FACT: NGC CAC coins sell for slightly LESS then PCGS CAC coins. There is a reason. Its either good marketing on PCGS part or something wrong w/the NGC coins.
I can tell you dealers buy NGC coins to mostly cross them. Why? They bring more money.
I often wonder why it bothers people that PCGS coins sell for more. Is it that they want PCGS coins but have to pay more? Is it that the coins in the PCGS holders are higher end so command a higher price?
If a lot of dealers are crossing the best over to PCGS it makes sense those would have higher prices.
The simple answer is that PCGS coins are not considered better by collectors just the lemmings. Yes in some areas PCGS coins do sell for more in the market, but that is not really because they are "better" coins in every case (they are sometimes) but simply because there are still some of the old Hall regime dealers that feverishly push PCGS to their customers due to their PCGS only stance.
Is this phrase just marketing gobbledygobbeldness?
Bingo!! yes Laura's comments are nothing but bluster and misinformation. Lets fact check, Laura said "Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger" sorry that is false. The PCGS registry shows just over 146K sets as of this moment, see my page copy.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that
the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
I sincerely appreciate the reply, and my thoughts are parallel in direction, with only a slight bend.
I suspected the same concerning the phrase (and admit I still don't know what it means).
There is logic in your reply, and that is important. If I was to add to the post, it would be that I recall a time not long ago when PCGS had a reputation of exercising a tendency to be generous with grading, as the norm.
So.....
I agree I cannot buy a NGC coin because of their ugly holder. Asthetics is a very important part of enjoying a coin. Only if a coin is truly amazing would I spend money and risk to cross to PCGS. The NGC holder is like 40 years behind the time.
Laura is absolutely right about the dealer strategy of buying to cross. My finest known 1871 dollar went from PCGS 64 to NGC 66. Thence, to PCGS 66. Does the coin change? Nope, but the motive does.
Laura is absolutely right about the dealer strategy of buying to cross.
My finest known 1871 dollar went from PCGS 64 to NGC 66.
Thence, to PCGS 66.
Does the coin change?
Nope, but the motive does.
Do you think in general strictly graded PCGS coins will cross a great amount of the time 1-2 grades higher in a NGC holder?
Laura is absolutely right about the dealer strategy of buying to cross. My finest known 1871 dollar went from PCGS 64 to NGC 66. Thence, to PCGS 66. Does the coin change? Nope, but the motive does.
Do you think in general strictly graded PCGS coins will cross a great amount of the time 1-2 grades higher in a NGC holder?
Here is one Kool-Aid example: NGC AU58 CAC sells 02/2022. Coin is "cracked out" or crossed to a PCGS holder. Now PCGS AU 58 CAC, currently offered for $3,500 more. Same coin, different holder in less than 45 days. Apparently, there was nothing wrong with this coin. Dealers can most definitely make more money hyping PCGS vs NGC when selling to the uninitiated.
Here is one Kool-Aid example: NGC AU58 CAC sells 02/2022. Coin is "cracked out" or crossed to a PCGS holder. Now PCGS AU 58 CAC, currently offered for $3,500 more. Same coin, different holder in less than 45 days. Apparently, there was nothing wrong with this coin. Dealers can most definitely make more money hyping PCGS vs NGC when selling to the uninitiated.
While the coin certainly might bring more in the PCGS holder, the price it's being "offered" (as opposed to sold) at, isn't necessarily indicative of its increased value.
Rather than just a count of registry sets between the various entities, a more useful count would be the current number of active sets where the owner(s) are actively working the sets. Then factor in, for the sake of this discussion, an approximation of the value contained in these active sets. That would be a closer representation of today's collector's interests and value distribution.
No one said the market has to act rationally. People don't always have to act rationally, either.
FACT: NGC CAC coins sell for slightly LESS then PCGS CAC coins. There is a reason. Its either good marketing on PCGS part or something wrong w/the NGC coins.
I can tell you dealers buy NGC coins to mostly cross them. Why? They bring more money.
Is the reason as you previously posted, that it seems they grade commercially?
Cutting thru the dodging, what exactly does grading commercially mean in the context you are using, and more directly, what does the phrase mean? Is it something you describe mentally as a personal evaluation, that you can not describe publicly?
You now seem to indicate, in your latest post, a link between grading commercially and something being wrong with the NGC coins. Is that a correct interpretation?
If you prefer not to educate others (me) what the phrase "seems graded commercially" means, no harm no foul.
FACT: NGC CAC coins sell for slightly LESS then PCGS CAC coins. There is a reason. Its either good marketing on PCGS part or something wrong w/the NGC coins.
I can tell you dealers buy NGC coins to mostly cross them. Why? They bring more money.
So it would seem from your post that you feel that CAC is evaluating PCGS and NGC coins differently as according to you there may be something wrong with the NGC holdered coins. I have never heard that CAC has a different evaluation criteria for NGC vs PCGS, have you?
That is possible....can you explain what the phrase "...seem to grade more commercially...." actually means, in the context of the subject of the thread? Is the phrase a known definition in the area of grading coins and is it a usage typically applied by a TPG and/or 4PG (CAC)?
That is possible....can you explain what the phrase "...seem to grade more commercially...." actually means, in the context of the subject of the thread? Is the phrase a known definition in the area of grading coins and is it a usage typically applied by a TPG and/or 4PG (CAC)?
I wont speak for others, but when I hear "more commercially", I think in terms of "market grading" and of (at least somewhat) loose grading.
That is possible....can you explain what the phrase "...seem to grade more commercially...." actually means, in the context of the subject of the thread? Is the phrase a known definition in the area of grading coins and is it a usage typically applied by a TPG and/or 4PG (CAC)?
I wont speak for others, but when I hear "more commercially", I think in terms of "market grading" and of (at least somewhat) loose grading.
Thank You, as usual, Mr. Feld. I thought of that possibility as a possible interpretation, since it would be a logical fit, but could not understand why use "commercially" for "market", when the word market is a universally understood definition when discussing grading by the TPGs/4PG?
If a person, and to be more direct...an acknowledged national level well known dealer.... opines the coin has been market graded, I immediately understand. When the person states the coin is commercially graded, that is very confusing and does not have a clear meaning of what is being conveyed.
When it is used in a manner that justifies a less than acceptable equality (which the phrase clearly intended to emphasize, in the manner used), the person using the term should make an effort to clarify, because it does have an effect to hobbyists/collectors/dealers.
In this particular thread, which is discussing all things being equal between 2 TPGs that are the same Grade and both have a CAC acceptance, stating one of the TPGs "seems to grade commercially", is avoidance and gobbledygobbledness, and then causes the reader to think: the person stating this is of the opinion that CAC has a preference, and it must be true because the person is a nationally known expert in the numismatic world.
When the person doesn't reply or offer an explanation, after 5 requests, then any value of the phrase is questionable.
I never recall, in all the past years I have been familiar with you, having this level of "huh?" when understanding your point.
The simple answer is that PCGS coins are not considered better by collectors just the lemmings. Yes in some areas PCGS coins do sell for more in the market, but that is not really because they are "better" coins in every case (they are sometimes) but simply because there are still some of the old Hall regime dealers that feverishly push PCGS to their customers due to their PCGS only stance.
Is this phrase just marketing gobbledygobbeldness?
Bingo!! yes Laura's comments are nothing but bluster and misinformation. Lets fact check, Laura said "Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger" sorry that is false. The PCGS registry shows just over 146K sets as of this moment, see my page copy.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that
the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
I sincerely appreciate the reply, and my thoughts are parallel in direction, with only a slight bend.
I suspected the same concerning the phrase (and admit I still don't know what it means).
There is logic in your reply, and that is important. If I was to add to the post, it would be that I recall a time not long ago when PCGS had a reputation of exercising a tendency to be generous with grading, as the norm.
So.....
I agree I cannot buy a NGC coin because of their ugly holder. Asthetics is a very important part of enjoying a coin. Only if a coin is truly amazing would I spend money and risk to cross to PCGS. The NGC holder is like 40 years behind the time.
I won’t put words in @Legend ‘s mouth, but “biggest” in terms of total market value would make her statement accurate. Although I disagree with her on other points, her comments in this thread are 100% spot on. And I’m not a plastic fan boy either; I have bought many NGC coins to crack/cross them exactly as Laura has observed others doing. The truth is many NGC coins can be downgraded in PCGS plastic, get the magic green bean, and be sold for a profit. It is the reverse crack out game.
The simple answer is that PCGS coins are not considered better by collectors just the lemmings. Yes in some areas PCGS coins do sell for more in the market, but that is not really because they are "better" coins in every case (they are sometimes) but simply because there are still some of the old Hall regime dealers that feverishly push PCGS to their customers due to their PCGS only stance.
Is this phrase just marketing gobbledygobbeldness?
Bingo!! yes Laura's comments are nothing but bluster and misinformation. Lets fact check, Laura said "Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger" sorry that is false. The PCGS registry shows just over 146K sets as of this moment, see my page copy.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
I sincerely appreciate the reply, and my thoughts are parallel in direction, with only a slight bend.
I suspected the same concerning the phrase (and admit I still don't know what it means).
There is logic in your reply, and that is important. If I was to add to the post, it would be that I recall a time not long ago when PCGS had a reputation of exercising a tendency to be generous with grading, as the norm.
So.....
I agree I cannot buy a NGC coin because of their ugly holder. Asthetics is a very important part of enjoying a coin. Only if a coin is truly amazing would I spend money and risk to cross to PCGS. The NGC holder is like 40 years behind the time.
I won’t put words in @Legend ‘s mouth, but “biggest” in terms of total market value would make her statement accurate. Although I disagree with her on other points, her comments in this thread are 100% spot on. And I’m not a plastic fan boy either; I have bought many NGC coins to crack/cross them exactly as Laura has observed others doing. The truth is many NGC coins can be downgraded in PCGS plastic, get the magic green bean, and be sold for a profit. It is the reverse crack out game.
I am not on a level of that particular knowledge; however, that is not the thrust of the OP question. The issue presented by the OP question is 2 coins being equal in all respects, including a CAC award, yet one TPG CAC piece sells for a higher price...why?
Ms. Sperber may be 100% correct with the commentary she posted. Logic dictates that her position is that CAC has a tendency of a favoritism toward one TPG over the other, even though the question states both coins are equal, by answering clearly that the reason is because NGC "seems to grade commercially". There is no reply by Ms. Sperber to clarify what that phrase means, and if she is 100% correct with her comments, in your opinion, you must, by association and familiarity, know what the phrase means.
PCGS has done an outstanding job of marketing for their product. There is no question PCGS CAC coins bring the most money.
^ This.
Then the logical point is, the buyer doesn't care that the coins are equal, or care that both coins have passed CAC, because there is no trust in the CAC opinion, because, darn it, PCGS just does a better job of marketing and brings more money!!
If I was told this by a nationally recognized dealer, I would not be interested in entering a buy-sell relationship.
PCGS has done an outstanding job of marketing for their product. There is no question PCGS CAC coins bring the most money.
^ This.
Then the logical point is, the buyer doesn't care that the coins are equal, or care that both coins have passed CAC, because there is no trust in the CAC opinion, because, darn it, PCGS just does a better job of marketing and brings more money!!
If I was told this by a nationally recognized dealer, I would not be interested in entering a buy-sell relationship.
The market reality is that collectors are increasingly paranoid about grade inflation and doctoring as many have been hurt by it as has the larger market (look at the drop starting in 2008 and continuing to 2019-20). The more preferred “approvals” the better in the eyes of many.
We can debate whether it is logical or not but the fact is PCGS CAC coins do command premiums over CAC NGC coins.
Comments
I can tell you dealers buy NGC coins to mostly cross them. Why? They bring more money.
If a lot of dealers are crossing the best over to PCGS it makes sense those would have higher prices.
I agree I cannot buy a NGC coin because of their ugly holder. Asthetics is a very important part of enjoying a coin. Only if a coin is truly amazing would I spend money and risk to cross to PCGS. The NGC holder is like 40 years behind the time.
My finest known 1871 dollar went from PCGS 64 to NGC 66.
Thence, to PCGS 66.
Does the coin change?
Nope, but the motive does.
I don't bother with the shuffle.
NGC AU58 CAC sells 02/2022. Coin is "cracked out" or crossed to a PCGS holder. Now PCGS AU 58 CAC, currently offered for $3,500 more. Same coin, different holder in less than 45 days. Apparently, there was nothing wrong with this coin. Dealers can most definitely make more money hyping PCGS vs NGC when selling to the uninitiated.
No one said the market has to act rationally. People don't always have to act rationally, either.
Cutting thru the dodging, what exactly does grading commercially mean in the context you are using, and more directly, what does the phrase mean? Is it something you describe mentally as a personal evaluation, that you can not describe publicly?
You now seem to indicate, in your latest post, a link between grading commercially and something being wrong with the NGC coins. Is that a correct interpretation?
If you prefer not to educate others (me) what the phrase "seems graded commercially" means, no harm no foul.
Is the phrase a known definition in the area of grading coins and is it a usage typically applied by a TPG and/or 4PG (CAC)?
If a person, and to be more direct...an acknowledged national level well known dealer.... opines the coin has been market graded, I immediately understand. When the person states the coin is commercially graded, that is very confusing and does not have a clear meaning of what is being conveyed.
When it is used in a manner that justifies a less than acceptable equality (which the phrase clearly intended to emphasize, in the manner used), the person using the term should make an effort to clarify, because it does have an effect to hobbyists/collectors/dealers.
In this particular thread, which is discussing all things being equal between 2 TPGs that are the same Grade and both have a CAC acceptance, stating one of the TPGs "seems to grade commercially", is avoidance and gobbledygobbledness, and then causes the reader to think: the person stating this is of the opinion that CAC has a preference, and it must be true because the person is a nationally known expert in the numismatic world.
When the person doesn't reply or offer an explanation, after 5 requests, then any value of the phrase is questionable.
I never recall, in all the past years I have been familiar with you, having this level of "huh?" when understanding your point.
Communication is fun.
But, thank you.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that
the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
I sincerely appreciate the reply, and my thoughts are parallel in direction, with only a slight bend.
I suspected the same concerning the phrase (and admit I still don't know what it means).
There is logic in your reply, and that is important. If I was to add to the post, it would be that I recall a time not long ago when PCGS had a reputation of exercising a tendency to be generous with grading, as the norm.
So.....
I agree I cannot buy a NGC coin because of their ugly holder. Asthetics is a very important part of enjoying a coin. Only if a coin is truly amazing would I spend money and risk to cross to PCGS. The NGC holder is like 40 years behind the time.
I won’t put words in @Legend ‘s mouth, but “biggest” in terms of total market value would make her statement accurate. Although I disagree with her on other points, her comments in this thread are 100% spot on. And I’m not a plastic fan boy either; I have bought many NGC coins to crack/cross them exactly as Laura has observed others doing. The truth is many NGC coins can be downgraded in PCGS plastic, get the magic green bean, and be sold for a profit. It is the reverse crack out game.
I am not on a level of that particular knowledge; however, that is not the thrust of the OP question. The issue presented by the OP question is 2 coins being equal in all respects, including a CAC award, yet one TPG CAC piece sells for a higher price...why?
Ms. Sperber may be 100% correct with the commentary she posted. Logic dictates that her position is that CAC has a tendency of a favoritism toward one TPG over the other, even though the question states both coins are equal, by answering clearly that the reason is because NGC "seems to grade commercially". There is no reply by Ms. Sperber to clarify what that phrase means, and if she is 100% correct with her comments, in your opinion, you must, by association and familiarity, know what the phrase means.
Can you clarify?
Then the logical point is, the buyer doesn't care that the coins are equal, or care that both coins have passed CAC, because there is no trust in the CAC opinion, because, darn it, PCGS just does a better job of marketing and brings more money!!
If I was told this by a nationally recognized dealer, I would not be interested in entering a buy-sell relationship.
We can debate whether it is logical or not but the fact is PCGS CAC coins do command premiums over CAC NGC coins.