Grading standard opinions
Southside7
Posts: 79 ✭✭✭
I read this article: https://thesprucecrafts.com/grading-mint-state-coins-4129278:// which is very recent. I am curious if most here agree with the importance ratios of real-world grading criteria as listed in the article? I ask because it "seems" to me that over the past couple years or so that eye appeal and luster have gotten to where they outweigh the technical (surface preservation, strike, die state) aspect.
I am curious what other collectors think.
Thanks!
0
Comments
Overall strike, other than some small detail of the overall design, has been underrated, as has been die state. This last is of particular importance when dealing with doubled dies.
I’m getting “page not found” when click on the link (after the forum warning that you’re leaving the CU website). But I believe I found the article you’re referring to on the Spruce website.
Eye appeal is usually directly related to surface preservation but not 100%. Different graders will weigh the distraction of a mark (size, location) differently. Luster to some extent, viewed by different eyes, is also somewhat of a judgement call. Then you add in differences of opinion about toning and there is room for significant subjectivity when it comes to grading. One man’s 66 is another man’s 65 or 67. This is one of the reasons you have to exercise great care when paying a significant premium for a one point difference in grade, especially in the higher grades where very minor issues can make or break a grade.
Trying again... https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/grading-mint-state-coins-4129278
Tested link this time and it works. Apologies for the error.
I disagree that "Eye appeal is usually directly related to surface preservation but not 100%". Coins which aren't technically sound can still exhibit wonderful eye-appeal. And even well (or exceptionally well) preserved coins are frequently awarded one or more extra points, due to eye-appeal.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That’s why I said “not 100%”. Do you agree that in some cases contact marks and scratches are judged differently depending on their size, number and location? Actually even the size of the coin will have a bearing on the issue. The 0.25mm contact mark on a silver dollar is going to be more of a distraction on a gold dollar. If the answer to that is yes then weighing those things is somewhat subject and you get the one or even two point spread in opinions about a grade.
"Usually"..."but not 100%" still sounds like a significant overstatement to me. In answer to your question, absolutely.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
eye appeal is all that matters
Maybe I’m misunderstanding your phrase “not technically sound”. When I think of not technically sound I’m thinking of coins with contact marks in focal areas that when you see the coin your eyes are draw to those marks. The coin can have a great strike, nice luster or rainbow toning be that contact mark on the cheek becomes the focus. Then there are other times where that same size contact mark is lost in the details or hidden in some nice toning and you wouldn’t see it until the coin is closely examined. Maybe we’re talking difference of degrees and I’ll defer to you seen you’ve seen and graded many more coins than I have.
There are no grading standards in todays market grading scheme, there are opinions which can and do change day to day.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Sorry, "not technically sound" as in "surface preservation" not coinciding with or being anywhere close to "directly related to eye appeal".
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think there's some truth in this statement.
I have always understood that a grading standards were established differentiate the marketability of coins. Establish a uniform quality standard that has close reflection to market value. However another factor that is ignored is auction pricing history, especially for top POP coins. If the grade is to reflect marketability, one cannot ignore relative pricing history. An example is: toning can significantly determine the auction price of a coin, much like Sunnywood Morgans, and more recently the half dollar that sold for $135,000 (?). Only problem is the half dollar would have to be a 73 or 74 based upon the auction price........ Grading coins on intricate technical details reflect a very basic grading concept that seems to have little effect on market value.
Another issue might be between PR60 and PR70 coins. I cannot really tell the difference, but people pay 3-4x for the PR70. Probably just for the Registry points. I have a box of PR69DCAM Jefferson proofs that I am thinking of submitted for a regrade just to see how many might upgrade to PR70DCAM. Or maybe better crack them and submit them RAW?
OINK
I've read that somewhere else too. Quite profound
Did you read the article that was referenced by in the OP? The description they gave regarding surface preservation was…
“The first category is surface preservation, and it carries the most amount of weight when determining the Mint State grade of a coin. Numismatists define it as the number of imperfections or flaws that are on the surface of the coin. These imperfections are not the result of the coin circulating in commerce but are caused during the manufacturing process when handling and moving the coins around the mint.
Handling coins during the production process can result in the following imperfections on the surface of the coin:
Bag marks resulting from the movement and handling of coins in bins or large bags
Scrapes, dings, small scratches during the manufacturing process
The larger the coin, the more bag marks and deeper bag marks on the surface of the coin
Older/classic collectible coins may have friction or slider marks from being stored in old wooden coin cabinets
Light friction on the highest points of the design is acceptable as long as this resulted from handling in mint bags or bins. Caution: This should not be confused with circulation friction on the highest points of the coin's design.”
They also said surface preservation accounts for 60% of the grade. In the very high MS grades one or dings in a focal area can drop the coin a point in grade. Since 68, 69 and 70 coins all have exceptional eye appeal minor issues of surface preservation dictate the grade. The same is true of 65, 66 and 67 coins but to a lessor extent but one significant ding on the cheek of coin could easily drop the grade a point. Strike, luster or color isn’t going to make up for what is a significant distraction in grade and/or eye appeal caused by that ding.
There recently was a thread on the mark that killed a coin. Individuals posted coins where one mark ruined the coin for them. For them the eye appeal was greatly diminished by one flaw in surface preservation. Of course this is subjective. There was one particular gold coin that had a mark that was bothersome to the owner but I didn’t consider a tremendous distraction. So the connection between technical preservation and eye appeal is somewhat subjective. How shy of 100% is debatable.
That’s the best you’ve got?
Jimmy Cagney in "Public Enemy" 1935 ..... classic line.. well-played
Too often the term 'standards' is used to substitute for 'opinion'. We have general categories that coins fall into... MS, AU etc.... Within those categories, evaluation performed by trained individuals, attempts to show a level of quality. These are opinions, since definitive standards do not exist. I will say, that among trained individuals, these opinions are usually quite similar. When 'eye appeal' becomes part of the equation, it becomes even more subjective. Not everyone likes the same thing.... i.e. 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.' My opinion is that eye appeal should be left to the buyers and not part of a grade. Witness the prices reached for that technicolor quarter and a few other examples lately. The advent of AI, applied to written standards, will be the next level for technical grading of the quality of coins. Dings, scratches etc. can be defined and quantified, location values can be added. Even contrast between fields and devices is measurable. Is it a big project? Yes. However, once it arrives, it will be THE standard of the future. It will take a while, but just like TPG's and CAC, it will become reality and the basis on which coins are judged. Cheers, RickO
I've come to understand not to expect much from those who standards are less/lower than your own.. What's the point/use? I came to reason, I'm the only one that's needed to be pleased when it comes to what I collect. This way, everyone is happy, er....including me.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Great and enlightening input, thanks to all!
It is very interesting and refreshing to me that many are very committed to their own taste. IMHO that is what should come first. And, as fellow collectors, everyone should support others in what it is that turns their crank. Yet, on the other hand, there seems to be a tremendous dependency on validation through opinions from third party grading and Certified Acceptance Company. It is an interesting dynamic.
Anyway...my likely worthless opinion is my favorite reason to obtain and own a coin is "because I like it".
Many years ago I bought a 1907 $20 graded MS63 by PCGS from defunct FJ Vollmer. The coin had a seriously distracting mark, scratch, etc. but superlative luster. The grade was correct. I'd trust the graders and judge the coin as to whether you like it.
There are grading norms, grading conventions, and grading trends, but there are no grading standards. The length of a meter is a standard. The diameter of a quarter is a standard. People sure get hung up on that though. The market really wants there to be. Markets like predictably and certainty. For people who are active and current with the market, the system, while messy, works well enough.
Yesterday’s MS65 is today’s MS67 and tomorrow’s MS67+ CAC. Same coin, sometimes even the same graders.
All of that said, luster & eye appeal have probably gained a bit of ground vs surface preservation. People like pretty, flashy things. So do fish and birds.
Yesterday's 65 being today's 67 means somebody screwed up royally. But no biggie as long as the price didn't increase by 20x. The reason grading companies exist is the economics involved in the hobby. The reason CAC exist is economics. It has nothing to do with the joy of collecting. That number is suppose to represent something as far as condition, eye appeal which all translates into dollars when buying and selling. The uncertainties in grading begin to be more of an issue as the dollars involved increase. Whether the Liberty $10 I purchased (another thread) is a 62 or 63 is irrelevant to me since the price difference between the two is minor (around 10%) and I like the coin. Those differences become an increasingly more important factor as the premium between the grades grows from 10% to 100% or higher. My liking the coin begins to take a backseat to the number on the slab which translates into being able to sell it and not realizing a huge loss.
I also agree with this statement. As long as different graders with different opinions grade coins, there will always be controversy.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
I don’t care for the know it all people who try make generalizations about grading standards then vs now (if even such) or the 4 TPG’s accepted by eBay. You have different graders and too many other wild card factors in play. Every graded coin is unique and may be an A, B, or C coin in the grade range. I make my own conclusions based on decades of experience and activity in the business. If your unable to evaluate your material and draw your own conclusions then RCI may not be for you.
Do stay in a range of risk zone that fits your budget and is comfortable for you. Get some experience in submitting material to our hosts.
For what I collect, minor contact marks which have a noticeable weight in the TPG label are a lot less important to me than other attributes. However, due to market pricing, I have to make it more important that I would prefer though there almost no coins in the entire series above mid-MS grades.
For anywhere near the same money, I prefer lightly circulated coins with "originality" and fuller detail (as opposed to just a supposed full strike) over MS coins without one or both.