PCGS vs NGC PF70 Prices 1 1

[James_OldeTowne]

Thanks for clarifying some good points!

[History Student]

RE: PCGS - If they don't misplace your coins for 6 weeks and if you are not the boss and need to assist in the UPGRADE a tad.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 25, 2009 by Saint Steve

[michael]

welcome to the boards!!

[Coin]

If 70 equals perfection .....and a test score of 100 is perfection for that particular test....we should never award a grade of 100 for a test because a student can not possibly do anything that warrants perfection .

From now until eternity , there will not be a test graded to the score of 100 , regardless if all the correct answers are given . All perfect answered tests will be awarded the grade of 99. A perfect score for an SAT exam will now be 1599...or whatever is one less than the top score . There will no longer be a perfect '10' model...all models will be referred to as a perfect '9' because we do not use the top number in our grading scale.

 

Sounds like apples and oranges , but then that is another opinion.

 

Why have a grade ......only to not use that grade? Why not grade MS60-70 , then have MS-Ultimate100...the top score that never gets used as the score to represent absolute-ness ?

[MarkFeld]

 

Why have a grade ......only to not use that grade? Why not grade MS60-70 , then have MS-Ultimate100...the top score that never gets used as the score to represent absolute-ness ?

What's wrong with including, but not utilizing the theoretical grade of (a perfect) 70 as part the grading scale? On a practical basis, that doesn't sound any different than what you proposed above with your "the top score that never gets used..".

[James_OldeTowne]

If 70 equals perfection .....and a test score of 100 is perfection for that particular test....we should never award a grade of 100 for a test because a student can not possibly do anything that warrants perfection .

Your analogy doesn't work. When taking a typical test, the answer to the questions is either right or wrong. There is no "opinion" at work here. Either you answer 2+2 correctly, or you do not.

 

With coins, there are not absolutes. Grading is always always always subjective. A coin can grade either VG-8, VG-10 or VF-35 depending on who grades it. However, we all agree that "70" is supposed to represent perfection, but we cannot all agree on what perfection is, particularly since that which is being discussed is created by human hands. That is why the grade actually cannot be absolutely defined.

 

Human ingenuity created coins and a system used to grade them, but a much higher power decided what 2+2 equals.

[Coin]

There is a qualifier for the grade or it would not be given . It has been awarded , therefore the qualifiers have been met .

 

The grade has been awarded by 3rd party graders . We can all see that the grading companies are different . Each has its very own unique , and sometimes similar, ways of grading and awarding grades. There are many grading companies . The grades in MS an PF of 60-70, awarded by these such grading companies, are based upon what they consider the standard or qualifier is. Nothing more ....the grading companies , and I have said this before in other posts, are not Omniscient 'Gods' who appoint absolutes . We see this in even their grading of all scales within the 60-70 point range. As I said before , the basis of all grading is born upon what is seen by the naked eye , and therefore , microscopic insignificants should not even be considered.

We call a model with 'perfect skin' , not based upon examining her under an electron microscope.

Oh , I could go on an on about endless comparisons, but the point is simply that a coin can be made to the standard of a grade of 70. There is not need to get philosophical and debate absoluteness and there can never be perfection....it is not the correct application of the form . As some may say....a 70 is the pinnacle, acme, uber, etc....it has to be or it does not exist .It is and is used. That is it in a nutshell , relax the collars and stop making it more than it is . It is merely a score within an index . We could probably break every grade into micro grades within every range and still have room to break them down further...and at the very end of the grade , we have the 70...and there are probably many coins graded 70 that can fit into many many micro 70 grades , but they all fall into that ( 70 ) category ...they are all better than 69 .

You guys are beating a very dead horse if you think it will ever go away.

 

Appears to be a 'live with the way you look at it, and I'll live the way I look at it' situation .

The various mints around the globe are putting out coins in 70 condition .

 

If the TPGs award a coin a 70 grade , I revell in their educated opinion .

I hear that NNC had a lot of coins label 70 , ...but the market of knowledgeable buyers Know how to consider those....so the real question in my mind is :

Are we saying that BOTH NGC and PCGS have no idea of how to grade 70's?

Apparently they do and are doing so. To combat them and say they can not use the grade is , well , kinda sour apples .

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

As I said before , the basis of all grading is born upon what is seen by the naked eye , and therefore , microscopic insignificants should not even be considered.

But if you really believe this to be true, then again, you validate my points above, and further invalidate the idea that any coin can be assigned a "perfect" grade, because what which we is perceive is subjective. It is physically impossible for all people to see any given coin (or any visible object) the same way, since we all have different eyesight. Therefore, no definition of "perfect" fits all scenarios, even though "perfect" implies something which is so exalted that it cannot be defective in any way under any circumstances.

 

Some folks are colorblind, some are near sighted, some far sighted, and some have astigmatism (sp?), yet all comprise the group of coin collectors. So what appears to grade MS-66 to a person with excellent vision may appear perfectly MS-70 to someone who cannot see the tiny flaws that his eagle-eyed companion can.

 

For all intents and purposes, every uncirculated coin might be "perfect" and grade MS-70 to a blind person who cannot detect flaws! So we cannot simply dismiss some physical aspects of a coin as "insignificant", since that decision in itself is subjective. What is insignificant to you may well be very significant to me, because we have different perspective.

[James_OldeTowne]

inadvertent double post

Edited December 2, 2009 by James_EarlyUS

[michael]

ode to an slabbed PCGS ms/proof70 coin (worship)

 

why oh why are you so expensive in your ultimate graded plastic holder

oh high and mighty PCGS 70 graded coin

and what tears of anguish and distain do you cry when removed

from your PCGS grand high exhalted mystic ruler holder

do you lose most all of your market value

and yet are still the perfect coin

because of the inflated/artificial demand and population controlled set registry program

why oh why does pcgs make you suffer so

poor PCGS 70 graded coin

and if your pops should increase then you lose demand hence value

 

break me out and set me free from all this pain

 

 

[Nathan F.]

On 11/22/2009 at 7:52 AM, MarkFeld said:

Raybo55 said:

No such thing as a "perfect" coin IMHO.

 

In the olden days 65 was the best that the TPGS offered.

The standards for a grade of 70 don't require perfection. I think that's a shame.

I think what they mean by having "no post-production imperfections" is a proof coin can have for example minor "ripples" in the fields vs being PERFECTLY flat. If you hold almost any large (39-40mm+) proof coin on its side and move it back and forth, you will almost certainly see that the flat mirror fields are not actually perfectly flat. It may look like a 150 year old glass pane or window that has "flow marks" in it because glass is technically not a perfect solid at room temperature; it is an amorphous solid. If you look at a 1980's proof Silver Eagle you will see this same effect in all of them. If not for that exception, NO 1986 ASE would be graded PF70.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/21/2009 at 8:55 AM, Dahms-migration said:

Can anyone shed some light on why PCGS pf70 coins sell at such a higher premium over NGC. I thought the two companies were basically equivalent.  On average do NGC coins typically grade the same if regraded by PCGS?

Are we talking moderns ?  If so, I think for the most part, NGC is on par or HIGHER than PCGS.  Only for ultra-rare label-specific categories like a 2009 MS70 DMPL UHR First Strike does PCGS command a notable premium.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/17/2021 at 1:34 PM, Nathan F. said:

If you hold almost any large (39-40mm+) proof coin on its side and move it back and forth, you will almost certainly see that the flat mirror fields are not actually perfectly flat. It may look like a 150 year old glass pane or window that has "flow marks" in it because glass is technically not a perfect solid at room temperature; it is an amorphous solid. If you look at a 1980's proof Silver Eagle you will see this same effect in all of them. If not for that exception, NO 1986 ASE would be graded PF70.

I believe you might be describing the technical definition of luster....thousands of microscopic "ridges" reflecting light  Though I am not sure you can see them individually (too small) but maybe you see the effects of large clusters in that "flow mark" in the fields.

[numisport]

Oh my how things have changed since this thread started in 2009. Specifically Eisenhower Pf 70's. Look how few NGC Pf 70 Ikes have been graded compared to PCGS. Then look at how prices for the PCGS coins have tanked after collectors realize that those Pf 70 DCams don't have that early strike ultra heavy contrast that Pf 70 coins should have. Somehow PCGS has decided to grade them technically and look what happens...... such coins that sold for wildly inflated prices when first graded have now tanked to disgustingly low values. You want one ? Several for sale tonight at Great Collections.

I quickly realized I could get ultimate heavy contrast coins in NGC holders that are nearly perfect that blow many of the Pf 70 DCams out of the water. These reside in Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameo holders and there are only a few available. '76-S coins appear to be the only ones really offered. Here is a couple I own.

[coinman_23885]

PCGS really has loosened considerably over the last 10-15 years. I think part of the reason for the increased populations could be more incentive to create coins for the PCGS registry (which appears to have more active participants), but I don't think that alone explains all of the increase. 

Edited July 19, 2021 by coinman_23885

[Henri Charriere]

On 11/21/2009 at 8:55 AM, Dahms-migration said:

On average do NGC coins typically grade the same if regraded by PCGS?

Simple, straightforward question. Complicated answer.  (Yes, even years later.)  If you are sick and go to the doctor, your symptoms will be noted and a diagnosis will issue.  Not so, coins. Every TPGS has its own agenda and "opinion," or advice.  The only thing you can rely on is anecdotal evidence.  Some report positive experiences; others do not.  The truth is you are on your own. You will make mistakes -- we all do, some catastrophic. With experience, information and self-education, you will be better positioned to make wiser choices.

[RWB]

Degrading "standards" increases revenue.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/18/2021 at 10:07 AM, numisport said:

Oh my how things have changed since this thread started in 2009. Specifically Eisenhower Pf 70's. Look how few NGC Pf 70 Ikes have been graded compared to PCGS. Then look at how prices for the PCGS coins have tanked after collectors realize that those Pf 70 DCams don't have that early strike ultra heavy contrast that Pf 70 coins should have. Somehow PCGS has decided to grade them technically and look what happens...... such coins that sold for wildly inflated prices when first graded have now tanked to disgustingly low values. You want one ? Several for sale tonight at Great Collections. I quickly realized I could get ultimate heavy contrast coins in NGC holders that are nearly perfect that blow many of the Pf 70 DCams out of the water. These reside in Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameo holders and there are only a few available. '76-S coins appear to be the only ones really offered. Here is a couple I own.

Numis, what happened to the prices specifically that you say "tanked" ?

[MarkFeld]

On 7/18/2021 at 9:07 AM, numisport said:

Oh my how things have changed since this thread started in 2009. Specifically Eisenhower Pf 70's. Look how few NGC Pf 70 Ikes have been graded compared to PCGS. Then look at how prices for the PCGS coins have tanked after collectors realize that those Pf 70 DCams don't have that early strike ultra heavy contrast that Pf 70 coins should have. Somehow PCGS has decided to grade them technically and look what happens...... such coins that sold for wildly inflated prices when first graded have now tanked to disgustingly low values. You want one ? Several for sale tonight at Great Collections.

I quickly realized I could get ultimate heavy contrast coins in NGC holders that are nearly perfect that blow many of the Pf 70 DCams out of the water. These reside in Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameo holders and there are only a few available. '76-S coins appear to be the only ones really offered. Here is a couple I own.

 

“Then look at how prices for the PCGS coins have tanked after collectors realize that those Pf 70 DCams don't have that early strike ultra heavy contrast that Pf 70 coins should have. “

The numerical grade is/should be independent of the designation, in this case, including the “ultra heavy cameo contrast”. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/25/2021 at 5:07 PM, MarkFeld said:

The numerical grade is/should be independent of the designation, in this case, including the “ultra heavy cameo contrast”. 

I thought PCGS just had "Deep Cameo" and NGC used "Ultra Cameo" ?

[MarkFeld]

On 7/25/2021 at 5:16 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I thought PCGS just had "Deep Cameo" and NGC used "Ultra Cameo" ?

There’s also the “Cameo”designation, used by both companies. And of course, many Proof coins receive neither the “Cameo” nor the “Deep Cameo/Ultra Cameo” designation.
 

[RWB]

On 7/25/2021 at 5:07 PM, MarkFeld said:

The numerical grade is/should be independent of the designation, in this case, including the “ultra heavy cameo contrast”. 

Yep !

[RWB]

To repeat Dr. Sheldon's definition of "70" - it is: perfect as it leaves the dies....NOT design and detail perfect.

[Treeman]

The truth is that there is no difference in most 69's and 70's from either grading service. Every time I mention this, I would get the same "you don't have the skill to see the difference between 69 and 70" response. However, if the description is no flaws under 5x, I use a 10x, and have found no flaws on many 69's, and have found flaws on 70's. This happens with both services, and my belief is that, during their few seconds of examination, it is most dependant on day of the week, or mood of the grader. Of course, the coin passes through the hands of more than one grader, but humans tend to bias toward a previous opinion. Now, perhaps the second grader does not see the 1st graders opinion, so maybe it's just the quick once over that causes the "mistakes". In any event, if you pay high premiums for a coin that, basically, has to be put under a microscope to see a difference, you are buying plastic, not the coin. The only reason any intelligent person would pay up for a "70" is for points on the registries. A true collector would buy the "69", and have plenty of money left to get another date/type. Okay, now everyone can rip me apart, but it is truly all about registry points. Making a common coin "rare" ,with a basically unnoticeable quality difference, should be left to Mike Mazak and HSN....

[RWB]

None of the TPGs have an empirical system for separating MS-69 from MS-70, or indeed any other "grads" of uncirculated coins.

Edited July 26, 2021 by RWB
corret spelling

[Henri Charriere]

@Treeman. At some point in numismatic history obviously after man made use of his opposable thumb, the light bulb idea of a Proof coin went on, and going as far back as Lydian times that was sufficient. If one were to peruse the older Red Books, a Proof was a proof.  Some were exquisite; others were below par. Any points of contention were resolved amiably between dealer and collector.

Then TPGS came along and shortly thereafter another light bulb went off:  Why not "grade" them?  In 99.44% of the civilized world that has yet to recognize the Sheldon scale, a Proof issued from a Mint with a COA was deemed sufficient. But a rogue "numismatist," who was a P. T. Barnum at heart, introduced the concept of "grading" the highest quality of coins produced and with a savvy Madison Avenue-type publicity campaign backing him, convinced your garden variety sapien that this was a sound idea whose time had come.  To date, no pillar of the community has been able to summon the mettle to challenge a gaggle of investors like Erin B vs PG&E.

I've gone on record, modest chiffonnier though I may be, and in an exercise of free will, decided I would not be complicit in the PF-69/PF-70 scheme.  That, and my rumored  🐓 compilation is my contribution to numismatics, the latter of which I might add, is shared by distinguished members many of whom remain discreetly silent for fear of alienating others but express their thoughts, thusly, "Lord give me strength." Others use emoji which are clever enough to pass screening.      😉

[Simple Collector]

If I recall correctly, NGC did not grade “modern” coins early on thus in some series there are many more PCGS coins in the marketplace in some series.

I also believe there are some significant differences between NGC and PCGS in some series. Examples that I am familiar with are Roosevelt Dimes and Franklin Halves. In the dime, PCGS is more strict in their standards. In the halves I believe NGC is more stringent. 

 

[Just Bob]

On 7/26/2021 at 11:39 AM, Treeman said:

The truth is that there is no difference in most 69's and 70's from either grading service. Every time I mention this, I would get the same "you don't have the skill to see the difference between 69 and 70" response. However, if the description is no flaws under 5x, I use a 10x, and have found no flaws on many 69's, and have found flaws on 70's. This happens with both services, and my belief is that, during their few seconds of examination, it is most dependant on day of the week, or mood of the grader. Of course, the coin passes through the hands of more than one grader, but humans tend to bias toward a previous opinion. Now, perhaps the second grader does not see the 1st graders opinion, so maybe it's just the quick once over that causes the "mistakes". In any event, if you pay high premiums for a coin that, basically, has to be put under a microscope to see a difference, you are buying plastic, not the coin. The only reason any intelligent person would pay up for a "70" is for points on the registries. A true collector would buy the "69", and have plenty of money left to get another date/type. Okay, now everyone can rip me apart, but it is truly all about registry points. Making a common coin "rare" ,with a basically unnoticeable quality difference, should be left to Mike Mazak and HSN....

Welcome back to the forum.  It's been a while.

[Treeman]

Thanks. I have been around, but I usually just check out the posts, and rarely post myself...

 

[numisport]

On 7/25/2021 at 5:07 PM, MarkFeld said:

 

“Then look at how prices for the PCGS coins have tanked after collectors realize that those Pf 70 DCams don't have that early strike ultra heavy contrast that Pf 70 coins should have. “

The numerical grade is/should be independent of the designation, in this case, including the “ultra heavy cameo contrast”. 

This is exactly the point I attempted to make. PCGS will grade these coins Pf 70 DCam even with later die stage still getting DCam designation. I will guess that the reason NGC won't grade the 71 and 72 dated coins that high is because these grades are now assumed to be appraisals and rightly so will not risk liability on them. Many thousands of dollars have been lost on those coins as they change hands. This is why I hunted down the few Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameos for my collection as I believe they have better eye appeal than many of those PCGS Pf 70 DCams.