CPM Forum
General => Banknote Grading Standards and TPG => Topic started by: glassmancanada on November 16, 2006, 10:23:18 pm
-
This thread is NOT open for discussions. This is to avoid arguments. If you post here it is to add your name to the petition.
If you agree with the content of the petition add your name if you do not agree do NOT add your name, very simple. Moderators will be policing the thread and deleting posts that do not comply.
You have a voice, use it. Sign up now before it just happens and there is nothing you can do then.
If you are against the now being considered multiple levels system of grading for UNC banknotes, add your full name in a reply to the topic and I will forward this as a petition to the Canadian Paper Money Society and the Charlton Press. I have included a photo of the petition started at the Edmonton show. I will add any names to the existing list. A copy of the petition follows the photo. I have changed the term "tiered" from the origional petition and replaced it with the term "multiple levels" to avoid any confusion plus I added UNC for clarity
(http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/2394/petitionfy3.jpg)
To whom it may concern:
I am a Canadian Banknote collector and I am against the now being considered multiple levels system of grading UNC banknotes. There is nothing wrong with the current system of grading and I feel this new system will only benefit the dealers of banknotes by purely increasing their profits while supplying the collector with inferior banknotes. I am not in favor of a multiple levels system of UNC or any other grade of banknote (AU, EF, VF etc) that will only confuse me the collector and cost me more to obtain notes of the quality that I have become accustom to. The current grading system allows SIMPLE classification of ANY banknote and I see no reason to confuse, discourage or dissuade collectors with a change in the method of grading. Why try and change something that works so well?
The coin grading system is confusing, chaotic and disillusioning and I the below named paper money collector want nothing to do with it, that’s the primary reason I collect banknotes and not coins!
I think it is important to remind you that the catalogue you provide is for COLLECTORS and NOT DEALERS whose bottom line is profit. After all Charlton did not sell over 6500 copies to dealers they sold them to collectors.
Thank you,
Concerned Banknote Collectors
I have included some of my additional thoughts on the subject below. I intend to send a copy along with the petition.
There has been talk of implementing the multiple levels of coin grading to banknotes, in other words having more than one grade of UNC. This would eventually lead to more than one grade of AU, EF, and VF etc.
I cannot express to the collecting community enough how concerning this is to me. The grading system for banknotes has purity in its simplicity. It is set out in such a manner that anyone can grade any banknote for themselves without outside assistance and this system has worked beautifully for many years. If it isn’t broke don’t fix it. If your car is running perfectly do you take it to your mechanic to have a full diagnostic tune done? Not!
You might be asking your self why anyone would want this type of grading for banknotes. Well to me the answer has purity in it’s simplicity as well…………it’s called GREED. The type of person who would benefit from this multiple levels system is not your average collector. Instead to them it is a business and the bottom line there is PROFIT.
What does this mean? What it means is that notes that you and I would call AU now come with a rating of UNC 63 and would cost you a premium over the AU price. A note that we would consider UNC is now UNC 67 or Gem UNC and would cost you more than the current UNC price in the catalogue to purchase. Remember the phrase “a Rose by any other name is still a Rose”. Basically it’s going to cost you more for lesser quality banknotes and a premium for notes that we now refer to as UNC. It’s all about getting more cash for less than UNC notes and a premium for the ones that are truly only UNC.
The other problem that arises is what happens to the lower grades. If AU is now UNC 63, what is AU??? And EF where does this fit in?? This pattern would suggest that every lower than UNC grade would now drop a notch and allow for more problems than the current system allows. What I’m guessing is the sub grades for UNC would initially be 3 tiers; UNC 67, UNC 63 and UNC 60. Over time this could expand to possibly 8 sub grades of UNC or more!!! The fact that the top end is UNC 67 suggests that plans are already in place to fill in the gaps. Dealers are already pushing this system and the trend for notes with UNC 67 rating is DOUBLE the book price of UNC……….Absurd!
You as the collector must ask your self, do I want this change and is it even necessary. Take a look at the coin grading system and pose this question to your self. How as a coin collector can I ever feel confident in purchasing a coin using this 8 multiple levels UNC system? This system is so confusing even many of the dealers can’t agree on a grade. Simplicity is the key to success in grading.
At least with the current paper grading system I have all the tools to decide the grade myself and pay what I feel the note is worth and not what some biased opinioned seller wants based on pushing the item up a sub grade of UNC. With the multiple levels of UNC system my negotiation abilities with the seller are now gone as these types of graded notes will be slabbed (sent to third party grading facilities and put in a hard plastic case) where it now becomes impossible to confirm/inspect the grade or even question a dealer regarding the grade. It will be a take it or leave it attitude with a premium price too.
Many coin collectors have given up on coins for this high level of uncertainty and have switched to collecting banknotes. In my opinion the coin grading system is lunacy and I am not surprised at all that coin collectors would switch to banknotes, I did.
It’s all about simplicity and its all about quality. Do you want to be at the mercy of some grading agency and profit hungry dealer? We all sometimes pay a premium to obtain a hard to find UNC banknote and justifiably so but we certainly do not want to be gouged on top of that. Who do these people think they are to claim to be the authority on grading? Why aren’t you the authority?
Do not get me wrong, I sell surplus banknotes too and would stand to profit greatly from the multiple levels grading but first and foremost I am a collector and I do not want this. I feel implementing the multiple levels system would lead to the demise of collecting banknotes as we now know it. Don’t forget; its not about what you have for a collection today… it’s about what you will have for a collection in the future (over graded over priced banknotes). Personally I would have to seriously consider getting out of Canadian currency collecting…period. We want the hobby to grow not to shrink by turning off existing collectors and by turning away new coming collectors with confusion and soaring prices.
The most important thing you must remember as a collector is that the Charlton catalogue is printed as a guide for YOU the COLLECTOR and NOT the DEALERS.
[edit]Cropped image and dropped file size. --BWJM[/edit]
-
I would like to be the first person to kick off this petition on these forums, and therefore I add my name:
{http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/6314/petitionsigau9.gif}
PS: Moderators will be watching this thread and removing any posts made for any purpose other than signing one's name in support of the petition. If you agree, sign it. If you disagree, don't post. Thank you for your cooperation.
-
Scott Melville
-
Arthur Kershaw
-
Derrick Dong
-
Oliver Macinski
-
Michael M. S. Zigler D.V.M., CertVOphthal.
-
Martin Dompierre
-
Gordon DeLaval
-
Michael Andrade
-
Rob Charland
-
Ian Stevens
-
Add my name to the petition please:
Kelly Baumgartner, Winnipeg
-
Chris Caddel
-
Alain-Robert Duncan
-
Manny Kirkoryan
-
Add:
James Baldwin
thanks
(and well put too!)
-
Please add me to the list :D
Peter Becker
-
Stéphane Potvin
-
Please add my name to the petition.
Murray Spier.
-
Graham H. Neale
(CPMS #509, IBNS #1254)
-
I have been asked to add this name to the petition:
Kevin Fraser
Nova Scotia
-
Craig Cowper
-
Pierre Bouchard
-
Hello everyone. I am asking members who have signed the petition to provide their location I.E. Province and city (if comfortable) for demographic reasons.
I have heard back from many and will update the thread with signers locations soon.
Please anyone who will sign the petition next include your province and city.
Thanks
-
I will NOT be posting members locations on the thread. They will be sent along with the petition in the form of a list.
Thanks
-
Stephane Tremblay
-
James Hoyt
Hanwell, NB
-
Ole Christensen, Calgary Alberta
(Uncirculated should mean only one thing... pristine!)
-
It looks like the petition has no meaning now, seeing how it appears the next Charlton book uses 3 grades of Uncirculated.
Good try.
Rick
-
I believe this petition brought some FAST awareness to the dangers of TPG notes, who were advertising many grades of UNC --> With reliability in question.
I think it was very valuable in this way. 3 grades of UNC beats 10 or 9. ::)
-
3 grades of Uncirculated notes beats a much larger number spread on these pages. The Sheldon system of numbers was never intended to have up to 9 or 10 different grades of Unc. coins, and certainly would be most difficult to have so many for notes, and probably more confusing.
Unc. 60, 63, 65 is more than enough for paper.
Rick
-
Add my name to the petition please:
Karol Winograd, Connecticut
-
Add me also aginst sub UNC
Steve Vrountzos
-
Sorry just realized this site, I truly agree that the private collector is the only to suffer from greed of others. Erroneous grading principles only discourage and confuse even the common collector. The Big prey on the small, but the smart prey on the Big. I Hope were not too late !
Ian Vincze
-
Gerry Parker
-
I signed this petition many months ago. However, it seems that the petition did not succeed as the next edition of the Charlton Government Paper Money Catalogue WILL be incorporating various degrees of Unc.
I was therefore wondering whether it would be appropriate to remove the "sticky" on this thread?
-
agreed
-
Note that this thread may have helped LIMIT the numbered grading system... It could have gotten ridiculous...
-
3 grades of Uncirculated notes beats a much larger number spread on these pages. The Sheldon system of numbers was never intended to have up to 9 or 10 different grades of Unc. coins, and certainly would be most difficult to have so many for notes, and probably more confusing.
Unc. 60, 63, 65 is more than enough for paper.
Rick
I was in Kitchener the other day and dropped into a popular Coin store there. The fellow said they sent away a few notes to PMG to test them out.
A note he graded AU-UNC ( 1937 $ 1 with 2 large counting creases ) came back as UNC66. These creases were so prevalant you could see them through the plastic holder. There is a lot of PMG stuff floating around out there. Beware !!