Dealer vs Member grading 1 1

[dccyber]

I keep seeing a variation of this message on Twitter:

“If I submit to TPG it comes back a MS63, but if a big dealer sends the same coin in it gets a 64 or 65.”

Is there anything to this?

[GoldFinger1969]

Probably less of a concern now with CACG but there are lots of stories about this in the affirmative.

I'll leave it to the vets here to discuss.

[Fenntucky Mike]

I'd consider the source. A newb getting burned and knowledgeable "dealer" or collector not, well, I would expect that 100% of the time. 

I do think that dealers or well known individuals do have an advantage in getting things authenticated through TPGs that would be returned as normal to regular submitter. 

[Jason Abshier]

Business doing business a favor is what I call it … The average Joe collectors like us sending in coins to have them graded by NGC/PCGS we are peanuts compared to bigger dealers who what really keep NGC/PCGS in business sending in bulk submissions 

market grading was dirty scam that was created and driven by dealers to profit money , in theory I say TPG has went off the rails with market grading does it really do good ? In a dealer’s standpoint his main goal when sending coins in is to get highway grade he can possibly get for profit…  For us collectors ? We get a huge dent in our wallets trying to obtain these higher end coins , if we were to crack one out and send them in ourselves I guarantee you we will get grade point lower most of the time 

Edited April 19 by Jason Abshier

[Sandon]

   Supposedly, the graders at reputable grading services are not allowed to know whose coins they are grading. The contention that large submitters receive better grades than others is an often-repeated contention for which no one to my knowledge has provided credible evidence.  A number of the several dozen coins from my collection that I have submitted to NGC received numerical grades higher than I expected, and I'm certainly not a large submitter. (I've had a few disappointing experiences as well.) On the other hand, I once heard a well-known representative of a major numismatic auction house complain that PCGS had refused to attribute certain early U.S. coins as proofs despite their having previously been attributed and sold as such; and I have read major auctioneers' catalog descriptions that questioned the accuracy of the grades given by grading services.

   The real problem as I see it is the interplay of (1) the complexity and subjectivity of the current numerical grading "system" and (2) the inherent pressure on grading services from all customers to satisfy them with generous grades. Experienced graders may reasonably disagree over whether a coin should receive a grade of, for example, 64, 64+, or 65. The difference in list prices from 64 to 65 may be substantial, and concern that any customer may go to a competitor could result in the coin being given the benefit of the doubt. Smaller submitters who think that their coins were just as nice as pieces sold by major dealers or auction houses at higher grades may assume that these large submitters receive special considerations, which is probably what leads to the contentions of favoritism in the first place.

[ldhair]

As a normal the grader is not going to know who sent the coin in for grading. It is possible with famous coins or collections that the grader already knew who owns those coins. 

[VKurtB]

On 4/19/2024 at 9:32 AM, ldhair said:

As a normal the grader is not going to know who sent the coin in for grading. It is possible with famous coins or collections that the grader already knew who owns those coins. 

Correct, full stop. It’s like counting ballots in a county with deep red and deep blue precincts. You can tell when the precinct changes. 

[RWB]

On 4/18/2024 at 10:55 PM, dccyber said:

I keep seeing a variation of this message on Twitter:

“If I submit to TPG it comes back a MS63, but if a big dealer sends the same coin in it gets a 64 or 65.”

Is there anything to this?

It's a casual emotional observation of little value. To test this theory, a broad selection of identical coins (meaning the SAME coins) would have to be submitted by several "anonymous" collectors and several "well known" dealers. Once the coin-by-coin results were compared, a more rigorous experimental design could be prepared.

Edited April 19 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

On 4/19/2024 at 10:05 AM, Sandon said:

   Supposedly, the graders at reputable grading services are not allowed to know whose coins they are grading....

A number of the several dozen coins from my collection that I have submitted to NGC received numerical grades higher than I expected, and I'm certainly not a large submitter....

One notable exception comes to mind and while members may feel I am harping on it, the truth is a judgment call had to made (as well as a career decision to the parties involved.) This concerned the injury suffered to the right leg of Liberty on the unique '33 "Double-Eagle." I shall not say another word more. Negotiations occurred between the owner and at least two TPGS and I have to assume the parties involved were satisfied.

I had wanted to restrict my observations to just the two comments you made above because if there is anyone given to making fair and balanced comments it is you.  Now, is it not a fact that you have regaled the membership with a steady diet -- and I exaggerate solely to illustrate the point I wish to make, that coins, particularly those slabbed years ago by A, were resubmitted by you to B, and you were pleasantly surprised by the results? You modestly offered a reason which I accepted at face value because I believe you are congenitally incapable of lying and/or showboating. Cross-grading entails risk and I believe every decision you had made was more than fortuitous good luck. I am very happy for you.

 

[rrantique]

On 4/20/2024 at 5:23 AM, Henri Charriere said:

One notable exception comes to mind and while members may feel I am harping on it, the truth is a judgment call had to made (as well as a career decision to the parties involved.) This concerned the injury suffered to the right leg of Liberty on the unique '33 "Double-Eagle." I shall not say another word more. Negotiations occurred between the owner and at least two TPGS and I have to assume the parties involved were satisfied.

I had wanted to restrict my observations to just the two comments you made above because if there is anyone given to making fair and balanced comments it is you.  Now, is it not a fact that you have regaled the membership with a steady diet -- and I exaggerate solely to illustrate the point I wish to make, that coins, particularly those slabbed years ago by A, were resubmitted by you to B, and you were pleasantly surprised by the results? You modestly offered a reason which I accepted at face value because I believe you are congenitally incapable of lying and/or showboating. Cross-grading entails risk and I believe every decision you had made was more than fortuitous good luck. I am very happy for you.

 

 

[powermad5000]

On 4/19/2024 at 12:33 PM, RWB said:

It's a casual emotional observation of little value. To test this theory, a broad selection of identical coins (meaning the SAME coins) would have to be submitted by several "anonymous" collectors and several "well known" dealers. Once the coin-by-coin results were compared, a more rigorous experimental design could be prepared.

SCIENCE!!!!!! YES!!!!! This must be proven through science and actual real world experiments!

As anyone can post any comment on social media, it must be taken with a grain of salt. I agree with @Fenntucky Mike and @Sandon when it comes to this. We in this forum will even argue over the proposed self grade of a coin posted by an OP. And sometimes people do crossover grading or even cut the coin out of the slab and resubmit to a different TPG after they get their submission back to try to get a better grade. Being grading itself is subjective, it is based upon the subject. Whoever made that statement in my opinion is mixing apples and oranges. Every coin has different surface issues (or not), and minor nicks and scratches in different places. It is not accurate for the person who posted that to make that comment unless the EXACT same coin was submitted through him or herself and then resubmitted by a dealer and even in that case it would be graded by two completely different graders who might have a different subjective view of the coin in hand and still assigning it two different grades in the end.

I would assume the dealer simply had better quality coins to submit in the first place.

[RWB]

I recall that several decades ago Coin World sent batches of coins (the identical ones) to various TPGs in operation at the time. Maybe someone here has a copy of the results. I remember it being useful data, so, of course, it was discontinued.

[VKurtB]

On 4/20/2024 at 3:41 PM, RWB said:

I recall that several decades ago Coin World sent batches of coins (the identical ones) to various TPGs in operation at the time. Maybe someone here has a copy of the results. I remember it being useful data, so, of course, it was discontinued.

The outcome was that grades nearly never repeated. 

[J P M]

On 4/20/2024 at 1:01 PM, rrantique said:

 

I is not that good looking 

[Sandon]

    The Coin World experiment, which I think was back in the early 1990s, wasn't about favoritism among submitters. It was about whether the then eleven-point (60 to 70) system for grading mint state and (unworn) proof coins was capable of being consistently applied in the first place.  As I recall, a number of individual coins received different--sometimes several point different--grades when resubmitted to the same grading service.  I thought, "this numerical grading nonsense ends here and now", but it didn't.

[Henri Charriere]

On 4/20/2024 at 1:01 PM, rrantique said:

 

I had wanted to comment on this video but as it does not directly relate to the OP's topic I am posting my observations on the more appropriate "Unsolicited Comments" thread.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 4/19/2024 at 10:05 AM, Sandon said:

....and I have read major auctioneers' catalog descriptions that questioned the accuracy of the grades given by grading services.

That's interesting because unless the auctioner is a numismatist like in the days of old (i.e., David Akers) most of the time the auction houses (esp. non-numismatic ones) would rely on the experts, right ?

On 4/20/2024 at 4:50 PM, VKurtB said:

The outcome was that grades nearly never repeated. 

The more important question is what is the variance...how far do the grades swing and WHERE ?

If the grades swing between 64-66 and the real money is at 67, no harm...no foul.  But swings at key inflection points -- shout out to the infamous CU Franklin Gradeflation thread !!  -- are HIGHLY controversial and problematic and the real source of contention.

Nobody gives a damn if a 1924 Saint gets an MS-62 or MS-63 grade.  Even the CAC bean probably doesn't matter much.

Edited April 23 by GoldFinger1969