ANACS Net Grading

TommyType

The more I look at ANACS net grades, the more I go "Hmmmm". It sometimes seems that the "details" grades are chosen to be just high enough that they can net it to what the coin deserved anyway!

One of my personal examples is below. I graded it myself as F-15, shot at VF-20 before sending it in. I admit I may have been a little low.....too much attention on full Liberty.

ANACS net graded it due to the scratches on the reverse....actually two fairly significant dings....one beside the eagle's neck, and the other under the final S in States.

When I graded it, I ignored the dings on the assumption that a F+ coin doesn't really have to have perfect surfaces.

What gets me is that there is NO WAY I would call this EF details. It looks like ANACS also decided that the dings were not that significant, but then over-graded the details so they could downgrade to what the coin might grade anyway!!

Some questions for this more experienced group:

1) Agree or disagree with the "details" grade?
2) Agree or disagree with the final net grade?
3) In your experience, does ANACS sometimes overstate the "details" grade in order to be able to give a higher "net" grade?
4) And finally, what would PCGS or NGC do with this coin? Would they really bag it for the "scratches", or quietly net the grade?

Any opinions appreciated. I've had the coin for quite a while, (it was one of my first $100+ coins), and while the VF-30 grade was initially a pleasant surprise, I sometimes think I would have been happier if they would have just called it "VF-20", and left it at that!

mrdq

Looks EF according to ANA grading standards book to me.

kieferscoins

<< <i>And finally, what would PCGS or NGC do with this coin? Would they really bag it for the "scratches", or quietly net the grade? >>



Bag it.

Cameron Kiefer

TommyType

Two responses, and already my whole premise is blown away.

stman

<< <i>And finally, what would PCGS or NGC do with this coin? Would they really bag it for the "scratches", or quietly net the grade? >>



I don't know how PCGS or NGC are on seated material, but from what I've seen on many Bust halves they very well
could/would have quietly net-graded it down a bit.

xbob

<< <i>Two responses, and already my whole premise is blown away. >>



I'll add another... I showed a 1858 flying eagle cent to a bunch of dealers at the last Baltimore show and they spot graded it XF, which I agreed with based on my limited knowledge and Photograde. I sent it to ANACS and they gave it a VF with NET F 12 for corrosion and cleaning. I had no clue it had been cleaned and apparently neither did anybody else I showed it to. I should have sold it at the show I guess but it is a family hand me down. I still have it and like it.

So ANACS didn't up my grade - just the opposite.

TommyType

<< <i>Looks EF according to ANA grading standards book to me. >>



Yeah....I guess at the time I was using Photograde as my primary grading guide.

They state for VF-20: "LIBERTY will be complete with weakness showing only at bottom of 'BE'"
And for EF-40: "LIBERTY will be sharp".

Based on that, this wouldn't make 20 since LIBERTY is pretty much obliterated between the L and T. The ANA grading guide is nearly as stringent for EF-40, but more lenient for VF-20.

Like I said, I probably under graded based on that little word "Liberty", while the rest of the coin might be better.

My engineering mind would be happier if grading were a science, instead of an art.

mozin

PCGS and NGC would likely body bag this coin. I see the detail as VF25 and I would net grade it to F12 because of the damage.

The only net graded coins I want to own are those that are at least R4+; even then I tend to dispose of them as quickly as possible. I simply do not like damaged coins and they are always harder to sell.

I would rather have a PCGS XF40 than an ANACS net AU50.

littlejohn

pcgs would body bag it. i think

Wolf359

Yes, ANACS net grading is always controversial. I think they try to take the surface down to the point where the damage, cleaning, etc
would be removed and that becomes the net grade. So if you pocket pieced the coin and let additional circulation take place, the damage
would no longer be visible at VF30 in their opinion.

Cratylus

Personally, I like the fact that ANACS will holder problem coins. However, I do not like the whole "Net grading" specification on the slab. To me, it's equivalent to "market grading." Attempting to say how much the problem takes away from the overall grade or appeal of a coin isn't a matter to be decided by a group of professional graders. ANACS should simply state something like the following: "AU50 Details, Whizzed" or "EF40 Details, Dipped" or "VF25 Details, Corroded, Scratched" and let the marketplace determine how much the coin is worth.

Baley

Cratylus, I disagree with you on that, I value ANACS opinion on how severe the damage is.

Example, if a coin (say a bust half dollar) is "Unc details, cleaned", that doesn't tell me nearly as much as

"Unc. details, cleaned, net AU55" (which would mean very minor cleaning, such as a gentle wipe with a soft cloth leaving a few light hairlines) or

"Unc. details, cleaned, net EF40" (which would mean severe, abrasive cleaning, with obvious hairlines covering the whole coin)

NCS will holder a coin with just the detail grade and leave it up to the buyer and seller to value the damage.

TommyType, I like your seated dollar, and think ANACS did a good job grading it.

KurtHorn

Looks about right to me...

majorbigtime

Sometimes ANACS can be too harsh in notations and net grades.

The only coin I ever cracked out and resubmitted was a 1901 S quarter ANACS slabbed as "scratched" net G-04. The scratch was small, on the earle's shield.

Cracked it out and sent to PCGS--came back as G-06!!

BillJones

The coin has close to EF detail, but overall it's got a really scruffy look to it. It seen circulation and then it has been banged around a lot in a bag with other silver dollars IMO. I think that the “scratched” comment goes beyond the marks by the eagle’s head that you mentioned. I’d agree that that net grade is VF, although I’d be more included toward VF-20 or 25 than 30.

The trouble is many collectors would prefer to have a VF-30 coin with good eye appeal and far fewer marks than this piece with more “meat” (detail) but lots of marks. For that reason the ANACS description does provide collectors with a mind’s eye picture of the coin than if you just net graded it to VF-30.

You might not like the ANACS system, but it’s the best we can do in numismatic shorthand with damaged coins.

mirabela

Most of what I think about ANACS and that particular coin has been said, but I'll add this -- while I appreciate them holdering & net grading, and think the details grades are usually pretty right-on, I think the net grades are often rather gracious. The coins in question most often don't have the appeal of a problem- free example of the same grade they net it, though I've seen a few exceptions. Heritage recently had a bust quarter with EF details, busted down to F15 for scratches and whizzing. It was a pretty coin, and looked from their bad pics to have some attractive color. It went for strong VF money and I suspect the buyer will be pleased.

boyhowdy

I used to buy a lot of ANACS net graded Barber dimes. Back when they started at the actual technical grade and
netted to a lower grade. Now it seems they have moved one rung up the ladder. They assign the technical
grade as the net grade and fluff up the details grade.

Steve

oreville

I think ANACS was too lax on that coin. VF details net Fine to me. The problem is that the reverse looks better than the obverse details wise. I wonder if ANACS forgot to look at the obverse.

I agree with TommyType.

JrGMan2004

Just my thoughts on the coin...

While the surfaces are a bit rough, the wear isn't that heavy, and seems to be in line with an XF details grade...