I are confused...

ccrdragon

When did the definition for 'BU' change from 'Brilliant Uncirculated' to 'Butt Ugly'???

Maybe I'm too strict on grading, but I thought that brilliant uncirculated meant that the coin looked like it just came off the mint presses with full lustre and no traces of toning, haze, etc. Once a coin acquires toning, then it can be uncirculated, but it CANNOT be 'brilliant uncirculated'.

In my opinion, neither of these coins qualify for the BU designation (unless you use the second definition ):

Hazy

or

Toned

Am I just being too much of a purist or do other agree with me?

As a secondary question, does anyone know what happened to seller ASYN on ebay? It used to be a couple of years ago, you could trust his descriptions of his coins to be accurate, but now I see auctions for coins that he is calling UNC that clearly show wear/rub in the pictures and I wouldn't grade a lot of his UNC's any higher than XF? Did Robert (I think that's who used to run the id) turn the auctions over to a flunky or did he just give up and go with the majority of the sellers who routinely overgrade thier coins?

kuhli

First coin, not sure how much of it is haze, how much of it is poor photography skills. Second one, definitely not "brilliant" (but still a pretty coin)

As for ASYN, I quit looking at his auctions awhile back, as his postage/handling charges have become a joke.

GDJMSP

<< <i>When did the definition for 'BU' change from 'Brilliant Uncirculated' to 'Butt Ugly'???

Maybe I'm too strict on grading, but I thought that brilliant uncirculated meant that the coin looked like it just came off the mint presses with full lustre and no traces of toning, haze, etc. Once a coin acquires toning, then it can be uncirculated, but it CANNOT be 'brilliant uncirculated'.

In my opinion, neither of these coins qualify for the BU designation (unless you use the second definition ):

Am I just being too much of a purist or do other agree with me? >>



That's the problem with using adjectival descriptions - what the same word means to one person means entirely something else to another. Toning should not, technically does not, affect the grade of a coin at all. For example - if the coin is worthy of the grade of MS65 it doesn't matter if it is toned or blast white. A 65 is a 65 - period. That doesn't mean you have to like the coin just because of its grade - but the grade simply is what it is.

By the way - I used MS65 because that is generally the grade a coin must be worthy of to be called BU - at least in my opinion. Others might disagree and say MS63 is BU.

theboz11

as I understand it(US Stndards)Unc is MS-60-62 ,BU is a MS-63-64 quality coin, Gem Unc is a 65-66 and a Choice gem Unc is a 67. Tone on the coin is not supposed to affect the GRADE of the coin , unless artificial..

GDJMSP

That's a perfect example of the problem of using adjectives to describe the grade of a coin. I can think of a few hundred folks who use the following comparisons -

UNC = MS60 - 62
BU = MS63/64
Choice BU = MS65/66
Gem BU = MS67 & up

As for me personally - I prefer
UNC = 60-64
BU = 65-66
Gem BU = 67 & up

Steve27

I agree that a BU coin should have all of its original luster, but that's not how the grading companies see it.

This coin may be BU, you just can't tell becauce of the picture.

theboz11

steve, unless you know were the high point on the coin is ,and look for a break in luster and wear, it is extremely difficult to tell.

Shipcoin

As a secondary question, does anyone know what happened to seller ASYN on ebay? It used to be a couple of years ago, you could trust his descriptions of his coins to be accurate, but now I see auctions for coins that he is calling UNC that clearly show wear/rub in the pictures and I wouldn't grade a lot of his UNC's any higher than XF? Did Robert (I think that's who used to run the id) turn the auctions over to a flunky or did he just give up and go with the majority of the sellers who routinely overgrade thier coins? -I bought from him recently two coins, described as UNC and they are really so, I like them, as for his shipping charges, they looks for me more acceptable than charges of other Canadian sellers.

ccrdragon

My main complaint about the coin pictured above is what looks to be a fingerprint on the reverse of the coin - over and above the denomination.

ccrdragon

Nickolai - I agree that some of the stuff that he's selling is truly UNC - I have 3 coins on my watch list now! It just seems that he has gotten as loose as some of the bottom feeders on his grading and that's a real dissapointment. As for the shipping, I just take that into account when I bid and adjust my max bid lower.

spinaker2000

I looked a some SA coppers he has listed. I didn't see one that looked any better than XF-AU and they were listed as UNC. I have gotten some nice ones from him in the past and his pics were bad then too.

traderdave

May I add that the Canadian shipping rates are far higher (& offer less) than in the US. Insurance is not available unless you go to express post and pay around $12 instead of about $3.50 Stateside. Add to that a fuel cost for transportation at about a dollar more a gallon, & you have to realize we just have it GOOD! Of course, all that is changing, too. Ya'll know which way.