What are your thoughts on the term "PQ" in relation to coins?

This is a good and informative interview with Don Willis, President of PCGS, discussing his take on the term "PQ" as used in relation to coins.

http://www.pcgs.com/articles/articl...e&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ezine07212009

The following are my comments posted on the CU forum about Don's interview:

I enjoyed reading Don's interview, and yes he knows his coins. He used to set up at my monthly show in Anaheim and always had beautiful high end coins, and definitely knows the coin business - I'm sure that's one of the reasons why PCGS snagged him! I agree with his take on the use PQ in the coin business and believe it can help define a coin's grade with more specificity. Of course, grading is quite subjective, so perhaps PQ is overused by some dealers. To me, part of the validity in identifying a coin as PQ is that you need to trust the person who is using the term PQ to be qualified and an accurate grader of that coin series.

I had special stickers made that say "PQ!" in red print and use them sparingly on some of my coins for sale. There are coins, both circulated and uncirculated, that are really nice, have exceptional eye appeal and a great strike as Don mentions, and/or have minimal distractions and marks for the grade given, but that coin might not quite meet the criteria for the next grade - so those coins to me would qualify as PQ. And, therefore, coins that are PQ should qualify for a higher markup, especially PQ RB coins that are closer to 90+% red, or coins that probably would upgrade.

If you want to read others' comments on this topic, here's a link to the CU forum: http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=730925

So what are your thoughts on the use of "PQ" for describing exceptional coins for the grade?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Personally, I feel that if it really is a premium quality coin it deserves a premium quality description that a pair of letters just can't give.

Exceptional toning? "Iridescent blue toning" Better than average strike? "Superb strike"

 

My first thought was that I didn't realize that I collect PQ coins. It is curious because NGC does not use the term PQ to describe their star designation but it seems Mr. Willis is equating the two. To me it makes little difference if people consider rainbow toned coins PQ. In the end the purpose of the term PQ is to drive a higher price in the market. I consider rainbow toned coins in a market of their own that does not have price guides.

 

If "PQ" is used to describe an 'A' coin (high for the grade) I have no problem with the term. In fact, I think the term is very useful. Unfortunately, like with most superlative terms, "PQ" is often overused and misused. That's when I have a problem with it.

 

I disagree with you Lehigh that people consider rainbow coins as PQ. Eye appeal is only one aspect of designating a coin as PQ. Strike, luster, even toning, minimal marks, no spots, etc. all have a part in describing a PQ coin - not just eye appeal. Don's comments are similar to how I view a PQ coin:

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]JH: What makes a coin PQ?
Don: Several factors. Predominantly eye appeal but strike could play a part (particularly for a coin that is notoriously poorly struck) or super luster or beautiful toning such as album toning.

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]Further, IMHO, you have a very synical view when you say that designating a coin as PQ is simply to drive the price up. Perhaps there are a few dealers who "over use" that term, but as far as I'm concerned, if that were the only reason a dealer used PQ for, it would only serve to hurt that dealer's reputation in the long run, because it would be obvious to the buyer once he received the coin whether it was PQ or not, and that buyer would probably not purchase more coins from that dealer.

I do agree with you about the market for rainbow or toned coins in that there are no pricing guides that cover these beauties - and I don't think there could be, since each colorfully toned coin tones differently, some brighter and more beautiful than others, some with purple, blues, yellow, greens, etc., and not each one is as eye appealing as the next one, and not each one will have the same luster or strike as another, so it would be very very difficult to put these coins in any kind of box to give it specific prices.

Regarding the PQ designation in general, I think the CAC, NGC's star system, and Rick Snow's Eagle Eye Photo Seal stickers are all similar concepts in trying to set apart higher quality coins in a specific grade, which I completely agree is very helpful - you just need to have faith and trust in the person/company making such designation. But as it has been said here, there, and everywhere and is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to remember in buying coins, the bottom line is and always has been - BUY THE COIN, NOT THE HOLDER (OR STICKER, IN THIS CASE)!

 

No doubt "PQ" is just something else that can be abused. But a seller can have all the grading with all the superlatives out there, but it still boils down to the "Do like it? and Can I afford it?"

Maybe I look at this too simple for my own good. I do study up on a coin before I purchase it, I certainly have learned to have patience. But, for me it still always boils down to those two questions above.

I've looked at probalby a couple of thousand Buffalos at this point. I have seen more of these I consider overgraded than any coin I have looked at. I have seen many a grade or two lower, but with a much better strike. Since my Buffalos are going to be cracked out anyway I stay with what Bowers says and that is to go for the better strike than higher grade. I think a better strike can have more eye appeal.

 

Can a PQ coin be in an overgraded holder, or must a coin be in the top-end of the grade in order to be PQ?

 

p.s. I agree with Lehigh, except the "rainbow coins are a market of their own" part.

 

In my opinion, a PQ coin cannot be in an overgraded holder, because the purpose of PQ is that the coin is premium for the grade given on the holder (and by holder, I am not excluding 2x2 or raw coin holders).

And, if you don't mind, I'd like to hear your thoughts as to what/why you agree with Lehigh - just curious.

 

I never said that I consider rainbow toned coins PQ, he did. He stated that several factors make a coin PQ. He did not say every PQ coin must have each factor. The way I interpret his quote is that phenomenal toning makes a coin PQ much in the same way that a superb strike or blazing luster does. If that is not what he intended to say, he should have been more expansive in his response to the question.

With regards to my cynicism, I think you missed my point to a degree. It is hard to dispute that the reason for the PQ designation is financially motivated. After all, if a dealer was going to just charge the same price, why would they bother to make the distinction of PQ or not. Having said that, it does not mean that I think PQ coins don't deserve the higher price. They absolutely deserve a higher price tag.

I think what this thread needs are specific examples of PQ coins and a description by the owner why the coin is PQ. Pictures are worth a thousand words. I don't have the energy to start though. I know you have a few Charmy, show us one.

 

I am interpreting Don's remarks differently than you are, so we'll just leave it at that.

But as an example, the 1861 PCGS MS64 below to me is PQ for the grade. It has superior eye appeal, great strike, only one minor rev mark, no spots, and tons of luster for an MS64 grade, so I feel this coin deserves a PQ designation, it may even possibly upgrade.

And compare it to the NGC MS65 1861 (yes, I understand PCGS and NGC may have different grading criteria, but that is a discussion for another day). I think the NGC 1861 is properly graded at MS65, however, not PQ - it has subdued luster especially compared to the PCGS MS64, and also has weak feathertips, a light spot, but no marks. What are your thoughts on these?

 

I think you are right. The PCGS example has a few more marks and is properly graded MS64 but has superior strike, luster, and eye appeal than the NGC MS65. I would call that a PQ coin all day long and pay a premium for it if I collected IHC's. To me luster is the most important aspect of grading. Eye appeal depends upon luster. You really can't have one without the other.

 

Here are another couple examples of coins with toning, this time proofs. The 1913 MPL PCGS PF65 RB, which I think is properly graded, has wonderful eye appeal and beautiful colorful toning but I would not call it PQ because it has a couple tiny specks. Now the 1916 MPL PCGS PF65 BN I think is PQ for the grade as it is absolutely pristine, has no flaws, and has beautiful toning and great eye appeal. What do you think?

 

Again, I think you are right. However, ask me which coin I would rather own? The eye appeal of the RB MPL is off the charts and those little spots (IMO) are not that distracting. You know of course that I am not a copper collector and the spots mean much more to hard core copper lovers than they do to a toned silver freak like me.

 

Not to sound so contrary, but I have to disagree with you a bit on this comment. IMHO, you absolutely can have eye appeal without luster. Take a look at the MPLs I posted above - they don't really have luster due to their matte-ness, yet in my opinion, they have spectacular eye appeal. I agree great luster usually equals great eye appeal, but not always as you say.

 

One last example. I've posted this coin before, but it is a good example of what we've been discussing - it is a neat error with great eye appeal, a good strike, no marks to speak of. However, in spite of the pretty toning, I would not give it a PQ designation because of the splotchy toning and the debris on the reverse. Would you?

 

So there's no such thing as a PQ raw coin?

In my opinion, there are coins that are "PQ' and there are coins that are "PQ for the grade", and it is the latter that Ron is alluding to in the Q&Al. Which was the point I was getting at with my (loaded) question.

Said another way, just because the TPG overgraded a coin, doesn't make it any less PQ, it just makes it overgraded. Provided the coin is priced commensurate with the quality, why does a number on a slab mean anything?

PQ is a term made up by sellers (oftentimes correctly, but more often incorrectly) to justify a higher price on a slabbed coin, plain and simple. Collectors don't use that term -- they use terms like "choice" or "good for the grade" -- or at least they didn't before the TPG game came into being.

 

p.s. PQ is also an extremely subjective term. Given most collectors and experts have trouble assigning grades to a coin, how can PQ -- which is essentially grading to antoehr signficiant digit -- be any more accurate and less subjective? That's part of the reason I view it as a justification for a price rather than a real descriptive term.

 

Lehigh, do I gots a PQ coin in that 28-S I just bought ?