The recent rash of bad grade threads ......

[Rookiemonster]

Has got me thinking .... Do other hobby’s have this isssue with grades? The likes of currency/coins , comics and what ever else gets graded in the collectable world? I mean I don’t think I would have the same eye as I do for cards with coins or comics.

[barrysloate]

Yes. Coin collectors complain all the time about third party grading. Large cent collectors so disagree that they have their own grading system which overrules the grader. For example, a coin graded a 40 by the grading service may be deemed only a 25 by the large cent collector. They generally feel that the number doesn't reflect the actual grade, but represents what a coin is likely to sell for. Coins with visible wear often receive an uncirculated grade which drives collectors crazy. Obviously, all third party grading has a long way to go to get it right.

[A2000]

Buy the coin not the holder!

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Yes. Coin collectors complain all the time about third party grading. Large cent collectors so disagree that they have their own grading system which overrules the grader. For example, a coin graded a 40 by the grading service may be deemed only a 25 by the large cent collector. They generally feel that the number doesn't reflect the actual grade, but represents what a coin is likely to sell for. Coins with visible wear often receive an uncirculated grade which drives collectors crazy. Obviously, all third party grading has a long way to go to get it right.

Thanks for the response. So if I were to try to translate this into the card Hobby.
Psa grades a card a pre war card a four but pre war collectors would say well it’s more like a 2.5? How do they determine this ratio.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

Thanks for the response. So if I were to try to translate this into the card Hobby.
Psa grades a card a pre war card a four but pre war collectors would say well it’s more like a 2.5? How do they determine this ratio.

It's more about expectations and the specifics of the issue. I'm not totally up on large cents, but as with most coins there's a standard that most graders follow. And especially at the lower end, there's a lot of interpreting.


If a card is mostly ok, has typical corner wear, and a small crease, is it VG, or only G. I was always taught that a crease equaled G and no better. The grading companies sometimes give a creased card a VG grade.


With many coins, it's things like How many letters of the word Liberty are still showing on the headband, or something like that. It's different depending on the exact design, and probably differs a bit for years where the coins were usually not struck well leading to ones that lacked some detail when they were new.


One of the long time dealers wrote a column on how the standards had been allowed to slide over the years. Possibly to keep collectors and dealers happy with the grades they got. So a Grade of fine today might have been only VG 10 or more years ago.

[steve B]

Grading for stamps is still fairly new, and the companies are very fussy. If the stamp has flaws like a short perforation or a tiny corner crease they may not grade it at all. It's almost purely a measure of how well centered an otherwise perfect copy is.


The stamp places in my opinion are what we'd consider to be slow. I just got my first two back from expertizing after 2-3 months. Both came back as being what I thought they were, which is good. One was the first one authenticated. What was nice was that I had no idea how they'd value it for the purpose of the fee. They simply picked the catalog value of the normal stamp that was used. They caught the fake cancel, which I hadn't. The other one, I sent in thinking it was never hinged, and it came back hinged. About a $400 difference. And all for a tiny flaw in the gum that's hard to see. I'm ok with that, lately with the difference between NH and hinged being pretty large on older stamps they've taken the position that any flaw is considered hinged. Overly cautious, but not a bad way to go. The good news was that the fee became the minimum fee rather than the percentage of the never hinged value they would have charged.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by steve B

One of the long time dealers wrote a column on how the standards had been allowed to slide over the years. Possibly to keep collectors and dealers happy with the grades they got. So a Grade of fine today might have been only VG 10 or more years ago.

Interesting. From what I'm seeing, cards seem to be going the opposite direction. Lots of things are grading about one grade lower than they would have 20 years ago.

[Throttlesteer]

Yes, now people are judging the serial number and generation of the holder to determine how strong a card is. That is, unless they just judge the card on its own. Reholdering throws some off.

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's more about expectations and the specifics of the issue. I'm not totally up on large cents, but as with most coins there's a standard that most graders follow. And especially at the lower end, there's a lot of interpreting.


If a card is mostly ok, has typical corner wear, and a small crease, is it VG, or only G. I was always taught that a crease equaled G and no better. The grading companies sometimes give a creased card a VG grade.


With many coins, it's things like How many letters of the word Liberty are still showing on the headband, or something like that. It's different depending on the exact design, and probably differs a bit for years where the coins were usually not struck well leading to ones that lacked some detail when they were new.


One of the long time dealers wrote a column on how the standards had been allowed to slide over the years. Possibly to keep collectors and dealers happy with the grades they got. So a Grade of fine today might have been only VG 10 or more years ago.

I like this thanks . I mention this a while back but I don’t think all cards should be graded under the same standards. There are conditions sensitive sets. Sets made on stock the are very thin. Some sets that the color fades easily. But all that taken into account. Maybe it makes sense to grade them the same and just know what’s see have these issues. But maybe a condition sensitive qualifier makes sense.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

Yes, now people are judging the serial number and generation of the holder to determine how strong a card is. That is, unless they just judge the card on its own. Reholdering throws some off.

Remember folks, buy the serial number, not the card. Keep the serial number and send the card to me.

Brian

[barrysloate]

It seems to me that old timers who started collecting before the advent of third party grading are less likely to accept it, while newer collectors who see pretty much all cards, coins, etc. in slabs assume that it is the only way to go. There are exceptions, but it's kind of an old school/new school battle.

[ClementeFanOh]

Hi folks- The comic book industry faces this same issue all the time. CGC, the primary 3rd party grader for comics, is notorious for head scratching grades that do not reflect the accurate evaluation of the book. The problem is that many of their graders are half the age of the true experts who either own nice collections, or have been grading for decades and own brick and mortar stores. (Think PSA for cards. They get the highest hammer prices at auction yet are hopelessly, hilariously inconsistent with grading). Many comic buyers actually prefer a loose book they can sift through, a vast difference with cards.

[silvor]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

Many comic buyers actually prefer a loose book they can sift through, a vast difference with cards.

Well, you can enjoy a card the same if it were in a PSA holder or if raw. A comic on the other hand, no.

[sb1]

Coins, especially copper large cent and small cents are judged by the 3rd parties based solely on their degree of wear in most instances, unless they have been cleaned which will result in a different holder or label. The advanced collectors also judge them on surfaces as well, be it nice chocolate brown, dark, corroded(scudzy), have scratches or other man made marks, so in effect they net grade the coin from it's degree of wear to reflect it's other flaws. An XF coin maybe net graded to VF 20, or a Fine, net graded to VG8, due to various maladies.

This does not happen so much in silver/gold issues as they don't tend to have some of these issues with the base metal.

To equate it to cards would be the typical qualifiers MC or OC or ST where a card appears Exmt or Nrmt etc but has one of the problems noted and the result is a card with a value of approximately 2 grade levels lower.

[barrysloate]

As Scott noted, copper coins have problems that silver and gold coins do not. A copper coin with porosity, for example, may get a third party grade of "Very Fine Details", which excludes any number designation. A veteran copper collector may instead grade it "Very Fine 20 net Fine 12", deducting 8 points for the corroded surfaces. It does make things confusing having two separate grading systems.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

I like this thanks . I mention this a while back but I don’t think all cards should be graded under the same standards. There are conditions sensitive sets. Sets made on stock the are very thin. Some sets that the color fades easily. But all that taken into account. Maybe it makes sense to grade them the same and just know what’s see have these issues. But maybe a condition sensitive qualifier makes sense.

That's sort of handled by pop reports, and to me should be. A quick check will tell you that some stuff just isn't out there in top condition. Grading it on a curve of sorts leaves no room for the outliers like the Black Swamp cards. It would also cause confusion in the expectation of what you get for a certain grade.

On the other hand, at least one company allows a bit of leeway for traits that are just part of the card as issued. Like how tobacco stains on Polar Bear T206s aren't considered to be as bad as a similar stain on other brands.

[Bigshot69]

Comics are similar. CGC is very consistent for the most part but if you look hard enough you will find an outlier here and there.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Have to disagree with this. You can't smell the old cardboard through the plastic. It is also impossible to handle and touch the actual card when it is in a slab. When starting to collect a new set, some collectors purposely buy ungraded cards to get familiar with them. I am not anti-grading. I have graded and ungraded cards in my collection.

Originally Posted by silvor

Well, you can enjoy a card the same if it were in a PSA holder or if raw. A comic on the other hand, no.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

Have to disagree with this. You can't smell the old cardboard through the plastic. It is also impossible to handle and touch the actual card when it is in a slab. When starting to collect a new set, some collectors purposely buy ungraded cards to get familiar with them. I am not anti-grading. I have graded and ungraded cards in my collection.

Agree with Robert here. It's important to get to know the cards when you first get into them. You lose some of that once they are slabbed. I also have graded and raw cards in my collection.

[Leon]

Very much agree with this statement. I purposely handle raw cards (especially scarce ones) more than I used to just because I want to know them better. There is no substitute for handling raw cards for experience.

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

Agree with Robert here. It's important to get to know the cards when you first get into them. You lose some of that once they are slabbed. I also have graded and raw cards in my collection.