Grade inflation 0

[v/d Merwe]

Happy new year fellow collectors.

I have been submitting coins for grading to NGC since 2008 and have been getting higher grades on my submissions recently compared to older ones. In hand most of my older graded coins looks better than my more recent ones which been submitted in 2020. 
I heard about grade inflation but didn’t give it much thought till I can compare with personal experience. 
If cost is not a drawback is it not then worthwhile to resubmit and expect a higher grade?

I see that NGC can be 3weeks + behind on some submissions and are recruiting new members of staff offering sign on bonuses. 
Could it be inexperienced graders or rushing through invoices to blame? 
The saying goes buy the coin and not the holder but when PF63/64/65 looks superior to recent PF67 graded ones I am beginning to be sceptical. 
 

 

[MarkFeld]

Welcome to the forum.

Many, if not most believe that “grade inflation” has been a fact of life over the past few decades.

Before you resubmit any coins, I suggest checking actual selling prices of them at the current grade, vs. a grade higher. Sometimes, a resubmission isn’t merited, due to only minor upside potential in value. And of course, there’s no guarantee that the grade will go up. So I wouldn’t necessarily “expect” a higher grade. Perhaps try a small number of regrades and see how that goes?

 

[v/d Merwe]

Thanks for your reply Mark. I will do thou maybe later in the year when turnaround times calmed down. Do you recommend resubmitting in current holder or to break out and summit raw?

 

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, v/d Merwe said:

The saying goes buy the coin and not the holder but when PF63/64/65 looks superior to recent PF67 graded ones I am beginning to be sceptical. 

Whoa, that is a HUGE jump in grade, from 65, let alone 64 and 63.  You've had this happen many times ?

What coins are you talking about here ?  Pics would help.

 

Edited January 2, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[MarkFeld]

16 minutes ago, v/d Merwe said:

Thanks for your reply Mark. I will do thou maybe later in the year when turnaround times calmed down. Do you recommend resubmitting in current holder or to break out and summit raw?

 

You’re most welcome. 
The answer to your question isn’t an easy one. If a coin truly deserves a higher grade, I think it has a better chance, if submitted raw. A large part of the reason is that it’s easier to assess a coin out of a holder.
On the other hand, I know of extremely sharp collectors and dealers who have been disappointed and surprised by raw submissions. Coins that you think should upgrade can still downgrade. And if the coin is resubmitted in the holder, you don’t have the downside of a downgrade. The bottom line is that I believe there is more upside and downside in submitting raw, rather than in the holder. It depends how conservative you prefer to be.

 

[MarkFeld]

4 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Whoa, that is a HUGE jump in grade, from 65, let alone 64 and 63.  You've had this happen many times ?

What coins are you talking about here ?  Pics would help.

 

He mentioned proof coins, so I think it’s unlikely that pictures will help much. It’s usually nearly impossible to provide meaningful grade assessments of proof coins, based on images. Because the grade is largely affected by hairlines, which rarely show to their full extent (if at all) in images.

[v/d Merwe]

Yes it’s mostly South African Union Proof coins. They are minted pre 1960. These proofs always look different in hand compared to pictures for various reasons as you all know. Especially if there’s toning. In hand there will be no hairlines even under magnifying for those that I decide to submit for grading. 
Photo is for reference regarding Union proofs. 

[numisport]

30 minutes ago, v/d Merwe said:

Yes it’s mostly South African Union Proof coins. They are minted pre 1960. These proofs always look different in hand compared to pictures for various reasons as you all know. Especially if there’s toning. In hand there will be no hairlines even under magnifying for those that I decide to submit for grading. 
Photo is for reference regarding Union proofs. 

You can't go by what these coins 'look' like. Some coins are graded technically rather than on eye appeal. And don't forget often times what you are getting is an appraisal rather than a technical grade. Confused ? Join the club 

[Coinbuf]

Welcome to the forum, I am one that feels that grade-inflation has been happening to the hobby.  However I see this issue as a bigger problem with PCGS as opposed to here at NGC, in fact I think that NGC has if anything gotten slightly more conservative over the past few years.  Keep in mind that my observations are with US coins and with a fairly small sample size in terms of my own submissions.  But I have read a few comments by others who have also submitted in this time frame who felt similarly.  Its also always important to remember that grades are an opinion given at one point in time, opinions that are subject to change if those coins are reviewed at a different point in time or by a different set of graders.

 

Best of luck to you should you decide to resubmit any of your coins and please be sure to update this thread with your results.

[v/d Merwe]

Thanks for all your replies. I tend to agree with your opinions.

I will update if/ when I ve resubmitted any in future submissions. 
 

[gmarguli]

8 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

If a coin truly deserves a higher grade, I think it has a better chance, if submitted raw. A large part of the reason is that it’s easier to assess a coin out of a holder.

But the TPG remove the coin from the slab before regrading it.

You're probably thinking of crossovers.

[MarkFeld]

17 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

But the TPG remove the coin from the slab before regrading it.

You're probably thinking of crossovers.

Yes, thanks for setting the record straight and apologies to the forum for having misspoken.

I still think that submitting raw offers more upside (and downside) than submitting as a regrade in the holder. How do you feel about that?

[GoldFinger1969]

56 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

But the TPG remove the coin from the slab before regrading it.  You're probably thinking of crossovers.

Collectors send in a certified coin to the same TPG that certified it -- and sometimes it gets a new, higher grade (with a new label and slab, I presume) ?  Am I reading this correctly ?

[MarkFeld]

2 minutes ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Collectors send in a certified coin to the same TPG that certified it -- and sometimes it gets a new, higher grade (with a new label and slab, I presume) ?  Am I reading this correctly ?

Yes, “regrade” service is for submission of a coin in the holder, to the same company which graded it previously, in the hope of a higher grade. If the grading company feels that the coin deserves a higher grade, they will change it.
I believe that there is some bias against raising the grade, hence my previous comments about more upside and downside in submitting raw, vs. via regrade.

[gmarguli]

45 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

Yes, thanks for setting the record straight and apologies to the forum for having misspoken.

I still think that submitting raw offers more upside (and downside) than submitting as a regrade in the holder. How do you feel about that?

It is my understanding that the TPG (used to, perhaps not anymore) use the original grade as Grader #1 on regrades. Therefore, if the first grader to see the coin this time (Grader #2) agrees with the original grade, the coin is done. It's only if Grader #2 disagrees with the original grade does it move one to a second grader (Grader #3). 

If you crack it out, then you get two graders to look at it without the initial grade bias.

You could argue either way as to which is better. I do both regrade and crackout, but my personal opinion is that crackout/raw is the better way to go. However, I'm extremely confident in my grading abilities and financially able to take the hit if I'm wrong or unable to get the coin back at the original grade. 

[MarkFeld]

15 minutes ago, gmarguli said:

It is my understanding that the TPG (used to, perhaps not anymore) use the original grade as Grader #1 on regrades. Therefore, if the first grader to see the coin this time (Grader #2) agrees with the original grade, the coin is done. It's only if Grader #2 disagrees with the original grade does it move one to a second grader (Grader #3). 

If you crack it out, then you get two graders to look at it without the initial grade bias.

You could argue either way as to which is better. I do both regrade and crackout, but my personal opinion is that crackout/raw is the better way to go. However, I'm extremely confident in my grading abilities and financially able to take the hit if I'm wrong or unable to get the coin back at the original grade. 

Thanks.

[GoldFinger1969]

Curious Gmarg....I know you rely on your grading skills, but does the year of certification -- the type of slab -- enter into your decision to resubmit and/or crackout a coin ?

We know that certain slabs and labels were associated with -- correctly or not -- tighter or looser grading.

Edited January 3, 2021 by GoldFinger1969

[MarkFeld]

4 minutes ago, Lancek said:

I think gradeflation is more of a thing at other TPGs, but it could be happening at NGC as well.  I also think it has been happening with mostly US coins and mostly Morgan dollars.  People (and TPGs) have realized certain years, certain mint mark Morgans are know for weaker strikes.  It never made sense to me, but somehow now that is supposed to factor in to the grades??? I have alway thought that weaker presses from ancillary mints that had fewer high grade coins was one of the reasons those are more valuable.  (Along with mintage numbers)  Now there seems to be this sort of handicapping system.  

People with far better eyes, and far more time that me, have gone through a lot of older TPG pics.  Identified coins that have been resubmitted by looking at distinguishing marks.  I suppose kind of like identifying a body with dental records.  Some were a 64 in old holders, and a 65 or more in new, recent holders.

That's the main reason Morgan's in "old green holders" or "rattlers" as they were known, go for such premium at auction.  Auctioneers even highlight the older holders as a selling point.   People think the old 63s might come back a 65 today.  But I think for that to happen, most people crack and submit raw.  The TPG that issued those holders used to deny, and maybe still does, that "gradeflation" exists.  If they know a coin has been through their grading process before, they are less likely to bump.

I personally don't think it will ever be a factor in non US coins.  And I collect a lot of those.

 

Grade inflation hasn’t, by any means, been limited mostly to Morgan dollars.

[numisport]

1 hour ago, Lancek said:

I think gradeflation is more of a thing at other TPGs, but it could be happening at NGC as well.  I also think it has been happening with mostly US coins and mostly Morgan dollars.  People (and TPGs) have realized certain years, certain mint mark Morgans are know for weaker strikes.  It never made sense to me, but somehow now that is supposed to factor in to the grades??? I have alway thought that weaker presses from ancillary mints that had fewer high grade coins was one of the reasons those are more valuable.  (Along with mintage numbers)  Now there seems to be this sort of handicapping system.  

People with far better eyes, and far more time that me, have gone through a lot of older TPG pics.  Identified coins that have been resubmitted by looking at distinguishing marks.  I suppose kind of like identifying a body with dental records.  Some were a 64 in old holders, and a 65 or more in new, recent holders.

That's the main reason Morgan's in "old green holders" or "rattlers" as they were known, go for such premium at auction.  Auctioneers even highlight the older holders as a selling point.   People think the old 63s might come back a 65 today.  But I think for that to happen, most people crack and submit raw.  The TPG that issued those holders used to deny, and maybe still does, that "gradeflation" exists.  If they know a coin has been through their grading process before, they are less likely to bump.

I personally don't think it will ever be a factor in non US coins.  And I collect a lot of those.

 

Of course the value of any given coin weighs heavily on the graders mind when assessing a final grade [or appraisal] if you will.

[RWB]

37 minutes ago, numisport said:

Of course the value of any given coin weighs heavily on the graders mind when assessing a final grade [or appraisal] if you will.

Which is, without doubt, completely at odds with independent and objective "grading."

[RWB]

"Grade inflation" can be absolutely proven and simultaneously absolutely disproven.

There are no clear standards, hence anything can be whatever one wants.

[Cat Bath]

I prefer to call it population redistribution. ATS in 1996, (one year before end of OGH) they weren't using about half the MS scale.

As grading got more refined, they needed higher resolution.

I think it needed to be done but collectors & JA totally lost their minds over it. 

Here is a page from 1996 pop report at PCGS (saints)

Edited January 4, 2021 by Cat Bath

[gmarguli]

On 1/2/2021 at 7:18 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Curious Gmarg....I know you rely on your grading skills, but does the year of certification -- the type of slab -- enter into your decision to resubmit and/or crackout a coin ?

We know that certain slabs and labels were associated with -- correctly or not -- tighter or looser grading.

New answer: No.

Old Answer: Had typed up more detailed response, but when trying to post the system told me I was logged out and trashed the post. I'm too tired to deal with the moronic auto-logout. Time for a break.

[GoldFinger1969]

3 hours ago, Cat Bath said:

I prefer to call it population redistribution. ATS in 1996, (one year before end of OGH) they weren't using about half the MS scale.  As grading got more refined, they needed higher resolution. I think it needed to be done but collectors & JA totally lost their minds over it.  Here is a page from 1996 pop report at PCGS (saints)

I can't really make it out, but I would venture to guess that the distribution was skewed a bit to the LEFT with a lower Bell Curve distribution biased below MS65 or MS64.  

Since then, especially since 2004 or so, standards apparently "loosened" and more MS65's, MS66's, and maybe a few questionable MS67's have been recorded.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/3/2021 at 12:42 PM, numisport said:

Of course the value of any given coin weighs heavily on the graders mind when assessing a final grade [or appraisal] if you will.

It shouldn't, but that could be why you nevere see a "+ or "*" designation at MS-61 or MS-62 levels.

But you do see them at MS-65, 66, and 67 grades.

[World Colonial]

On 1/2/2021 at 11:39 AM, v/d Merwe said:

Yes it’s mostly South African Union Proof coins. They are minted pre 1960. These proofs always look different in hand compared to pictures for various reasons as you all know. Especially if there’s toning. In hand there will be no hairlines even under magnifying for those that I decide to submit for grading. 
Photo is for reference regarding Union proofs. 

I have submitted a number of these, though none in about a decade.  Even back then, the grades were all over the place.  Some really mediocre coins in grades up to PR-66 but better looking ones with lower numbers.  I'd attribute it to present but not noticeable (to the naked eye) hairlines.

I wouldn't bother submitting most of these coins, regardless of the potential grade.  Of the few I have left, I wish I had left it in the original presentation case.

[v/d Merwe]

Hi missed you on the BOB forums. Agree that these sets look better in their mint issue cases ungraded. I am participating in the NGC registry sets hence me wants them graded. 
I am not really bothered on potential upside in value having a higher graded coin BUT having a coin that’s graded right for its condition would be nice compared to what’s in the registry. If it raises the value it’s a bonus be it a very nice one.
Apart from a few select years they are not high cost to purchase. Some sets will probably be cheaper than the grading fees on the set. Hobbies hey?
I am a firm believer in buying the coin and not the holder. Seeing noticeable  marks on the obverse of Queen Elizabeth bust especially on the 5 Shillings in slabs up to PF 66. Then comparing to a PF63 and thinking NGC got the slabs mixed in grading. 
 

[Revenant]

On 1/2/2021 at 9:42 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Whoa, that is a HUGE jump in grade, from 65, let alone 64 and 63.  You've had this happen many times ?

What coins are you talking about here ?  Pics would help.

 

I think when he says "looks better" you can get coins with fewer or less severe marks that are subjectively more unattractive. 

And we've all seen the AU58 slider that looks nicer than a lot of MS62 or even MS63 coins.

[GoldFinger1969]

2 hours ago, Revenant said:

I think when he says "looks better" you can get coins with fewer or less severe marks that are subjectively more unattractive.  And we've all seen the AU58 slider that looks nicer than a lot of MS62 or even MS63 coins.

You mean subjectively more ATTRACTIVE, right ?