Please explain. I may need to change what "net" grading means to me.
Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues.
LOL, I've asked before WHO (what genius) in EAC came up with net grading? Never answered.
Now, who came up with this: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
Oh my, That is not "net grading!" Net grading is calling an AU coin VF due to problems.
THIS: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues." simply describes how ALL Mint State coins are normally graded.
Anyone wish to disagree (I really miss that button!) or LOL? Please post your rebuttal. I'm here to learn and have an open mind.
Oh, the .006% approach. Well, that still does not explain it. Anyone know the highest MS grade ever given to a Copper by an EAC consensus? I'm curious.
"Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
Oh my, That is not "net grading!" Net grading is calling an AU coin VF due to problems.
No, it isn't. You've been learned that many times already.
Once more:
Not saying IS a VF. Saying is "like" a VF for overall quality evaluation opinion purposes, in order to attempt to agree on making a transaction which changes the ownership title to said coin.
@logger7 said: "Here are some XF coins that are on the PCGS coinfacts page:
Thanks for the research. Note that the ONLY coin posted that even approaches the worn condition of the other 1821 at the top of this thread is this one.
@Insider2 said:
LOL, I've asked before WHO (what genius) in EAC came up with net grading? Never answered.
Think of it as numismatic common law - it is developed systematically through custom and usage.
Now, who came up with this: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
Technically it's true
Oh my, That is not "net grading!" Net grading is calling an AU coin VF due to problems.
That's how I use the term as well, but I see Baley's point. It is more of a philosophical thing.
THIS: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues." simply describes how ALL Mint State coins are normally graded.
@Insider2 said:
LOL, I've asked before WHO (what genius) in EAC came up with net grading? Never answered.
Think of it as numismatic common law - it is developed systematically through custom and usage.
Now, who came up with this: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
Technically it's true
Oh my, That is not "net grading!" Net grading is calling an AU coin VF due to problems.
That's how I use the term as well, but I see Baley's point. It is more of a philosophical thing.
THIS: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues." simply describes how ALL Mint State coins are normally graded.
Yes!
If someone asks Who came up with the Sheldon Grading System, there is a specific answer.
If someone asks Who came up with the "true" original Technical Grading System, there is also a specific answer.
Someone had to come up with the "Net Grading System" as used by EAC yet no one knows. That's funny because any numismatist around in the 1960's was alive. and collecting. Was it the guy who wrote "Copper Notes?" I think his name was Robinson and he used words like "scuzzy" to describe a surface.
Who devised the net grading system for large cents? it did not just spring up. The idea had to be published somewhere in an EAC newsletter.
@Baley said:
There are a lot of ways a coin can grade 30, starting to see some..
I DISAGREE with this. We are talking about commonly used standards. The one and the only way coin can grade VF-30 is by wearing down its surface. None of the damage it may have lowers that grade.
Anything other than this is typical foolishness, ignorance of the VF grade, value or net grading and these practices or any combination of them is the reason that the simple art of grading coins has become so confusing and screwed up.
Let me paraphrase something from the mouth of a very famous and successful professional coin dealer at the First Grading Roundtable in NYC in the early 1970's: The coin has the details of an XF but it must be graded VF due to the rim nicks and scratch!
LOL. I had the same feeling hearing that as I did now reading the post I quote: It's no wonder things are so, ah screwed up.
Later in the meeting, after silently listening to the back-and-forth, I got up the courage to say a few things to these luminaries.
Then I told them that we could start grading coins at the Certification Service within one week of getting the go-ahead as the system we used for internal records was precise and working flawlessly!
Of course, back then there were only three grades of Uncirculated.
@Baley said:
There are a lot of ways a coin can grade 30, starting to see some..
I DISAGREE with this. We are talking about commonly used standards. The one and the only way coin can grade VF-30 is by wearing down its surface. None of the damage it may have lowers that grade.
Whoa, this doesn't sound like the Insider2 that was arguing against me in the grade inflation threads. I thought you said that there were no real standards and that the evaluation criteria changed frequently effectively rendering a TPG grade "good for this day only." Maybe @Baley is espousing a newer iteration. It is hard to know because under your previous arguments, the grades could theoretically change daily. The longer I am in this hobby, the more cynical I become. I am beginning to see third party grading as one huge money making racket. The words of others are fleeting and only a few dozen elite rich dealers who submit thousands of coins every month can keep up with the current trends in grade inflation (or momentary pockets of deflation).
" Let me paraphrase something from the mouth of a very famous and successful professional coin dealer at the First Grading Roundtable in NYC in the early 1970's: The coin has the details of an XF but it must be graded VF due to the rim nicks and scratch!"
LOL. I had the same feeling hearing that as I did now reading the post I quote: It's no wonder things are so, ah screwed up.
Do you really not understand, or do you just wish it weren't true?
@Baley said:
There are a lot of ways a coin can grade 30, starting to see some..
I DISAGREE with this. We are talking about commonly used standards. The one and the only way coin can grade VF-30 is by wearing down its surface. None of the damage it may have lowers that grade.
Whoa, this doesn't sound like the Insider2 that was arguing against me in the grade inflation threads. I thought you said that there were no real standards and that the evaluation criteria changed frequently effectively rendering a TPG grade "good for this day only." Maybe @Baley is espousing a newer iteration. It is hard to know because under your previous arguments, the grades could theoretically change daily. The longer I am in this hobby, the more cynical I become. I am beginning to see third party grading as one huge money making racket. The words of others are fleeting and only a few dozen elite rich dealers who submit thousands of coins every month can keep up with the current trends in grade inflation (or momentary pockets of deflation).
There is no contradiction at all. Just observable facts:
There are published grading standards. Unfortunately, they are close but not identical. Therefore there really is not a universal grading standard.
Gradeflation is a fact. It resulted when the value of a coin and its condition of preservation (two things that had nothing to do with each other in the precise "Technical System) were combined into a "grade." As values increased, grades MUST also.
TPGS standards can change faster than gradeflation. It is as easy as the boss telling the graders to tighten up such-and-such or loosen up!
Most of us should be thanking the TPGS and the sticker companies for the job they do. They are not perfect but without them, the marketplace of today would be a bloodbath for the uninformed. There would be a lot of folks selling cars and not coins too.
"None of the damage it may have lowers that grade "
Damage doesn't reduce a coin's grade? Good luck with that!
Per EAC grading (net grading standards) damage does not reduce the "details grade." However, since it reduces the value of a coin, we must LOWER its obvious condition (what remains of its design) to a "new NET grade" that has no relationship to the overall appearance of the coin that we first determined.
Good luck to you guys and the foolishness of net grading! The major TPGS finally got the word and stopped using "body bags." Now, most of the time) the coin is correctly graded and major problem that lowers its value is stated. That allows folks to look at a copper and match its image in a grading guide. If the coin were net graded, they would be scratching their head trying to figure out why this XF coin that matches the image of an XF is in knowledgeable dealer's 2X2 graded VF!
It's hard to know real quality without in hand inspection. I would rather have the former Anacs XF45 coin than the lifeless looking VF coins on the PCGS coinfacts page for sure.
@Insider2 said:
4. Most of us should be thanking the TPGS and the sticker companies for the job they do. They are not perfect but without them, the marketplace of today would be a bloodbath for the uninformed. There would be a lot of folks selling cars and not coins too.
You mean like today? The grading services provide a false veneer of legitimacy for the same dubious practices they supposedly were created to combat: over graded coins, sliders in MS holders, problem coins such as lightly cleaned coins being straight graded, etc. They are lulled into thinking they are protected by a guarantee except that the guarantee is based on standards that can change on every whim and caprice.
@logger7 said: "It's hard to know real quality without in hand inspection. I would rather have the former Anacs XF45 coin than the lifeless looking VF coins on the PCGS coinfacts page for sure."
You and I have a very different idea concerning "lifeless looking." That's what makes the world go around.
@Insider2 said: @logger7 said: "It's hard to know real quality without in hand inspection. I would rather have the former Anacs XF45 coin than the lifeless looking VF coins on the PCGS coinfacts page for sure."
You and I have a very different idea concerning "lifeless looking." That's what makes the world go around.
If the coin were displayed at it's actual size and not 7.7 inches in diameter. You really would not have had all this discussion.
It's devices hold quite a bit of luster and the lines are not at all noticed unless you have a 7x loupe in your hand up close. Do I think it is an EF.............No........It's devices are too flat or blended for any sharpness warranting a higher grade than VF 35. I appreciate the comment should have left it in the ANACS holder. Well, I think it unsaleable in the ANACS holder.
Nobody, but you guys care and that's what's great about a bunch of numismatists discussing a coin.
Comments
@Baley said: "All coins are net graded."
Please explain. I may need to change what "net" grading means to me.
Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues.
I think @Baley takes an EAC approach.
Here are some XF coins that are on the PCGS coinfacts page:
45:
40:
30:
LOL, I've asked before WHO (what genius) in EAC came up with net grading? Never answered.
Now, who came up with this: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
Oh my,
That is not "net grading!" Net grading is calling an AU coin VF due to problems.
THIS: "Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues." simply describes how ALL Mint State coins are normally graded.
Anyone wish to disagree (I really miss that button!) or LOL? Please post your rebuttal. I'm here to learn and have an open mind.
Oh, the .006% approach. Well, that still does not explain it. Anyone know the highest MS grade ever given to a Copper by an EAC consensus? I'm curious.
"Everything starts at MS70 and points are knocked off here or there for various issues."
No, it isn't. You've been learned that many times already.
Once more:
Not saying IS a VF. Saying is "like" a VF for overall quality evaluation opinion purposes, in order to attempt to agree on making a transaction which changes the ownership title to said coin.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
@logger7 said: "Here are some XF coins that are on the PCGS coinfacts page:
Thanks for the research. Note that the ONLY coin posted that even approaches the worn condition of the other 1821 at the top of this thread is this one.
Think of it as numismatic common law - it is developed systematically through custom and usage.
Technically it's true
That's how I use the term as well, but I see Baley's point. It is more of a philosophical thing.
Yes!
If someone asks Who came up with the Sheldon Grading System, there is a specific answer.
If someone asks Who came up with the "true" original Technical Grading System, there is also a specific answer.
Someone had to come up with the "Net Grading System" as used by EAC yet no one knows. That's funny because any numismatist around in the 1960's was alive. and collecting. Was it the guy who wrote "Copper Notes?" I think his name was Robinson and he used words like "scuzzy" to describe a surface.
Who devised the net grading system for large cents? it did not just spring up. The idea had to be published somewhere in an EAC newsletter.
There are a lot of ways a coin can grade 30, starting to see some..
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
.
I DISAGREE with this. We are talking about commonly used standards. The one and the only way coin can grade VF-30 is by wearing down its surface. None of the damage it may have lowers that grade.
Anything other than this is typical foolishness, ignorance of the VF grade, value or net grading and these practices or any combination of them is the reason that the simple art of grading coins has become so confusing and screwed up.
Let me paraphrase something from the mouth of a very famous and successful professional coin dealer at the First Grading Roundtable in NYC in the early 1970's: The coin has the details of an XF but it must be graded VF due to the rim nicks and scratch!
LOL. I had the same feeling hearing that as I did now reading the post I quote: It's no wonder things are so, ah screwed up.
Later in the meeting, after silently listening to the back-and-forth, I got up the courage to say a few things to these luminaries.
Then I told them that we could start grading coins at the Certification Service within one week of getting the go-ahead as the system we used for internal records was precise and working flawlessly!
Of course, back then there were only three grades of Uncirculated.
Whoa, this doesn't sound like the Insider2 that was arguing against me in the grade inflation threads. I thought you said that there were no real standards and that the evaluation criteria changed frequently effectively rendering a TPG grade "good for this day only." Maybe @Baley is espousing a newer iteration. It is hard to know because under your previous arguments, the grades could theoretically change daily. The longer I am in this hobby, the more cynical I become. I am beginning to see third party grading as one huge money making racket. The words of others are fleeting and only a few dozen elite rich dealers who submit thousands of coins every month can keep up with the current trends in grade inflation (or momentary pockets of deflation).
@Insider2 said:
"None of the damage it may have lowers that grade "
Damage doesn't reduce a coin's grade? Good luck with that!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
@Insider2 said:
" Let me paraphrase something from the mouth of a very famous and successful professional coin dealer at the First Grading Roundtable in NYC in the early 1970's: The coin has the details of an XF but it must be graded VF due to the rim nicks and scratch!"
Do you really not understand, or do you just wish it weren't true?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
There is no contradiction at all. Just observable facts:
There are published grading standards. Unfortunately, they are close but not identical. Therefore there really is not a universal grading standard.
Gradeflation is a fact. It resulted when the value of a coin and its condition of preservation (two things that had nothing to do with each other in the precise "Technical System) were combined into a "grade." As values increased, grades MUST also.
TPGS standards can change faster than gradeflation. It is as easy as the boss telling the graders to tighten up such-and-such or loosen up!
Most of us should be thanking the TPGS and the sticker companies for the job they do. They are not perfect but without them, the marketplace of today would be a bloodbath for the uninformed. There would be a lot of folks selling cars and not coins too.
Per EAC grading (net grading standards) damage does not reduce the "details grade." However, since it reduces the value of a coin, we must LOWER its obvious condition (what remains of its design) to a "new NET grade" that has no relationship to the overall appearance of the coin that we first determined.
Good luck to you guys and the foolishness of net grading! The major TPGS finally got the word and stopped using "body bags." Now, most of the time) the coin is correctly graded and major problem that lowers its value is stated. That allows folks to look at a copper and match its image in a grading guide. If the coin were net graded, they would be scratching their head trying to figure out why this XF coin that matches the image of an XF is in knowledgeable dealer's 2X2 graded VF!
It's hard to know real quality without in hand inspection. I would rather have the former Anacs XF45 coin than the lifeless looking VF coins on the PCGS coinfacts page for sure.
You mean like today? The grading services provide a false veneer of legitimacy for the same dubious practices they supposedly were created to combat: over graded coins, sliders in MS holders, problem coins such as lightly cleaned coins being straight graded, etc. They are lulled into thinking they are protected by a guarantee except that the guarantee is based on standards that can change on every whim and caprice.
@logger7 said: "It's hard to know real quality without in hand inspection. I would rather have the former Anacs XF45 coin than the lifeless looking VF coins on the PCGS coinfacts page for sure."
You and I have a very different idea concerning "lifeless looking." That's what makes the world go around.
If the coin were displayed at it's actual size and not 7.7 inches in diameter. You really would not have had all this discussion.
It's devices hold quite a bit of luster and the lines are not at all noticed unless you have a 7x loupe in your hand up close. Do I think it is an EF.............No........It's devices are too flat or blended for any sharpness warranting a higher grade than VF 35. I appreciate the comment should have left it in the ANACS holder. Well, I think it unsaleable in the ANACS holder.
Nobody, but you guys care and that's what's great about a bunch of numismatists discussing a coin.