PCGS / NGC / The Death of the Modern Coin Market?

[gmarguli]

For those who submit modern coins for resale, you need to get some PF70s in order to make money. It's just an economic reality.

 

Typical PCGS situation was that you'd submit 100 coins at bulk grading rates and you get 1-2 PF70s and the rest PF69s. The PF69s you dump - many times at a small loss per coin. One modern dealer used to wholesale out his PF69s at around $2.50 per coin less than the cost of grading and that's not taking into account the cost of the actual coin. The PF70s used to be big winners and that's where you'd make your money.

 

NGC went the other direction, they handed out PF70s much easier. Typical situation with them was you'd get 20 PF70s and 80 PF69s. Again, you dump the PF69s frequently at a small loss, but the PF70s bring OK money - not great, but OK and enough to cover your losses on PF69s and make it worth your while.

 

My personal opinion, not that it matters in relation to this, is that NGC was too easy, but PCGS was too strict. ICG had it just right (just kidding). While the quality of many of the coins likely deserved to be graded PF70, IMHO, NGC took the stance that they are going to give out a high number of PF70s without much regard for their value in the marketplace, while PCGS took the stance that there has to remain an economic incentive to continue to submit large quantities of coins and they gave out very few, but the ones that they do give out sell for solid money and encourage more submissions.

 

I used to beat on PCGS for not grading enough coins PF70. At one point they clearly had an unwritten policy not to give any coin a PF70 grade. Now I feel (fear) that they're going too far in the opposite direction. They're giving out way too many 70s. It wasn't too long ago that any PCGS PF70 was a big winner. It didn't matter the coin or the date, if it was a PF70 it was a big $$$ coin. Now many of these coins can be easily had for under $200 and it seems like everyone is getting a few on their submissions.

 

Since I had way too much time on my hands I decided to look at the seemingly recent explosion in PF70s being churned out by PCGS to see if this were an accurate assessment on my part. To have a point of reference, I also included NGC coins for the same time period to see if there was a change with their grading percentages. Keep in mind that for moderns, most of these coins were highly likely submitted during the year they were minted.

 

 

 

 

The numbers do not include the San Francisco commems for NGC as they are not listed on their web site.

 

I found a few things interesting.

 

1) The percentage of PF70s given out by PCGS for 2006 coins has risen 173% over 2005 coins. For NGC it was 62%. Likely the Mint is making higher quality coins, but both seem to be massive leaps. I've also been hearing of older moderns receiving PF70, but I don't have any older pop reports to see if this is true to a large extent.

 

2) The number of modern coins graded 2006 vs. 2005 is down for both PCGS & NGC. The somewhat surprising part is that PCGS has a down 2005 over 2004, but NGC appears to have had a massively successful 2005 over 2004 with a 71% increase.

 

3) Given how everyone basically thinks that PCGS owns the moderns market, I was surprised to see that not only does NGC grade more moderns than PCGS, but the gap is huge and widening substantially. I would not have suspected that the numbers were so far apart!

 

Some questions I wonder about:

 

Given the fact the above numbers are all public information, could the dramatic rise in PF70s coming from PCGS be political due to submitters favoring NGC and not necessarily due to increased quality?

 

Is the slowing coin market causing a loosening of grades?

 

Is this a vicious cycle developing? If PCGS keeps pumping out the PF70s at their current rate, the average value of one will continue to drop. As it is now, the profit potential of a PCGS bulk submission is shrinking. The PF69s aren't worth submitting. If you can't make up the money on the PF70s, then there is no reason to submit. At the same time, if NGC keeps pumping out more and more PF70s, the value of them will fall. In both situations the value of the PF69s may get more depressed and it's even harder to make your money back on the bulk submission.

 

Is it time for both services to tighten their grading on ultra-moderns?

 

Does anyone care or is this just all modern *spoon*?

[Zoins]

Thanks for putting these numbers together Greg. I knew NGC was certifying a lot more coins than PCGS and that NGC had a lot more 70s (both percentage and absolute numbers) but it's good to see the numbers. I think some people get the impression PCGS owns the moderns market because people talk about the winners a lot. The NGC 70 game is a bulk game where you make more due to having a higher quantity of lower priced 70s. This isn't as sexy so the people playing this game don't talk about how much they are making in aggregate.

 

What I find really interesting wrt 70s vs 69s is that there is a lot of discussion about percentages, loose vs strict grading, pricing, etc. but you almost never see people post photos of 69s or 70s in a "grade this" thread. Occasionally you'll get a photo of someone asking "why isn't this a 70?" but it's very rare and nowhere near as prevalent as the threads talking about grading results and pricing. I think it would be interesting if people posted close ups of their 69s for others to point out the flaws, if there even are any visible ones under a camera's macro magnification.

 

The other thing that I think is interesting is that people on the NGC boards make fun of ICG for handing out lots of 70s while people on the PCGS boards make fun of NGC for handing out lots of 70s. Many of these jabs are just cheap shots. Posts like this are much more informative and useful.

[michael]

sweet so yes i see

 

the ms/proof 70 grade market is just a money maker for submitters to get a score and then sell which makes economic sence to a for profit private business. and that 70 is truly not a grade but it is a political thing and this is only for the demand of submitters to profit from

 

and this is okie as the business private and for profit is only giving what the market wants in a service

 

for me there is no such thing as a 70 grade it is only a theory grade and since coin grades are subjective and eye appeal even moreso adding to a grade

 

70 is just some choice proof/ms 69+ grade with a little plastic and tag thrown in for good measure to give submitters to get more submissions and then letting the general proof/70 slabbed coin buyer fight over to set a market price

 

so the winners are the submitters who nthen in turn sell of course for a profit this is waht business is all about and this is a good thing and of course the slabbing service profits but this is even a better thing as they are a private enterprise only supplying what the market wants

[michael]

the important question is who is this market and what are they doing with all these 70 subjective graded perfect coins?

 

and what happens if 5 ten years from now subjective standards change then waht will become of these pieces of plastic that say 70 on them??

 

also since it is perfection 70 straight from the dies as by defination then what happens let s say 5 years from now and the coin takes on an ever so slight tone is this now not a 70 grade?

 

or is it the preceived standard of the servic e that grades the coin a 70..................

 

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

overall i like the way things that ngc does with regards to 70 grades they give out more of them and rightly so as some of the mints products these last few years borders on prefect so the difference in price by 1.5x, two times the 69 price for a 70 grade makes more sence to me

 

still that is one expensive tag

 

someone a submitter/promoter is making lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

but will they buy them back from all the chickens buying these plastic holders and 70 tags thinking they are prefection which they are most certainly not

[michael]

the modern coin market is alive and well

 

the problem is that the plastic holders and tags that make a coin hugely in demand where if you break the coin out of this holder it is now not even close to the value in the holder

 

the modern coin market is alive and well

 

but plastic holders and tags that say 69/70 on them is not a coin market at all

 

so should you buy the coin or the plastic holder and tag

 

you be the judge for yourself just make sure you put discretionary money in these little pieces of plastic and 70 graded tags

[Bruceswar]

Moderns are crazy. Up one minute, down the next. It is like the stock market. At either rate a very interesting read. Thanks for putting it together. Now all you have done is support 2 things. Grade flation, and laura's never ending rants on moderns.

[jgrinz]

Very amazing work there Greg and I appreciate the time put into this data.

I have to add that along with the 'Death of the MCM',the GRADING companies AND the US MINT are taking the 'Relitively modest Coin collector' out of the market.

The AMOUNT of offerings by the US MINT, the EXPENSE incurred in obtaining better specimens, 69 OR 70's from the TPG's, are getting a little rediculous and is almost an impossiblity to keep your collecting sets 'complete'.

I for one are a casualty of this Tandem murder.

I consider myself a little MORE than your 'modest coin collector' and have decided to leave the modern coin market all together because of this (At Least on the Commemorative Side) ... Having amassed a MCOMM collection ranking me at #27 here - I have starting divesting these 100 or so coins into the market on EBAY. I will not be apart of this mass murder !

IF any one is loking for anything IN THE MCOMM are ... ( Shameless Plug )

 

my

[Dcoin]

I think that very few entities stand to loose more from a slumping coin market than TPG’s. In a way the hobby has given them the power to set tends and move the market one way or another.

 

With that in mind, TPG’s are now looking to jumpstart a modern coin market that was white-hot for years and is now looking to find its mean.

 

The only way to keep the revenue flowing during this correction is giving out more ‘homeruns’ and creating an artificial buzz in this sector of the hobby. In the end, TPG’s just like any other for-profit organization will seek to create its own market even if one does not necessarily exist.

 

Edit: Greg, your dedication to the stats is impressive and appreciated.

Thanks !

[TomB]

This is a really cool read, Greg.

 

Some folks might argue that the pre-screening of moderns by submitters has become more efficient so that the percentage of PF70 coinage would be higher, but I do not know if I would buy that point since there were many skilled pre-screeners in previous years, too. In fact the gross numbers, which have increased over time, would argue that it would be difficult for these pre-screeners to keep up the volume of work. Anecdotally, we see many more common submitters starting threads at PCGS stating that they have just received their first PF70/MS70 graded coins, so this would casually support the idea of a shift in grading standards for the PF70 market.

 

I believe that the US Mint may have been making higher quality coinage over the last few years, though I have no data or evidence to back up this assertion. Additionally, I do not believe that the US Mint has issued coinage of that much higher technical quality to reflect what we see in the table provided.

 

My opinion is that there has been a subtle change in definition at the TPGs as to what will qualify for the PF70 grade. This decision would not have been made in a casual manner, but must have been made with increased revenues and share of the market in mind. This is not necessarily evil in itself. It is also not the first time that we have seen a change in grade definition. Obviously, most of us are aware that coins slabbed in the early history of the TPGs were more likely undergraded when compared to today's standards than were coins slabbed much more recently. However, many folks are not aware that various series or grade ranges get tweaked by the TPGs at different points.

 

An excellent example is the silver (1932-1964) Washington quarter market in the ultra-high grade range of MS67 and MS68. I do not have the pop reports on hand, but until approximately 2000 PCGS had only graded one silver issue Washington quarter as MS68. Then, in an apparent attempt to create more of a market for the highest graded pieces and perhaps drive submissions, PCGS graded eighteen silver issue Washington quarters as MS68 in the course of about two years. After that period, another shift seemed to occur and the numbers of newly graded silver issue Washington quarters graded as MS68 dropped to essentially zero. This was not chance, nor was it a sudden flood of previously unseen quality. It was more likely an attempt by the TPGs to profit within a niche market that had become extraordinarily hot.

[Denver Dave]

 

Wow gmarguli you do have some time on your hands..."-)

 

Great info, Thanks for sharing...

 

I do not know much about the Modern Coin Market or the Coin Market in general as far as that goes...

 

What I find interesting... if you only take the Eagles ( gold, silver platinum ) PCGS is giving out 200% to 300% more 70's over the 4 year period, where NGC is giving out relatively the same percentage of 70's over the same 4 year period...

[Hoot]

Nice commentary and analysis, Greg. In address of this:

 

I was surprised to see that not only does NGC grade more moderns than PCGS, but the gap is huge and widening substantially

 

... you need one more column, which is a ratio of the percent of 69 PCGS to 69 NGC, and 70 PCGS to 70 NGC. Chart this ratio and it will show the rise or fall in terms of how changes between the services track one another. This analysis will aslo track (2) and (3) of your points.

 

I'm not convinced that the value of a PCGS graded 70 has dropped noticeably or measurably in a statistical sense. This would also have to be demonstrated. I think that there are many followers of PCGS graded moderns who still covet the 70 grade, and the rarity of these pieces still far outstrips their availability relative to demand. These people put pressure on the market that, I would claim, has not yet alleviated prices. That does not mean that a PF70 2006 Kennedy sells for as much as a PF70 2004 Kennedy, as the perceived population difference has a bearing on the psychology behind the relative pricing. However, I believe that this phenomenon would be difficult to tease out of the analysis and would require some rather sophisticated differential variance analyses.

 

I think Michael hit the nail on the head with this:

 

70 is just some choice proof/ms 69+ grade with a little plastic and tag thrown in for good measure

 

The overriding factor in pricing is that people are so ego-driven in the ownership of "perfect" objects, that they allow their inane desires for that perfection to override their common sense.

 

Hoot

[cladking]

Thanks for the effort. This is great information.

 

As TomB said, some of this is most probably attributable to higher quality coming out of the mint. They know people are wathing ALL of their products and are trying to improve them as much as is practical. This is at least in part evidenced by the fact that there isn't a large number of older coins getting the higher grades.

 

Demand has gotten these into the graders and it's quite possible that slabbing is falling off partly because of supply constraints. There never was an endless supply of these coins. Certainly it can seem endless as one looks at boxes and boxes of proof sets.

 

I do agree with the general thesis though that it's getting at least a little easier to get a coin from PCGS graded PR-70. It seems as though the market is beginning to percieve that coins that are slabbable at PCGS as a 70 will go there and the best of all the others will go to NGC in the hopes of a 70. No this isn't coolaid talking just the observation that the top two graders are actually grading different coins. Liners will go to the service in which the coin will have the greater value.

[just-john]

As a collector of coins not an investor in coins.Their are very few coins minted after 1964

that i collect.I feel that the number of coins taken out and melted when silver went crazy

think it was like $8.00 for a dime is not reflected in their current price and is overlooked

with this modern gradeing nonsence.How in the world can a coin with a mintage in the BILLIONS be rare and some with 2 and 3 Million proofs come on.Im not saying you can't make money on the types of coins im saying if thats you cup of tea fine go for it.But don't say their rare

[gmarguli]

TomB Wrote: Some folks might argue that the pre-screening of moderns by submitters has become more efficient so that the percentage of PF70 coinage would be higher, but I do not know if I would buy that point since there were many skilled pre-screeners in previous years, too. In fact the gross numbers, which have increased over time, would argue that it would be difficult for these pre-screeners to keep up the volume of work.

 

There is no real reason for submitters to screen these bulk submissions. Since you only pay for coins that meet your minimum grade, you just send in the batch blindly and hope for the best. Buy a big batch of stuff from the Mint and ship it off to your grading service of choice and a couple weeks later you see if you won the lottery.

 

 

cladking wrote: I do agree with the general thesis though that it's getting at least a little easier to get a coin from PCGS graded PR-70. It seems as though the market is beginning to percieve that coins that are slabbable at PCGS as a 70 will go there and the best of all the others will go to NGC in the hopes of a 70. No this isn't coolaid talking just the observation that the top two graders are actually grading different coins. Liners will go to the service in which the coin will have the greater value.

 

For older proofs and many mint state coins, this might be correct. However, for ultra-moderns, it is highly doubtful that they are screened before submitting. I've been told by graders at 3 of the big 4 that they receive lots of big boxes from submitters who don't even bother to take the coins out of the mint shipping boxes. They're just shipped without being looked at.

[WinstonWare]

This is a great thread. Greg, thanks for taking the time to put this together.

[CarlWohlforth]

Thanks for the post.

 

While the info is public very few of the public actually bothers to look at the info as you did. Thanks again.

 

I see that % PF 70 Jeffs and JFKs made are not increasing dramaticaly. I think it is hard to make a perfect proof Jeff even with the latest low relief dies. I see most of the gain is due to the Eagles. I would guess the Mint has gotten many returns and is really trying hard to improve quality there. I think Eagles are the squeaky gear that needs to be oiled so to say.

 

There might be other possible influences on the market for 70s. It could be that the buyers are realizing that they can't tell the difference between a 69 and a 70 or that some 69s (with no loupe) look better than 70s. Some would be buyers might actually be willing to NOT be #1 in the Registries...

[WoodenJefferson]

Nice info...hard to digest that much information all at once, we usually get it in bits and pieces from here and there and not in one great big hunk like this. Nice job Greg...I think the moderns have created a lot of "assembly line" graders and would expect some major burn outs in the future.

 

I know the graders take much pride in their work and abilities, but after looking at say 200 sets of 20th Anniversary Eagles, your probably about to go gaa gaa. It's not their fault with mass submissions because of deadlines...it's the nature of the business or as some are calling it, "The Beast"

 

Agreed, getting a 70 was cause for opening champagne and toasting your new found treasure, but now days, people are actually getting upset if they don't get a 70 grade.

 

It's all out of control...take a look at the Dow Jones...scary.

 

Anyway, thanks for the insight, I'm to far along to worry about what is hot and what's not for the next flip.

 

I collect, therefore I am.

[al_e_gator]

Excellent post. I love the stats.

 

As far as modern coins go, I'll put together an MS-69 or MS-70 birth set for a friend or relative here and there. But in general I avoid this market for long term investing, although I do have a light collector's interest if I can get them real cheap.

 

I'm not necessarily a modern basher ... but ask yourself ... how many people have you talked to or overheard saying that they buy several quarter proofs sets, uncirculated rolls, even bags of uncirculated state quarters with each new issue to save for their kids/grandkids. Me personally, hundreds. I bought 12 proof sets this past year for Christmas gifts, plus 1 for my collection. What will this do to the population of MS-69 or MS-70 coins years from now when these people or their kids or grandkids decide they want to cash in? My guess is that the poor saps that are now paying $300+ for an MS-70 state quarter will be sitting on $3 slabs in the very near future. My advice is to slab'm and sell'm now while you can still get a premium.

This applies to all moderns, especially to all the 'collector series': Jefferson Westward Journey nickels, $1 Presidents, etc....

[WaxonWaxov]

Good point, Al-e-Gator

 

 

Moderns are crazy. Up one minute, down the next.

 

Boy, you can say that again.

 

2006 PF70 Franlklin Scientist... $300 on DLRC, lucky to get $50 for it on Ebay.

 

This is an interesting read. Here's what I think:

 

The Registry was created to get more people to submit more coins, hence more profit. I have a very nice set of Eisenhower dollars. The only ones in slabs are the 1972 (type 1,2,and 3) It would cost me a few hundred bucks to submit all those coins to compete in the Registry, and the Eisenhower set ain't that many coins when compared to say Jeff nickels.

 

The PF-70's have increased to entice more people to submit not only for the profit, but for the Registry.

[IrishMike]

Death, no shift yes. If you read the footnotes to the CU financial statement it gives you the answer to the shift to grading more 70's. They lost some big submitters, which by logic has to be the bulk modern guys. Obviously they went somewhere else and once again logic dictates NGC. The supply will go wherever demand will be met.

 

These dealers still have to cash flow to stay in business so talking a smaller profit is better than none at all. CU had no choice but to look at the issue.

[coinman1794]

And so, the notion that 70s are given out based on political concerns should, in turn, be cause for consumer concern as well. Buying a 70 is buying plastic.

[texasrichard]

Thanks for putting together the data in the format that you did. It is interesting and eye-opening.

 

Since I am not a "bulk submitter" I do have a question. When dealers or others send in the huge bulk orders, do they actually look at the coins prior to sending in for grading? Perhaps the actual overall quality of the submissions has improved over time if folks are taking the time to cull out the obvious problem coins. Just a thought.

[cladking]

[q]

The Registry was created to get more people to submit more coins, hence more profit. I have a very nice set of Eisenhower dollars. The only ones in slabs are the 1972 (type 1,2,and 3) It would cost me a few hundred bucks to submit all those coins to compete in the Registry, and the Eisenhower set ain't that many coins when compared to say Jeff nickels.[/q]

 

 

This is a great theory but is totally destroyed by the facts.

 

People have been collecting moderns since long before any grading services existed. More importantly the first registry was at PCGS and they refused to allow ANY moderns in their registry. It was public demand that got them to add modern series and they wouldn't do it until after people started submitting more moderns.

[gmarguli]

Since I am not a "bulk submitter" I do have a question. When dealers or others send in the huge bulk orders, do they actually look at the coins prior to sending in for grading? Perhaps the actual overall quality of the submissions has improved over time if folks are taking the time to cull out the obvious problem coins. Just a thought.

 

For ultra moderns, the bulk submitters generally do not screen the coins. The bulk submission programs allow you to send in a large quantity of coins and set a minimum grade. A submitter may submit 100 current year proof sets and say PF69 is the minimum grade. In a few weeks they get back all the PF69s & PF70s and a bunch of coins in flips that won't meet the minimum grade. It would be a waste of time for a submitter to screen the coins unless they were really only interested in the PF70s and wanted to minimize the PF69s.

[MikeInFL]

Greg,

 

Fascinating post. Very nice analysis, too.

 

First, an aside....I feel sorry for those who own earlier PF 70 coins, as they will eventually be devalued if the recent increase in PF 70 coins becomes the norm.

 

Back to the topic at hand...One variable that's tough to factor in, and you were right to point out, is the quantitative difference in the quality of coins the mint is producing (or the submitters submitting) from year to year. I would be very interested in your and other modern experts opinion on this topic, because if we don't rule this out (or bound it) then it shoots a hole in the entire theory.

 

Regardless, I would imagine that PCGS/NGC will continue to sacrifice grading integrity for profits until it doesn't make financial sense to do so. The key question is what is this tipping point...

 

However, I'd be a bit reticent from labeling it a vicious circle, because at some point the collecting public will figure out the game being played -- or at least I hope they do -- and the equation will tip in the other direction....Mike

[cladking]

Excellent post. I love the stats.

 

As far as modern coins go, I'll put together an MS-69 or MS-70 birth set for a friend or relative here and there. But in general I avoid this market for long term investing, although I do have a light collector's interest if I can get them real cheap.

 

I'm not necessarily a modern basher ... but ask yourself ... how many people have you talked to or overheard saying that they buy several quarter proofs sets, uncirculated rolls, even bags of uncirculated state quarters with each new issue to save for their kids/grandkids. Me personally, hundreds. I bought 12 proof sets this past year for Christmas gifts, plus 1 for my collection. What will this do to the population of MS-69 or MS-70 coins years from now when these people or their kids or grandkids decide they want to cash in? My guess is that the poor saps that are now paying $300+ for an MS-70 state quarter will be sitting on $3 slabs in the very near future. My advice is to slab'm and sell'm now while you can still get a premium.

This applies to all moderns, especially to all the 'collector series': Jefferson Westward Journey nickels, $1 Presidents, etc....

 

 

We must live in completely different worlds.

 

I've been collecting moderns for more than a third of a century and I've never found a coin even close to MS-70 in circulation. Mind you in the old days I'd drive from bank to bank and city to city looking for them. In fact, I've never even seen anything similar to an MS-69 or an MS-68 either. I've seen only a very few coins that might go MS-67 and they were all one cent coins. It got so frustrating that I started looking in mint sets. ...thousands of them. And guess what... ..still no MS-70's and no MS-69's. Very few MS-68's and most were cents and dimes.

 

Try finding a nice MS-64 Ike in a mint set or anywhere else and then come back and tell me how many of these will showw up in fifty years.

 

No, keep making the coins. It's hard work and someone has to do it. But anyone thinking all they have to do is wait 50 years to put together a nice set of moderns has already waited far too long.

[WaxonWaxov]

Speaking of the market for PF-70s....

 

I just bought (off of Ebay) a Jamestown NGC PF-70ucam $5 gold for $270... That's just $30 more than what a 'raw' coin woudl cost from the Mint right now.

 

Hell, I could not buy the coin, pay for shipping, submit it to NGC (paying shipping both ways plus grading fees) for less than $270 (plus $8 shipping) and even then I might not have a 70.

[al_e_gator]

I mis-stated what I really meant. I was mainly referring to PF69 and PF70 coins for years 2000 and above ... my bad. Birth sets I was referring to were also PR69/70 for kids of friends and relatives being born in the last few years.

 

However, if you look at the numbers, a very small percentage of the mintage total production has actually been submitted to grading services including circulated, SMS, and proof.

 

Let's go back 40 years. I don't have access to all the submitted populations for each grading service, but taking a quick glance at say the 1967 SMS 1-cent. Mintage of 1,863,344. NGC submission of 767. I have to make an assumption (so don't beat me up too bad on this) if the other grading services combined graded 3x this amount, we have a total of 3068 graded coins.

That is less than 0.2% of the mintage that was actually graded. That leaves about 1.86 Million coins still ungraded. Lets also generously assume that HALF of these remaining ungraded sets have been examined by collectors who know what they are doing, therefore they didn't submit based on lower grades. That still leaves close to a million 'virgin' sets sitting in grandmom's attic. That's a ton of coins that could still appear on the market, perhaps at high grades, perhaps not. Can we really judge high grade populations based on such a small graded population? If it were 10%, perhaps we could make a leap of faith, but certainly not on 0.2%. My weatherman said an 70% chance of snow yesterday ... it was the nicest, sunniest day anyone could want.

 

Move up to the 21st century coinage, better mint QC, people hoarding state quarters, etc... It's just not a wise investment (long term) to get involved in those 'ultra modern' coins. So I'll stick with my previous statement:

"My advice is to slab'm and sell'm now while you can still get a premium."

 

I am hedging that many of these 'new' collectors will get hooked and start to come after the low mintage and key coins of early years. Thats the upside about the modern collectible series ... they get new blood into the hobby ... that is a very good thing.

[al_e_gator]

An excellent example is the silver (1932-1964) Washington quarter market in the ultra-high grade range of MS67 and MS68. I do not have the pop reports on hand, but until approximately 2000 PCGS had only graded one silver issue Washington quarter as MS68. Then, in an apparent attempt to create more of a market for the highest graded pieces and perhaps drive submissions, PCGS graded eighteen silver issue Washington quarters as MS68 in the course of about two years. After that period, another shift seemed to occur and the numbers of newly graded silver issue Washington quarters graded as MS68 dropped to essentially zero. This was not chance, nor was it a sudden flood of previously unseen quality. It was more likely an attempt by the TPGs to profit within a niche market that had become extraordinarily hot.

 

"but until approximately 2000 PCGS had only graded one silver issue Washington quarter as MS68"

Hmmm, year 2000 you say? Right after the intro of the state quarter series.

 

"This was not chance, nor was it a sudden flood of previously unseen quality."

Perhaps this new interest in collecting state quarters encouraged more people to rumage through relative's basements and attics in search of stashed quarters (previously unseen) to complete 1932 - Date sets. People get interested in things just as fast as they lose interest, so that could partially explain the peak and valley of higher quality submissions.

[cladking]

I mis-stated what I really meant. I was mainly referring to PF69 and PF70 coins for years 2000 and above ... my bad. Birth sets I was referring to were also PR69/70 for kids of friends and relatives being born in the last few years.

 

However, if you look at the numbers, a very small percentage of the mintage total production has actually been submitted to grading services including circulated, SMS, and proof.

 

Let's go back 40 years. I don't have access to all the submitted populations for each grading service, but taking a quick glance at say the 1967 SMS 1-cent. Mintage of 1,863,344. NGC submission of 767. I have to make an assumption (so don't beat me up too bad on this) if the other grading services combined graded 3x this amount, we have a total of 3068 graded coins.

That is less than 0.2% of the mintage that was actually graded. That leaves about 1.86 Million coins still ungraded. Lets also generously assume that HALF of these remaining ungraded sets have been examined by collectors who know what they are doing, therefore they didn't submit based on lower grades. That still leaves close to a million 'virgin' sets sitting in grandmom's attic. That's a ton of coins that could still appear on the market, perhaps at high grades, perhaps not. Can we really judge high grade populations based on such a small graded population? If it were 10%, perhaps we could make a leap of faith, but certainly not on 0.2%. My weatherman said an 70% chance of snow yesterday ... it was the nicest, sunniest day anyone could want.

"

 

Certainly I see your point but you picked a very unfortunate example.

 

The SMS's have been highly picked over by many people for decades. About the only ones left as possible candidates are unopened boxes and these have become exceedingly tough to find in the last ten years. It also should be pointed out that if you have multiple unopened boxes it's possible to know what's in these by spot checking them. In other words, even some unopened boxes are checked.

 

Large numbers of these sets have been destroyed over the years and all the original buyers are some 40 years older. Since it was mostly middle aged men who bought them it's not reasonable to believe vast numbers of these remain in pristine condition.

 

 

I am hedging that many of these 'new' collectors will get hooked and start to come after the low mintage and key coins of early years. Thats the upside about the modern collectible series ... they get new blood into the hobby ... that is a very good thing.

 

I agree that collecting coins and attracting a new generation of collectors is a good thing but I draw no distinction whatsoever whether they are collecting old, new, or ancient.