Why I wouldn't buy IHC'S sight unseen

IrishMike

Both of these are up for sale at Teletrade, both are PCGS red 64's. Would you say there is a lot of latitude in the grading?

1890

1870

toothpuller

That 90 sure looks poor Mike and the reverse fingerprint is certainly more than faint. Lots of small spots and specks too. The 70 really isn't that bad. Its a tough date to find nice. Could be a big toning spot on the reverse ribbon which some people find problematic. I bought a 1884 MS65RD on Teletrade not too long ago and was very pleased. Their imaging is pretty decent at this point and their ease in making the transaction [vs B&M or Heritage] made it a pleasant experience.

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

WHAT YOU SEE ....IS WHAT YOU GET

As a informed collector,I would recommend buying only PCGS Ms 66 red IHC.They are always in demand and the price has been constantly rising.They are usually consistently graded.Expect to pay a premium!

Stewart

Pushkin

Mike,

Yes, but what you have shown is so typical. In several posts over the weekend I made similar comments. The 63s, 64s,65s RDs that I have/have seen are all over the place - a few are nice, but most abysmally graded. My personal opinion is that about 70% of th e population are misgraded - only my opinion based on anecdotal evidence. My solution is too look for nice BNs - there are many beautiful 65s and 66s out there that nobody wants - they are orphans because of the "RED CRAZE". I'll take them anyday over those ugly, spotted, fingerprinted RDs. And, the choice BNs are great buys.

As for MS-66 RDs, well, that's good advice I suppose if you have a Daddy Warbucks pocket book.

prooflike

Obviously if the coins have such a wide variance of grading/slab, patience and research is necessary to find the right/PQ coins.

BigD5

The first coin technically grades a certain grade, and the slabbing co. gives the coin that grade. This coin should sell for way below market value for a 64 of that date. We all talk about coins getting "bumped" for having postive eye appeal, or toning by the services, couldn't this coin be a candidate for a downgrade? It gets too complicated. Just slab 'em where they grade, and let the market put a monetary value to the coin.
The second coin looks real nice, but it doesn't look full red, and the reverse is rather mushily struck. I do like the look of it though.

shylock

The 1870 is a beauty and I'm trying to figure out why it's a 64. The right side of the wreath is weak but you see that on many key dates in 65 holders. Maybe that and few too many light scratches in the fields kept the grade down. It does look dark like so many 1870 RD graded examples but you never know with Teletrade images. The obverse looks really PQ for a 64.

shylock

Stewart -- besides the cost factor of 66RDs, just finding them has become tough the last couple of years. PCGS really is consistent at that grade level with Indian cents, as anyone who's tried upgrading a PQ 65 can attest.

IrishMike

Paul, as you know I own several PCGS 64's, that one looks nicer than any one that I own. Teletrades copper pictures are always darker then the coin appears. While it might not go 65 it is at the upper end of the 64 scale.

Stewart, I love to look at 66's, but they are very rare and hard to find. Absolutely PCGS seems to grade them tough and consistently. Personally I like to spread my funds around a bit more than buying 66's would allow. It's that or keep on working for another 10 years.

Pushkin

But why is PCGS (and NGC) so inconsistent with MS-64 and 65 RDs - that inconsistency is really a significant disservice to the collecting community - not just the numerical grade but the wide variation in RD and RB?

Elcontador

Mike,

I don't buy anything sight unseen unless there's a no questions asked no charge refund policy. Have you thought about buying a nice 5 RD? It's a lot cheaper than a 6 (as someone said, assuming you can find a 6). An 02 or an 09 won't set you back an obscene amount. I have an 09 PCGS 5 RD myself; it's a nice coin. There are too many contact marks on the ONE CENT on the reverse to upgrade, but the color & look is 'there.'

These coins are available. Most people want the better dates. Be patient. The things to avoid are carbon spots / flecks, contact marks on
the Indian's face & uneven color. I also like the 4 diamonds to jump out at me. You may get some contact marks on the ONE CENT in 5, just because this is IMO the most exposed part of the coin.

IrishMike

This thread is not about which coin I would buy, I own some 65's too, but I am interested in putting together a 64 Red set, a nice one just to see if it is possible at what I have determined is the total amount I will spend. I have one and a half raw sets too.

I meant this thread to be about the wide range copper in 64 seems to have. There are other examples in this same auction that you have to look at yourself and wonder what were they thinking. It seems that many graders are very reluctant to hand out 65 and 66's in this series, but obvioulsy are not ashamed to grade some of these dogs as 64's. This isn't a recent discovery, I seen some of these junk coins in 64 holders over the years and just scratch my head. The only reason I can think of is that these coins can't be graded in 7 seconds. They are just too tough to spend that short of time on them.

toothpuller

One of the biggest problems with IHC grading inconsistencies is that some coins will change appearance and degrade in the holders. I would think that even on his worst day a grader couldn't let a coin that looked like that 90 at encapsulation into a 64 holder. It looks like it was spit on and thumbed in. So we are looking at handling problems [seller/submittor/or grader] just prior to holdering. Also every now and then a recently doctored one slips by and later its original ugly appearance rears its head. Buying a copper coin in an older holder whenever possible makes the most sense. You pretty much know what it will look like down the line. Don't know what percent of the grading inconsistencies can be attributed to change in the holder, but these coins never stay with a happy owner and continually pop up again and again.

Pushkin

I would agree you can't grade a MS-64, ... 66 RD in 7 seconds, but if that is what the services are doing with these coins, then the whole grading process for this series is a sham. At the same time it doesn't take hours to reject most of the MS-64 and MS-65 RD "junk" that I think we've all seen.

I wonder if there should even be a RED designation below MS-66 or MS-65?

For me personally, I have a lot more trust in a MS+ BN, and they are starting to look better every day.

shylock

Four factors that play into the inconsistency of MS64s and especially MS65s in this series.

1) From what I read MS66 wasn't a grade often utilized in the early stages of certification. Graders still had a tendency to define coins as either gem or superb gem and it took a while to get a feel for which coins belonged "in between". As a result many of the really nice MS65s have been cherrypicked into 66 holders through the years, leaving a large pool of coins that have at least minor obvious problems in 65 holders. I'm sure many MS64s have also maxed out into 65 slabs.

2) This series is conditionally challanged -- they're copper and they're small, and the quality of the alloy was very inconsitent from year to year. As a whole it probably gets market graded to some extent, or "graded on a curve". Spotting and toning seems to be tolerated a bit more by graders than other series, and their small size makes any imperfection stand out.

3) The same problem coins tend to recirculate over and over again. If you don't keep track of them there can appear to be 10X as many out there as really exist. Conversely, the really solid ones tend to find long term homes like Elcontador's 1909. Type set owners learn early on that a nice 65RD IH is not easy to find.

4) Though it's beginning to change, MS65s are still relatively inexpensive and graders are always aware of grades that represent a substantial price increase. With common date IHs the 65 to 66RD jump is the big leap. Some coins at the 64 and 65 level are probably more likely to slide.