PCGS....."The Standard For the Rare Coin Industry"

[MarkFeld]

Before the popularity of "TPGs," auction companies graded the coins they offered as part of the description. The same for descriptions and varieties. These became part of the auction guarantee. Now, slab grades are presented along with a selling description and possibly some unlisted variety information if the coin is very scarce.

 

I'm unaware of an "auction guarantee" other than with respect to authenticity - and that applied long before "the popularity of 'TPGs' ", as well as presently.

[19Lyds]

I am under the assumption that the OP commentary is about grading consistency, or in this case, extreme lack thereof.........

 

Hence, the quotations around the title.

 

Best, HT

 

I'm under the same impression. But if that's the point of this thread, there are an abundance of examples from which to choose for each of the major grading companies.

Not to mention the fact that the coins were graded possibly 20 year apart.

 

Have folks forgotten that in the rattler days MS65 was a tough grade and MS63 was fairly common simply because PCGS, being the driving force behind Coin Dealer acceptance of TPG Grading, was forced to build credibility in their grades without raising a lot of objectionable criticism?

[mark]

MarkFeld:

 

I know you were once a grader for NGC and, of course, were mega active before that. So, do you think your grading standards have changed over the last, say, two decades? If so, by how much?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Mark

[MarkFeld]

MarkFeld:

 

I know you were once a grader for NGC and, of course, were mega active before that. So, do you think your grading standards have changed over the last, say, two decades? If so, by how much?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Mark

 

Mark, I don't think that my personal grading standards have changed much, but I have likely loosened up a little bit over the years - perhaps a point.

 

That said, I think it's very difficult - not to mention, impractical - to completely separate one's standards from those of the major third party grading companies. In other words, adhere to your own standards if you can, but don't lose sight of what the rest of the world is doing, even if you disagree with it.

[Hard Times]

Grading and TPG's, can't live with them, can't live without them.

 

Best, HT

[Catbert]

I found this thread somewhat amusing because the OP appears to be bothered by marketing slogans.

 

Here's how NGC describes themselves:

 

When Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC) was founded in 1987, it heralded the introduction of a new standard of integrity in coin grading. From the beginning, NGC has remained focused on grading collectible coins, tokens and medals accurately, consistently and impartially. As the company has grown to become the leading and largest third-party coin grading service, it has maintained a steadfast and uncompromising commitment to these ideals.

 

The knowledge, integrity and dedication of NGC's team of numismatic professionals ensure a level of grading consistency unparalleled among grading services. This record of consistency, built over the years, has helped to foster greater stability throughout the collectible coin marketplace.

 

If we acknowledge the evolution of grading, would the OP be just as upset with NGC's assertion of uncompromising commitment to consistency and accuracy since 1987?

 

It's just words, words......

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I found this thread somewhat amusing because the OP appears to be bothered by marketing slogans.

 

Here's how NGC describes themselves:

 

When Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC) was founded in 1987, it heralded the introduction of a new standard of integrity in coin grading. From the beginning, NGC has remained focused on grading collectible coins, tokens and medals accurately, consistently and impartially. As the company has grown to become the leading and largest third-party coin grading service, it has maintained a steadfast and uncompromising commitment to these ideals.

 

The knowledge, integrity and dedication of NGC's team of numismatic professionals ensure a level of grading consistency unparalleled among grading services. This record of consistency, built over the years, has helped to foster greater stability throughout the collectible coin marketplace.

 

If we acknowledge the evolution of grading, would the OP be just as upset with NGC's assertion of uncompromising commitment to consistency and accuracy since 1987?

 

It's just words, words......

 

Uncompromising commitment does not mean absolute accuracy, whether using market grading or technical grading. It does mean that an entity will strive to continue to improve.

 

Words do mean something. No TPG or 4PG entity states 100% consistency and/or a warranty of same.

 

Words mean something.

[Hard Times]

I found this thread somewhat amusing because the OP appears to be bothered by marketing slogans.

 

Here's how NGC describes themselves:

 

When Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC) was founded in 1987, it heralded the introduction of a new standard of integrity in coin grading. From the beginning, NGC has remained focused on grading collectible coins, tokens and medals accurately, consistently and impartially. As the company has grown to become the leading and largest third-party coin grading service, it has maintained a steadfast and uncompromising commitment to these ideals.

 

The knowledge, integrity and dedication of NGC's team of numismatic professionals ensure a level of grading consistency unparalleled among grading services. This record of consistency, built over the years, has helped to foster greater stability throughout the collectible coin marketplace.

 

If we acknowledge the evolution of grading, would the OP be just as upset with NGC's assertion of uncompromising commitment to consistency and accuracy since 1987?

 

It's just words, words......

 

 

I would say that this is an accurate statement by NGC. Both TPG's are consistent and accurate to a reasonable degree over short time intervals (1 year, a few years?) but I would think all agree that from 1986 to now, grading perceptions have changed in the industry, and that is related to TPG's, dealers, and collectors as a whole. In a perfect world they would not change, but, market factors and the desire to get a better grade and make more money via resubmissions have drvien these changes. If there was no profit involved and coins were cheap, it is likely that would not happen.

 

But there are differences between the two. For example, PCGS, as far as I can tell, are more liberal with toning that could be considered human assisted or questionable. NGC is more conservative with that. There are other examples.

 

Best, HT

[Catbert]

In the context of grade inflation (as per the OP's point), I maintain that there is no difference between the two and think the OP's point is therefore undermined.

[Hard Times]

Catbert, but if there is no difference between the two in this context, then how can PCGS be The Standard? Seems that it would be in a group of two - no one is first if there is no difference.

 

Best, HT

[Conder101]

"The Standard" does not have to imply two, and if they are equal then the other can also be said to be "The Standard" and be equally correct.

 

If PCGS ="The Standard"

 

and

 

PCGS = NGC

 

then

 

NGC = "The Standard" as well.

[RWB]

As used here "standard" has no meaning. It's merely advertising like "best price" or "new, improved," "all natural."

[Nutmeg Coin]

Probably CAC is more of a standard as they back it up with $$$ offers. I've never heard of anyone getting a plug nickel on guarantee or problem coin submissions.