Are grading charges applied to detail coins?

bsshog40

I don't submit coins to TPG's, so my question and opinion is basically out of curiosity. If a person sends in coins to be graded and it has some sort of damage such as scratched, cleaned, QT, etc..., are the grading charges still applied to the submitter? Personally, if they are, I would think that a grade should still be given along with the details listed. If they aren't, do you think that the submitter should be given the option to have a numerical grade added and charged?

MetroD

@bsshog40 said:
I don't submit coins to TPG's, so my question and opinion is basically out of curiosity. If a person sends in coins to be graded and it has some sort of damage such as scratched, cleaned, QT, etc..., are the grading charges still applied to the submitter? Personally, if they are, I would think that a grade should still be given along with the details listed. If they aren't, do you think that the submitter should be given the option to have a numerical grade added and charged?

Source: https://www.pcgs.com/faq

MFeld

Yes, the charge is the same as for a straight grade coin.

How would you propose that a specific numerical grade be assigned to a problem coin?

For example, you have a gorgeous 1924 Saint that would grade MS66, but for a giant scratch across half of the obverse - do you think there's a better alternative than the current one of grading the coin "MS60 detail, Obverse Scratch"?

Would you prefer "MS66 Detail Obverse Scratch"? And if you would, do you really think that would make a meaningful difference to most potential buyers? I don't, as I believe that buyers would care a lot more about how such coins actually look than about the numerical grade that accompanies the problem/issue with the coins.

jmlanzaf

They graded it... details and the main damage. While the submitter might want more, I don't think any more is required.

You can't turn "UNC details- environmental damage" into "MS65 if it weren't corroded" because you wouldn't necessarily know what the environmental damage is hiding. And I can't imagine that any sane person would pay more for a 65 details than a 63 details because the "details" is the dominant grading element.

Crypto

ANACS attempted this in the earlier days with NET grading trying to assign a weight to the problem and how the coin faced up. Ultimately the market rejected it clearly as it is no longer around

bsshog40

@MFeld said:
Yes, the charge is the same as for a straight grade coin.

How would you propose that a specific numerical grade be assigned to a problem coin?

For example, you have a gorgeous 1924 Saint that would grade MS66, but for a giant scratch across half of the obverse - do you think there's a better alternative than the current one of grading the coin "MS60 detail, Obverse Scratch"?

Would you prefer "MS66 Detail Obverse Scratch"? And if you would, do you really think that would make a meaningful difference to most potential buyers? I don't, as I believe that buyers would care a lot more about how such coins actually look than about the numerical grade that accompanies the problem/issue with the coins.

I would prefer "MS66 Detail Obverse Scratch". I think it would help with applying a value to the coin. Especially with much older classics that some would like to add to their collection and not being able to afford a straight graded example. Knocking the grade down 6 points doesn't really represent the condition of the coin if it did not have any problems.

bsshog40

@jmlanzaf said:
They graded it... details and the main damage. While the submitter might want more, I don't think any more is required.

You can't turn "UNC details- environmental damage" into "MS65 if it weren't corroded" because you wouldn't necessarily know what the environmental damage is hiding. And I can't imagine that any sane person would pay more for a 65 details than a 63 details because the "details" is the dominant grading element.

I can understand this with an environmentally corroded damaged coin, but my questioned was more aimed at scratches, toning, rim dings, etc....

jmlanzaf

@bsshog40 said:

@jmlanzaf said:
They graded it... details and the main damage. While the submitter might want more, I don't think any more is required.

You can't turn "UNC details- environmental damage" into "MS65 if it weren't corroded" because you wouldn't necessarily know what the environmental damage is hiding. And I can't imagine that any sane person would pay more for a 65 details than a 63 details because the "details" is the dominant grading element.

I can understand this with an environmentally corroded damaged coin, but my questioned was more aimed at scratches, toning, rim dings, etc....

Same issue. If I have graffiti on the cheek of the coin, am I supposed to ignore it and say "65 if it didn't have initials carved into it"? Toning would come under environmental damage. Rim damage, you could grade the rest of the coin. But that's about the only category and I still say "what's the point?"

bsshog40

@jmlanzaf said:

@bsshog40 said:

@jmlanzaf said:
They graded it... details and the main damage. While the submitter might want more, I don't think any more is required.

You can't turn "UNC details- environmental damage" into "MS65 if it weren't corroded" because you wouldn't necessarily know what the environmental damage is hiding. And I can't imagine that any sane person would pay more for a 65 details than a 63 details because the "details" is the dominant grading element.

I can understand this with an environmentally corroded damaged coin, but my questioned was more aimed at scratches, toning, rim dings, etc....

Same issue. If I have graffiti on the cheek of the coin, am I supposed to ignore it and say "65 if it didn't have initials carved into it"? Toning would come under environmental damage. Rim damage, you could grade the rest of the coin. But that's about the only category and I still say "what's the point?"

My point would be just accessing value of a coin. I've seen questionable toning on coins that could still be graded and as you stated, rim damage and scratches. I think it would be much easier to sell a coin with details if a numerical grade was attached to it. A buyer could use their own judgment of how the details affects the price they would pay. At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.
If it's already been tried and failed, then I guess the market already determined why it isn't done. Lol

jmlanzaf

@bsshog40 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@bsshog40 said:

@jmlanzaf said:
They graded it... details and the main damage. While the submitter might want more, I don't think any more is required.

You can't turn "UNC details- environmental damage" into "MS65 if it weren't corroded" because you wouldn't necessarily know what the environmental damage is hiding. And I can't imagine that any sane person would pay more for a 65 details than a 63 details because the "details" is the dominant grading element.

I can understand this with an environmentally corroded damaged coin, but my questioned was more aimed at scratches, toning, rim dings, etc....

Same issue. If I have graffiti on the cheek of the coin, am I supposed to ignore it and say "65 if it didn't have initials carved into it"? Toning would come under environmental damage. Rim damage, you could grade the rest of the coin. But that's about the only category and I still say "what's the point?"

My point would be just accessing value of a coin. I've seen questionable toning on coins that could still be graded and as you stated, rim damage and scratches. I think it would be much easier to sell a coin with details if a numerical grade was attached to it. A buyer could use their own judgment of how the details affects the price they would pay. At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.
If it's already been tried and failed, then I guess the market already determined why it isn't done. Lol

Except the number is irrelevant relative to the damage. And, frankly, the TPG's should not be encouraging such a price discrimination. A 65 with minor room damage will sell for more than a 67 with major rim damage. Making the number relevant is a value illusion.

MFeld

@bsshog40 said:

... At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.

>

Under your proposal, how could you research the value of a numerically graded coin with a bad scratch, harsh cleaning, altered surfaces, etc. (that would currently receive a detail grade) any better than you can under the current method of grading? Wouldn't you still need to know what the coin actually looked like and wouldn't the unique appearance of each coin still determine the value as it does now?

seatedlib3991

@bsshog40 . I don't do much coin submitting either but I think I understand your question.
You send a coin in and it is designated Damaged scratch VF . You are paying for an opinion, they are coin experts so why can't they put VF 20, or VF 30 or VF 35? the scratch does not change the wear on the coin and they have all ready been paid so what is the harm? James
Sorry if that isn't what you meant.

bsshog40

@MFeld said:

@bsshog40 said:

... At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.

>

Under your proposal, how could you research the value of a numerically graded coin with a bad scratch, harsh cleaning, altered surfaces, etc. (that would currently receive a detail grade) any better than you can under the current method of grading? Wouldn't you still need to know what the coin actually looked like and wouldn't the unique appearance of each coin still determine the value as it does now?

I hear what y'all are saying. My point was if I saw a coin I liked and say it was an MS65 coin with a value of $1000 No Details, but this one had a scratch. At least I had a starting point to determine what the coin would be worth to me with the damage.
Btw, I know appearance has it's place also, but just looking at a grade standpoint and average selling prices.
This is just hypothetical, not looking at anything.

braddick

The OP's suggestion would be akin to a food critic stating, "Although the chocolate cake was made using salt in place of sugar, if not having been so, would have been absolutely one of the best deserts ever eaten. Nine out of ten. Unfortunately, it was salty and unable to be consumed."

bsshog40

@braddick said:
The OP's suggestion would be akin to a food critic stating, "Although the chocolate cake was made using salt in place of sugar, if not having been so, would have been absolutely one of the best deserts ever eaten. Nine out of ten. Unfortunately, it was salty and unable to be consumed."

Not sure I agree with your analogy. The cake can be thrown out and made new with sugar. The coin can be removed from the holder but the details will not change. Lol

Old_Collector

I don't think that a net numerical grade is really workable, as there would be huge variation in what different collectors thought of the specific problem, best to stay with the MS details IMO.

It is a different situation with Roman coins, where NGC-A gives a grade plus standard strike and surface grade and notes graffiti or flan cracks for example. Same with Trade Dollar chop marks as in both situations those are anticipated and often valued by collectors of those items.

oldabeintx

On the point of charges, the TPG provides a valuable service regardless, as they do stipulate UNC, etc. And they have determined that the coin is genuine. And they have identified problems that an owner may have missed. If it is question of fairness, I suspect that Details coins take more of a grader’s time than a 65.

braddick

@bsshog40 said:

@braddick said:
The OP's suggestion would be akin to a food critic stating, "Although the chocolate cake was made using salt in place of sugar, if not having been so, would have been absolutely one of the best deserts ever eaten. Nine out of ten. Unfortunately, it was salty and unable to be consumed."

Not sure I agree with your analogy. The cake can be thrown out and made new with sugar. The coin can be removed from the holder but the details will not change. Lol

Okay, how about-
"He would have been an olympian swimmer if it wasn't for the fact he was out of shape and forty pounds over weight."

lermish

@bsshog40 said:

@MFeld said:

@bsshog40 said:

... At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.

>

Under your proposal, how could you research the value of a numerically graded coin with a bad scratch, harsh cleaning, altered surfaces, etc. (that would currently receive a detail grade) any better than you can under the current method of grading? Wouldn't you still need to know what the coin actually looked like and wouldn't the unique appearance of each coin still determine the value as it does now?

I hear what y'all are saying. My point was if I saw a coin I liked and say it was an MS65 coin with a value of $1000 No Details, but this one had a scratch. At least I had a starting point to determine what the coin would be worth to me with the damage.
Btw, I know appearance has it's place also, but just looking at a grade standpoint and average selling prices.
This is just hypothetical, not looking at anything.

ANACS does this and has for some time. They assign a grade and then list any issues.

jmlanzaf

@seatedlib3991 said:
@bsshog40 . I don't do much coin submitting either but I think I understand your question.
You send a coin in and it is designated Damaged scratch VF . You are paying for an opinion, they are coin experts so why can't they put VF 20, or VF 30 or VF 35? the scratch does not change the wear on the coin and they have all ready been paid so what is the harm? James
Sorry if that isn't what you meant.

And environmental damage? A 30 or 35 distinction may be made hard by porosity.

You're creating a situation where it is potentially harder to grade a details coin than a straight grade. Would you pay more for your more detailed details grade?

jmlanzaf

@braddick said:

@bsshog40 said:

@braddick said:
The OP's suggestion would be akin to a food critic stating, "Although the chocolate cake was made using salt in place of sugar, if not having been so, would have been absolutely one of the best deserts ever eaten. Nine out of ten. Unfortunately, it was salty and unable to be consumed."

Not sure I agree with your analogy. The cake can be thrown out and made new with sugar. The coin can be removed from the holder but the details will not change. Lol

Okay, how about-
"He would have been an olympian swimmer if it wasn't for the fact he was out of shape and forty pounds over weight."

How about: he would have been an Olympic champion if he hadn't drowned at the start?

TwoSides2aCoin

Yes. Similar to calling a TV repairman over because the television won’t turn on. He arrives and sees the set unplugged. We pay the service call fee and still have the problem. Only we can fix that problem. Or can we ?

braddick

@TwoSides2aCoin said:
Yes. Similar to calling a TV repairman over because the television won’t turn on. He arrives and sees the set unplugged. We pay the service call fee and still have the problem. Only we can fix that problem. Or can we ?

Except you are between paychecks and have not paid your electricity bill. You are unaware the power has been turned off.

bsshog40

@lermish said:

@bsshog40 said:

@MFeld said:

@bsshog40 said:

... At least with a numerical grade attached, some value of the coin can be researched. Without a grade, you're just left with making an assumption of what it might have been.

>

Under your proposal, how could you research the value of a numerically graded coin with a bad scratch, harsh cleaning, altered surfaces, etc. (that would currently receive a detail grade) any better than you can under the current method of grading? Wouldn't you still need to know what the coin actually looked like and wouldn't the unique appearance of each coin still determine the value as it does now?

I hear what y'all are saying. My point was if I saw a coin I liked and say it was an MS65 coin with a value of $1000 No Details, but this one had a scratch. At least I had a starting point to determine what the coin would be worth to me with the damage.
Btw, I know appearance has it's place also, but just looking at a grade standpoint and average selling prices.
This is just hypothetical, not looking at anything.

ANACS does this and has for some time. They assign a grade and then list any issues.

Ya, this is basically what I was talking about. I like that! I know there are circumstances when there can't be a grade determined by a TPG, but when it can be, why not!

braddick

@bsshog40 said:

@lermish said:

@bsshog40 said:

@MFeld said:

@bsshog40 said:

Ya, this is basically what I was talking about. I like that! I know there are circumstances when there can't be a grade determined by a TPG, but when it can be, why not!

Q: "Why not!"

A: Consistency.

seatedlib3991

@braddick. I am sorry but you are very bad at using an analogy. If cakes are your thing what you want to use is this. You want a 30th birthday cake for your wife. When you show up it says Happy 300th Birthday. Still a good cake but I wouldn't take it home.
If the Olympic swimmer thing is your choice you want to look at the difference between being the Bronze medal winner and the dude who came in 4th.
I just restated what I thought was being suggested. I never said I was for it. In fact I much prefer the current system. a few months ago I got an 1855-S Seated Quarter in a PCGS holder labeled VF Details Scratch. 90% of the people never looked past Detail. the next 9% just must have looked at the scratch. I assure you. if PCGS had put VF 35 detail (I have 6 other PCGS 35 coins it is an exact match for), I would either not own it now or would have had to pay double or triple. James
P.S. On the other hand I can see how the original submitter would have liked to get that money.

logger7

I heard someone say that the time spent on details coins is often more than on no problem coins; either way they have to be compensated for running a viable business.

jmlanzaf

@logger7 said:
I heard someone say that the time spent on details coins is often more than on no problem coins; either way they have to be compensated for running a viable business.

I said it WOULD be more if they had to both grade it and list the defects.

oldabeintx

I can’t quibble with ANACS assigning a numerical grade to circulated coins as an indication of wear. However, do they assign numerical grades to uncirculated coins? I would think not, or at least hope not.

lermish

@oldabeintx said:
I can’t quibble with ANACS assigning a numerical grade to circulated coins as an indication of wear. However, do they assign numerical grades to uncirculated coins? I would think not, or at least hope not.

As far as I can tell, they give Details Unc coins a blanket MS60 but my search was not exhaustive.

DisneyFan

I've just submitted two PCGS Genuine NOT GRADABLE coins to CACG for their Crossover service. One came back "as is" because it was defined as Graffiti which CACG does not holder. If it had been submitted raw, it would have been body bagged. The other came back as CAC G Details with a coin lookup that reads, Details Registry Value of AG3 and also gave a CPG Price Guide value.

I was charged for both opinions.

ms71

@braddick said:

@bsshog40 said:

@braddick said:
The OP's suggestion would be akin to a food critic stating, "Although the chocolate cake was made using salt in place of sugar, if not having been so, would have been absolutely one of the best deserts ever eaten. Nine out of ten. Unfortunately, it was salty and unable to be consumed."

Not sure I agree with your analogy. The cake can be thrown out and made new with sugar. The coin can be removed from the holder but the details will not change. Lol

Okay, how about-
"He would have been an Olympian swimmer if it wasn't for the fact he was out of shape and forty pounds over weight."

Or "most of the body is that of an Olympian swimmer, but one arm is in a cast".

ShaunBC5

I’d like all my coins to be graded MS70 with “years and years of wear” noted on the holder. Don’t call it an XF45 or VF12.
Sometimes I’ll see a details coin and wonder what it would have been without the PMD, but I think the TPGs are on the right track leaving it to me and the market to judge it beyond UNC or AU details.
Weren’t all coins graded by words until fairly recently? You bought an UNC or GEM UNC or whatever, and for details coins, the problem was also noted (or hidden) by the owner/seller.

logger7

I remember when the details coins came back in a "body bag" with an explanation for why; then around 20 years ago they started following Anacs example, indicating grade level if the submitter requested it in a holder. There are problem coins that are "just made it" and get a grade with the issues evident to most all people and sell as steep discounts.

braddick

Not all coins- just like not all human participants, should get a trophy.

jesbroken

I think the system of VF Details Cleaning is fine or Uncirculated Details scratch is fine also. Any further designation from individuals opinions would garner the same being graded different by every grader with absolutely no regularity. No single person can tell how much a harsh cleaning or damage or inscriptions may change the properties of metal in every instance. I am happy with them giving a rough grade at all. Then that's just my opinion.
Jim