If YOU were the **FINAL** authority on how U.S. coins were to be graded; what would you change?
Insider2
Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
This is an exercise in fantasy as we cannot change anything that is being done at this time. I just don't like having to put aside my personal standards in order to arrive at a "commercial grade" to be fair to the buyer, seller, and coin, It becomes too subjective. I wish the grading standards were more strict and more universal. Changes I would make to take the stress out of grading:
No red copper coin would be graded above MS-64 with environmental carbon damage. The thought of this is what started my rant!!
"Mint State" would actually mean something.
Bumping the grade of an "inferior" coin 1-2 grades because its actual condition (wear or defects) is hidden by its attractive color would stop.
Only authenticity would be guaranteed. That includes ancients!
Anyone disagree? Otherwise, what would you like to see changed if you controlled EVERYTHING?
Comments
They'd still send em to CAC.
Adopt the 100 point scale. Even as prices tumble, collectors would be elated as their AU50 coin would become a 73.5
I'd like to see a separate grade assigned for the obverse and reverse side of the coin like was originally done by ANACS and other early grading services. Many times one side of the coin is nicer than the other side of the coin and this would be more descriptive of the coin's actual condition.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Massive confusion though on pricing.
Are we grading coins or pricing them?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
The two are inseparable.
I would establish REAL standards for grading coins... and would eliminate the effect of colorful tarnish on the grade. Eye appeal is totally subjective and differs with individuals. Standards can be established, and with AI, grading would be fast, consistent and accurate. Cheers, RickO
EXACTLY! The biggest cause for most of the problems with grading is trying to indicate the value of a coin with a single number." So I would change that. GRADE THE COIN for what it is; then let others decide what it is worth!
NEWS FLASH: "Value grading" never worked. All MS-65's do not have the same value. Many MS coins are not. Some damaged coins are straight graded.
Lucky for us, there is not a "FINAL" authority. Thus, second, third, and fourth opinions - including "stickers" are available.
Eliminate this foolish grade by price, grade bump for certain color, market acceptable nonsense, give me a grade that's biased on the surfaces and level of preservation and let the price work itself out between the buyer and seller.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Calm down Insider, you set the trap.
Absolutely the coin of a specific grade does not carry an indelible value. In high grades a Morgan for example may carry a two or three to one multiple in a given TPG slab and grade. Add a sticker and the price rises from there. Same grade in an Anacs or ICG holder and the price tanks.
Other than a basis of valuation though, the TPG and fourth party stickering would disappear so a modicum of consistency is required.
We have enough debates on the efficacy of the Greysheet model. Multiply the options ten fold with two sided grading and the chaos would become anarchy.
Well said. No trap. Discussing all the aspects of grading pro and con expands our understanding of the subject rather than going around "blind." This is pure mental masturbation because nothing will change the commercial market and the way coins are now graded.
Stop the market grading of classic coins. Let the market determine the value.
I hope you meant "based" rather than "biased" although many grades are biased when assigned by the coin's owner.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Drop grading entirely and encapsulate for authenticity only. Force collectors to learn how to grade.
Overall Quality-->"Grade"--->Value
Of what use is a "Grade" with no relationship to the OVERALL quality nor value of the item?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
They should start by regrading all the 1804 Dollars!
At the first TPGS, INSAB in Washington, the owner believed that grading was a subjective opinion. Therefore,
the INS opinion of grade (something done anyway for our internal records) was provided (for free) on a separate card from the Photo certificate of authentication.
LOL, what a stupid idea!
If I was the final authority? I guess my name would be John.
But seriously, I think grading by technical grade only would be the way to go.
Collector, occasional seller
First thing I would change would be my address.
If I was the final authority I would be making a lot more money than I am now.
Adopt the EAC net grading methodology.
In all seriousness... I would go the other way: stop netting in or out factors such as eye appeal, toning, old cleanings, etc. I guess that probably means strict technical grading.
Smitten with DBLCs.
LOL. You both know that the value of many coins DETERMINES the grade that is assigned. That's why those dollars (for example) have increased in value AND GRADE over the decades. IMO, most of the folks who buy,sell, and grade coins at this level also know what's going on. It has been explained on this Forum that the assigned grade for some special coins does not matter because it is more of a position holder or ranking.
Been there, done that.
I'd adopt what they do for NGC ancients. I would give grades on 3-5 factors and validate authenticity, but not provide a net or total grade.
This would avoid the whole AU-MS slider problem, coins that are graded low because they have wear but are still better than UNC coins.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
I do like the idea of grading strike for Uncs, but not strike(for this issue). Like a 1-5 scale that is constant for a type, 5 being full strike.
Collector, occasional seller
Probably nothing. Any thing that I came up with would probably create other, unforeseen problems.
Didn't someone do a presentation on a proposed grading system using 1877 Indian cents as examples? It's on youtube somewhere, I remember it being a good presentation.
Collector, occasional seller
May have been Rick Snow.
You are correct. A quick google search found it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY7KMZRmkIw
Collector, occasional seller
If they did this I am OUT! GONE! BYE BYE !!!!
All I would ask is they take a few seconds longer and get the grade correct!
If the grading services adopted a 100 point grading standard, there is no way that I'd spend several thousand dollars to submit all of my slabbed coins to get them regraded. I'd keep what I have and look for something else to collect.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I'd have the surfaces of the slab designed so nothing sticks on them.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I would sell everything I have and be GONE!!!
I'm going to go with what David Hall advocated in 1988, with a few of my own modifications:
1) Remove all human elements from the grading process. Automate everything in the grading process with computers, starting with a scientific verification of the metallic contents and age of the coin to be graded.
2) All coins would have, similar to PCGS' Photograde, an established database for technical definitions of MS70 and descending grades from there.
3) "Wear" and "luster" would be machine-determined and laser-measured against what a hypothetical MS70 would be.
4) Contact marks on the coin would be quantifiably measured by both depth, length, and severity, which would NOT be linearly-correlated with a detraction in grade.
4a) Contact marks and scratches which are too light to count as more than a hairline would subtract somewhere in the 0.10 to 0.25 off of overall grade, per hairline; however if the hairlines were indicative of cleaning, then per standards the coin would be "not gradeable" and simply receive a Details slab.
4b) Contact marks and scratches which have a depth equal to, or in excess of, 12.5% of the overall thickness of the coin would be disqualified from grading and receive a "Details" grade.
4c) Contact marks and scratches which touch only the fields, rather than the devices, would subtract between 1 and 5 points off the grade, varying based on total quantity of marks and their respective severity, and also interference with luster.
4d) Contact marks and scratches which touch the devices would subtract between 3 and 10 points, depending on the total quantity of marks and their respective severity, and also interference with luster.
4e) Any contact mark or scratch determined to be "graffiti" would render the coin "not gradeable" and simply receive a Details slab.
5) "Rub" on a coin will not cause a coin to be considered "AU" unless the rub removes at least 1% of the thickness of the coin (as compared to an MS70 coin), or 5% of the relief height, whichever is a greater amount (this will vary by coin).
5a) Any coin with rub below the minimum can still be considered MS, but will still lose a minimum of 3 points, and can lose as much as 15 points if it has enough contact marks, particularly on the devices. Luster can add 3 to 10 points, depending on intensity and distribution. The net balance will determine the grade.
5b) Any coin with rub at or above the minimum cannot be considered MS, and will lose at least 12 to 20 points. Luster can add 3 to 8 points, but the coin cannot exceed a net grade of AU58 under any circumstances. Coins with significant contact marks will be limited to AU50-AU53 grades.
6) All coins with "soft strikes" will never be considered to be above MS67, regardless of contact marks or luster. Though they can receive a "star" (*) designation for excellent eye appeal (scientifically measured by luster and contact marks).
6a) Any coin with a slightly-soft strike will lose 1 to 10 points, depending on the amount of details absent from the strike.
7) Off-center strikes will be considered ungradeable, Details-only, given that parts of the original design are missing and the void their absence creates on the fields of the planchet constitute an unrecognizable component to the grading process.
8) Disparities between the grade of the obverse and the reverse would be averaged to the median.
There's probably more I haven't thought of, or just can't remember from the last time my mind was on the subject, but basically that's most of it. As explained above, the exact numbers would vary based on the coin in particular, and it's respective MS70 model.
The bottom line is that grading would become a quantifiable science, rather than a subjective interpretation made by humans. It would also help to remove the fears of "grader bias" both in favor of their friends or "big clients" for grading firms, and against small-time collectors or submitters, by removing the human element and therefore perceived-bias from the grading process.
Thanks for reading.
No net grading.
No market acceptable cleaning.
No detail coins in straight grade holders.
No coin series gets a break on grading standards.
Technical grade only (remove eye appeal from grading)
For MS grades, I'd give the grade like this:
Surface Preservation: 64 (whole numbers only)
Luster: 66
Strike: 66
Technical Grade: 65 (SPx2+L+S)/4 - round to the nearest 0.5 grade
Eye Appeal: +0.5 (-1,-0.5,0,+0.5,+1)
Total Grade: 65+0.5
I know millions of people would have issues with this, but you asked what I'd do.
On second thought, grading has been in flux since the moment the first coin was collected..... so I'd probably just learn to adapt to the current system of grading.
Have you seen the recent test of cars with automatic breaking? Absolutely horrible....
I think you put far too much faith in automation.....
(This coming from an engineer who, in theory, should be all-in for technology).
No matter how detailed and exacting a grading system is, nothing will ever take the place of an actual in hand examination of the coin under a good light source using a quality magnifier.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Require all graders to drink beer and smoke an occasional blunt so, that there grades would match mine. My coins always look better with a 'lil purple haze too.
Circulated Type II Standing Liberty Quarters from 1917 to 1924 should be graded on the details of the entire coin.
The wear on the date should not hold as much weight as it does.
Now THIS: "I'm going to go with what David Hall advocated in 1988." would have been very interesting to read!
I don't have the time or the inclination to comment on the rest of your post today. However, please keep posting! I'll look forward to reading more of your ideas when you remember them.
AMEN
You have just described the basis for "true" technical grading that was developed to ID the condition of coins (for internal records along with weight and a photo) that were sent in to the Service for authentication. That grade did not change over time. No consideration was given to value or rarity because it did not matter.
@Insider2 No offense, I was just trying to give an answer as asinine as your question. I suppose we can always wish in one hand :-)
?
None taken. I thought you
were serious! Your other posts on this thread were good.
When I was hired by one of the top TPGS, I was encouraged to get up and take a break anytime I wished. I didn't smoke but one of the graders (a great guy) was eventually let go because he was taking too many very long smoke breaks and the turnaround times for his work became obscene.
BTW, I only use one hand for one thing. Perhaps you need to try it so you'll be inspired to post another one of your excellent, and informative discussions.
This would only mean that every AU coin would be offered as a gem BU. We have already been down that path.
Yes, back then the sheep got eaten while the wolves flourished. The smart sheep eventually learned to grade. That is like being protected by a shepherd with a 30-06 and a pack of sheep dogs.
Besides, not much has really changed. Now, only "attractive" AU early gold is offered as gem BU.
I've kind of concluded that WHATEVER grading system, scheme, or method exists, some will complain.
So, dance with the partner you have now. Figure out what you do and don't like, and then buy the coins that match your personal preferences, (or grading). Pass on the ones you don't like, or don't agree with the grading of.
That means "getting to know" the grading system currently in use. (But that would be the case no matter what system is being used, so it's not a great and foreboding deterrent.)
In the end, it's the coin that is important. What number YOU or someone else assigns is just trivia.
+++++Great post. Hope you get a "Best Of!"
I started collecting when ads and price lists were lines of text in a newspaper or mailer. Grading at that time allowed you to have some idea what the coin you were ordering might look like. Nowadays, with internet access, you'll likely have an image of the coin you're considering to help you make a decision whether or not to buy. As long as I'm happy with the coin at the price you're asking, you can grade it however you like. Knowing how to grade yourself is an indispensable skill but IMO, if you're not competing in the registry game, how other people grade is not as important as it used to be.
Yes and at the same time no, Freudian slip perhaps. My issue with todays market grading is that the grade is biased depending on how the graders/tpg perceive a coin's eye appeal which is a highly subjective issue. As an example I'm not a big fan of toned coins overall however many times toned coins have been seen by some to have gotten a grade bump for color. I don't want a grade that is based in part on if the grader or grading company likes the color more than it would if the coin were blast white.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.