]

I think that your blaming the wrong group, it's the buyers paying the crazy multiple premiums that reward and encourage the doctors not the TPG's This is related to the question I posed to you in the other thread. You, and others, are actively searching for toned coins that you find attractive or interesting and as a group toned coin buyers continue to pay more and more for these coins. Do you not think that the coin doctors do not see this as an opportunity to cash in? Of course the TPG's are cashing in on this current market wave too just as are dealers, but the doctors are hard at work because toned coin buyers are demanding their MA wares. At least that's how I see the modern, toned market as someone that is looking in and not a participant. As you are a participant in this market perhaps you can educate me on why (assuming I am incorrect) my view is incorrect.

 

Absolutely correct when it comes to toners. Anytime you can take a $9 proof set add color and sell it for $1300 there is a huge incentive to cheat the system.

 

However, PCGS and NGC do a relatively good, not great, job of identifying those coins and keeping them out of their slabs.

 

What the TPGs do encourage is for people to dip off non-rainbow or unattractive toning in an effort to gain a numerical point or two on the grade assigned. And thus also gaining economically. This form of doctoring is encouraged.

 

So while its the market that is pushing the price of toned coins higher - it is the TPGs that are trying to regulate it and put the breaks on it. Or at least they appear to be trying. From my perspective, NGC is much harder on color than PCGS though.

 

As for dipped coins I dont submit those coins for grading but from my participation on these boards and my observations of other boards, I have never seen one person post that their coin was net graded because of dipping. If anything I have seen the reverse - some one cracking out a MS64 coin, dipping, resubmitting it and it now grading MS65 or even MS66 once the original skin is removed and the luster restored.

 

If original skin coins were rewarded with higher grades by the TPGs in the place and stead of dipped coins with luster, then I think the market will change. The crackout game will end but that will also hurt the TPGs bottom line.

 

[Nutmeg Coin]

PCGS sent me an email the other day recommending their "restoration" where the toning is removed: http://www.pcgs.com/restoration/ Toned coins become "white".

 

If you have reasonably toned coins that will not sell unless they are "white" what other options do you have?

[World Colonial]

I think we agree on most points. Though, I do see foreign toners gaining steam and price over the last few years. There is currently a hoard of toned Canadian Dollars that in my opinion might be AT but are selling for $275+. And they are grabbing the attention of toned collectors not just foreign collectors. Shane has a toned coin from Norway up for auction right now that I bet will bring very strong money.

 

I think modern toners (like the 1983 proof set) can sell for the levels that they do because there is a uniqueness to them that you dont find in series such as Morgans or some of the classic 20th century coins.

 

I can honestly say without reservation that the 1983-S set was the most unique 1983 proof set I have ever seen. Matter of fact it was probably the most unique modern proof set I have ever seen. It is 1 of a kind. And that level of singularity as well as the desire for the purchaser to keep the set intact drove the bidding.

 

Was it worth $1300 ? Sure if you like to own unique one of kind collectibles.

 

 

I suspect that whoever is buying those foreign toned coins for large premiums, that it is disproportionately US based collectors. Collectors outside of the United States by a lopsided proportion absolutely do not care about TPG and will not pay US premiums for what are actually minimal differences in quality as represented by two proximate TPG grades. I believe the same is true of toned coins which I consider another specialty practice.

 

As for the 1983 proof set, the reason I do not view it as you and numerous other US collectors do is because I do not see anything significant about this set or any other coins like it, regardless of the TPG grade or what it looks like. This is why I will never pay $1300 or anything close to it, even if I was interested in US modern proof sets which I am not.

 

My standard of significance is just a lot higher than practically all US collectors. If you have ever heard of John J Ford, mine is much closer to his even though I cannot afford the same coins. By my standards, there are almost no post 19th century US coins that I consider anywhere nearly as significant as so many US collectors apparently see them.

 

My explanation for why US collectors pay these prices is first because like most collectors, they have their favorite coins and disproportionately ignore all others. Its what most collectors do generically. I do it to some extent but I believe much less.

 

Second, for those who collect US coins and aren't going to buy anything else, the affordable options have shrunk from prior generations (such as when I started collecting).

 

Third, for the options which remain affordable to most, I presume you agree with me that financially, it is a better option than most US alternatives because the clear trend is for more buying power to concentrate into fewer better quality and eye appealing coins which today and probably in the future will include coins like this 1983 proof set.

[Coinbuf]

I think that your blaming the wrong group, it's the buyers paying the crazy multiple premiums that reward and encourage the doctors not the TPG's This is related to the question I posed to you in the other thread. You, and others, are actively searching for toned coins that you find attractive or interesting and as a group toned coin buyers continue to pay more and more for these coins. Do you not think that the coin doctors do not see this as an opportunity to cash in? Of course the TPG's are cashing in on this current market wave too just as are dealers, but the doctors are hard at work because toned coin buyers are demanding their MA wares. At least that's how I see the modern, toned market as someone that is looking in and not a participant. As you are a participant in this market perhaps you can educate me on why (assuming I am incorrect) my view is incorrect.

 

Absolutely correct when it comes to toners. Anytime you can take a $9 proof set add color and sell it for $1300 there is a huge incentive to cheat the system.

 

However, PCGS and NGC do a relatively good, not great, job of identifying those coins and keeping them out of their slabs.

 

What the TPGs do encourage is for people to dip off non-rainbow or unattractive toning in an effort to gain a numerical point or two on the grade assigned. And thus also gaining economically. This form of doctoring is encouraged.

 

So while its the market that is pushing the price of toned coins higher - it is the TPGs that are trying to regulate it and put the breaks on it. Or at least they appear to be trying. From my perspective, NGC is much harder on color than PCGS though.

 

As for dipped coins I dont submit those coins for grading but from my participation on these boards and my observations of other boards, I have never seen one person post that their coin was net graded because of dipping. If anything I have seen the reverse - some one cracking out a MS64 coin, dipping, resubmitting it and it now grading MS65 or even MS66 once the original skin is removed and the luster restored.

 

If original skin coins were rewarded with higher grades by the TPGs in the place and stead of dipped coins with luster, then I think the market will change. The crackout game will end but that will also hurt the TPGs bottom line.

 

Ok that helps, while I don't consider dippers as doctors knowing that you do add's context and helps me to understand your original post better. I don't quite agree that the TPG's are trying to put the breaks on the market, I sort of see it just the opposite, more so with PCGS. But I do agree that it would be nice if the services were able to reward original surfaces, the problem is I'm not certain that anyone can agree anymore on what is original.

[TonerGuy]

 

I suspect that whoever is buying those foreign toned coins for large premiums, that it is disproportionately US based collectors. Collectors outside of the United States by a lopsided proportion absolutely do not care about TPG and will not pay US premiums for what are actually minimal differences in quality as represented by two proximate TPG grades. I believe the same is true of toned coins which I consider another specialty practice.

 

As for the 1983 proof set, the reason I do not view it as you and numerous other US collectors do is because I do not see anything significant about this set or any other coins like it, regardless of the TPG grade or what it looks like. This is why I will never pay $1300 or anything close to it, even if I was interested in US modern proof sets which I am not.

 

My standard of significance is just a lot higher than practically all US collectors. If you have ever heard of John J Ford, mine is much closer to his even though I cannot afford the same coins. By my standards, there are almost no post 19th century US coins that I consider anywhere nearly as significant as so many US collectors apparently see them.

 

My explanation for why US collectors pay these prices is first because like most collectors, they have their favorite coins and disproportionately ignore all others. Its what most collectors do generically. I do it to some extent but I believe much less.

 

Second, for those who collect US coins and aren't going to buy anything else, the affordable options have shrunk from prior generations (such as when I started collecting).

 

Third, for the options which remain affordable to most, I presume you agree with me that financially, it is a better option than most US alternatives because the clear trend is for more buying power to concentrate into fewer better quality and eye appealing coins which today and probably in the future will include coins like this 1983 proof set.

 

Again we agree on most points. I think world coins offer much better value and rarity in relation to price than their American counterparts do. And I think that we will see more and more US collectors moving towards that market as NGC and PCGS gain a greater foothold. Im not saying thats good Im just saying that they have established consumer confidence in the US collectors and I see those collectors feeling more confident in purchasing a slabbed foreign coin then a raw since they will not have the necessary experience to do so with confidence. I can tell you thats how I feel. I think once the Chinese collectors get into other coins the market will continue to accelerate.

 

I also see foreign coins as a maturation of an individual's collector's tastes. I know 15 yrs ago I would not look at foreign coins, not I wont skip them.

 

I think being in world coins right now offers some great opportunities. It is why I am looking foreign toners. For the most part they are still relatively reasonably priced.

[TonerGuy]

Ok that helps, while I don't consider dippers as doctors knowing that you do add's context and helps me to understand your original post better. I don't quite agree that the TPG's are trying to put the breaks on the market, I sort of see it just the opposite, more so with PCGS. But I do agree that it would be nice if the services were able to reward original surfaces, the problem is I'm not certain that anyone can agree anymore on what is original.

 

I think PCGS turns a blind eye more often than NGC does.

 

A few years ago NGC made a policy decision that they were not going to grade toned ASEs. PCGS kept grading them. Because of that there are a lot of questionable ASEs in PCGS plastic while you hardly ever see a wildly toned ASE in NGC plastic.

 

If I can get 60-70% of my submissions graded Im pretty happy. My last modern submission went 0-13 at NGC. I sent the same coins to PCGS and they went 13-13. I felt comfortable that all but 2-3 coins were NT. The 2-3 coins I wasnt sure about but I felt as though 50/50 they were NT. But yet NGC got nervous about the 2-3 questionable coins so they just bagged the entire submission. And that wasnt the first time that happened.

 

I think if I posted 10 original skin coins most everyone on this board would agree on them. At this point unless you are trying to cover up an old cleaning there really is no benefit to faking original skin. There's no increase in value. If you can AT a coin with original skin you probably can add some color to the mix to increase value.

[World Colonial]

Again we agree on most points. I think world coins offer much better value and rarity in relation to price than their American counterparts do. And I think that we will see more and more US collectors moving towards that market as NGC and PCGS gain a greater foothold. Im not saying thats good Im just saying that they have established consumer confidence in the US collectors and I see those collectors feeling more confident in purchasing a slabbed foreign coin then a raw since they will not have the necessary experience to do so with confidence. I can tell you thats how I feel. I think once the Chinese collectors get into other coins the market will continue to accelerate.

 

I also see foreign coins as a maturation of an individual's collector's tastes. I know 15 yrs ago I would not look at foreign coins, not I wont skip them.

 

I think being in world coins right now offers some great opportunities. It is why I am looking foreign toners. For the most part they are still relatively reasonably priced.

 

My comments on foreign collector practices were intended to be more generic. I can see that US collectors who start buying world coins may be interested in toned coins and start paying similar premiums proportionately as they do for US coins, though the price level should remain much lower

 

I don't believe that non-US collectors are going to increase their preference for TPG coins to any significant extent across the board. Those in China appear to have a greater preference than most from elsewhere and I know that in South Africa, they do as well. However, generically, non-US collectors don't have a history of paying premiums for eye appeal like their US counterparts do for grade and I don't expect them to change this for toning or strike either. My reason for this is because in many instances, the coins are scarce enough generically that there is no point in specializing as US collectors do today. If you do, you won't ever buy anything.

 

I will close by adding that while I would never pay this type of premium for an otherwise common coin, if I did I would certainly pay it for toned coins over any of the other specialties most of the time. The reason for this is that the difference is easily noticeable. This isn't true for "top pops","special designation strikes" or die varieties much of the time. So from this standpoint, I think attractive toners are a much better value and I like them more.