Yet Another Newbie Question: Mint State?

TheShaman10

As a newb, the first thing that comes to mind when I hear Mint State is flawless. IOW, the condition the coin was in when it left the mint. Yet I see numerous examples of MS graded coins that have some sort of flaw. From a miniscule hairline scratch all the way up to a few big dings. Common sense tells me that if a coin is scratched, dinged, etc. then it is no longer Mint State. But, this type of damage is still allowable under ANA grading guidelines(as well as TPG's) to qualify as Mint State. Now, I do know that this is the norm and I accept the fact that even though a coin has some minor damage it can still have an MS grade. For some reason though, I still have a hard time giving a coin an MS grade when in my mind it truly isn't 'Mint State'. Does/Has anyone else been confused by this?

airplanenut

Hi,

A lot of those coins have been in bags and gotten back marks... sometimes dings such as reeding marks. The coins were in the bags when they left the mint, so technically, they are as they left the mint, sealed in a bag until released.

Also, you must realize that each coin is minted, and ejected into a giant vat of coins... they'll get beat up that way, too. Since MS70s are so hard to come by for most series', it is hard to find a coin that doesn't have some minor flaw to it... of course, the term mint state really only means there are no luster breaks and the coin hasn't been damaged.

Jeremy

kranky

Think of it this way: Mint State only means "no detectable wear".

cladking

Coins are not often perfect even as they leave the dies due to striking, planchet, and
die flaws. Once they do leave the dies it's impossible to know where they were damaged.
Many marks and scratches will be imparted right at the mint and more in transit. Nearly all
of this damage though will be inflicted from banging against other coins and counting and
handling equipment. There will be some of the sliding and moving against other surfaces
which sloughs off metal and appears as wear, but this wear will not accumulate sufficiently
to appear as wear. Wear accumulates on the high points first and is not really seen until
the luster is broken. "Uncirculated" too, is really as misnomer as a coin can be in circulation
for a while before it shows signs of wear.

These terms are synonymous and simply mean that the luster is intact even on the high points.

sinin1

If you just think "uncirculated", you will be better off


mint state covers the kinda ugly MS60 to the perfect MS70



there are 11 different levels of surface preservation/ strike / luster / eye appeal



what still gets me confused is BU , choice UNC, gem UNC

I used to think BU was about as good as it gets, now I know better

DHeath

It will help you to remember the coin below is mint state, essentially as struck.

TheShaman10

Thanks for the feedback guys, and sorry to take so long to respond. I had forgotten about what kind of treatment coins actually receive during the minting process. Doh! The suggestions about thinking 'no detectable wear' and 'uncirculated' will help a lot as I try to learn this whole grading scheme. BTW, I think I'm beginning to see why even 'old hats' have a hard time determining grades sometimes.

Steve27

Think of Mint State as the state it was in when it left the mint, and then go look at some mint sets. Most before 2001 were terrible (coins appeared to have been put through slot machines a few times before packaging).

razorface1027

Ditto: to all the above. In my early coin collecting days late 60's early 70's, I was always confused with a MS grading and the term UNCIRCULATED. Moreover, it was a R.S.Yeoman guide I always used, of course, old R.S. has pretty much been phased out and a variety of other grading companies standard's have been incorporated leaving someone like me ambivilant in the numismatic realm as far as grading is concerned. I first realized the differentiability using a "Uncirculated" GSA 1884-CC M.D. that my pop ordered from the GSA in 1972. It was, excuse the wording, BEAT TO HELL! I was then, led on a total misconception of how coins were graded until most recently when I delved into numismatics again. Now, back to the 1884-CC which is still, I think, in it's original GSA holder for I've recently submitted it to PCGS for holdering just a couple of weeks ago for the hell of it to see what MS it'll be returned, it will be interesting to see what they'll give it.


MINT, as defined by Webster's II:
context 1...synopsis..The place, the process and the like.
Here's the real deal as a verb transitive, minted, minting, mints...1) To produce(money) by stamping metal: coin 2)To invent or fabricate (a speech miNted for the ceremony)...Here's the DOUBLE real deal...I think. As a adjective...UNDAMAGED as if FRESHLY MINTED.

So, a more definitive context would be the term MINT as a adjective. CONFUSING HUH!