Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Grading Education Service Needed
I know that there is an desire to keep things simple and to summarize a coin's state of preservation and desirability with a single grade. I agree that that is what is needed for a viable market. However, a grading service might also offer a separate educational service. I would like to see a service that can comment or rate the various factors that went into the determination of that one final grade (and/or categorization as a CAC A, B, or C, if stickered). And, of course, I would be willing to pay for that service and consider it an educational expense.
For example, a grading report might look like this for a circulated early coin:
Technical grade: The wear on this coin is consistent with (AU 58, ..., F12, etc.). The flatness in the hair is striking weakness not wear.
Strike: The strike is unusually sharp for this date/variety/etc. 5 stars. Or, the strike is weak for this usually well-struck date/variety/etc. See weakness at eagle's claws, motto, and left wing. 2 stars.
Surfaces: The number of marks on this EF40 coin are numerous with some particularly egregious ones in the primary focus area on Liberty's cheek. 2 stars. Or, the scratch in the right obverse field is disqualifying for a straight grade. Or, the scratch in the field is distracting. 1 star. Or, if the coin has been cleaned, a description of what thought processes/observations went into that determination.
Luster: There is abundant luster under the toning. 5 stars. Or, more luster should be expected for the amount of wear exhibited. 2 stars.
Originality: The toning appears original. 5 stars. Or, the coin had been dipped but has retoned attractively. 4 stars. Or, the coin has been dipped and is mostly brilliant. 2 stars for an AU55. Disqualifying for an VF20. Or, the coin has been cleaned. See hairlines in left obverse field. See more detailed information under Surfaces. Or, this coin has been cleaned but still should be straight graded for the following reasons.
Other: The toning is attractive and adds to the eye appeal. 5 stars. Or, the toning is dark, but original. 3 stars. Or, any other comments the grader/educator thinks would be useful.
I know that adding detailed information with a grade has been done in the past. For example, the early ANACS photo certificates showed ratings for luster, surfaces, eye appeal, and strike, but this practice was ultimately discontinued. My proposal is NOT that every coin submitted for grading receives a detailed report to explain its grade, but for an extra fee (perhaps substantial) an expert shares their detailed opinion about a coin, like a mentor. The service could also be a stand-alone product such that a coin in any holder, or raw, could be evaluated. I think such a service would go a long way in educating collectors and be a boon to the hobby.
For example, a grading report might look like this for a circulated early coin:
Technical grade: The wear on this coin is consistent with (AU 58, ..., F12, etc.). The flatness in the hair is striking weakness not wear.
Strike: The strike is unusually sharp for this date/variety/etc. 5 stars. Or, the strike is weak for this usually well-struck date/variety/etc. See weakness at eagle's claws, motto, and left wing. 2 stars.
Surfaces: The number of marks on this EF40 coin are numerous with some particularly egregious ones in the primary focus area on Liberty's cheek. 2 stars. Or, the scratch in the right obverse field is disqualifying for a straight grade. Or, the scratch in the field is distracting. 1 star. Or, if the coin has been cleaned, a description of what thought processes/observations went into that determination.
Luster: There is abundant luster under the toning. 5 stars. Or, more luster should be expected for the amount of wear exhibited. 2 stars.
Originality: The toning appears original. 5 stars. Or, the coin had been dipped but has retoned attractively. 4 stars. Or, the coin has been dipped and is mostly brilliant. 2 stars for an AU55. Disqualifying for an VF20. Or, the coin has been cleaned. See hairlines in left obverse field. See more detailed information under Surfaces. Or, this coin has been cleaned but still should be straight graded for the following reasons.
Other: The toning is attractive and adds to the eye appeal. 5 stars. Or, the toning is dark, but original. 3 stars. Or, any other comments the grader/educator thinks would be useful.
I know that adding detailed information with a grade has been done in the past. For example, the early ANACS photo certificates showed ratings for luster, surfaces, eye appeal, and strike, but this practice was ultimately discontinued. My proposal is NOT that every coin submitted for grading receives a detailed report to explain its grade, but for an extra fee (perhaps substantial) an expert shares their detailed opinion about a coin, like a mentor. The service could also be a stand-alone product such that a coin in any holder, or raw, could be evaluated. I think such a service would go a long way in educating collectors and be a boon to the hobby.
Tagged:
Comments
thank you so much!
thank you so much!
Any person working for a TPG in any collectable venue should undergo a testing procedure that requires in-depth knowledge of the subject/item being evaluated. the person should also be required to have at a minimum a complete Ophthalmology exam (by a licensed Ophthalmologist) at a minimum of once a year and preferably twice a year, and the exam should include Field of vision, visual acuity, depth perception, color vision, pupils-including reactivity of each pupil in light and dark conditions, extraocular motility and alignment, intraocular pressure, confrontation visual fields, and slit-lamp exam, all a minimum standard.
The person should be licensed by whatever independent professional organization exists for the particular endeavor the person is involved in...for example evaluating a Morgan is not the same as evaluating a half-disme... and any licensing should require rigid knowledge testing for the classification of license applied for. An ID number that remains with the licensed person should be issued by the professional organization, even if the person changes employment from a TPG to another TPG or starts their own Grading Entity. The ID # should be identified on any any item the person grades. Over time, the grading can be tracked and the information can be evaluated by the marketplace (and the entity employing the person, of course). If more than one Grader is involved, both...or three should be identified in the same manner on the item. The ID is private and is certified and held by an independent professional organization. The person should be required to take yearly CEU, as determined by the independent organization. The person is not to be engaged in personal grading for others outside the employment position.
Launch tomatoes.....
This service was provided by the International Numismatic Society's Authentication Bureau in the 1980's. INSAB was the first TPGS in the U.S. beating ANACS by a few months. INSAB is no longer in business. For a few extra dollars over the normal grading fee ($5 as I remember) we provided a detailed grading evaluation covering strike, surface condition , luster, marks, eye appeal, minting characteristics, and hand drawn location and ID of die cracks, hairlines, etc. It was similar to a GIA diamond evaluation.
I'd be shocked if I did more than 70 of them. Unfortunately, this type of service would not be PRACTICAL for a major TPGS due to the time it took and the huge volume of coins seen at a TPGS. However, some of the smaller services provide direct contact with a professional grader to talk about your coins.
Additionally, I suggest you look into taking several grading seminars so you will learn to evaluate coins for yourself. SPLAT! SPLAT! WACK! SQUISH! SPLAT!
This would be a major undertaking but I believe it could become the coin collector's "bible" when buying new coins.
Or even reviewing their present coins.
PHOTOGRAPHY would be key on this.
https://www.pcgs.com/photograde
That site even offers this video link:
As for telling someone (ALL the info) why their coin was graded the way it was - NONSENSE! So I am not in full agreement with you. There are too many attributes of a coin's grade to consider that are not available with PCGS Photograde alone. Besides, as I posted somewhere before, many of the progressions for each series are flawed - the lower grade looks better than the higher grade. There are also minor "errors" in the definitions and videos on their website. Unfortunately, I am banned from Collectors Universe (I broke
At every TPGS I've worked at (except NGC and NCS), we/I left personal notes about specific coins when the submission was sent back. Customers love it.
JA can attest to that as apparently he does the same thing on occasion. An Educated collector makes the best customer! Unfortunately, I'll bet the volume of coins and long turnaround times makes this impossible at the two top TPGS.
i suggest that “professional == expert”
and if someone doesn’t know what an “expert” is, then it really shouldn’t matter to them
thank you so much!