Spink launch grading system!

[Simonz]

Quoted directly from Spink auction 22096 "St Albans" collection, I have not made any of these up! 24 of 53 Lots have Spink grading as below, unclear what order they should go in... why do they send any coins to NGC? This is clearly a serious attempt to undermine the grading systems. Are they trying to help punters, or themselves?

Rightfully graded – UNC Details

Fairly graded – AU Details

Helpfully graded – AU58

Generously graded – XF40

Harshly graded – UNC Details

Exceptionally harshly graded – PF62 Ultra Cameo

Nonsensically graded – UNC Details

Strictly graded – AU53

Very strictly graded – MS61

Ridiculously graded – UNC Details

Conservatively graded – MS63

Carelessly graded – UNC Details

Preposterously graded – UNC Details

Clumsily graded – AU Details

Edited November 27, 2022 by Simonz
Typo

[jultorsk]

44 minutes ago, Simonz said:

Quoted directly from Spink auction 22096 "St Albans" collection, I have not made any of these up! 24 of 53 Lots have Spink grading as below, unclear what order they should go in... why do they send any coins to NGC? This is clearly a serious attempt to undermine the grading systems. Are they trying to help punters, or themselves?

I don't know the details of this particular sale, but sometimes it is the consignor who writes the lot description - or wants at least to have a say in how their lots are presented as a precondition for consigning. I saw this with a recent auction in Australia (the Verene Collection). Interesting, nevertheless.

[Simonz]

25 minutes ago, jultorsk said:

I don't know the details of this particular sale, but sometimes it is the consignor who writes the lot description - or wants at least to have a say in how their lots are presented as a precondition for consigning. I saw this with a recent auction in Australia (the Verene Collection). Interesting, nevertheless.

That makes sense, also got this response from Spink;

Quote

unlike other auction houses we always provide our own assessment of the coin alongside the grade provided by the grading company.

 

[Simonz]

Just seems really odd thing to do?

Another example was with the Ellerby Hoard. They sent all the raw coins for grading, got them back with a lot of 'Details' grades. Sold them at auction and now have sent them all back to NGC for regrading 'Details' to 'Genuine',  which is "is confounding their internal processes" causing more delays and buyers unsure of what they've bought.

[SheepStacker]

[GoldDiggerDave]

This is a link to the auction https://www.spink.com/auction/22096?page=1

I would not be surprised  that spink are trying to save face especially if a "raw" coin has already been though their auctions and graded by their experts only for the NGC to grade them AU details cleaned....I would think spink would be a little embarrassed if that was the case.  Spink are not even constant with their own descriptions they are happy to take the NGC grade if the grade pushed the coin into the highest population but the second it drops the grade of the coin and especially if its already been though their auction and their  "experts"  they are having a dig at the NGC they can't have it both ways, take the grade if it makes them more money, or slate the grade when their "experts" have got it wrong in previous auctions......This is so funny! 

 

# 33 - The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC MS63* | GEM EYE... » 

(g) The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC MS63* | GEM EYE APPEAL | George IV (1820-1830), Sovereign, 1821, Type 1, laureate head left, rev. St George and Dragon, edge milled, 8.01g, 7h (Marsh 5; MCE 471; Bentley 13; Stratos 119-120; Spink 3800), a scuff on neck and wisps of handling in otherwise brilliant obverse fields, the obverse evidently struck with a repurposed Proof die, the reverse lustrous, a pleasingly bold extremely fine, the reverse much as struck, with NGC 'St Albans' Certification, graded MS63 STAR 

 

 

 

 

# 37 - The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC UNC Details | Wi... » 

(g) The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC UNC Details | William IV (1830-1837), Sovereign, 1833, second bare head right, rev. crowned shield in mantle, edge milled, 7.98g, 6h (Marsh 18; MCE 491; Spink 3829B), scuffing and pecking to shield in second quarter, and a nick to rim in first, the reverse a touch untidy, otherwise with much residual lustre, struck details approaching extremely fine, with NGC 'St Albans' Certification, carelessly graded UNC Details ~ Cleaned (#6295553-049)Provenance'A Distinguished Collection', purchased en bloc via Spink, August 2018Spink, by private t...  🤣🤣🤣

 

Can you see whats going on here yet? 

 

# 38 - The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC UNC Details | Vi... » 

(g) The St. Albans Collection of English Gold Coins | NGC UNC Details | Victoria (1837-1901), Sovereign, 1846, 'Arabic' 1, first young head left, WW in relief on truncation, rev. crowned shield in wreath, edge milled, 7.99g, 6h (Marsh 29; MCE 507; Spink 3852), softer strike on high points, and with light cabinet friction across otherwise lustrous surfaces, near extremely fine / the reverse displaying full mint bloom and much as struck, with NGC 'St Albans' Certification, preposterously graded UNC Details ~ Obverse Cleaned (#6295553-050)Provenance 'A Distinguished Collection', purchased en bloc via Spink, August 2018 🤣🤣🤣      

 

Not mush of a provenance  is it?

   

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2022 by GoldDiggerDave

[KevjustKev]

Grading companies have 'too much power', what they say goes and I've never heard of them saying there were wrong.

If NCG say this coin is a 67 and PCGS say 65, one of them must be wrong.

40 years ago there was no such thing (as such). Only in the last 10-15 years it has become important.

The only thing they are good for is saying the coin is real

[Simonz]

You can't beat and good old English farce!

I think you just have to go back to basics and ignore all the chatter and just 'buy the coin'.

[Simonz]

5 minutes ago, KevjustKev said:

Grading companies have 'too much power', what they say goes and I've never heard of them saying there were wrong.

If NCG say this coin is a 67 and PCGS say 65, one of them must be wrong.

40 years ago there was no such thing (as such). Only in the last 10-15 years it has become important.

The only thing they are good for is saying the coin is real

Agree, and maybe assigning provenance to a hoard or famous collection.

In 10 years time I reckon raw coins will be the ones that fetch a premium. 

[GoldDiggerDave]

1 hour ago, KevjustKev said:

Grading companies have 'too much power', what they say goes and I've never heard of them saying there were wrong.

If NCG say this coin is a 67 and PCGS say 65, one of them must be wrong.

40 years ago there was no such thing (as such). Only in the last 10-15 years it has become important.

The only thing they are good for is saying the coin is real

Okay if you get the “raw” coin and show this to the top 10 numismatists in the world are you saying they would all come back with the absolutely the same grade and evaluation?  
 

 Try grading a batch of your own coins, record the results and then grade them again sometime later and I bet you have different results. 
 

Have the grading companies have too much power?  It really depends on who’s asking, if you end up with the highest graded numismatic gem, I don’t many would complain, however if you have bought a raw coin from spink and it comes back details…..most would be very upset and spink are trying to save face.

 

I’ll be going into Spink soon so I’ll ask them about these negative attributions on coins that have gone past their experts. 

[CollectForFun]

2 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

Spink are not even constant with their own descriptions they are happy to take the NGC grade if the grade pushed the coin into the highest population but the second it drops the grade of the coin and especially if its already been though their auction and their  "experts"  they are having a dig at the NGC they can't have it both ways, take the grade if it makes them more money, or slate the grade when their "experts" have got it wrong in previous auctions......This is so funny! 

Why do you expect that Spink be impartial and not try to improve the sale in any way they can? As long as they don't provide intentionally misleading descriptions (their reputation would go down the hill quickly then) I don't see anything wrong with what they do - they provide NGC assessment as well as their own opinion and of course they won't be arguing with favourable NGC grade.

[ArgentSmith]

NGC = Subjective

Spink Auctions = Preposterously subjective

[Chorlton]

In part there is always an element of doubt when the grader is also the seller, which is also in part determined by their reputation and history in the first place. 

[HerefordBullyun]

Spink can stick it right up their spinkter

[Simonz]

11 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

Okay if you get the “raw” coin and show this to the top 10 numismatists in the world are you saying they would all come back with the absolutely the same grade and evaluation?  
 

 Try grading a batch of your own coins, record the results and then grade them again sometime later and I bet you have different results. 
 

Have the grading companies have too much power?  It really depends on who’s asking, if you end up with the highest graded numismatic gem, I don’t many would complain, however if you have bought a raw coin from spink and it comes back details…..most would be very upset and spink are trying to save face.

 

I’ll be going into Spink soon so I’ll ask them about these negative attributions on coins that have gone past their experts. 

Will be VERY interested to hear if you get any useful info from Spink Dave. Most likely get redirected to the 'right' person who 'unfortunately is away in America' right now...

Got the below response from them regarding an old auction I enquired about. There was a raw coin but a bit of digging revealed it had previously been graded but they made no mention of it in the auction listing.

Quote

 

Many thanks for your email regarding lot 4060. Yes, the coin has been removed from the NGC holder.

The decision to do this was made because it was felt that the grade AU Details was an unfair assessment of a rather honest coin. We therefore felt that leaving the coin in the slab was not beneficial to it.

In terms of our general approach to slabbing, we tend not to remove coins from slabs once they have been encapsulated. However, when a grade is far from the condition we deem the coin to be in we believe it is beneficial to do so. I should also note that unlike other auction houses we always provide our own assessment of the coin alongside the grade provided by the grading company.

 

 

[Shep]

1 hour ago, Simonz said:

Many thanks for your email regarding lot 4060. Yes, the coin has been removed from the NGC holder.

The decision to do this was made because it was felt that the grade AU Details was an unfair assessment of a rather honest coin. We therefore felt that leaving the coin in the slab was not beneficial to it.

In terms of our general approach to slabbing, we tend not to remove coins from slabs once they have been encapsulated. However, when a grade is far from the condition we deem the coin to be in we believe it is beneficial to do so. I should also note that unlike other auction houses we always provide our own assessment of the coin alongside the grade provided by the grading company.

“Therefore we felt that leaving the coin in the slab was not beneficial to us.”

Thanks for sharing, that really is eye opening.

 

Edited November 27, 2022 by Shep

[GoldDiggerDave]

8 hours ago, Simonz said:

  Quote

 

Many thanks for your email regarding lot 4060. Yes, the coin has been removed from the NGC holder.

The decision to do this was made because it was felt that the grade AU Details was an unfair assessment of a rather honest coin. We therefore felt that leaving the coin in the slab was not beneficial to it.

In terms of our general approach to slabbing, we tend not to remove coins from slabs once they have been encapsulated. However, when a grade is far from the condition we deem the coin to be in we believe it is beneficial to do so. I should also note that unlike other auction houses we always provide our own assessment of the coin alongside the grade provided by the grading company.

 

@Simonz which auction was this? I'm amazed an auction admitted to this I very much doubt if they had a high numismatic rarity graded coin they would do the same,  its a case of wanting it both ways. 

[CollectForFun]

2 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

@Simonz which auction was this? I'm amazed an auction admitted to this I very much doubt if they had a high numismatic rarity graded coin they would do the same,  its a case of wanting it both ways. 

https://www.spink.com/lot/22111004060

https://auktionen.sincona.com/Los/43/145.0/

https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/2124443-033/NGCDetails/

Graded "Details" sold for CHF 3,000+%, out of the slab with tooling admitted in the lot description sold for £3,500+% just 4 months later.

Details slab adds very little if anything to the coin's value...

Edited November 28, 2022 by CollectForFun

[GoldDiggerDave]

9 minutes ago, CollectForFun said:

https://www.spink.com/lot/22111004060

https://auktionen.sincona.com/Los/43/145.0/

https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/2124443-033/NGCDetails/

tooled?…….it’s scratched to hell! 
 

[ArgentSmith]

9 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

tooled?

small screwdriver, annoying lump of gunk ruining coins appeal.

[Simonz]

12 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

@Simonz which auction was this? I'm amazed an auction admitted to this I very much doubt if they had a high numismatic rarity graded coin they would do the same,  its a case of wanting it both ways. 

Well found @CollectForFun, Marsh says ER GBP14,500! Sold for GBP3,500 on Spink auction, should have gone for it! Scratch on face described as 'hairline'!

[Brazil2001]

On 27/11/2022 at 08:15, KevjustKev said:

Grading companies have 'too much power', what they say goes and I've never heard of them saying there were wrong.

If NCG say this coin is a 67 and PCGS say 65, one of them must be wrong.

40 years ago there was no such thing (as such). Only in the last 10-15 years it has become important.

The only thing they are good for is saying the coin is real

On the whole I grade a lot of coins as in several hundred to a thousand a month and relatively speaking there is no difference between NGC and PCGS grading they tend to get roughly the same with cross over rates around 50% although I suspect the crossover is more political, if you cracked the coin it would probable get the same grade. 
 

They are starting to hold a lot of weight because it makes the coin internationally saleable someone in the US bidding in a UK auction knows it's been independently verified and knows it will be what the slabs says, plus now in a lot of countries a raw coin is seen as a problem coin as in there must be a reason it's not graded.

As for the point about been wrong I've sent plenty of coins back I disagree with the grade and as long as you have evidence they maybe got it wrong they will consider it again and I've had plenty upgraded where I've been able to obtain photos of similar coins already graded showing mine is equal or better to the ones already graded, so by swapping the grade upwards they are essentially admitting they made a mistake. As it happens I have a details Cnut penny I disagree with which will be going back as I have no idea how they managed to grade it details. 

[Simonz]

5 hours ago, Brazil2001 said:

On the whole I grade a lot of coins as in several hundred to a thousand a month and relatively speaking there is no difference between NGC and PCGS grading they tend to get roughly the same with cross over rates around 50% although I suspect the crossover is more political, if you cracked the coin it would probable get the same grade. 
 

They are starting to hold a lot of weight because it makes the coin internationally saleable someone in the US bidding in a UK auction knows it's been independently verified and knows it will be what the slabs says, plus now in a lot of countries a raw coin is seen as a problem coin as in there must be a reason it's not graded.

As for the point about been wrong I've sent plenty of coins back I disagree with the grade and as long as you have evidence they maybe got it wrong they will consider it again and I've had plenty upgraded where I've been able to obtain photos of similar coins already graded showing mine is equal or better to the ones already graded, so by swapping the grade upwards they are essentially admitting they made a mistake. As it happens I have a details Cnut penny I disagree with which will be going back as I have no idea how they managed to grade it details. 

Very interesting that they will regrade coins. If the intention is to give traders a consistent process that everyone can trust then this clearly undermines that. Grading should probably be taken as a 'guide' to condition rather than an absolute definition, it is still subjective regardless of how many experts are involved, but it seems lots of buyers just look at the numbers and ignore the coin.

[Simonz]

The plot thickens!

Super excited to finally receive the Ellerby Hoard, James II Guinea I won nearly 3 MONTHS AGO!! There's a big 'BUT'!

"THE NGC GUARANTEE DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS ITEM"

Sounds like NGC and Spink have fallen out. In NGC's 'opinion'... it's a coin, but they can't guarantee it! 

I'm now going to type something I've never typed before, all caps and bold, yeah do it... WTF!!!! ...Nope, doesn't feel any better, maybe some physical abuse to de-slab it will help, what you reckon?

 

[GoldDiggerDave]

.

Edited March 7, 2023 by GoldDiggerDave