Experiment with crossover service fails!

[Chippewa]

Since I stopped buying raw coins a couple of years ago I have not had much need to submit coins. However, when I bought a PDS set of very original typically toned Cincinnatti commems at the May Goldberg auction I decided to send them to NGC for consecutive numbering and reholdering. The coins were as follows (P=PCGS 65, D=NGC 66, S=PCGS 65) and the ever diligent graders at PCGS had labeled the P coin as an S.

 

The Goldberg auction description was as follows:

 

"A well matched set with each coin exhibiting a delightful natural light violet tone on both sides. Worthy of a premium bid."

 

When I got the coins I thought the Goldberg description and images were pretty reasonable. The D-mint coin was slightly superior to the others and I did not expect upgrades of the two PCGS coins. However, I also did not expect to receive them back with the message "This coin would likely grade lower at NGC - thick unattractive toning." If they find thick natural toning unattractive on early commems there are a few coins I have seen in NGC 67 holders that they may want to rethink.

 

I know that PCGS likes to play the game of not crossing NGC coins, and to me it looks like the opposite may also be true. My next experiment will be to send them to PCGS for correction of the P-mint labeling and to see if they will cross the NGC 66. A couple more rounds of this and maybe they will all be 64's.

 

After this I am done with the grading services. I will let the dealers have all the fun.

 

[EZ_E]

Do I understand correctly that NGC sent all three coins back since they wouldn't cross-grade (except for the ms-66)?

[Chippewa]

EZ

 

I got the two PCGS coins back in their original holders with identical post-it notes on them with the message I described. The NGC coin came back in its original holder since they obviously would not be sequential numbers. So essentially they did nothing except to reject the crossovers.

[291fifth]

The only time crossovers should be attempted is when truly nice coins reside in holders from slabbing companies that the market considers unacceptable. "Cross at any grade" is probably the best way to go in this case.

 

Here is something to think about. What actually has more marketability. An absolutely bottom of the grade coin in a major brand slab or the same coin, one grade lower but now considered PQ for the grade? I have always noted that dealers never buy the bottom of the grade coins. They tend to end up in online auctions.

[crito]

So is the toning light or dark? The auction description says one thing and NGC another. I could understand it if the difference was over the "natural" color, especially since they're purple. But light and dark is kind of like night and day. Really hard to get the two confused.

 

My sympathies though, as I'm about to attempt the same thing.

 

[jom]

A couple more rounds of this and maybe they will all be 64's.

 

A couple more "rounds" and you'll be out of money...

 

After this I am done with the grading services. I will let the dealers have all the fun.

 

Totally agree. IMO, it is a COMPLETE waste of time and money sending coins thru the services UNLESS you intend to immediately sell the coins. I figured out about 7 years ago doing the "crack out" or "upgrade" game is a waste. I'm happy for you (I mean that) that you've come to this conclusion...

 

jom

[Elcontador]

Apparently this also applies to Commems. Years ago, you'd see hordes of really ugly dark toned technically graded 19th Century type coins in MS 65 & 6 holders. The worst of the lot were Seated and Trade $s, followed closely by Barber Halves.

They come up quite frequently at auctions and on the bourse floors of shows, because they are ugly and no one wants them.

 

Five years ago, give or take, the shift was made to giving more grading consideration to coins with attractive eye appeal, and this became even moreso in the last several years. This results in coins with more overall eye appeal in lower grade slabs than uglier technically graded coins.

 

The only toned coins which get a bump are those where:

 

1) the toning does not in any way diminish the original luster on the coin

2) it is universally considered attractive: ie; target toning on a Buffalo nickel, or

a nice, say, even russet toning on a coin's rims.

 

if the toning is neither 1 or 2 (excepting Morgan $s), the coin is downgraded.

 

Then too, grading standards have changed in different ways at the different services. NGC has definitely tightened up in many areas. For example, I have a 38 NGC PF 5 Dime & there are far more PF 5s in PCGS rather than NGC holders

(I'd guess it's easier to 5 this coin with PCGS rather than NGC).

 

I always show the coin to someone I think knows more than I do before submitting it for crossover or upgrade.

[gmarguli]

While I haven't exactly submitted a ton of coins to NGC for crossover, my success rate is exceptional. EVERY coin I submitted that I expected to cross has crossed. I had two more coins cross today (an MS65 commem and an AU58 Morgan). I have submitted several coins that I did not think would cross and for the most part they didn't. These were usually less reputable slabs and the coins were either overgraded (per my opinion) or had questionable toning. However, some did cross.

 

I have has several coins cross at higher grades (ex PCGS, ANACS, SEGS).

 

Overall, in my experience I believe NGC looked at the coins and not the slabs. There were a couple of borderline (low end) coins that they crossed. I have zero doubt they wouldn't cross the other way.

 

[MAULEMALL]

These are all crossovers.

I will let you know how I did,They are all in Q.C. and I hope they will be done at the begining of next week.

Coin List

Coins for invoice number 2053294 Line

Item Year Mint

Mark Variety Denom. Proof Grade Strike

Char Comments

001 1923 S S$1 n/a n/a n/a n/a PCGS

 

002 1936 S TEXAS 50C n/a n/a n/a n/a PCGS

 

003 1993 P JEFFERSON S$1 n/a n/a n/a n/a ACG

 

004 1987 W CONSTITUT $5 n/a n/a n/a n/a ACG

 

005 1879 S S$1 n/a n/a n/a n/a ANACS

 

006 1886 TOP-100 VAM-17 DDR ARROWS S$1 n/a n/a n/a n/a ANACS

 

007 1881 S S$1 n/a n/a n/a n/a ANACS

 

008 2001 EAGLE G$5 n/a n/a n/a n/a ICG

 

009 2001 EAGLE G$5 n/a n/a n/a n/a ICG

 

010 2001 EAGLE G$5 n/a n/a n/a n/a ICG

 

011 2000 EAGLE G$5 n/a n/a n/a n/a ICG

 

012 1964 50C n/a n/a n/a n/a ICG

 

[Chippewa]

Thanks for the education. I agree that it is not worth resubmitting in most cases and the only reason I did in this case was because it really troubles me to look at the PCGS holder showing a Philadelphia mint coin as a 1936-S. Following up on another thread here, maybe I will send it in for a "Presidential Review".

[MAULEMALL]

Well Here are My crossover grades;

 

Coin List

Coins for invoice number 2053294 Line

Item Year Mint

Mark Variety Denom. Proof Grade Strike

Char Comments

001 1923 S S$1 MS Didn't was ms63

 

002 1936 S TEXAS 50C MS Didn't was ms65

 

003 1993 P JEFFERSON S$1 MS Didn't , Was A Mistake ,It was supposed to Be, Cross at any grade MS70 ACG

 

004 1987 W CONSTITUT $5 MS Didn't , Was A Mistake ,It was supposed to Be,Cross at any grade Proof 70 ACG

 

005 1879 S S$1 MS 99 Didn't MS64

 

006 1886 TOP-100 VAM-17 DDR ARROWS S$1 MS 64

 

007 1881 S S$1 MS 99 Didn't MS64

 

008 2001 EAGLE G$5 MS 69

 

009 2001 EAGLE G$5 MS 69

 

010 2001 EAGLE G$5 MS 69

 

011 2000 EAGLE G$5 MS Didn't MS69

 

012 1964 50C PF Didn't ICG Proof 70

 

 

Should The Ones didn't Cross, Have Crossed?

It's a 1 word answer,No.

NGC felt they were not up to their standards.

11 and 12 were my fault as they should have been Cross at any grade and when I looked at my submission form I noticed I had Not wrote it in.

 

No's.5 And 7 suprised me as I thought they would have no problem crossing.

Then I remembered that #5 was a PL morgan and It had some really nice purple toning in the fields.

 

 

# 2...........#2 in my mind was a dead lock at an upgrade.Shows what I know,It didn't even cross.

 

# 3and 5 were marked as Cross at any grade because of the plastic they are in but must have been overlooked on the sheet.

 

I will send them back with the next submissions.

 

 

[Chippewa]

Maul

 

Re your crossovers. Since you were trying to cross a 1879 and a 1881 coin over at the MS-99 level I guess I could cut NGC some slack on this one. Or were there some typos in your message? In either case, don't waste your money crossgrading post 1945 coins, IMHO.

[MAULEMALL]

Maul

 

Re your crossovers. Since you were trying to cross a 1879 and a 1881 coin over at the MS-99 level I guess I could cut NGC some slack on this one. Or were there some typos in your message? In either case, don't waste your money crossgrading post 1945 coins, IMHO.

 

Yes, I was little confused on that as well.

I called NGC to Find Out What ms99 meant and was informed that When you get the variety plus service ,If there is no variety (VAM) for that date and it did not cross, that ngc assigns it MS99 on the Web Posting.

 

I try to cross all my coins that I plan on keeping to NGC as I like the uniformity to my coins.

[gmarguli]

What were the original grades?

[MAULEMALL]

What were the original grades?

 

I edited the post to show the original grades.

[EZ_E]

What is the general concensus on the old PCGS slabs with the green label? Are they generally overgraded? I have two Oregon trail commems graded ms 65 in these holders. I'm thinking of sending one to NCS and then on to NGC. What are the odds that it will at least cross-grade? Opinions solicited. Thanks.

[MAULEMALL]

What is the general concensus on the old PCGS slabs with the green label? Are they generally overgraded? I have two Oregon trail commems graded ms 65 in these holders. I'm thinking of sending one to NCS and then on to NGC. What are the odds that it will at least cross-grade? Opinions solicited. Thanks.

 

 

I am 50/50 with the rattlers.In fact the Texas Comm was an old rattler and it didn't even cross.

[jom]

What is the general concensus on the old PCGS slabs with the green label?

 

That's a good question. Some think that these coins are undergraded because they came from an era when PCGS was grading more conservatively. If that is the case then many of these coins will have already been cracked out. If there are any left by now it is a good chance that it was been passed over many times for a regrade and was probably overgraded to begin with. Therefore, it can go either way at this point....

 

It is just too difficult to generalize about slabs. It really just comes down to the coin....

 

jom