PCGS HK grading standards

nealeffendi · November 23, 2017, 05:55:14 PM

A few months ago Trout mentioned that he thought that PCGS HK was overgrading coins. I've purchased about 100 slabbed coins this year (half in HK slabs) and I have to agree with Trout as their grades vary from equivalent to head office down to several points overgraded. (a Canberra MS65 florin I BIN purchased for about $165 is a perfect example of this, the PCGS lookup of the florin [80742158] shows it in the slab and you cannot spot all the dings that makes it only worthy of MS63, at least the seller had it BIN based more on the coin than the grade)). I think some sellers are intentionally sending them to HK to get the lax grading (plus lower fees) and hoping that buyers will bid based on the grade and not the coin. It isn't even easy to bid on the coin and not the slab as the HK coins are photographed in the slab (that is how you know it wasn't done in California) and the images are pretty ordinary. Personally I always apply a discount when bidding on HK coins so the seller doesn't really come out in front.
Some of the recent top of the pop coins only seem to be there due to the lax grading and that makes it hard to compete on an uneven playing field in the set registry. Also what is to stop the owner of an overgraded HK coin sending it to California to get the coin cracked out for a Trueview image (and then reholdered). A single point can add tenfold to a coins valuation so there is a big incentive to play that game.
Opinions?

ausjack · November 23, 2017, 07:01:16 PM

Good point Neal :good: I know of one person that's also an admin on FB that has used HK and is also a member here that says nothing shonky happens on FB but I don't know how many times I've seen dodge stuff happening and especially from so called admin but they ALL say nothing ever happens and it's the best place to deal..give me a break :dash1:

ausproofs · November 23, 2017, 07:19:37 PM

I have to agree. I have observed the same. I have a few coins I know would grade point higher (BTW if that happens they would become the SFG) easy. But as always buy the coin not the slab.

trout · November 23, 2017, 08:23:43 PM

The first time I noticed this crappy grading from PCGS in HK was with that huge submission that Cotton & Co got graded there and subsequently put on the market, There were some absolute shockers in that batch.
I have since noticed many more badly graded coins coming from the HK office.
Maybe APCGS has moved to HK :angel:

wwwww · November 23, 2017, 09:57:14 PM

The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

ausproofs · November 23, 2017, 10:09:53 PM

Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

Thanks Walter, if thats the case do you know why the pics from HK are different ?

nealeffendi · November 23, 2017, 10:27:39 PM

Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

If HK sends them to the US then how does HK offer slabbing fees frequently lower than if they were sent direct to the US? Wouldn't their costs be higher with the expense of transporting them across the Pacific and back? Plus how do they offer to grade coins for 16USD in HK (1955-64 pre decimals are Modern under HK standards) but in the US those same coins cost 20 USD to grade because they have a different definition of Modern?
If it isn't due to being submitted to HK then why have a number of us spotted HK shockers? Something is causing this problem, so did the standards slip due to the pressures of the big submissions to HK or did Mr Magoo temp at PCGS when those big lots went through HK?

trout · November 23, 2017, 11:05:55 PM

Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

If that is the case then why the completely different imaging system between the HK submissions and the US submissions?
IF the coins are in fact sent to the US to be graded then it would be understandable to think that they would also be encapsulated and imaged in the US as well.
Or is it a case of NOW the coins are being sent to the US for grading after the US office became aware of the crappy job that the HK office was doing?

IF from the very first instance the HK submissions were all sent to the US office for grading then PCGS seriously dropped the ball as far as grading standards go with the HK submissions and I have a hard time believing that the graders at Newport Beach would allow the garbage that some of the coins in that are in the HK slabs to get out of the building.

It just seems to me to be very very Odd that the submissions sent to the US to be graded are at the usual high standard of grading that we have come to expect and yet the submissions that have been sent to HK have a much lower standard of grading and lack of consistency thereof.

wwwww · November 23, 2017, 11:17:31 PM

Quote from: 'ausproofs' pid='112927' dateline='1511437193'
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

Thanks Walter, if thats the case do you know why the pics from HK are different ?

I'm not sure, Phil Arnold said PCGS is looking for a photographer in Shanghai so maybe they're graded there instead? Actually all I know is they're shipped out of HK for grading, I had always just assumed they go to the US.

wwwww · November 23, 2017, 11:52:55 PM

Quote from: 'trout' pid='112929' dateline='1511440555'
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

If that is the case then why the completely different imaging system between the HK submissions and the US submissions?
IF the coins are in fact sent to the US to be graded then it would be understandable to think that they would also be encapsulated and imaged in the US as well.
Or is it a case of NOW the coins are being sent to the US for grading after the US office became aware of the crappy job that the HK office was doing?

IF from the very first instance the HK submissions were all sent to the US office for grading then PCGS seriously dropped the ball as far as grading standards go with the HK submissions and I have a hard time believing that the graders at Newport Beach would allow the garbage that some of the coins in that are in the HK slabs to get out of the building.

It just seems to me to be very very Odd that the submissions sent to the US to be graded are at the usual high standard of grading that we have come to expect and yet the submissions that have been sent to HK have a much lower standard of grading and lack of consistency thereof.

HK never did grading, their office isn't even big enough for grading to be done there, it's just a Submission Centre.

Quote from: 'nealeffendi' pid='112928' dateline='1511438259'
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='112926' dateline='1511436434'The Hong Kong office just sends them to the US for grading so the submission centre doesn't affect the grade.

Remember correlation doesn't equal causation.

If HK sends them to the US then how does HK offer slabbing fees frequently lower than if they were sent direct to the US? Wouldn't their costs be higher with the expense of transporting them across the Pacific and back? Plus how do they offer to grade coins for 16USD in HK (1955-64 pre decimals are Modern under HK standards) but in the US those same coins cost 20 USD to grade because they have a different definition of Modern?
If it isn't due to being submitted to HK then why have a number of us spotted HK shockers? Something is causing this problem, so did the standards slip due to the pressures of the big submissions to HK or did Mr Magoo temp at PCGS when those big lots went through HK?

It doesn't cost PCGS $10 more to grade a 1964 coin over a 1965 coin, they've just chosen a pricing structure that's relevant to the target market.

Regarding shockers, I reserved my comment here as quite simply I haven't got enough data to comment. I can confirm that the grading standards themselves are the same but to test whether HK submissions have more mistakes you'd need to judge thousands of coins to get any sort of reasonable confidence level.

If you want to find the truth, you shouldn't be looking for mistakes but rather look at large numbers of random coins from the HK office, test the grades and calculate how many mistakes they make per 1000 coins, do the same with the US office and see the results.

ausjack · November 24, 2017, 05:06:01 AM

I still think some coins are graded higher for the bigger submissions and bigger customers to keep them happy and continue to use pcgs. And why have they changed the standard if it's suppose to be to one standard as older slabbed coin appear to be under graded as compared to today's standards or is it that you have to get the right people grading on the right day when they're in a good mood and if this is the case it makes grading coins a bit of a waste of money as it's not unbiased and consistent like people say it is.

And I agree Neal as it makes no sense or even good business to be sending coins all around the world for less money, maybe everyone, US customers as well should sent to HK if it's cheaper. But then there's a lot of things that don't make sense when it comes to business, eg buying a holden or ford car they've exported to the US a hell of a lot cheaper than you could buy here and that's with shipping and changing to left hand drive and other modifications to make them compliant. It was cheaper to buy a ford capri or holden monaro and have then shipped back and changed back to right hand drive than to buy one here..it's just madness. Sorry for going off topic :blush2:

trout · November 24, 2017, 07:45:26 AM

QuoteIf you want to find the truth, you shouldn't be looking for mistakes but rather look at large numbers of random coins from the HK office, test the grades and calculate how many mistakes they make per 1000 coins, do the same with the US office and see the results.

Finding the Truth and getting answers from PCGS is just as hard as doing the same thing with RAM in my experience Walter and with both enterprises even when confronted with the truth at times they refuse to acknowledge it.
IF the Hong Kong office of PCGS is simply a submission centre then what is the explanation as to why there is such a Vast difference in the level of service provided to PCGS customers that use that office?
I have always thought that the imaging service provided by NGC was pretty "Ordinary" But the images provided for the coins that are submitted to the HK office of PCGS although similar to the NGC images are even worse, Why is this the case?
If the coins submitted to the HK office are all sent to Newport Beach for grading and encapsulation then it would be reasonable to assume that these coins would receive the same level of service (Including the images provided) as the coins sent directly to the US for grading, This is simply NOT the case.
Personally I don't think it is necessary to examine thousands of slabs from the US and HK PCGS submissions to tell if there is a problem with the HK slabs Much the same as there was NO need to examine thousands of APCGS slabs to know that there was a problem with those slabs either.
Maybe myself and Neil are not Big fish in the pond But we don't need to be "Big Fish" to notice the rubbish floating around in that pond.
PCGS in Australia has a Great "Image" and the popularity of both PCGS and NGC graded coins has done great things as far as improving a collectors ability to acquire coins that are truthfully and accurately graded But the inconsistencies that are coming out of the Hong Kong office of PCGS has the very real potential of destroying that image and it has to stop.

trout · November 24, 2017, 08:01:12 AM

Quote from: 'ausjack' pid='112933' dateline='1511462161'I still think some coins are graded higher for the bigger submissions and bigger customers to keep them happy and continue to use pcgs. And why have they changed the standard if it's suppose to be to one standard as older slabbed coin appear to be under graded as compared to today's standards or is it that you have to get the right people grading on the right day when they're in a good mood and if this is the case it makes grading coins a bit of a waste of money as it's not unbiased and consistent like people say it is.

I am not sure that the bigger customers get better grades and I have No proof or evidence of that So hopefully that isn't the case.
I do however know that the bigger submissions are cheaper per coin and I believe that they get moved through the grading process faster than the smaller players submissions do.
I don't think that the older slabs were "Under Graded" I personally think it is more of a case "Gradeflation" that is occurring.
As for the same coin being graded differently by different graders then that is Definitely going to happen simply because different graders will always have a different opinion of a particular coin at times and you have to remember that when you send a coin away to be graded by a TPG what you are paying for is an Opinion, Nothing more and nothing less.

wwwww · November 24, 2017, 09:48:37 AM

I'm the 2nd biggest submitter in Australia and I don't get better grades so I don't think that's true.

Some older PCGS slabs do seem more conservatively graded but you don't really find Australian coins in these so it's really just a US issue.

Think about this Trout, I'd estimate about 100,000 Aussie coins have gone through HK, at a 99% grading accuracy rate there'd be 1000 grading mistakes out there and if they all go to the market at once you'd inevitably see lots of them and in the same way you'd notice 1 bad driver instead of 99 good ones, you end up remembering each mistake ignoring the hundreds of correct grades along the way.

nealeffendi · November 24, 2017, 10:10:49 AM

[quote pid='112932' dateline='1511443375']
HK never did grading, their office isn't even big enough for grading to be done there, it's just a Submission Centre.

So why did PCGS have many press releases back in 2012-13 stating that HK would be grading and authenticating coins? I'm looking at one document (dated 26/1/12) from PCGS and in it Murial Eymery (Vice President International Buisness Development for PCGS) states "...along with the PCGS Hong Kong grading and operations team,.."

Regarding shockers, I reserved my comment here as quite simply I haven't got enough data to comment. I can confirm that the grading standards themselves are the same but to test whether HK submissions have more mistakes you'd need to judge thousands of coins to get any sort of reasonable confidence level.

If you want to find the truth, you shouldn't be looking for mistakes but rather look at large numbers of random coins from the HK office, test the grades and calculate how many mistakes they make per 1000 coins, do the same with the US office and see the results.
[/quote]

I don't need a statistical analysis of thousands of coins. if out of 50 coins I find 10 that are clearly overgraded compared to similar dates/grades then there is a problem.