NGCX 1 1

[EagleRJO]

On 11/18/2022 at 7:41 AM, Hoghead515 said:

Im just wondering what the cross over cost would be to cross a coin from the old style to the new.  If they cant compete in the same registry sets together then there will be people wanting to cross them over so they can. 

I can't imagine that registry sites wouldn't develop a method to allow entry of coins with either industry grading system for the same sets if that's the direction it goes, where it would seem like a simple thing to convert to whichever is used as a points basis instead of requiring a crossover submission.

[Hoghead515]

On 11/18/2022 at 11:08 AM, EagleRJO said:

I can't imagine that registry sites wouldn't develop a method to allow entry of coins with either industry grading system for the same sets if that's the direction it goes, where it would seem like a simple thing to convert to whichever is used as a points basis instead of requiring a crossover submission.

Heres what I found on the website.  Looks like eventually they may make them where they will coexist. Id hope so anyways. 

[EagleRJO]

On 11/18/2022 at 11:38 AM, Hoghead515 said:

Heres what I found on the website.  Looks like eventually they may make them where they will coexist. Id hope so anyways. 

Seems like for now they are treating the NGCX coins as a completely separate entity without any cross compatibility. However I don't think it's such an issue as apparently the new grading system is initially just to be used for modern bullion coins as mentioned by others. If the new system is eventually carried over to older coins I can't imagine not allowing either grade basis to be entered for the same set.

Do you have registry sets of modern bullion coins where there is a concern?

Edited November 18, 2022 by EagleRJO

[Hoghead515]

On 11/18/2022 at 11:47 AM, EagleRJO said:

Seems like for now they are treating the NGCX coins as a completely separate entity without any cross compatibility. However I don't think it's such an issue as apparently the new grading system is initially just to be used for modern bullion coins as mentioned by others. If the new system is eventually carried over to older coins I can't imagine not allowing either grade basis to be entered for the same set.

Do you have registry sets of modern bullion coins where there is a concern?

I got a couple. Eagles and silver proofs. That what got me concerned

[EagleRJO]

On 11/18/2022 at 2:43 PM, Hoghead515 said:

I got a couple. Eagles and silver proofs. That what got me concerned

Might be worth posting a question about that in the NGC Registry sub-forum to voice your concerns and make sure they are thinking that through to keep on top of any potential issues. 

ASEs (proof and BU) were one of my favorites for the longest time going back to 1986 ... well, at least up to 2021 when the mint went woke and started messing everything up. Long story short, all my mint subscriptions except the Innovation dollars are now canceled as a result, and I'm not sure how long that last subscription will last.  But that's for another time and place to complain about.

[VKurtB]

NONE of this to follow is from anything I’ve read, only my own speculation and “reading between the lines” with some look toward what makes sense to me. 

I could imagine a time when modern coins would end up in this new 10.0 system exclusively, while so-called classic coins remain in the quasi-Sheldon 70 point system. I see this taking as long as 10 years or perhaps more to take full effect. We would then be back where NGC grading classically was, while the NGCX system sits as a world apart. 

[Sandon]

    Coins struck since 1982 are almost exclusively collected in unworn mint state or proof grades, which are 9.0 to 10.0 on the NGCX scale.  If the NGCX scale is intended only for use on such coins, why does the scale include circulated grades from 1 to 8.5?

 

 

Edited November 18, 2022 by Sandon
Changed typo 9.5 to 8.5

[Crawtomatic]

On 11/18/2022 at 2:46 PM, Sandon said:

    Coins struck since 1982 are almost exclusively collected in unworn mint state or proof grades, which are 9.0 to 10.0 on the NGCX scale.  If the NGCX scale is intended only for use on such coins, why does the scale include circulated grades from 1 to 9.5?

I believe to account for errors & varieties which dip down into the circulated range.  Even if modern.

[VKurtB]

On 11/18/2022 at 2:48 PM, Crawtomatic said:

I believe to account for errors & varieties which dip down into the circulated range.  Even if modern.

Never forget the 7 varieties of 1982 cents. Or 8 if you include the ultra-rarities. Also, no uncirculated set coins in 1982 & 1983. 

Edited November 18, 2022 by VKurtB

[Crawtomatic]

On 11/18/2022 at 3:01 PM, VKurtB said:

Also, no uncirculated set coins in 1982 & 1983. 

There were the Souvenir sets but you had to purchase direct from a Mint gift shop.  Right?  I wasn't around for that Mint mishap.

[VKurtB]

On 11/18/2022 at 3:06 PM, Crawtomatic said:

There were the Souvenir sets but you had to purchase direct from a Mint gift shop.  Right?  I wasn't around for that Mint mishap.

You are well-informed. That form of packaging actually preceded 1982 &1983, but wasn’t only in those years. The 1982&1983 Souvenir sets were important because it was the ONLY way to get straight-from-a-mint coins. The same green envelopes initially appeared for Susie B sets. 

[EagleRJO]

On 11/18/2022 at 3:46 PM, Sandon said:

... circulated grades from 1 to 9.5?

Looks like the circulated grades would be 1 (PR) to 8.9 (AU), and mint state would be 9.0 to 10 (vs 60 to 70 at present, so pretty similar there).  It would also require additional half grades, consistent with or in lieu of that the continuation of "+" designations.

I would have preferred to see a 100 point system with 1 (PR) to 89 (AU) for circulated grades and 90 to 100 for MS, without any decimals (e.g. a 67+ would simply become a 97+, and not a 9.75 or 97.5).  Maybe it will eventually transition to that since I think it makes more sense for coin collectors and would be easier for most to wrap their heads around that.

Edited November 18, 2022 by EagleRJO

[Crawtomatic]

On 11/18/2022 at 3:10 PM, VKurtB said:

You are well-informed. That form of packaging actually preceded 1982 &1983, but wasn’t only in those years. The 1982&1983 Souvenir sets were important because it was the ONLY way to get straight-from-a-mint coins. The same green envelopes initially appeared for Susie B sets. 

I've done my share of thumbing through 1970s mint sets for decent Type 1 Ikes and quality Jeffersons.  Mostly before this recent run-up in pricing.  Every chance I had to get a 77 or 78 souvenir set I found the quality of the packaging to be far superior to that of the mint sets sent out by mail.  For example, practically all Lincoln cents in a mint set from 77-79 are in some state of RB toning (and not attractively) at this point.  The other coins would generally be beat to hell.  But those in the souvenir sets have held up quite well.

[World Colonial]

On 11/17/2022 at 6:09 AM, EagleRJO said:

I'm going to go against the grain here and say it may be a good change in the long run.  There has been talk of switching to a more logical 100 point system for a while, which it essentially will be with tenths. 

Been gone from here for a while and catching up.  Someone may have said this later, but I'll find out soon enough.

It's a revenue generator or intended to be one.  That's it.  A private equity firm bought them, and this is one option to generate incremental ROI to make it pay.  None of this has anything to do with collecting.  It's a business and I get it.  Said so on the PCGS forum where the majority seem to think it's a good idea.

The real dream of the TPGs is to change to another grading scale and convince enough coin owners (notice I didn't say collectors) to resubmit to maintain marketability at current levels.  It's somewhat similar to the complaints I've read about CAC though I consider the two different.

For "collecting", it's another option of attracting a new group of predominantly financially motivated buyers to inflate the price level as much as possible.  This is my inference why a plurality on the PCGS forum thinks it's a fantastic idea.  They believe it will maximize return on their "investment".

Will this work, either as a parallel system or replacement?

I'm not spending a dime to get my coins regraded now or later, that's for sure.  Fortunately, I don't collect any US coins, so it will matter a lot less. 

It's this type of practice that affirms my decision not to collect US coinage, as if I needed one.

[World Colonial]

On 11/17/2022 at 2:03 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

Bringing new people in is not a bad thing but I doubt many will cross over into more traditional collecting, 3% sounds about right. 

This could turn out to be a good business decision for BX, short term money maker then flip CCG. 

Depends upon someone's definition of "good".

I don't want any increase in financially motivated buying. This is a likely outcome of this practice, more financialization of the "hobby".

I don't buy coins to intentionally lose money but never became a collector to diversity my portfolio.

Since COVID started in 2020, I've read from numerous sources about the rising price level.  I'd consider modestly rising prices ok but not some of the price spikes we've had since then.

1921 Peace dollars, common Morgan dollars, 1916-D G-4 Mercury dimes, and MS-63 09-S VBD cents have all increased significantly and that's just a short list.

[World Colonial]

On 11/17/2022 at 8:38 PM, Crawtomatic said:

The grading scale can be a knowledge barrier for the casual collector when it's not in line with other collectibles.  I guess this addresses that.

Anyone with an IQ of 100 or higher should have no problem comprehending any grading system (US or otherwise) I have encountered.

Or maybe this is part of the problem?

[Crawtomatic]

On 11/22/2022 at 2:48 PM, World Colonial said:

Anyone with an IQ of 100 or higher should have no problem comprehending any grading system (US or otherwise) I have encountered.

Or maybe this is part of the problem?

I should have said "potential collector" rather than "casual collector".  I feel like the 10 point scale approach is to draw in new eyes and collectors.

I know when I've shown holdered coins to friends & family that are not in the numismatic community the secondary question is generally, "what does 63 mean?"  Or whatever number it is.  0-70 isn't intuitive to a non-collector.  But 0-100 or 0-10 is self-explanatory.

[Henri Charriere]

On 11/22/2022 at 3:30 PM, World Colonial said:

.... I'm not spending a dime to get my coins regraded now or later, that's for sure....

My sentiments exactly.  Besides, there are enough people around who recall, the nuts-and-bolts grades first formulated in prehistoric times (G, VG, F, etc.) irrespective of collector/owner status... and IQ.

[EagleRJO]

What's up WC, it's been a little while.  Wanting something to be more logical and user friendly does not mean there isn't an understanding of that or being based on flawed principals simply used because those before them used that, and are not necessarily mutually inclusive. Plus running a business naturally means that decisions will mostly be made that benefit that business.  And I for one don't mind things being "nuts-and-bolts" if it works. 

Edited November 23, 2022 by EagleRJO

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/22/2022 at 3:30 PM, World Colonial said:

Been gone from here for a while and catching up.  Someone may have said this later, but I'll find out soon enough.

It's a revenue generator or intended to be one.  That's it.  A private equity firm bought them, and this is one option to generate incremental ROI to make it pay.  None of this has anything to do with collecting.  It's a business and I get it.  Said so on the PCGS forum where the majority seem to think it's a good idea.

Agreed....

On 11/22/2022 at 3:30 PM, World Colonial said:

The real dream of the TPGs is to change to another grading scale and convince enough coin owners (notice I didn't say collectors) to resubmit to maintain marketability at current levels.  It's somewhat similar to the complaints I've read about CAC though I consider the two different.

It may be a dream, but it can't possibly be any serious discussion of a future business plan.  The Sheldon 1-70 scale is here to stay as far as the eye can see, IMO. 

On 11/22/2022 at 3:30 PM, World Colonial said:

For "collecting", it's another option of attracting a new group of predominantly financially motivated buyers to inflate the price level as much as possible.  This is my inference why a plurality on the PCGS forum thinks it's a fantastic idea.  They believe it will maximize return on their "investment". Will this work, either as a parallel system or replacement?  I'm not spending a dime to get my coins regraded now or later, that's for sure.  Fortunately, I don't collect any US coins, so it will matter a lot less.  It's this type of practice that affirms my decision not to collect US coinage, as if I needed one.

How is it going to help their investment ?  If their "investment" is modern coins costing $50 - $1,000....I might agree with that because many newcomers into our hobby have used their time at home and discretionary income (and govt checks) to splurge on coin and currency novelties.  But most of the PCGS/CU crowd isn't into moderns and the kind of lower-priced stuff that newcomers gravitate to.  You have some SERIOUS collectors there.

I do NOT see it benefitting higher-priced coins/currency as this has not been the area where the majority of these people have gravitated to.  Maybe with Crypto, NFTs, and sportscards imploding, they'll move on to serious coin collecting but that remains to be seen (as you and I have discussed many times here ).

I am not spending any $$$ on re-grading, either, WC. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/22/2022 at 3:40 PM, World Colonial said:

Since COVID started in 2020, I've read from numerous sources about the rising price level.  I'd consider modestly rising prices ok but not some of the price spikes we've had since then.  1921 Peace dollars, common Morgan dollars, 1916-D G-4 Mercury dimes, and MS-63 09-S VBD cents have all increased significantly and that's just a short list.

Are all those in the low-to-moderate price range ?  If so, that's the area that the stay-at-home, collecting-checks-by-mail Covid-19 crowd has spent $$$ on.

Have NOT seen it in any of the Saint-Gaudens types I watch, where the prices start pretty much at the price of 1 ounce of gold, $2,000 or so.  Maybe the 1/2 and 1/4 Eagles have seen a price move up ?

[World Colonial]

On 11/22/2022 at 5:25 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Are all those in the low-to-moderate price range ?  If so, that's the area that the stay-at-home, collecting-checks-by-mail Covid-19 crowd has spent $$$ on.

Have NOT seen it in any of the Saint-Gaudens types I watch, where the prices start pretty much at the price of 1 ounce of gold, $2,000 or so.  Maybe the 1/2 and 1/4 Eagles have seen a price move up ?

1916-D Mercury dime went from about $700 to something like $1200.  09-S VDB cent in MS-63 BN from about $1200 to $2000 though this one is from 2016.  1921 Peace dollar, I can't remember but it's been covered on this forum since last year to my recollection and it was "noticeable".  All three of these coins are very common and the 16-D in G-4 would be "dreck" if it was any other date.

Common Morgan doilars I think sell in the $100 range in MS-63 which I consider ridiculous for such common coins.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/22/2022 at 10:17 PM, World Colonial said:

1916-D Mercury dime went from about $700 to something like $1200.  09-S VDB cent in MS-63 BN from about $1200 to $2000 though this one is from 2016.  1921 Peace dollar, I can't remember but it's been covered on this forum since last year to my recollection and it was "noticeable".  All three of these coins are very common and the 16-D in G-4 would be "dreck" if it was any other date. Common Morgan doilars I think sell in the $100 range in MS-63 which I consider ridiculous for such common coins.

And yet, the ridiculous premiums on silver persist even without leading to a rise in the silver price.  Go figure....

[World Colonial]

On 11/22/2022 at 5:22 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

How is it going to help their investment ?  If their "investment" is modern coins costing $50 - $1,000....I might agree with that because many newcomers into our hobby have used their time at home and discretionary income (and govt checks) to splurge on coin and currency novelties.  But most of the PCGS/CU crowd isn't into moderns and the kind of lower-priced stuff that newcomers gravitate to.  You have some SERIOUS collectors there.

I do NOT see it benefitting higher-priced coins/currency as this has not been the area where the majority of these people have gravitated to.  Maybe with Crypto, NFTs, and sportscards imploding, they'll move on to serious coin collecting but that remains to be seen (as you and I have discussed many times here ).

I am not spending any $$$ on re-grading, either, WC. 

I'm making a few assumptions

First, that the intent is to eventually convert a noticeable proportion of these new collectors into other coinage.  If it succeeds at scale, that's how it could happen.  Otherwise. I don't see that there is enough money in the effort, as I presume most volume will occur under bulk submissions.

Remember also that "at scale" doesn't have to be very large if it increases demand in a particular area "noticeably".  For my primary collecting interest (which is unlikely from this source), one new collector outbidding me is "noticeable".

Second, it also depends upon the source for most of the volume.  My assumption is predominantly NCLT.  1982 is a rather odd cut-off, unless it's intentional to coincide with US modern commemoratives and (presumably) for world coinage series such as the Panda and Mexican Libertad.

It's my inference that most collectors of NCLT who transition to other coinage buy equivalent "classics" including Morgan dollars, generic pre-1933 US gold, and world coin equivalents.

Looking at the TPG population data, the bulk of the volume for circulating coinage is proofs, not business strikes.  I presume substantial buying of Ike dollars occurred from marketing promotions but someone else will know about that.  These buyers are probably more likely to transition to US classics normally collected by the broader collector base.

[World Colonial]

On 11/22/2022 at 10:31 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

And yet, the ridiculous premiums on silver persist even without leading to a rise in the silver price.  Go figure....

I agree, but the problem for actual collecting is decreasing affordability for the more typical collector.  To my recollection, I don't recall anyone else ever (not even once) bringing this up here or on any coin forum where I posted.  Most posters are lot more interested in a higher price level.

I believe common MS-63 and similar Morgan dollars are mostly owned in volume as "investments" by financially motivated buyers.  The coins are far too common to be mostly owned by set and type collectors or even as impulse purchases.

Concurrently, this is a "staple" coin of US collecting and I think it's important that coins like it remain affordable to most buyers.  "Affordable" is relative of course but my assumption is that at least 50% of the collector base has an annual budget of $500 or less. 

A noticeable percentage in this group probably do not own $100 coins.  Eliminating this and other similar coins as an option due to budget constraints will make collecting less interesting to them.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/22/2022 at 10:43 PM, World Colonial said:

I believe common MS-63 and similar Morgan dollars are mostly owned in volume as "investments" by financially motivated buyers.  The coins are far too common to be mostly owned by set and type collectors or even as impulse purchases.

Makes sense.  One estimate for collectors of Saints was that 500-1,000 were serious registry players....about 25,000 were Type collectors or partial-registry collectors (anywhere from 2-20 Saints; I'm in this group).....and the rest in the hundreds of thousands who were investors in bullion who used a few super-common Saints.

There are about 10 Saints that have 20,000 or more coins in Mint State alone that are available at spot gold or modest premiums for low-60's Mint State grades.  These are the coins that the 3rd group, the investor class, would be utilizing for the most part.

I have not seen any estimates for serious Morgan registry players, Type collectors, or investors using them as a silver bullion substitue.  I am going to guess it is a multiple of Saint investors given the much lower cost to collect....probably as many as 10-20x as more.

Edited November 23, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[World Colonial]

On 11/23/2022 at 2:01 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Makes sense.  One estimate for collectors of Saints was that 500-1,000 were serious registry players....about 25,000 were Type collectors or partial-registry collectors (anywhere from 2-20 Saints; I'm in this group).....and the rest in the hundreds of thousands who were investors in bullion who used a few super-common Saints.

The registry number seems too high, unless by this you mean set collectors.  Maybe there are this many.  If you remember my analysis from a few months ago, it is the #1 series for highest budget collectors, per the Heritage archives.

On 11/23/2022 at 2:01 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

There are about 10 Saints that have 20,000 or more coins in Mint State alone that are available at spot gold or modest premiums for low-60's Mint State grades.  These are the coins that the 3rd group, the investor class, would be utilizing for the most part.

This is my assumption also.

On 11/23/2022 at 2:01 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I have not seen any estimates for serious Morgan registry players, Type collectors, or investors using them as a silver bullion substitue.  I am going to guess it is a multiple of Saint investors given the much lower cost to collect....probably as many as 10-20x as more.

I'd guess there are in the vicinity of 100,000 who collect the series in some format.  Either the entire series (which is large and expensive to most collectors) or some sub-group, like one per date or all dates from one of the mints.

There must also be a large number of impulse buyers, who aren't collecting by type.  This is the probably the majority, for the common dates.

Still, the most common dates like the 81-S must have in the vicinity of 1MM going by the current TPG counts.  Even with my guesstimate of 2MM active collectors, it's unlikely in the vicinity of 50% own any single Morgan dollar date, very unlikely.

[Henri Charriere]

On 11/22/2022 at 10:17 PM, World Colonial said:

....All three of these coins are very common and the 16-D in G-4 would be "dreck" ....

I did not think I would ever see a 16-D mentioned in the same breath using this descriptor, but it is an apt analogy.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Quintus Arrius
Rewording.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:54 AM, World Colonial said:

The registry number seems too high, unless by this you mean set collectors.

Doug Winter came up with 500 and I have interpolated since his (dated) comment allowing for expansion of the group.  It definitely could be less as you say, WC. 

Also, I'm not a registry player but since 1 coin (the 1933) is uncollectable unless you are our friend EC here at this forum....and unless you are willing to pay Big $$$ or go down bigtime in quality for about 5-7 other Saints, most people who are even serious collectors might only want to go for 40 or 45 coins or something like that.  I would still call those people registry players even if they have no intention of going after every non-1933 coin in the Saint series.

On 11/23/2022 at 9:54 AM, World Colonial said:

I'd guess there are in the vicinity of 100,000 who collect the series in some format.  Either the entire series (which is large and expensive to most collectors) or some sub-group, like one per date or all dates from one of the mints.

There must also be a large number of impulse buyers, who aren't collecting by type.  This is the probably the majority, for the common dates. Still, the most common dates like the 81-S must have in the vicinity of 1MM going by the current TPG counts.  Even with my guesstimate of 2MM active collectors, it's unlikely in the vicinity of 50% own any single Morgan dollar date, very unlikely.

Agree with your guestimates. 

Edited November 23, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[Tyrock]

Doesn't sound like a move in the right direction. Making things more complicated just as a new TPGS is coming out. Hey, at least Mike Mezack will have something new to hype.