Pics of my 4 Recent Downgrades From pcgs, and Yes, I can No Longer Post There.

[MJ]

To be honest i wish id have kept my mouth shut.... I'm certainly not here to prove or convince anyone nor do I care if anyone believes it or not. .. facts are facts... as far as the community "self regulating" if you would have read my last reply, the part about "everything being back to normal as of last week" it seems to me as if someone somehow already regulated everything right back to the way it was before 500 dOlla 70's...

 

I know I would like to see the fact part. Anyways I believe there are at the very least germs of truth to this. Maybe there was a $500 fee for a period and it was deemed a bad idea. You may have indeed heard correctly. As you say things are back to normal. I readily admit I don't know how the bulk and modern market works.

 

Mark

[coinman_23885]

To be honest i wish id have kept my mouth shut.... I'm certainly not here to prove or convince anyone nor do I care if anyone believes it or not. .. facts are facts... as far as the community "self regulating" if you would have read my last reply, the part about "everything being back to normal as of last week" it seems to me as if someone somehow already regulated everything right back to the way it was before 500 dOlla 70's...

 

You're missing the point entirely. It isn't about attacking your credibility. The fact is that it remains hearsay at this point. And if physical evidence were to come forward and the allegations substantiated, it could have potential serious repercussions for those involved in my humble opinion. It would absolutely affect the modern coin market, as it should.

 

Grading services advertise their expertise as objective third party opinions that buyers rely on in the market. If it turns out that they are as not as objective as claimed (and are charging more for these coins than the published tier levels), then I see this as potentially problematic. If an obvious conflict of interest or bias were to be revealed, or perhaps something even more serious possible, then I think claims of neutrality as third party grading services are potentially deceptive advertising or perhaps worse (in my opinion).

 

And would it really matter? In my opinion, yes. First, people holding the high end material deserve to know if there are problems with the integrity of their market segment and if the bottom could fall out. Second, the FTC has already taken an interest in third party coin grading services in the past, and I would be very curious as to its opinion on the subject matter. Also, if there is an innocent and plausible explanation for increased fees (if the allegations are true), then I would love to hear it.

 

For legal purposes, I am not representing anything as fact and everything is meant purely as opinion. There are no statements, express or implied, as to wrongdoing or civil liability of any particular third party grading service.

[wdrob]

 

 

And if physical evidence were to come forward and the allegations substantiated

 

Would you accept circumstantial evidence?

 

We routinely put people in prison for life based solely on circumstantial evidence. It would seem odd that a business entity would receive far better treatment than the citizenry of this country who are supposed to be protected by the Constitution aka Bill of Rights.

 

Is there a Business Bill of Rights?

 

I think I could accept circumstantial evidence just fine myself.

 

We don't want to have to raise the bar too high.

 

 

[jpcienkus]

Thanks for the confirmation. I'm just sitting here shaking my head. Shenanigans. I'm kind of relieved to know that you can't buy the grade, but at the same time, this business (>$$ for a 70) practice doesn't sit well with me either.

 

I'm not going to create any conspiracies here, but if that is accurate, then it still doesn't make the stuff in the part in red true. Had he refused to pay the fee that was allegedly above and beyond his contractual agreement, would they have put it in a PF69 DCAM holder? Would they have sent it back to him and refused to encapsulate it at all?

 

Yeah, I see your point.

[Conder101]

Circumstantial, maybe if it was substantial and convincing, Hearsay, no. A copy of an invoice showing the fee charged would be good.

[wdrob]

 

Circumstantial, maybe if it was substantial and convincing, Hearsay, no. A copy of an invoice showing the fee charged would be good.

 

Well yes it would.

 

Physical or documentary evidence is always a plus, yet more companies are found liable and more people are sent to prison based on circumstantial evidence and inference than by "real" evidence.

 

That would be the entire basis of circumstantial evidence. Cumulative evidence which individually would not lead a reasonable mind to a conclusion, yet cumulatively is enough to form an inference.

 

If the slab don't fit -- you must acquit!

 

 

 

[Hard Times]

telephoto, Thank you for your interest in my thread (two thirds of your entire post count). Certainly there are many other interesting threads here where you can spread your sunshine and good will?

 

Sorry, I didn't realize that we needed the thread creator's permission to post.

I'm also sorry that you are unable to come to grips with the fact that you simply messed up and cracked out perfectly good pieces with visions of dollar signs on upgrades, only to have it backfire. This is not a unique happenstance; it's happened to many others, and on coins with much higher values. Wouldn't it be logical to simply resubmit these pieces if you are so firm in your convictions? Or if you are truly "done" with TPGs wouldn't it be logical to simply move on rather than continuing to beat this particular dead horse...on two separate forums?

Feel free to have the last word if you wish; I won't be here to read it- something that will please you no end, I'm sure.

 

Good Luck.

 

Absolutely agree with telephoto. Grading is subjective, sometimes you win sometimes you lose. You lost which is never fun. Consider it a learning experience. Bottom line is that as many has said here and elsewhere, right now PCGS it tightening up. Not a good time to have high expectations.

 

Best, HT

[telephoto1-migration]

FOR ANYONE AND EVERYONE WHO READ THE PART ABOUT 3PG XXXX CHARGING 500 PER 70DC ON CERTAIN COINS. . I TALKED TO MY FRIEND AFTER HAVING THIS DISCUSSION HERE TODAY AND HE SAID GOT A CALL LAST WEEK AND THAT IT'S ALL BACK TO NORMAL AND THERE ARE NO MORE $500 70's BEING ASSIGNED. .. I ASKED IF HE THOUGHT HE STILL MIGHT GET THE UNLIKELY 70 HERE AND THERE. . TO WHICH ANSWERED "WE WILL SEE"... SO WHO KNOWS. IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY DID IT FOR A MONTH OR 6 WEEKS AND THEN STOPPED. ... I WISH I KNEW MORE.

 

I'm still in the doubting Thomas Camp that this happened exactly as described and until proven I will go with Urban Legend . There is no many moving parts and shift of the story to make heads or tails of this. I reserve the right to change my mind with some confirmation. I did seek some out. For now this is hearsay. Who is the dealer?

 

BTW I'm sure the OP is thrilled his thread was hijacked.

 

Mark

 

This.

Show proof or it didn't happen.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Since what is being provided by the grading services is an "opinion" of a grade backed up hopefully with a guarantee of authenticity and accuracy, the increased grading fees for higher than expected grading services should fall into the reasonable range based on market value. If a 95-W ASE grades PR70 instead of 69 as expected it is reasonable to pay a little more in keeping with their need to stand behind the grade and value. The same thing goes with markedly increased values over the submission sheet declared value. With the staggering profits made by the grading services in the last 30 or so years they really owe those who have made their success and financial gain possible, accountability. And it isn't about their month by month profits moving forward, "bottom line", that should be their ultimate concern. 95% of ethical coin dealers make very meager profits buying and selling numismatics.

[coinman_23885]

And if physical evidence were to come forward and the allegations substantiated

 

Would you accept circumstantial evidence?

 

 

Not unless it was corroborated and admissible in court. I tread very carefully and make no factual representations or judgment calls criticizing an organization unless or until shown clear and convincing evidence substantiating negative allegations, and for a number of reasons, most of them legal. And if the allegations were true and I researched the matter and felt it was warranted (after inquiring to the TPG myself to see the other side of the story as well), I would ask the FTC to investigate. In that scenario, I would absolutely want to make sure that I had all of my documentation and evidence together in anticipation of a retaliatory lawsuit.

[19Lyds]

$500 for a PR70DCAM IKE doesn't sound out of the realm of possibility to me.

 

When I was doing Bulk Submissions, the grade of the coin dictated the grading fee.

 

MS66 = $10 per coin

MS67 = $20 per coin

MS68 = $40 per coin

[coinman_23885]

$500 for a PR70DCAM IKE doesn't sound out of the realm of possibility to me.

 

When I was doing Bulk Submissions, the grade of the coin dictated the grading fee.

 

MS66 = $10 per coin

MS67 = $20 per coin

MS68 = $40 per coin

 

But how many people are submitting 1995-W (PF70 DCAM or otherwise) Silver Eagles in bulk? And with regards to pricing, is this information made available publicly? And isn't the purpose of a bulk submission to get a bulk discount? Why is it that the rates are higher than those published online for single/small coin submissions? Are bulk submissions given "special" considerations? It doesn't make sense to me at all why anyone would pay more to submit large numbers of coins than they would pay by sending smaller orders unless they are getting something in return. Even if they aren't charged for coins that are pre-screened, the spikes in submission fees we are contemplating would seemingly kill any advantage to a bulk submission unless there is something more to it. And if that is the case, then it would potentially substantiate the complaints that the FTC made against a certain grading service in the 1990s in my opinion.

 

Legal Disclaimer: As always, everything is meant as opinion and not fact, and no statements, express or implied, are made as to any wrongdoing or liability. No accusations are being made.

[dragon]

<<< Since what is being provided by the grading services is an "opinion" of a grade backed up hopefully with a guarantee of authenticity and accuracy, the increased grading fees for higher than expected grading services should fall into the reasonable range based on market value. If a 95-W ASE grades PR70 instead of 69 as expected it is reasonable to pay a little more in keeping with their need to stand behind the grade and value. The same thing goes with markedly increased values over the submission sheet declared value >>>

 

 

 

 

 

On that note......when a certain grading service undergoes its bi-monthly grading 'standard' revision to induce re$ubmissions and protect their cash payouts on regrades, should they then offer a rebate on the submission fees? Also, declared value on submission sheets is solely for the purpose of return insurance fees and has nothing to do with grades given or otherwise.

[Nutmeg Coin]

There are a bunch of online review sites where customers, usually those with particularly difficult experiences, share their experiences with the grading services like here: http://www.yelp.com/biz/pcgs-professional-coin-grading-service-newport-beach

 

As to the "guarantee" or "warranty" of certified coins, that is the last thing that the services want to have, so they would rather not have coins anywhere near overgraded and subject to warranty requests. If you had the highest resolution scanner imaging, then there would be no question as the OP's concerns as before and after events could be well established. Though I doubt if those coins that had originally been certified by NGC with their current scanner quality levels would have made clear how close they are for grade or variability with being "undergraded". Apparently PCGS has had a greatly increased level of warranty requests which is a major headache for them and DH has to personally review each one of those which can take months. Plus you have to pay a per coin review fee, refunded if they agree. Correct me if I am wrong but NGC's process is faster and they do not charge as much on warranty/guarantee submissions. With the undergraded coins there is little in the way of recourse, how do you prove that? And I have not heard of CAC gold stickering any significant recently graded coins. It is mainly coins that were certified 20 plus years ago in my experience.

 

Another thought; surely someone must have images on these coins? If you bought them from a dealer, an auction site, etc.? If you bought the coins raw had them certified and then later decided to crack them out and re-submit them without any real trail on these particular coins' previous history, that raises a lot of questions as others have pointed out.

[t-arc]

I can understand your pain, but I really have no sympathy for you because cracking out coins at that high of a grade is just a crapshoot. They have to be regraded again and this makes the coins subject to both a downgrade and an upgrade. You got what you wanted, regrades. And you lost this time!! That said I had the same experience with them you had. I rejoined the club two years ago and spent 200 smackers like you did to get 8 coins graded. Two of the coins were buffalo nickels I cherrypicked, having bought them as unc coins. One was a 13 type one that I thought had a shot at a 66. Minimum 65 coin, and it comes back a 64. On the other hand the second proof buffalo nickel was a carbon spotted 1936 sating finish proof that they graded a proof-64 so that was the one coin I was more or less satisfied with. I won't even go into the

other six coins except that one was a fully profile 1937 business strike buff that I thought had a shot at 67 and it comes back a 64!!!. I am calling pcgs tomorrow to cancel my reoccurring membership which auto renews on the 29th of this month. I am going to give ngc a try because I have heard from others, like you, that their grading is really tight now. And so they are going to be losing customers.

[Houston Investor]

The crackout game has its risks. Be prepared to lose / pay if your going to play.

 

Been there.

[coinman_23885]

Do you have any pics of the 1937 Buffalo Nickel?