"In our experience, the best, most desirable coin is often not the highest graded."

RYK

From the latest installment of the Coin Rarities Online Road Report, a must read for anyone interested in, well, coins!

I dare not post such heresy on the Registry Forum, but it is a point worth repeating. My most instructive lesson was for my 1843-D $5. I owned one a few years ago in an NGC AU-58 holder, that I thought was accurately graded (okay, with my track record, it probably would 55 at PCGS) and original with a nice clean look. I later had the opportunity to purchase an AU-53 with a killer green-gold distressed surface look that, while technically had more circulation, had The Look™. Other coins in my collection have been downgraded to more appealing coins in a similar fashion.

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>Other coins in my collection have been downgraded to more appealing coins in a similar fashion. >>



I would recommend this all-day everyday, and twice on Sundays.

Longacre

<< <i>

<< <i>Other coins in my collection have been downgraded to more appealing coins in a similar fashion. >>



I would recommend this all-day everyday, and twice on Sundays. >>

Dahlonega

Agree !
Although I have had the opportunity to buy or actually owned higher graded dates in my core collection I have placed a few core coins (usually 55/58) that I like better and often even sold the higher graded coins.
I will try an analogy; some may prefer Anna Nicole and her superior measurements ie, (numerical grade) but, I want my coins to look like Princess Grace. Admittedly this makes more sense in certain series such as branch mint gold.

DHeath

Nice looking coin Robert. I like finding coins with a little juice left in them, and that's hard to do with coins in terminal holders.

RYK

For disclosure, board member, "Dahlonega", sold me the coin pictured below.

Edit: and mgoodm3 photographed it.

mgoodm3

I really like that 43.

leothelyon

The strike rules! So does originality!

Leo

NowhereMan

I think the most obvious grades where this is a true statement is the "downgrade" from MS60 to AU58.

I'm most familiar with Morgans, and it that series, there are many holdered 60's that are beat to hell with bag marks, and 2 points lower, there are beautiful coins with ever-so-light wear on the hair or breast, and super clean surfaces elsewhere.

And BONUS -- the 58 is substantially CHEAPER for many key dates than the 60.

Rex

BRdude

eye appeal is definately one of the most deciding factors. Love the looks of that gold

coinkat

terrific coin

ziggy29

<< <i>I think the most obvious grades where this is a true statement is the "downgrade" from MS60 to AU58.

I'm most familiar with Morgans, and it that series, there are many holdered 60's that are beat to hell with bag marks, and 2 points lower, there are beautiful coins with ever-so-light wear on the hair or breast, and super clean surfaces elsewhere.

And BONUS -- the 58 is substantially CHEAPER for many key dates than the 60. >>

IMO, this is only typically true for condition rarities. For coins that don't have a huge bump in price from 58 to 60, the nice 58s will usually sell for more than 60 money.

OKbustchaser

<< <i>

<< <i>I think the most obvious grades where this is a true statement is the "downgrade" from MS60 to AU58.

I'm most familiar with Morgans, and it that series, there are many holdered 60's that are beat to hell with bag marks, and 2 points lower, there are beautiful coins with ever-so-light wear on the hair or breast, and super clean surfaces elsewhere.

And BONUS -- the 58 is substantially CHEAPER for many key dates than the 60. >>

IMO, this is only typically true for condition rarities. For coins that don't have a huge bump in price from 58 to 60, the nice 58s will usually sell for more than 60 money. >>



That's because the "nice 58's" are in 62 to 64 holders.

shirohniichan

I couldn't agree more.

I mentioned this in another thread, but recently a dealer pointed out the technical merits of a coin he had (and wanted retail+ for) and called mine "crappy". He may have been correct when both coins were put under the 15x loupe he uses, but based on eye appeal I still like mine better (and that I paid far less for).

ricko

When chasing labels, grades, plastic - objectivity blurs and art does not exist. The true collector (as opposed to a neophyte, a lazy collector, status seeker or flipper) buys the coin, for its beauty, rarity, fit (as in 'it fits what I am collecting) and, in some cases, price. Cheers, RickO
edited to add: Oh yes, very nice coin RYK...

RichieURich

I certainly agree with this advice. I was helping a customer put together a set of proof Indian cents, and somehow he got two of the same date, both in PCGS or NGC holders, both were attractive coins, one was a PR-62 and the other a PR-66. I showed them to a few dealers knowledgeable in the area and in the set being assembled, and we all concluded the best coin to keep in the set was the PR-62, and the collector agreed also.

numisma

Beautiful coin.

I agree with the subject of the thread too. I have sold AU coins for Ch. Unc. money many times and have sold certified "Uncs" for less than Unc money. Eye appeal = value.

coinlieutenant

Well said...

Elcontador

Old news, but it certainly bears repeating. I want the nicest coin for the grade I can find. I can show you ugly Seated & Trade $s in 5 or 6 holders on any major show's bourse floor that I wouldn't touch without a hepatitis vaccination and latex gloves.

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>I was helping a customer put together a set of proof Indian cents, and somehow he got two of the same date, both in PCGS or NGC holders, both were attractive coins, one was a PR-62 and the other a PR-66. I showed them to a few dealers knowledgeable in the area and in the set being assembled, and we all concluded the best coin to keep in the set was the PR-62, and the collector agreed also. >>



This is exactly the type of example I was thinking of when I wrote that in our Road Report - and while Rich's example sounds extreme (how can a 62 be better than a 66??), I don't think its all that unusual.

Barberian

Excellent thread. I recently saw an XF45 Bay Bridge commemorative sold on ebay that blew me away (post sale). The coin in XF was prettier than those I've seen in higher grades because the grey tarnish accentuated the fine waves on the Bay and other details of the coin. It was a real lesson to me.

Myqqy

Beautiful half eagle, and sage advice too!

BigRed

I would rather have a nice original well struck example of a lower grade coin anyday than a dipped and stripped high grade coin.

Coxe

AU58 is a good example of this. I had two of the 4 or 5 known 1872 half dimes that got catalogued as Breen-3132 at one time. Subsequently, we know that the variety turned out to be very scarce but not anything close to that rare. Anyway, one got graded as a 58 by ANACS. Later, there was a mint state one, a 61 I think. The strike was mushy and the overall presentation was lacking. Wasn't the least inclined to "upgrade" to that piece. Still have the 58, one of the few seated varieties I kept. Probably some choice or better have been discovered of the variety by now though. Nonetheless, there are probably plenty of cases where a 58 is the nicest coin of an issue/variety even though there might be technically higher graded ones in the 60 to 62 range.

1794half1839

Wear, toning, and "dirt" add to the originality of a coin, and make the details stand out more, which make them more interesting to me, I don't know about you all.

fc

great coin and a great post! thanks for sharing.

roadrunner

In the MS/PF 65-68 type coin arena the higher grade is often the better coin imo. There are always exceptions and you can always find a killer MS65 that will beat a so-so MS66, etc But since the grading services are somewhat (>50%) consistent, the higher graded coin is typically and more often than not, the better coin...and in most cases the more valuable coin. Warning: exceptions abound. But in the majority of the cases I'll go with the above.

roadrunner

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>In the MS/PF 65-68 type coin arena the higher grade is often the better coin imo. There are always exceptions and you can always find a killer MS65 that will beat a so-so MS66, etc But since the grading services are somewhat (>50%) consistent, the higher graded coin is typically and more often than not, the better coin...and in most cases the more valuable coin. Warning: exceptions abound. But in the majority of the cases I'll go with the above.

roadrunner >>



I don't think so. At least I would never assume it to be the case and would always make my own decisions based on in-hand comparisons of the coins in question, side by side.

Additionally, the highest graded coins are as often as not conserved, dipped or otherwise helped along on their path to their mega-grades, and I will take a less flashy, more original example of anything over one of these 100% of the time.

roadrunner

Nowhere in my post did I state 100% of the time or anything close to that. Often, most, usually, typically.....etc do not mean 100%. Considering how often I disagree with what I see in those holders, I would not be true to myself in stating 100%, 90% or even 80%.....but typically or usually.......Yes.

Consider this a test conducted blind-folded. Which would you choose if you had to? All you get is the assigned grade. Tell me you'd pick the lower one because you feel the crustiness coming through the plastic or the blinding light from the "brutal" conservation is peaking through your blindfold (lol).

As a rule I don't buy stripped type coins and feel uncomfortable as long as they are in my possession. Exceptions exist, but not many.
They usually are farmed out after I learn I should have passed in the first place.

roadrunner

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>Consider this a test conducted blind-folded. Which would you choose if you had to? All you get is the assigned grade. Tell me you'd pick the lower one because you feel the crustiness coming through the plastic or the blinding light from the "brutal" conservation is peaking through your blindfold (lol). >>



I can tell you this - when I read that a (insert coin type here) in MS68* NGC will be coming up at auction, I pretty much assume it's going to be a conserved, awful thing until proven otherwise.

IGWT

I certainly agree with this advice. I was helping a customer put together a set of proof Indian cents, and somehow he got two of the same date, both in PCGS or NGC holders, both were attractive coins, one was a PR-62 and the other a PR-66. I showed them to a few dealers knowledgeable in the area and in the set being assembled, and we all concluded the best coin to keep in the set was the PR-62, and the collector agreed also.

In what way was the 62 the better coin to keep? Was it the better coin in a straight-up comparison; or, instead was the 66 just not 4 points better (in condition and price)?

RichieURich

IGWT, the 62 had nice, even colorful toning that made the coin look gorgeous, although it had a couple marks accounting for the 62 grade. The 66 was somewhat lifeless and the color was a bit uneven.

bidask

If this is often true, isn't this another reason for CAC services?

IGWT

If this is often true, isn't this another reason for CAC services?

Just the opposite. It's another reason for collectors to know their own minds and to act on their own preferences. That's not to say that CAC doesn't provide other valuable services.

PerryHall

<< <i>If this is often true, isn't this another reason for CAC services?

Just the opposite. It's another reason for collectors to know their own minds and to act on their own preferences. That's not to say that CAC doesn't provide other valuable services. >>



Will CAC sticker a coin that's been dipped bright?

JZrarities

<< <i>If this is often true, isn't this another reason for CAC services? >>



Only if CAC would sticker the 62 Coin, and not the 66...

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>

<< <i>If this is often true, isn't this another reason for CAC services? >>



Only if CAC would sticker the 62 Coin, and not the 66... >>



Took the words right outta' my mouth . . .

IGWT

Rich didn't say that either coin was improperly graded. He simply said that he and others preferred the 62 (which, I might add, is a great thing, if one can spend less and acquire something preferable). Why should I want or expect CAC or any other service to tell me what to prefer?

JZrarities

<< <i>Why should I want or expect CAC or any other service to tell me what to prefer? >>



Of course, we don't.

But I humbly believe that the majority of Collectors and Dealers are 'Best Value' purchasers.

So, an MS-66 that is pushing the limits of the grade, and appears 'lifeless' (dead Luster) should not get a sticker.

That is my problem with CAC, allowing stickers for an ethereal 'Acceptable for the Grade'.

If CAC only stickered coins that were Above Average for their grade, then I would have a real need for the service (and the sticker) on my coins.
I would then pay a Premium for CAC approved coins.

Putting a sticker on a coin that is just 'Acceptable' does nothing for me - the marker has already deemed them 'acceptable' and I have yet to meet a dealer that will SELL a PCGS/NGC coin for less than the stated grade. So, they are already 'acceptable' by default. But, the majority of dealers will tell you how great a coin is for the grade, and if it had a CAC sticker, then the argument would carry some weight. Good luck to the Collector trying to buy a CAC coin and argue that it's only 'Acceptable for the grade' and try not to pay a Premium.

(While I'm on my SoapBox) I spent a while with another dealer at the Phoenix ANA discussing the CAC concept. Laura/John (if you read this) the thing that bothers me the most is the Public/Show Circuit has no way of knowing if a coin DID NOT STICKER already - thereby allowing Multiple Submissions. This envites the Resubmission Game...and solely generates Fees for your Company. You may argue that you are providing a Good Service to the Public, but this will keep me from participating. The solution is easy, each holder has a certificate, DON'T KEEP SECRETS. CAC, I value your opinion, and if you didn't sticker a coin, I would like to know it.