Recently readers of Coingrader Capsule have asked me to report on crossovers to PCGS, and the fact is, I've had some success.
As explained in a previous post, "Crossover, -under, and -out," a crossover means a coin by one grading company successfully made the same grade by another company (i.e. an MS65 Morgan in a ANACS holder earns the same in a PCGS one); a cross-under means an MS65 Morgan in an National Numismatic holder earns an MS64 in a PCGS one; and a cross-out means an MS65 Morgan in a Numistrust holder is returned in a "Genuine" no-grade holder by PCGS.
I sent these Morgans to PCGS in September:
- 1880-S MS65, National Numismatic Certification
- 1885-O MS66, Numistrust Corporation
- 1888 MS65, National Numistrust Certification
- 1888 MS65, PCI
- 1890 MS65, National Numistrust Certification
- 1897-O AU55, Numistrust Corporation
- 1903 MS65 PCI
I'll provide pictures of the group in their original holders. Click on the pictures to expand and see if you agree with the original grade or the PCGS one.
Here were the results:
- CROSSOVER:1880-S MS65, National Numismatic Certification
- CROSSUNDER: 1885-O MS66, Numistrust Corporation, MS65 PCGS
- CROSSUNDER: 1888 MS65, National Numistrust Certification, MS64 PCGS
- CROSSOVER: 1888 MS65, PCI
- CROSSUNDER: 1890 MS65, National Numistrust Certification, MS63 PCGS
- CROSSOUT: 1897-O AU55, Numistrust Corporation, "Genuine" (cleaned) PCGS
- CROSSOVER: 1903 MS65, PCI
Scorecard for the submission: 3 crossovers, 3 crossunders, 1 crossout.
We're nearing the Super Bowl game, so let's use football comparisons in the PCGS "crossover, -under and -out" game: A crossover is a touchdown (6 points); a crossunder, a field goal (3 points if PCGS grades 1 point lower); safety (2 points if two points lower); and extra point kick (1 point if three points lower); and a crossout, an opponent TD with conversion (8 points).
Score: Coingrader Capsule, 26; Opponent, 8.
These were the grades I predicted after inspecting the coins carefully before submitting them:
- CROSSUNDER:1880-S MS65, National Numismatic Certification; MS64 PCGS
- CROSSUNDER: 1885-O MS66, Numistrust Corporation, MS65 PCGS
- CROSSUNDER: 1888 MS65, National Numistrust Certification, MS64 PCGS
- CROSSOVER: 1888 MS65, PCI
- CROSSUNDER: 1890 MS65, National Numistrust Certification, MS64 PCGS
- CROSSOUT: 1897-O AU55, Numistrust Corporation, "Genuine" (cleaned) PCGS
- CROSSUNDER: 1903 MS65, PCI, MS64 PCGS
That scorecard would have read: Coingrader Capsule, 21; Opponent, 8
A few closing points: PCGS is proving to me with my crossover submissions that it evaluates the coin, not the reputation of the holder, when making designations.
Second- and even third-tier grading companies are ranked that low not because they get every grade wrong, but because they are not consistent in their grades (which gives you the edge if you know more than the grader and can cherrypick beauts).
As for these coins, I think the 1880-S is a borderline PCGS MS65. Conversely, I think the 1885-O would have been graded MS65+ had I not submitted it in the "economy" class (which doesn't award "plus" grades [unlike NGC]). I knew the 1888 in a PCI holder might cross and the 1888 in a National Numistrust holder would not. The 1897-O is obviously cleaned.
The real surprise and delight was the 1903 PCI coin. I could not capture in the picture the rich pastel blue and yellow toning which, in retrospect, might have obscured a tiny bag mark or two. I thought I'd get an MS64 because of that. But in looking at the coin now, in a PCGS holder, I not only agree with the grade but marvel at the extraordinary eye appeal.
This will become one of my most cherished coins in the local bank box.
So what grades would you give to these coins? Share your views in the comments section below!
Related posts:
Excellent article, Michael. I always look forward to reading your posts. I think it’s very telling that all the NGC coins undergraded at PCGS by one tick, something we all should pay close attention to. Interestingly, many high end rarities can be found in NGC holders, presumably graded accurately. However, when it comes to coins valued below $2,000, NGC seems to be as guilty of gradeflation as many of the third tier TPGs. That said, I have come to respect PCI slabs and believe they’re the best kept secret in today’s coin market. More often than not, you can pick up PCI slabs significantly discounted relative to PCGS/NGC, yet they tend to hold coins at the same grade as listed on the slab. I currently own 10 or so PCI slabs and in my opinion all are graded appropriately. And given PCI slabs can be purchased well below FMV, there’s plenty of room to submit them to PCGS without going underwater on the purchase.
On a separate note, I believe PCGS will consider “plus” (+) grade for economy submitted coin. In the beginning of this program, PCGGS applied “plus” grading for only the full priced grading and SecurePlus tiers, however a few months ago they announced they would “plus” grade all submitted MS coins. So the coins submitted were eligible for a “plus” designation. However, I have been told by PCGS insiders that the “plus” grade is more like a switch in the grading room that is turned on and off depending upon various factors, only a few of which are connected to the actual coin being graded. Although this “rumor” sounds incredible on the face of it, there may be grains of truth buried within it. Far too often I hear tales of a coin submitted 4 to 5 times without “plus-ing” only to come back with a “plus” after being submitted by a new owner. Despite the Machiavellian-like joy I experienced when showing the newly “plus-ed” coin to its former owner (LOL), it’s difficult to understand this phenomena without considering factors unrelated to the actual coin itself.
Thanks again for your excellent column and I wish you, and yours, a very happy holidays!
TD
Dear TD,
Thanks for your thorough and insightful response! I agree with you wholeheartedly about PCI. I have a good record of crossing with that label, including the company that purchased it–Dominion Grading Service (which, alas, recently shut down).
Concerning the plus grade, I went back to PCGS to find out if it had changed its policy announced Aug. 2, 2010, in this release: http://www.pcgs.com/articles/article_view.chtml?artid=6322&universeid=313&type=1
The company is closed today for the holiday. (I had called to check and will do so again next week.) You may recall that I had criticized PCGS for the policy of not grading “Economy,” as a grade is a grade.
Last I checked, PCGS and NGC also do not assign plus grades to “Modern” submissions.
Please know, TD, that your comments add value to the columns here and often stimulate discussion, not only online but also at our local coin club.
I wish you and all Coin Update viewers a happy holiday and wonderful new year!
Michael
The last time I tried any crossover attempts with PCGS left me feeling really upset with these grading companies. I submitted 8 coins for crossover. Four coins were “crossovers”. Two coins were “crossunders” (one by 1 point, the other by 3 points). Two coins were “crossouts”.
Four of the coins were graded by the same 3rd party grading company. Two were “crossovers”, but the other two were the “crossouts”. So, I lost the battle with the four coins from this grading company 16 to 12.
These submissions were some time ago, before PCGS started encapsulating these coins as “GENUINE”. So, PCGS returned these coins within the original grading slabs with a checklist sticker on the back marked with the reasoning for not grading the coin.
I also reiterate that the PCGS grading standards vary from the grading standards used by NGC. Those grading standards used by PCGS can be attributed to the “crossunders” from NGC to PCGS.
-Richard Stinchcomb
Thanks for your comment, Richard, and for sharing your experience. As you correctly note, the crossover game can be frustrating. I lose as often as win.
My biggest recent crossover was with an old ANACS holder (I’ve had great success with these) with an 1894 Morgan, EF45.) I have two more bank-box worthy crossovers from ANACS pending.
And we thank you again, Richard, for noting the different grading standards between NGC and PCGS. Feel free to add to the following below.
NGC’s standards are described in essay format here: http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/grading2.aspx
NGC also tends to follow the rating system of the American Numismatic Association, which can be found here: http://www.coin-collecting-guide-for-beginners.com/coin-grading-scale.html. (Note: The ANA has chosen NGC as its official grading service, and ANA members can submit on that basis alone. See: http://www.ngccoin.com/affiliates/ana.aspx.)
PCGS has its own slightly different standards, which can be found here: http://www.pcgs.com/grades.chtml/.
If you submit to a grading service, and I do to the top three, it is imperative that you assemble a grading set of coins from your collection. For instance, if you collect Morgans, you might have an example in many of the major 0-70 categories.
This will help you immensely in deciding what coins to send and to which company.
I wonder about other coins, specifically those with much more “to lose”. I have an MS65 bust quarter in an IGC holder. I was impressed with the coin, and paid about MS64 picing, although this was fully 1/3 of the Numismedia wholesale price for the MS65. We’re talking a 5 figure difference, if I could get this very coin into a PCGS holder. What do I do with it? Breakout and submit (very risky in my opinion), send in with a crossover or return request, or an open request to regrade, and leave it in the ICG holder when I submit (again very risky, in my opinion).
Any opinions?
Thanks for your question, Steven. I can tell you what I do in similar situations. (First of all, good score on buying an MS65 bust quarter at an MS64 price in a top holder.)
Recently I purchased (at XF price) an 1894 Morgan in an ANACS holder at EF45. I never crack out the coin when in this situation because, as you sense, it is very risky; PCGS and NGC are often too quick to designate a coin as cleaned. I estimated that the 1894 in a PCGS holder was worth an EF40 to me but not an XF35. So I submitted the coin stating that my minimal grade was EF40.
It came back as a crossover, EF45.
You’ll have to decide whether to keep the coin as ICG MS65 or send it in to PCGS as a crossover only (maintaining the same grade) or designating a grade you feel you can live with.
I haven’t had much crossover luck with ICG, by the way. (None, actually, with PCGS.) That said, PCGS graders in my opinion do look at the coin and not the holder when making a determination on a crossover submission.
Hope this helps.
LOOKING FOR SOME ONE TO GRADE OUR COINS. NEED A RATE FOR ABOUT 60 MORGAN COINS. PLEASE E-MAIL US WITH A PRICE AND LOCATIONS ON WHERE THEY NEED TO GO. THANK YOU, PENNY AYERS
Dear Penny,
I would not recommend sending Morgans for grading and then paying someone for that, although many coin dealers ask for $100. My advice would be to find a dealer in your vicinity and take them to him or her, avoiding postal costs. I also am president of the Ames Coin Club, and when we get requests like this, we often grade coins for individuals in our neck of Iowa. I would recommend finding a coin club near you and asking if any member would grade these, again avoiding postal costs and also probably evaluation fees.
Finally, never sell your coins to the traveling road shows that come to town now and again. I went undercover (I’m a journalist in my day job)and exposed them. They wanted to pay $6 for uncirculated Morgans worth $50-100 each. I wrote about that in a recent edition of Coin World.
Take care, and good luck!
Michael
Michael, just a follow-up to my post of Dec. 31. I have trouble understanding how you have never had an ICG crossover to PCGS, but you have had some PCI, Numitrust, SGS, etc. Is something not wrong with this picture? My question would be this? Have you sent PCGS a large enough sample size to draw a conclusion about ICG’s grading practices? For example, if you have attempted 3 crossovers, then 3 failures, while disconcerting, aren’t earthshaking. On the other hand, if your number of attempts has been in the dozens, across a variety of coins (or even just Morgans??) than that disturbs me. How can a second-tier company strike out, when you have had success with third-tier companies? Clearly this makes no sense, or ICG simply cannot be trusted, period.
Finally, refering back to my ICG MS65 Bust Quarter (with gorgeous toning, I might add), is there some place I can send it for an appraisal (in the holder). Understand this. I know of a few local dealers, who cannot be trusted, period. They would gladly underrate any of my coins, in order to “steal” them from me, and have done so more than once. Sad, but I don’t know a single one I can trust. I would gladly pay for an honest appraisal, but the appraiser would have to be recommended by someone of your caliber.
Hi, Steven. I haven’t send a large sample of ICG coins as crossovers. No more than six. And all have been Morgans. You’re right; it’s not a big enough sample. As for PCI and Numistrust, well, what can I say? They did cross, and the issue about first, second and third tier coins is more about consistency.
Concerning dealers, if you want an appraisal, I’d bring the coin to a show and get several. Or better still, a coin club whose members might include an expert or two.
Thanks for writing, and good luck!