Options
Newman Gold. From VF to AU cleaned.
MGLICKER
Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭
Just received my lot from the Newman sale. 1850 Eagle is graded AU cleaned. Newman envelope states VF.
Coin looks XF/AU maybe lightly cleaned to me.
Did Newman tend to underrate his coins or have grades inflated that much....?
I think I know the answer.
Coin looks XF/AU maybe lightly cleaned to me.
Did Newman tend to underrate his coins or have grades inflated that much....?
I think I know the answer.
0
Comments
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
<< <i>Net Grading??? >>
That might make sense. Anyone know if EN ever designated a coin as cleaned on his kraft envelopes?
vf's were xf, xf were au.
so in this case if the coin is a borderline AU he might have graded it "xf"=vf old days
Today "gradeflation" has lowered the standards, especially in the circulated collector grades from Fine to EF. In many cases "gradeflation" has raised the circulated grades by one full notch. Yesterday's VG is now a Fine or even low end VF. Yesterday's VF-30 is now EF-40. The EF graded coins have become AU-50 and higher end AUs have become MS-61 and 62. This has become the trend, which makes it harder for the customers who are on a budget to build circulated sets of properly graded coins.
Some cases this is not totally wrong. For example to me a really nice AU-58 is worth more than a chopped up or spotty technical grade MS-60 or 61. There "gradeflation" is reflecting a true market. To me a light rub is less of a sin that loads of bag marks and ugly toning.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
MGLicker: <<Did Newman tend to underrate his coins or have grades inflated that much>>
Although Newman did a brilliant job of researching pre-1793 numismatic items and acquired a great many wonderful pieces from the Col. E.H.R. Green estate, I doubt that he was ever considered one of the all-time greatest graders. Most collectors now do not have the grading skills of JA, Charlie B., Richad B., Jim H., Bill S., Scott T., Matt K., Jason C., or others currently at the top of the profession. After all, would we expect a young man who now has a great collection of colonials to be able to grade U.S. gold coins with precision?
JoeEbb: <<I think its gradeflation.>>
291Fifth: <<Most current collectors don't realize just how severe gradeflation has actually been >>, Capt. Henway: <<+1>>
In past eras, the advantage of those who were expert graders over everyone else was even greater than it is now. Dealers did not have a motive to reveal their true thoughts about the grades of coins and each collector could assign any grade to any coin in his own collection and some collectors believed whatever they were told by those selling coins. It would be extremely difficult for us to conceptualize now exactly what the standards and criteria were in the 1950s. It would help to know how specific coins, which have not since changed markedly in apperance, were interpreted THEN in wholesale trading or in sales to the few collectors who were expert graders.
There were collectors in the 1940s and 1950s who were able to select on their own, or with the help of expert advisors, "gem" coins that we now grade from 66 to 68. John J. Pittman and James A. Stack, Sr. come to mind. Elliot Landau picked these out on his own and, when New Netherlands sold his collection in the late 1950s, amazing prices for gem coins were realized.
The terms Very Fine and Extremely (or Extra) Fine were used very casually then and some of the people then using such terms then might not have been making much of an effort to grade coins consistently. There was not as much of a difference in value between grades and sellers then often figured that it was the responsibility of the buyer (or his agent) to grade the coins being offered.
Also, I have viewed a large number of the Newman items that were auctioned in Nov. 2013, Jan. 2014, May 2014 and Nov. 2014. I do not get the impression that our friends ATS did any grading favors for Newman. For better or worse, they graded Newman's coins pretty much the same way they grade coins from relatively unknown submitters. Besides, a significant percentage of Newman's gold did receive green beans. The 1867 DE is particularly important.
An Extremely Important, Type 2 Double Eagle
The First Coins Struck in The Original Thirteen Colonies: Massachusetts (‘NE’) Silver of 1652
Grading is really an appraisal of where the value, in the opinion of the grader, lies along the price guide continuum. This is why so many get confused at TPG grades for rare old coins with a bit of rub that look like they "should" grade AU and not low mint state, or conversely, coins with a lot of detail that "look" undergraded, but have been netted down for various defects.
IMO, "gradeflation" tells us just as much about how things used to be graded (and why), as it does about how things are graded now.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I know my opinion is weird and I have none so there's no dog in the fight, but I wouldn't buy a net graded coin of any sort.
That would mean by default that you don't own any U.S. coinage dated pre 1815. Nothing weird about it; it's all a matter of personal preference. Ie., I won't buy a pre 1815 copper unless it's in a PCGS OGH.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Yesteryear's XF's are today's AU's to MS63's.
Elcontador is correct. Every coin is net graded except for those that are perfect. And I've yet to see a perfect US mint made coin.
Roadrunner: <<Elcontador is correct. Every coin is net graded except for those that are perfect. And I've yet to see a perfect US mint made coin.>>
Although I could have mis-interpreted their remarks above, I believe that it was Baley who said that and El Contador was concerned about a broadening of the domain of gradable pre-1815 coins, over the last fifteen years.
I wonder if Baley, El Contador and Roadrunner have all mis-interpreted TopStuf's remark that he <<wouldn't buy a net graded coin of any sort.>>
Sometimes, extremely rare or very famous coins receive numerical grades that they would not receive if the same exact coins were not so rare and not famous. When I read TopStuf's remark, I thought he was referring to coins that received a numerical grade though should have been denied a numerical grade because of serious problems, not minor imperfections. In any event, even if I am reading too much into TopStuf's remark above, I know collectors who shun coins that have serious problems, regardless of the rarity or fame of such coins.
By the way, as I indicated above, I have viewed a large number of the Newman items that were auctioned in Nov. 2013, Jan. 2014, May 2014 and Nov. 2014. I did not get the impression that items with serious problems were assigned numerical grades solely because of the Newman pedigree. There are problematic, extremely rare items that will be net graded because of their rarity and overall importance, rather than just put in 'Genuine' holders. The services are more forgiving regarding a 1796/5 Half Eagle than they are when they grade 1896 Half Eagles
The Fabulous Eric Newman Collection, Part 12: Pre-1793 Patterns for U.S. coins
An Extremely Important, Type 2 Double Eagle