If market grading produces "AU63" coins, does it also produce "MS55" coins?

Zoins

Given that market grading is practiced by some TPGs and taught by the ANA, the thought is that it can result in AU coins in 60+ grades due to coin value. Should the same approach result in MS coins at grades below 60, like "MS55"?

Or is 60 a floor for MS, no matter what it's value?

Baley

I've long held the opinion that the "line" at 60 for "Uncirculated" or "Mint State" is unnecessary, illogical, and the single most confusing and problematic aspect of the coin grading system.

Just dropping the adjective words, and using numbers, would go a long way toward improving the grading system and correcting this ingrained fallacy. To an extent, the services already do this. (To the chagrin of many who think otherwise, who see the "line" at 60 as the central dogma of grading)

There are obviously a lot of ways for a coin with a touch of rub to grade 60 or higher, and for a coin with no trace of wear but lots of bag marks and/or other damage and/or funky stainy toning, to grade below 60, in the real coin universe.

YQQ

Am totally with you on this one. However, all TPG's would have to work with that.
next step would be detailed, like 57 or 44. and there should then the "Details" done away with and let a buyer decide instead of seeing a TPG's opinion affecting the grade because the TPG can not prove "what details" it should be. Like for example questionable color.

Zoins

@YQQ said:
Am totally with you on this one. However, all TPG's would have to work with that.
next step would be detailed, like 57 or 44. and there should then the "Details" done away with and let a buyer decide instead of seeing a TPG's opinion affecting the grade because the TPG can not prove "what details" it should be. Like for example questionable color.

I'm still a fan of details and problem grades. Problems should be identified.

See the following:

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1057487/has-rainbow-toning-jumped-the-shark#latest

MasonG

If you're a grading company...

1. Grade the coin based on wear (or lack thereof).
2. Describe any features that would make the coin stand out from others with the same level of wear.

The value commanded by the coin in the market is not relevant to the above unless you're pricing coins instead of grading them. In that case, "Professional Coin Pricing Company", anyone?

JMO, of course.

Baley

in reality, "grading" means the more complex concept of "appraisal of overall Quality", rather than the more limited simple measurement of "technical amount of remaining details"

MasonG

@Baley said:
in reality, "grading" means the more complex concept of "appraisal of overall Quality", rather than the more limited simple measurement of "technical amount of remaining details"

Ok- that works for me, too. What grading doesn't mean is "figuring out how much it's worth".

Baley

The other major factor especially important in the 55-63 range (as well as higher and lower overall Quality scores) is Luster, particularly in the fields of the coin. For expert graders, even the rims and edges of the piece provide information for evaluation.
Edit to agree; the value of a coin is (and should be) an "effect" of the assigned grade, not a "cause". Still, a consideration of "what grade the Educated Market" will accept a coin "as" is often (and should be) taken into account. (The TPGs do this, and CAC, the prevailing FPG, does it even more)
In the broader business community, this is sometimes referred to as "passing the red face test." 🤔

Hydrant

Interesting. I've given a lot of thought to the MS58 grade but never even considered an MS55 grade. I'm thinking about it now. Thanks, Zoins.

BryceM

The spectrum of coin "goodness" and the spectrum of discernable wear don't line up very well. In that way, our current grading system is a bit arbitrary. For the most part, the participants in the market have accepted where we are and adjusted accordingly. In truth, a huge number of coins in MS holders, even up to MS65 show a little bit of wear on the tips of the feathers and such. The more there is, the more limiting it becomes.\

But, as far as your actual question, I don't think a coin without visible wear (especially in the fields) will grade lower than MS60. It would no-grade for some reason or other before they'd do that. For series with plentiful examples in all grades, the zone of MS60-62 is no-man's land, where almost anyone would prefer an attractive AU58. In some series, MS61 is the finest known...... and then you're happy to live with it.

DNADave

If you take a MS67 peace dollar and give it a little wear, you have an AU58.

If you take a MS61 baggy dog of a peace dollar and give it the same little wear. Do you not have an AU 58 ? Or something less?

ColonelJessup

The market rarely grades AU58+ coins as much or more than MS63, so of course there are also AU61's and AU62's.
The market occasionally grades AU59 coins AU64
I guess a 59+ could be a 66. You know you've seen a Bust Half like that.

You might quibble, but this is the way that the pros often discuss coins among themselves. There's nothing confusing about this language. Nothing confusing at all once you've put in your 10,000 hours for mastery

The more coins you look at, the more you'll absorb subliminally. The world-class graders who have been refining their own craft for a decade or two will recognize certain dates as having various eccentric qualities. Consider the varying strike/lustre qualities many Buffalo issues manifest as a dramatic case in point. You've got a boomingly lustrous 26-D 5c with a hammered 66 obverse and, yet, the center of the reverse by itself, no matter how frosty and clean, looks like it has XF detail.

As Dr. Samuel Johnson said "Nothing sharpens the mind so much as the prospect of being hanged in the morning". For some, it's "Nothing sharpens the mind so much as the prospect of being off 0.2 points and having it cost you ten thousand bucks".

ricko

I do enjoy these discussions regarding grading and the nuances therein.... The system is far from perfect, we know that. There are no standards, just general categories with qualifications. As such, these debates will continue, as will successful, and unsuccessful, resubmissions. We are working with trained opinions, and will continue. Cheers, RickO

breakdown

I think it is important to understand how market grading works and why it has become the norm at the grading services (to the derision of some traditionalists). But taken too far, such grading can violate Mark Feld rule 12:

12.Eye-appeal is hard to ignore, but technical quality shouldn’t be over-looked/compromised.

Mark might say that is not what he meant when he wrote that rule, but that's my interpretation.

lsica

I think the whole "AU63" and "MS55" thing is just trying to use the grade as the only determiner for value, and that just doesn't work. There are AU58 coins that are more appealing than MS60 coins, and their price reflects that, just as there are MS63 coins that are more dazzling than some MS65 coins and their price reflects that. To try to use the numerical grade number as something that is the sole determination of price is.. well... "Whimsy"

MFeld

@breakdown said:
I think it is important to understand how market grading works and why it has become the norm at the grading services (to the derision of some traditionalists). But taken too far, such grading can violate Mark Feld rule 12:

12.Eye-appeal is hard to ignore, but technical quality shouldn’t be over-looked/compromised.

Mark might say that is not what he meant when he wrote that rule, but that's my interpretation.

I think your interpretation is spot-on. While I wrote my rules/tips for collectors, my thoughts regarding technical quality certainly apply to graders and dealers, as well.