Is it OK for one grading company to want and/or try to harm another?

[James_OldeTowne]

As always, I am going to respond only to the opening post, without reading other replies first. That way, you'll get my unbiased response .

 

I think it is OK for a corporation to "want" harm to befall a competitor, but I do not think it is OK for the corporation to "try" to harm the other overtly. In other words, I don't think Chevrolet should be allowed to infiltrate Ford with spies who go out on the factory floor and destroy machinery. But it's certainly OK for Chevy to wish something bad would happen to Ford!

 

Indirect "harm" is OK, though. In other words, if Chevy develops a new hybrid car that does so well that it shrinks Ford's marketshare (thus "harming" Ford), that is perfectly fine.

 

Naturally, I am using "Chevrolet" and "Ford" for illustrative purposes only.

 

Now, I'll go back and read other responses!

[ant]

it is funny you use ford and chevy as a view. ford is selling off all there "luxury" lines! so cadillac will be top dog for a bit out of the 2 (ford just sold the a. martin line for 838 mill.

 

but back to coins. the way pcgs talks is sickening! ive never sent to pcgs myself and after reading that i never will! it made me sick to see the word rape in there! that is a sign of intent to "mess with".

 

on the cbh note i see anacs and ngc selling more than pcgs.even cleaned anacs coins sell for good price.

 

i think all coments like that do is help the others(anacs and ngc) and still believe that if ngc keeps up the good work they will be top dog some day!

[BillJones]

I do not understand how NGC, or any TPG service, is "harmed" by a coin being placed in any other TPG holder. I, as the owner of the coin, can decide for whatever reason to have my coin graded by any TPG service for the going fee.

 

Let's put this way. If all the attractive, properly graded coins that grading service one issues are crossed to grading service two, grading service two will get the credit for those coins in the market. Conversely all the dogs that gradins service one puts out remain in their holders, which gives them a black eye.

 

I think that this is the why no would THIRD major grading service has never emerged. With all the PCGS weenies around, I fight to keep NGC in the race. If PCGS becomes the ONLY major grading service I'd be ready to support the CAC and become an associate member if they would have me. They were be our last defense against PCGS taking hobby back to the bad old days with overgraded *spoon." (I chose to save the computer the bother of changing my wording.)

[cpm9ball]

They way I see it, if they would try to $crew their competitors, then they would do the same to their customers.

 

Chris

Chris, I don't see how that follows.

 

Mark, there is one thing I learned a very long time ago about business. If you try to make yourself look good by making your competitors look bad, it will have a negative effect on how others perceive your actions. If you want to make yourself look good, then do the job better than anyone else!

 

Perhaps this will explain my position..........a liar never believes anybody and a thief never trusts anybody. If PCGS conducts their affairs to the detriment of one, they would likely do it to anyone.

 

Chris

[AegisIII]

One word changes the context entirely. Why should CAC, or any group, attempt to preempt my judgment as to a coins value. Only to satisfy a small group of disgruntled dealers---NOT

 

What did a small group of "investment quality" dealers do in 1986?

 

Less bluntly, CAC will preempt your judgment to only whatever amount you let them. Frankly, if you buy sight seen, that should be none. "Buy the coin, not the slab" in a CAC era should merely become "buy the coin, not the slab or sticker," not "buy the sticker, not the slab."

 

Honestly, I really do not see why any pro-slab person would be vigorously opposed to the CAC idea.