Smoothing out liner coins in high grade, A new proposal
nugget369
Posts: 56
I am not advocating this idea for generic, lower and mid grade examples because coin values here change very little from one grade to the next and nobody really should care about a PQ62. We don't need a 1924 MS63.7 Saint that one grader calls a 63 and two other graders call a 64, that's just a 64.
My idea calls for any coin that meets a minimum grade set for it's particular series and date would then be examined by additional graders on site, preferably five total and an average score would then be awarded. This minimum grade parameter would vary with the objective to achieve fractional grades only at the highest virtual grade for each specific coin series and date.
Take for example another 1924 Saint only this time a choice specimen that the original graders score a 67,66 and 66 respectively. Then the remaining two graders examine it and give it an additional 67 and 66. Take the average and you have a MS66.4. This coin would be interpreted as a tweener or high end 66 and it's value in the marketplace could be adjusted accordingly.
Under the current grading system this coin would simply be a 66 or on a good day a 67. The difference here is a whopping $ 5000 in value. I contend that the average score from 5 graders is certainly more accurate than rounding it to the nearest point from 3 graders.
I would set the minimum fractional scoring parameters as follows
Common Saints 1923-D-1928 MS66
Kennedy Half Dollars 1964-1970 MS66
Morgan Dollars 1880-S MS67
Flying Eagle Cents 1856-1858 MS65 Ect Ect What do you all think?
My idea calls for any coin that meets a minimum grade set for it's particular series and date would then be examined by additional graders on site, preferably five total and an average score would then be awarded. This minimum grade parameter would vary with the objective to achieve fractional grades only at the highest virtual grade for each specific coin series and date.
Take for example another 1924 Saint only this time a choice specimen that the original graders score a 67,66 and 66 respectively. Then the remaining two graders examine it and give it an additional 67 and 66. Take the average and you have a MS66.4. This coin would be interpreted as a tweener or high end 66 and it's value in the marketplace could be adjusted accordingly.
Under the current grading system this coin would simply be a 66 or on a good day a 67. The difference here is a whopping $ 5000 in value. I contend that the average score from 5 graders is certainly more accurate than rounding it to the nearest point from 3 graders.
I would set the minimum fractional scoring parameters as follows
Common Saints 1923-D-1928 MS66
Kennedy Half Dollars 1964-1970 MS66
Morgan Dollars 1880-S MS67
Flying Eagle Cents 1856-1858 MS65 Ect Ect What do you all think?
0
Comments
helpful for many collectors on coins where the value jumps considerably from one
grade to the next.
Dealers often ask for and get a premium price for PQ coins, and I'm sure serious coins
usually sell for what they're worth at auction as there are plenty of interested and
knowledgeable bidders present, but the average collector probably has a hard time
getting a premium price when they go to sell their PQ coin. If an MS64 goes for $100
and an MS65 goes for $1,000, the collector will find it tough getting anywhere near
the halfway point for their PQ MS64 example.
Now, I'll throw in an alternate idea that would help to get a smoother progression
of grades and pricing - I've always found the 1-70 point grading scale sort of odd, and
I like the metric system way of doing things, so...
How about a 100-point grading scale?
Keep the grades from PO01 to AU-58 as they are.
If a coin is BU, it gets 60 plus a possible 1-10 points for each of four grading
characteristics; strike, luster, marks and eye-appeal.
Thus, a coin could be graded like this:
60 because the coin is uncirculated
7 for a fairly strong strike (for the issue)
10 for unimprovable, eye-popping luster (for the issue)
5 for average hits and scuffs (using a well-defined technical scale)
7 for better than average eye-appeal (obviously subjective, but still useful)
---
89 total grade
We are currently entrenched in the 1-70 scale, but I'll bet if a Progressive
Coin Grading Service offered the option (or perhaps the addition) of 100-point
grading, that it just might fly. They get to write the book on 100-point
grading and, if it catches on, could benefit financially as many more coins
might be regraded from people trying to get a small bump up in the larger
scale for undergraded coins.
Ken