I'm confused about designation for Canadian coin

toyonakataro

Hello. Please help me understand the disignation for Canadian coins. I thought there are 3 kind of coins=business strike, proof like coins, and SP(specimen? special proof?), but am I wrong?
Here's a link for a coin whitch was graded MS+PL by ANACS and also graded by ICCS as PL coin, but in this case, did ANACS regarded this coin as a business strike with proof like surface or did they wanted to say it's "PL" just like ICCS did?
Canadian coins are confusing because they also have cameo, heavy cameo version even for business strike.

shirohniichan

Most 1960's Canadian coins in high grade are prooflikes and not business strikes (the are many 1967 specimens from the $20 gold coin sets, also). I think ANACS designated the coin "MS" because they do not have "PL-67" in their grading system. They simply noted that it's a prooflike by adding the "PL" at the bottom. True business strikes in super high grade are rather scarce.

toyonakataro

I see, so both ANACS and ICCS graded this coin as PL in this case, right?
Do you think ICCS is most accurate in terms of designating MS/PL/SP ? I mean, do other grading services often misattribute MS coin as PL and vice versa when compared to ICCS?

docday2003

<< <i>I see, so both ANACS and ICCS graded this coin as PL in this case, right?
Do you think ICCS is most accurate in terms of designating MS/PL/SP ? I mean, do other grading services often misattribute MS coin as PL and vice versa when compared to ICCS? >>



yes

MyWorldCoinTypeSet

I see, so both ANACS and ICCS graded this coin as PL in this case, right?

Yes

Do you think ICCS is most accurate in terms of designating MS/PL/SP ?

Definitely.

PCGS does a good job of differentiating the business strikes (MS) from the high quality specimen (SP) coins produced up to 1953 and in 1964/1965. It does an ok job differentiating business strikes (MS) from prooflikes (PL) and the lower quality post 1970 specimens (SP) for most years. I don't think PCGS attemps to differentiate between prooflikes (PL) and the lower quality post 1970 specimens any more, excluding some early 1970's silver $1.

That said, even ICCS has problems for some years. The quality of prooflike (PL) coins varied greatly year to year. Without the packaging, sometimes it's near impossible to tell them apart. In some bad years, like 1968, many of the prooflikes (PL) look like business strikes (MS). In some good years, like 1971, many of the prroflikes (PL) look like specimens (SP).

toyonakataro

I think I had better stick to ICCS when I buy canadian coins, then.
Thanks for replies.

Clankeye

I think that's a good plan. I have great faith in ICCS.

Clankeye