"Finest known"

Sunnywood

Here's something that drives me crazy. Let's say a coin is pop 22/0 at PCGS, and the same date & grade is pop 18/2 at NGC. A dealer has the coin in a PCGS holder, representing one of the 22 grading submissions at that grade. The dealer advertises the coin as "FINEST KNOWN."

The coin is NOT NOT NOT the "finest known." It is not even the "finest certified." It is not even "tied for finest certifed." A more accurate description would be "tied for finest certified at PCGS." Why do people say "finest known" when it is not even remotely applicable !!!

I see this all the time and it drives me crazy !!! In orderf to say "finest known," you have to have definitive information on all known condition census examples, including any uncertified examples. Just because there's a "zero"on the right side of the slash (e.g. "pop 22/0"), does not mean it is the "finest known."

Sunnywood

JrGMan2004

And on top of that, Finest Known, like grading, is very subjective... There could be a PCGS MS67 and a PCGS MS65 coin, and I could say that the MS65 is the finest known, because it has attractive toning, and great eye appeal, and say that because Mr. MS67 is a dipped out lifeless piece that just has less hits...

FatMan

Nothing but Hype. But to the registry crowd who deal in numbers on slabs it is the "finest known". Presently no one can beat it and that's what it is all about.

tradedollarnut

That's why I like to research the history of a series ... find out what the real wondercoins are. If it was considered finest know 30 years ago, 20 years ago, ten years ago and is still up there ... then odds are it is indeed the finest known.

These days coins are jumping two grades or more on resubmission. Sad, but true.

stman

Agreed. And how about when they use the population of the "Star" designation in NGC holders? It's a hype that doesn't agree with me.

I mean, how many coins are out there that haven't and won't be submitted for this designation? And frankly.... who cares!!!!

I do like the coins I've bought with the "*" but this hype with populations for it is a bit ridiculous IMO.

Sunnywood

George, that is certainly true. For example, I own several condition census examples of the two famous 1866/1866 repunched date shield nickel varieties (FS-001, Breen's "18666" and FS-001.1, Breen's "11886666"). For the FS-001.1, I have an NGC MS65 and a PCGS MS64. The PCGS coin is superior technically and in eye appeal, and it is a very early die state that shows wonderful detail at the date. It is the finest specimen known to me, despite the number on the holder, and it may well be the "finest known."

Another area of abuse are pops that are divided by attributions. For example, there are proofs graded CAM and DCAM. A coin cani be 1/0 as a CAM, but there could be DCAMS, and there could be non-CAMS at higher grades. The pop reports are becoming difficult to navigate. What is finer, an MS64RD, and MS65RB or an MS66BN ??? A PR66, a PR65CAM, or a PR64DCAM??? An NGC PF66CAM, a PF65DCAM or a PF65*CAM ???

Best,
Sunnywood

braddick

Same frustration when an ad states a coin is unique and he has more than one of them for sale.

Sunnywood

LOL braddick, love that ... hard to believe, but it DOES happen !!!

JrGMan2004

<< <i>Same frustration when an ad states a coin is unique and he has more than one of them for sale. >>

But, that can be truthfully said Every coin is unique in it's own way...

jbsteven

Barry Stupler is the worst on Ebay of the "Finest Known" hype crowd.

Sunnywood

yeah, and he's a former ANA governor, go figure.

Russ

My PCGS PR68DCAM Accented Hair is pop 8/0 at PCGS and pop 7/1 at NGC. It IS the finest known, though. How do I know? Just because.

Russ, NCNE

keets

"Finest Known" is one of those hype-marketing tools that's BS, as most of them are. more accurately they should be called highest graded.

al h.

mr1931S

I don't think "finest known" has much meaning for a coin that has millions or billions of brothers and sisters.

100proof1957

Finest known should be POP 1 and none higher !
no star or any crappola like that.

Pr68 Cam Linky from 1957 in an NGC holder POP 10,i own one,It is tied for the Finest known with 9 others.

Would i hype it as the finest known ?

Nope,its a nice low pop coin !

JrGMan2004

<< <i>Finest known should be POP 1 and none higher !
no star or any crappola like that.

Pr68 Cam Linky from 1957 in an NGC holder POP 10,i own one,It is tied for the Finest known with 9 others.

Would i hype it as the finest known ?

Nope,its a nice low pop coin ! >>

Not necessarilly... then you get into, well, it's a Pop 1 at PCGS, but a Pop 3 at NGC... so, which one is the "Finest Known"? And that discounts the possibility of there being an uncertified coin that blows all 4 coins away... I know in certain series, this is very easilly possible, particularly Early American Copper, Silver, and Gold, but especially Copper and Silver...

foodude

This drives me nuts too. I don't know of any remedy for the problem.

Too bad it isn't practical to get the top sets in each series together for a show of. In the end, it has to be the coins that make the sets, and show which are the finest known.

DHeath

That's why I like to research the history of a series ... find out what the real wondercoins are.

Smart post.

ER

<< <i>Same frustration when an ad states a coin is unique and he has more than one of them for sale. >>


It might in a unique holder.

But if a coin is truly unique, then it 's got to be finest known, right?

fountainheadgold

Excellent Thread, this has bothered me as well

tradedollarnut

Finest known is always subjective - except for perhaps a few extreme cases. Some of us value certain attributes more than others and it would be unusual for us to sum up all those attributes exactly the same.

I have a pop 3/0 Seated Dollar in gem. At one point or another, I've owned all three of that date. I kept the one I liked the best and sold the others. One was darn close and I had the previous owner look at mine and say he liked his much better. There wasn't much I could say - I preferred the one I kept and consider it the finest in my mind, which is all that matters to me.

Sunnywood

Agreed TDN. Glad I got to agree with you this weekend LOL !!!

tradedollarnut

morgannut2

TDN makes a great point, but IMHO there are other factors in my decision making of one coin over another as finest known than taste. For example, I'd prefer to have one of the RAREST KNOWN Morgans with say DMPL/PL surfaces, than a much higher graded "finest known" coin in the Pop's of the same date, which might be very common without these unusual preserved surfaces. Or I'd prefer a totally original example, or a uniquely "eye appealing" bag-toned example, than pay megabucks for a Morgan that's dipped to grab that pop 1 label. In other words, altough today there is general agreement as to the 4 major factors determining grade and hence "finest known", I suggest that things will change in the years ahead. There will be additional, quantifable factors that TDN does not mention, but ironically many of his imaged coin's show--and in the future originality will be more fashionable again (for example) to the detriment of shiney coins with high plastic numbers!

Hoot

Excellent thread. I've always found "finest known" a misnomer when used as advertising hype, including the description of the vast majority of #1 registry sets. Personally, I believe there a few numismatists out there that know their series of interest and the history thereof to be qualified to way such a thing. I also think that few series are even known boradly enough to have such claims made of them. The problem gets worse and worse, the more modern a series is.

Hoot

oreville

ttt

lcoopie

could they really mean
finest known.... to me
and not
finest known... to everyone

Advertising is usually not truthful