Author Topic: NGC comments on PCGS  (Read 3155 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Birdman

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1885
  • Karma: 137

Offline bender9876

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Karma: 4
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2017, 06:59:11 PM »
I have thought that along time ago. Always thought NGC did the right thing. I have been upset with some of my results(from NGC), but I understood why they were given.

Offline jc888888888

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Karma: 22
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2017, 07:56:05 PM »
I totally agree the ms 70,s coming out of Pcgs for new and recent releases has been startling..... I treat pcgs coins when dealing in MCC as 1 grade point lower in monetary value in comparison to NGC ,just my opinion. I still look at the coin carefully and try to buy it not the grade . Pcgs  US issues that are housed in old green holders have been become more and more coveted By US collectors ...........

Offline jc888888888

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Karma: 22
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2017, 07:57:29 PM »
I wonder if NGC has almost leaned to under grading coins lately ??

Offline eric

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 163
  • Karma: 7
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2017, 07:59:11 PM »
It is a bold article. I would call it a GREAT marketing piece. While I wouldn't doubt that PCGS grading standards may have changed a little, I think his evidence is pretty biased and exaggerated. He implies that the price declines are due to PCGS overgrading the coins. But he fails to mention how many total coins have been graded, NGC's grades for the same coins, or any examples of NGC graded coins that have lost a lot of value in recent years.

Look at his first three examples, with numbers I took from NCG and PCGS current websites...

1912-S Liberty Nickel
PCGS total graded = 2670
PCGS 66 or 66+ = 35 (1.3% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 1409
NGC 66 = 14 (1% of the total graded)

In this example, PCGS has graded nearly twice as many of the coin as NGC. Is it possible that among those coins was a high quality hoard that skewed the grading higher by 0.3%? I'd think so.

1939-S Washington Quarter
PCGS total graded = 1941
PCGS 67 or 67+ = 68 (3.5% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 1175
NGC 67 = 42 (3.5% of the total graded)

In this case, PCGS and NGC are grading nearly identical for the top grade. So why point the blame at PCGS for the drop in value?

1995-W Silver Eagle
PCGS total graded = 3570
PCGS 70 = 175 (4.9% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 4952
NGC 70 = 451 (9.1% of the total graded)

In this case, NGC is giving WAY more 70 grades than PCGS! And this is a modern coin which should be more cut and dry in terms of grading standards. So it makes no sense to point the finger at PCGS for the drop in value of this coin. In fact, it appears to be the opposite, so much so that I think some would call the article a "red herring".

I could show similar results for all the examples, but I think this is enough to make my point. Someone from PCGS could just as easily dig up specific examples of coins that "appear" to be overgraded by NGC.

I like NGC and PCGS, I think they both provide a good product/service. A few years ago I was collecting mostly PCGS, and I actually crossed a lot of coins from NGC over to PCGS because I liked their holder better. Not all of them crossed successfully, and I don't think I got an upgrade on any of them. These days I'd say a little over half of my collection is NGC. I started collecting more NGC after learning that the Chinese market favors NGC.

Offline r3globe

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 590
  • Karma: 20
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2017, 08:08:33 PM »
I do agree with the general themes in the article, but I do believe the examples are little misleading. Could it be that impressive auction results around a market peak (different types of coins have their peaks at different times) bring out a lot of high grade coins hoarded by collectors/dealers to capitalize on the spike? He ,also, assumes that speed of information dissemination and transparency was the same 30 years ago. It is not because we have something called the internet.It affects buying and selling decision greatly.

Offline KeyDate1/2ozPandas

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 931
  • Karma: 203
  • Gender: Male
    • China Mint Coins, LLC
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2017, 09:11:33 PM »
PCGS standards started declining around 2012, it all occurred after their bulk submission department ramped up marketing efforts to secure more dealer business.  Historically a bulk submission is 100 of the same coin, but in 2012 bulk meant 50-100 of a wide mix of coins, so one could submit 5 of one coin, 10 of another coin and 40 of another coin and qualify for bulk.  Next grades given in these bulk submissions were often 0-2 point higher than NGC would give and if was obvious over graded.

Some major missteps PCGS made to lose my business were, in 2010 they capped the limit on modern Chinese coins to $1000 guaranty, down from market value, unless you paid up and upgraded your holder to secure plus which was $30 more expensive.  Then they started charging me for spot removal in 2011, if PCGS coin toned badly, they would conserve it for free, but in 2011 they started charging $25 for the service.  Then in 2011 NGC Chinese coin registry kicked out PCGS coins which cause 80% of my PCGS customers to abandon PCGS.  Then 2012 PCGS set up shop in china and gave very favorable grades to a few large dealers to earn their loyalty.  Finally by 2012 PCGS slabs no longer commanded a premium to NGC and today they trade at 5-10% discount for MS69 slabs.

While the US coin market has dropped over the years, PCGS coins have dropped faster than NGC for the same grade, a more fair comparison would have been to show NGC pops and prices over the same period when compared to PCGS, however anecdotally I fully agree with Mark analysis.  I am surprised he took a shot at the leader for US graded coins, I guess NGC is not happy just being world coin leader, they want to be US coin leader also. 

Offline ccl

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 324
  • Karma: 7
    • Chinese Coins Live, LLC.
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #7 on: January 17, 2017, 09:28:51 PM »
any special requests for a chart, NGC v PCGS for MCC?

> 10 responses from 10 different CCF users with suggestions and we'll do it.

Offline pandaccumulator

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
  • Karma: 8
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #8 on: January 17, 2017, 09:34:48 PM »
Overall, I agree with mark's analysis. PCGS has loosened their grading standard over the past 4-5 years. A good example is 95 silver eagle, it was a coin worth $80k when the pop was 8, now the value has decreased 90%, because it is much easier to get a 70 now. I suspect many of these 70s were from "upgrades" of old 69s.



 

Offline pandaccumulator

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
  • Karma: 8
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2017, 09:44:22 PM »
Have I seen the same problem from NGC? yes, a good example is 1/2 oz 90 gold panda. It used to be harder to get 69 grade(30%), over the past 2-3 years, the percentage has gradually changed to 76%.

 

Offline poconopenn

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2690
  • Karma: 229
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2017, 12:52:57 AM »
It is a bold article. I would call it a GREAT marketing piece. While I wouldn't doubt that PCGS grading standards may have changed a little, I think his evidence is pretty biased and exaggerated. He implies that the price declines are due to PCGS overgrading the coins. But he fails to mention how many total coins have been graded, NGC's grades for the same coins, or any examples of NGC graded coins that have lost a lot of value in recent years.

Look at his first three examples, with numbers I took from NCG and PCGS current websites...

1912-S Liberty Nickel
PCGS total graded = 2670
PCGS 66 or 66+ = 35 (1.3% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 1409
NGC 66 = 14 (1% of the total graded)

In this example, PCGS has graded nearly twice as many of the coin as NGC. Is it possible that among those coins was a high quality hoard that skewed the grading higher by 0.3%? I'd think so.

1939-S Washington Quarter
PCGS total graded = 1941
PCGS 67 or 67+ = 68 (3.5% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 1175
NGC 67 = 42 (3.5% of the total graded)

In this case, PCGS and NGC are grading nearly identical for the top grade. So why point the blame at PCGS for the drop in value?

1995-W Silver Eagle
PCGS total graded = 3570
PCGS 70 = 175 (4.9% of the total graded)
NGC total graded = 4952
NGC 70 = 451 (9.1% of the total graded)

In this case, NGC is giving WAY more 70 grades than PCGS! And this is a modern coin which should be more cut and dry in terms of grading standards. So it makes no sense to point the finger at PCGS for the drop in value of this coin. In fact, it appears to be the opposite, so much so that I think some would call the article a "red herring".

I could show similar results for all the examples, but I think this is enough to make my point. Someone from PCGS could just as easily dig up specific examples of coins that "appear" to be overgraded by NGC.

I like NGC and PCGS, I think they both provide a good product/service. A few years ago I was collecting mostly PCGS, and I actually crossed a lot of coins from NGC over to PCGS because I liked their holder better. Not all of them crossed successfully, and I don't think I got an upgrade on any of them. These days I'd say a little over half of my collection is NGC. I started collecting more NGC after learning that the Chinese market favors NGC.

Great analysis. You are correctly to point out that price change should not be correlated to the change in grade standard. The significant increase of total numbers of top grade combined by both companies (NGC and PCGS) is the reason for the drop in price.
 
I happened to own 1995-W eagle proof set. In March, 2013, PCGS had 8 1995-W PF70 and NGC had zero. One PCGS PF70DCAM fetched $86,500 in Great collectors auction on March 2013. Currently, PCGS has 175 as 70 while NGC has 451. The population of 70 has increased from 8 to 626. The majority of the increase in 70 population during last four years is from NGC, not PCGS. The significant drop in price is expected when the population of 70 increased about 8,000%

For the Chairman of NGC to publish a such misleading article, this is a very sad day for coin collection community 
Perhaps, Mr. Salzberg should read the following thread (Grading standard of NGC and PCGS) and comment on it.

http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=10709.0


Offline jc888888888

  • Supporter
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Karma: 22
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2017, 06:22:15 AM »
any special requests for a chart, NGC v PCGS for MCC?

> 10 responses from 10 different CCF users with suggestions and we'll do it.

requested!!

Offline silberschatzimsee

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: 4
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2017, 06:39:17 AM »
According to NGC-logic, how did the ngc graded 1995 1/2oz decrease so drastically in price?

Online Vredaren

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: 7
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2017, 06:39:59 AM »
requested!!

I second this, would be very helpful!

Offline SANDAC

  • Supporter
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+8)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Karma: 118
Re: NGC comments on PCGS
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2017, 06:52:41 AM »
For the Chairman of NGC to publish a such misleading article, this is a very sad day for coin collection community 
Perhaps, Mr. Salzberg should read the following thread (Grading standard of NGC and PCGS) and comment on it.

http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=10709.0
people live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I agree fully with poconopenn's comment.  My own NGC monthly data shows the same kind of MS/PF 70 growth over time that Salzberg illustrated in his article, except it is the NGC population growth!

http://china-mint.info/forum/index.php?topic=10647.0