Insert idea

..

I had an idea I thought might make slabbed coins a bit more "interesting" as to how/why they are graded the way they are. When you buy diamonds, raw or mounted, you usually get an appraisal/certification with the said diamond/s. This certification usually has a diagram of the top/side/bottom with "tick marks" that show where the imperfections/flaws are on the diamond/s. I was wondering if this might be a good idea for the insert on the back of the coin to have a small diagram that marks where the flaws are on the coin? I know I can look at many coins and have no idea where the flaws are (unless they are obvious). I think coins in the $2,000+ range might be good targets for this type of a service........and it might help us understand what the grader saw and why the coin graded the way it did.

JBK

I think there are too many potential "flaws" to be detailed on a label, but grader's notes online with the TV might be useful.

Then again, I've heard that the time spent on each coin is usually very short so extra notes might not be feasible.

ShaunBC5

I think it’d be cool if they’d do something with Modern coins like they do with ancients (of which I own zero slabbed) where they rate strike and other characteristics. As far as diagramming defects, I think coin imperfections are quite a bit different from diamond imperfections since most were caused after creation (as compared to already existing within the stone).
I don’t know, though. It would give us a lot more to argue about.

TomB

I guess if enough folks are willing to pay a substantially higher fee for grading and wait significantly longer for coins to be returned then it may have some utility. However, I doubt that will be the case.

The_Dinosaur_Man

Something of that sort could be applied to the online certificate when you look it up, like a TruView, but it would have to be an add-on to the submission. Someone at the grading company would need to take the time to compare the submitted piece to an example that is a perfect 70 from the die used to strike the submitted piece.

jmlanzaf

@TomB said:
I guess if enough folks are willing to pay a substantially higher fee for grading and wait significantly longer for coins to be returned then it may have some utility. However, I doubt that will be the case.

This is the issue. How many people will pay $250 for grading?

ctf_error_coins

Unneeded as the the TruView has that information.

ricko

I would agree with @TomB.... Such added information would increase grading time, and elevate the cost prohibitively. That being said, if the service were offered as a selection, ahead of time, and the cost indicated, allowing collectors to choose it as an option, that would be fine. Just not as a standard service. Cheers, RickO

joeykoins

It's an idea.
Since the cost is the issue. How bout if one would receive an substantial discount for the legacy members? The ones that contributed or spent a certain amount of money?

TomB

@joeykoins said:
It's an idea.
Since the cost is the issue. How bout if one would receive an substantial discount for the legacy members? The ones that contributed or spent a certain amount of money?

Soooooo...you suggest folks who are connected or have previously spent significant sums of money should be able to get added benefits and reduced wait time and have the great bulk of the common population pay for it through longer wait times and increased fees? It sounds to me like you have a future in politics!

yosclimber

Diamonds are graded numerically in several categories:
weight, color, cut (shape), clarity, flaws.
The flaws can be tiny, so a map may be helpful.
They tend to be harder than almost anything they contact, so they don't need a surface wear grade like coins.

Usually coins get an overall numeric grade,
and in copper MS series they get a 3 category color grade
and a 0/1 strike indicator grade in some series (FB/FSB, FH, FBL).
Given how wear can be variable, the coin photo tends to be very helpful in addition to the usual single grade.

For NGC Ancients, they get separate numeric 1-5 grades for surface and strike, plus a 0/1 for style.

jesbroken

It would be no delay to the grading process. The graders merely press buttons with several selections or just record their grading as to 3 or 4 reasons and have that added by a non professional to the tv process long after coin w/grade returned, as is currently the process. As soon as the system is in place it could be fine tuned. Just a thought. This should in no way hold up grading process as the actual work could be done by a non-professional and made available
Month later.

jmlanzaf

@jesbroken said:
It would be no delay to the grading process. The graders merely press buttons with several selections or just record their grading as to 3 or 4 reasons and have that added by a non professional to the tv process long after coin w/grade returned, as is currently the process. As soon as the system is in place it could be fine tuned. Just a thought. This should in no way hold up grading process as the actual work could be done by a non-professional and made available
Month later.

That is NOT what the OP proposed. And the less detail it has, the less value added there is.

You will also increase the dissatisfaction of the submitters. Instead of just arguing that it should be a 66 instead of 65, they will argue it should be be 5 for luster instead of a 4, 4 for strike rather than a 3 etc.

MasonG

You could probably get most whatever you want, but you'd have to pay for it. I bet PCGS has thought long and hard about what most people would actually be willing to pay for.

jmlanzaf

@MasonG said:
You could probably get most whatever you want, but you'd have to pay for it. I bet PCGS has thought long and hard about what most people would actually be willing to pay for.

You trust a business to know their business?