Options
Grading & British Imperial Coinage
SwK
Posts: 378
Grading & British Imperial Coinage
Smile, just another name for English Coinage. This short article deals with Rarity, value and condition and the matrix of price. The British grading system is a matrix of 12 degrees of rarity and 7 degrees of grade. This matrix has the effect of Rarity being affected by grade. Yes there is a multitude of different options. This was shown in the 1973 book Cope & Raynor English Milled Coinage
US grading I have made no headway to get a clear picture of the MS system of grading in the US. I have posted many questions and had few answers. I tried on a simple area to understand the 10 grades of UNC, no answer except one mat assume a PROOF 100% with no marks and perfect fields will be classified as MS70 being the highest grade. I cannot understand and no clear picture has emerged for MS60 to MS69 inclusive.
The result of the two grading systems is that in the European market a lot of the grading is left in the hands of the collectors and dealers, knowledge across a far wider range of material is demanded from Roman, Hammered and early Milled were as USA coins are mainly from 1780’s to date all milled except for some colonial but very few.
Is there one way to grade, the answer is no, protection however is flawed with both systems. The best given is the US way to a market the is in many cases driven by investment whereas the European market is driven by collectors more than investors we are able to make our own decision.
In a plastic case you can be told the coin is protected but on the other hand part of the pleasure of numismatics is handling the coin.
Br
Smile, just another name for English Coinage. This short article deals with Rarity, value and condition and the matrix of price. The British grading system is a matrix of 12 degrees of rarity and 7 degrees of grade. This matrix has the effect of Rarity being affected by grade. Yes there is a multitude of different options. This was shown in the 1973 book Cope & Raynor English Milled Coinage
US grading I have made no headway to get a clear picture of the MS system of grading in the US. I have posted many questions and had few answers. I tried on a simple area to understand the 10 grades of UNC, no answer except one mat assume a PROOF 100% with no marks and perfect fields will be classified as MS70 being the highest grade. I cannot understand and no clear picture has emerged for MS60 to MS69 inclusive.
The result of the two grading systems is that in the European market a lot of the grading is left in the hands of the collectors and dealers, knowledge across a far wider range of material is demanded from Roman, Hammered and early Milled were as USA coins are mainly from 1780’s to date all milled except for some colonial but very few.
Is there one way to grade, the answer is no, protection however is flawed with both systems. The best given is the US way to a market the is in many cases driven by investment whereas the European market is driven by collectors more than investors we are able to make our own decision.
In a plastic case you can be told the coin is protected but on the other hand part of the pleasure of numismatics is handling the coin.
Br
A collection uploaded on www.petitioncrown.com is a fifty- year love affair with beautiful British coins, medals and Roman brass
0
Comments
Very well put and something not appreciated at the moment over here on this side of the
Atlantic. I must confess to having entombed coins and satisfied by their protection but definately reminds one of a museum where the coin is seen at some distance with no touching either positively or negatively.
Obviously, there is a sort of seal of warranty for the legitimacy of the coin, and the grade certified in the name of objectivity which as you point out is possibly a bit simpler with a reasonably uniforn milled coinage.
As you point out the numbering system is meant to be objective but there are some problems with enumerating something where subjectivity remains one element. All of this influences price and there is so much capital involved with US coins that the British and European collector coins in total likely pale in comparison.
I am somewhat on the fence with regards to these TPGs, but there is a bit more reproducible grading with the better ones. Generally an MS64 milled silver Victorian will have a certain appearance and I at least have come to expect more uniformity in that piece than, for example the GEF subjective grade in the British system. There are certainly many examples that do not fit the average however in either system.
I am not giving anything away to note that a proof PCGS or N(GC)65 milled Victorian piece is going to be very high quality piece with it generally being very acceptable as Mint State in the British system. Grades to either side maybe a bit problematic as a 62 may not be all that nice and a 67 not being readily or appreciably better than the 65. Well, I am sure that others may have much to say and so will hold at that for the moment.
Well, just Love coins, period.
way to a large degree.
The system however got a lot of charlatans and, fudgers and down right cheaters out of the market and that is certainly a benefit, along with the
fact that there is now a pretty solid value base that can be tracked more or less like the stock market and the prices
of gold and silver.
I did answer your grading question (Sheldon scale) on another thread; will repeat it here if you'd like.
One of my big objections to the holders has been overcome in the past couple of years, with great coin photography
and the PCGS True View certificates.
It's very easy now to share your collection with others-in images large enough to do the coin justice-without ever
taking the coin of your cabinet or other storage.
It's just that I got my PCGS grades.
As expected there are many grading standards from across the globe. As I collect American, German, Austrian and several other European Countries I have also struggled at times with gaining knowledge of how they grade. I don't know if you have seen this but here are PCGS grading standards: Link
I'm sure some of us here would be more than happy to post pictures to show the varying degrees of the American grading system. Another source would be the Set Registries at the Top Grading Companies in which some (but not all) collectors actually have images attached. Here is the link to PCGS new Photograde as well.
As far as the handling of coins goes- all my coins which aren't in graded slabs are stored in cardboard or plastic flips at least. Not only for protection when transporting or storing but also somewhat from the elements. So there are varying degrees of thought on this as well. Judging from some of the scratches, nicks, dents etc. I have seen on slabs, my thoughts are this: better to have scratched the plastic container than the coin inside- the plastic can always be replaced, but can the coin be?
Best,
Jim
No Grade Description Printed Description
82 Filed Rims Yes Yes
83 Peeling Lamination No No
84 Holed and Plugged Yes Yes
90 Not Genuine No No
91 Questionable Color No Yes
92 Cleaning No Yes
93 Planchet Flaw No Yes
94 Altered Surfaces No Yes
95 Scratch / Rim Dent No Yes
96 Refund - No Service No No
97 Environmental Damage No Yes
98 Damage No Yes
99 PVC Residue No No
I can see a handful of these no-grade numbers causing problems not to mention inconsistencies for certain issues, British or otherwise.
The first one (82) for example would exclude some Taylor restrikes of Soho pieces because the rims were sometimes filed to remove rust spots. Additionally, he also produced some pieces with neatly filed edges, an example of which I have from the Boulton collection pieces. In addition to this, the Anne pattern halfpennies and the George II proofs have either a plain or striated edge according to Peck. The striated edge is due to filing and appears to be due to the removal of excess material arising from being struck in what may be a collar of some description. However, PCGS have slabbed a 1729 copper proof halfpenny in my possession which is virtually certain to have a filed edge. The only GII proof I have seen without a striated edge was an interesting special case worthy of further research.
The lamination fault (83) would exclude certain Royal Mint decimal patterns which are only known only on a laminating flan, but are as struck (even in the RM collection).
Planchet flaws (93) would exclude many pieces and even some milled including some that could reasonably be expected to be slabbed by the minerals and crystals department based on the crystalline inclusions. Do rust spots count as flaws? Striking splits almost certainly do, but may be a feature of the issue. Presumably in this and the previous case the issues become unslabbable.
Thanks for the replies, as I mentioned I am not advocating anyway is correct but after reading all the responses one important point is the importance to handle the coin.
I except the points of coins being protected, museum coins etc. There is the situation in Europe were we can handle the coins for study, in fact all the collections hed in the US as I remeber are the same and not in plastic.
I am considering the question of grading - I take one coin that as a British Numismatist we know the coin was taken after striking and lay in one collection for near 350 years. How do we grade a coin that is as struck? [made in 1648]
www.petitioncrown.com
There is still a difference in grading standards between the US and Europe. From what I see the Brits and Europeans are tougher on circulated grades, but looser on mint state grades. As an exaple there was a recent Swiss auction put on by a well respected firm, almost all of the coins described by the auction firm as FDC were graded 62-64 by the US TPG they used.
I also see problems with grading hammered and early milled coinage. It can be extremely difficult for many people to tell the difference between an EF and mint state coin in the early pieces due to the weaker striking pressures. Don't get me wrong, they do make mistakes, however I really believe the graders at the tpg's do a better and more repeatable job than 99% of collectors. I have several pieces I purchased from British dealers, that had been cracked out of slabs, that I resubmitted and they came back with exactly the same grade they previously had.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Slabs- why slab?
Slabs have an important place depending on the coins collected and the value. To use an British example, if one were trying to assemble a high grade set of crowns- basically anywhere from Charles II through George V, I would likely have them slabbed if they were high grade coins- the slab provides a degree of protection, it prevents mishandling, and it takes some argument out of establishing a fair value of the coin at the time sold if a third party has authenticated and graded the coin. While TPG is not perfect, it seems to provide a service that is generally helpful.
While I believe slabbing is important for some coins- especially high grade examples- it is not necessary for all coins. Again, a British example- one can put together a nice set of circulated Victoria 1d with varieties...or without... and study them, handle them and not have them graded- maybe with the possible exception of the 1869 and 1875-H.
If I had bought the Baldwin's 1700 Crown yesterday, I would have had it slabbed- without hesitation.
I bought another 1875 1d that by US standards is probably a low end EF40 at best- would I slab that? No- and I like that coin as it is- same said for some of my Mexican 8R's.
My final comment is simply this- Don't under estimate the connection between the grade (condition rarity) and value. Some coins, while most may view as common, can bring significant money in high grade- case and point- The recent Heritage Auction had a 1902 Crown graded ms65 by PCGS and the auction estimate was blown away- I believe the hammer price with commission was over $3000- personally, I did not see that coming
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Well, just Love coins, period.
It is very interesting all coments
MS65 is above average mint luster. Only a few scattered contact marks or two larger marks are present. One or two hairline patches. A few light scuffs on highest points of coin. Quality and eye appeal are above average and quite pleasing.
MS67 Has almost all of original mint luster. No more than three or four very small contact marks. One or two small hairlines or scuffs acceptable. No distracting flaws allowed. Exceptional eye appeal.
I wish it to be clear we are all allowed our preference and I am not Cnute trying to hold back the tide.
As coins over a period become more finite as they either get lost or further damaged there is a good case for the US system. All the strings on grading is part of an education process for a "Britt" on the other side of the pond.
The more I read and begin to understand I was directed to http://www.us-coin-values-advisor.com/grading-coins.html and found the article great.
Gentlemen thank u, grading has started in the UK and when I was asked my opinion my reply was if I remember let the market decide although the majority of dealers disagreed with me.
br
www.petitioncrown.com
This penny is from the 'other side of the pond', i.e., it was sourced from the UK. It is graded by CGS. So then, the game is what would a knowledgable, conservative UK collector grade the penny using the UK system (gVF, VF, aEF, etc).
After a day or so, I'll be back to let you know how CGS graded this coin, as well as what I would expect PCGS to grade same. BTW, I like these CGS holders given one side is literally more viewable along the edges.
Whatever great photo
MS64
br
<< <i>Hi see if I learned anything
Whatever great photo
MS64
br
>>
Image courtesy of Mark Goodman, btw. He's one of the Forum imaging geniuses.
SwK, how would the Brits classify this coin?
P.S. PCGS would add a colour designator at the end of the MS64; e.g., Your PCGS guess above should also include MS64BN (BROWN), MS64RB (RED-BROWN), MS64RD (RED).
<< <i>It's late; I'm tired, but I'll leave all with this:
This penny is from the 'other side of the pond', i.e., it was sourced from the UK. It is graded by CGS. So then, the game is what would a knowledgable, conservative UK collector grade the penny using the UK system (gVF, VF, aEF, etc).
After a day or so, I'll be back to let you know how CGS graded this coin, as well as what I would expect PCGS to grade same. BTW, I like these CGS holders given one side is literally more viewable along the edges.
Difficult without seeing it in the hand, but I would give it better than EF, but not UNC. The hair appears to have some slight friction and similarly the two raised drapery folds across Britannia's lap. There are also a few marks in the field. Without knowing how many of these CGS have slabbed and at what grade, I would say they gave it a 70 or 75. I would guess a US grade of 63BN is a possibility based on the marks. It all depends on the grader on the day. I've seen worse 64s than this.
I think CGS slabs are better for viewing too. A major plus is that you can crack the coins out quite easily from them as with PCGS. The key to this in both instances is the sealed rim which is thinner than NGCs and so easier to trim off.
As far as the 1859, I think I am in the 64BN camp as there is not enough red to qualify for RB. I think the folds across Britannia's lap are softly struck with a slight bit of oxidation as opposed to wear. Actually this specimen is quite well struck overall with decent obverse hair detail and rev. with excellent details to the margin of B's helm and especially the garment details about the knee which is many times one of the first spots to look as well.
Also, check B's shouolder and upper arm esp. to our left which are relatively well struck....Too much chatter overall despite the blowup for a 65 grade.
Well, just Love coins, period.