got grades

coinkat

Well, my coins came back and I will only make reference to those coins that may be of interest. I am not really that happy with the results (for reasons that are not completely apparent). The coins were submitted to ANACS. The 1746 Maundy set: 1d MS62, 2d MS 64, 3d MS64 and the 4d MS63. I thought two were lock 65. The 1900 set was 3 MS65 and 1 66. This was a nicely toned set that IMHO was more attractive that the 1893 set I bought from CIVITAS (CIVITAS, I really like that set and I am only using that as an example and point of reference).

I was very disappointed that ANACS did not recognize the 1745 LIMA Shilling variety (no bar in the A of LIMA) that is recognized by COINCRAFT. ANACS said "worn dies and it is not a variety"... well, I think they are WRONG. BTW, the coin graded AU58 which is a tough call. The other 1745 came back EF45. I submitted a 1758 that came back AU50 that was better... perhaps a 58. ANACS was very hard on the George II shillings. A George III 1787 was net graded as a AU55... no excuse for a net grade. The problem I see is the difference in grading standards across the pond. It seems that if a George II Shilling is graded EF45 or AU 50 by a US TPG...then it couldn't possibly be graded EF by British Standards. Well, if the TPG misses the grade, it just complicates the difference even further.

Probably the most satisfying coin was a 1652A French ECU that was graded EF40. It is nice and original and the type of coin I like.

One final comment, this was the worst submission in terms of the presentation of the coin in the slab. Too many coins were just not centered well in the slab.

SYRACUSIAN

<< <i>A George III 1787 was net graded as a AU55... no excuse for a net grade. The problem I see is the difference in grading standards across the pond. >>




Coinkat, I also got a result on a 1901 2drs from Crete ,as AU details, net AU55 ! It's too valuable not to be resubmitted to NGC.

I'd like to see a picture of this 1746 Maundy set.When will you finally learn to use a digital camera?

1jester

Coinkat, I'm very sorry to hear of your disappointing results from ANACS. It's awefully frustrating when you know a TPG service has made glaring errors. I know this feeling first-hand, as you remember. I can only offer my condolences, and perhaps also a suggestion to re-holder them at NGC. I just wonder what's going on at ANACS? If they're not accurate or consistent, they will end up driving away good customers, and then losing their so-far good reputation. I wonder if they're listening to this?

Steve27

"Too many coins were just not centered well in the slab. "

I get the impression that they don't have pre-cut inserts for small coins, like the Maundy 1P, and use a drill to cut a hole in a blank insert (which doesn't work very well).

CIVITAS

<< <i>I just wonder what's going on at ANACS? >>



Word is that ANACS is tightening their standards in an attempt to raise the value of their slabs on the market. This comes from a lightside dealer I work closely with, so it may not apply to their world coin grading standards, but I can't say for sure.