Options
Absolute grading vs comparative grading
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,198 ✭✭✭✭✭
Today I was at the Las Vegas invitational and received in hand the MS66 1799 bust dollar that I bought from Heritage at Long Beach. After viewing the coin in hand once again, and a MS65 gem that was on the bourse floor, I was struck by a thought:
Even though on an absolute sense people may state that the MS66 should only be a 65, on a comparative basis it was at least a grade better than the 65 on the bourse floor. The net price on the 66 was $260k and the asking price on the gem was $180k. I'd pay near the former for a CAC'd 65 and double the latter for a CAC'd 66. So is CAC the absolute yardstick and non CAC the comparative? And my NGC CAC MS64 sure looked darn nice compared to the non CAC 65.
It's all soooo confusing!
Even though on an absolute sense people may state that the MS66 should only be a 65, on a comparative basis it was at least a grade better than the 65 on the bourse floor. The net price on the 66 was $260k and the asking price on the gem was $180k. I'd pay near the former for a CAC'd 65 and double the latter for a CAC'd 66. So is CAC the absolute yardstick and non CAC the comparative? And my NGC CAC MS64 sure looked darn nice compared to the non CAC 65.
It's all soooo confusing!
0
Comments
Please visit my website Millcitynumismatics.com
<< <i>So is CAC the absolute yardstick and non CAC the comparative? >>
That' a good way of putting it, TDN. We expect a strict grade assessment from CAC. But when it comes to conditional rarities for scarce coins that have not been CAC-reviewed, a comparative assessment may come into play.
Now, may we see pictures?
Lance.
How can you have an "absolute yardstick" when grading is subjective?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Had the 66 been in a PCGS regency slab or a doily labeled slab OR a black NGC slab you would not be asking comparative vs absolutive kind of questions.
You would have gone straight with the Absolut and just enjoyed your victory.
Sure, you and many others, may prefer one almost 66 over a 65( of the same date or series), or
even a 64 over a 65. What does JA's opinion today have to do with your preference?
And it is only an opinion the day he renders it. And it is only your preference the day you gave it.
There is nothing absolute about a stickered coin. Many examples exist of JA changing his mind about
whether to sticker a coin. After Heritage requested a review of 4 coins in my Barber half set sold in 2009,
he stickered all 4. ( The first review left these 4 without, but over 50 with).
I agree that another expert's view will assist in the marketability of many coins, But until there is a pricing guide
and auction results correlated(rather than an occassional bid by CAC), the sticker only means that JA thinks it is okay for grade.
I sure would not buy an expensive rare coin approved by CAC sight unseen.
<< <i>So is CAC the absolute yardstick and non CAC the comparative?
How can you have an "absolute yardstick" when grading is subjective? >>
Winner, winner ... chicken dinner!
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
While reading your 2nd paragraph, it felt like taking the MCAT all over again.
opinions is all
i'm reading yours to be a a very accepting one with the new purchase
as to grade...if you like the coin at the price you paid...does second opinion even matter if you're happy with it...yeah...that's the crowd i'm in
kool you did get to compare it...nice...funny thing that you of all even had another example to do so as you buy such elite coins to begin with
hehehe...
put me in your next giveaway too...an...just maybe....you might get not one...but 2...yup 2 xmas cards this year...
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
From lots of reading here, I'm left to conclude that many people are under the assumption that coins actually do have a grade - almost as if that grade is an inherent property of the coin, just like its metal composition, date, or MM. The TPG's job, therefore, is to discern that grade and write it on a piece of paper so the rest of us can see it too. We then judge the TPGs based on their ability to accurately discern the coin's grade.
There is no yardstick. There is no gold standard. Coins have dates, die states, mint marks, and reed counts, but they do not actually have grades. Grades are simply a somewhat feeble invention we've devised to convey the coin's market value and to provide a reference whereby the coin can be compared to its peers.
This kind of stuff really breaks down when you have a coin valued at $2,500 in MS64+, but $22,500 in MS65. What about the coin that is a nice 64+ or a poor 65? What are they worth?
The whole TPG grading / slabbing concept is still relatively young in comparison to the hobby. It will be interesting to see how it evolves over time.
Maybe this is a longwinded way to say "Buy the coin, not the holder?"
<< <i>Rare-air coins such as you describe are playthings of the very rich, and regardless of slab brand & grade / cac approval (or not, if it hasn't been shown to them) make all the opinions other than your own a moot point. Had I, for example, the money and desire to afford such, I'd arrange to compare them side-by-side and make up my mind which I liked best aesthetically, then go about dickering on price / trying to win at auction. Highest technical grade doesn't ever automatically guarantee a coin is the best example to have. >>
Because a lot of times the grades are wrong.
The idea of a yardstick is just for comparison is fine- but even then, it really has to be an apples to apples yardstick and there lies the problem.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Now look at comparative grading. That is to compare a coin to a grade, or grading criteria. Look at the King of Siam 1804 proof silver dollar. They may only slab it as genuine because of all the handling, robs, scratches, dings, etc? I've never seen it so just guessing. But compare this coin to an 1879sMorgan with the same problems. You'd probably scrap it for silver. That's because it looks like crap because of the aura of the 1804. You don't see the harm. One form of comparative grading.
I like my Kennedys, yeah, yeah, flame away! Here are a few photos to look over. See which ones you like. You HAVE to pick one, no cheating. Which one would you like/want in your set? How do you grade them. One of the coins isn't mine and I haven't asked him, but I'm sure he wouldn't me sharing his photo. How do you grade them? What do think the grades are? How about when they were first submitted, what were the grades?
Ok, here are the quick stories. First coin was submitted 3 times. Third submission I had to call PCGS while graded and still in house. I had to point out that below Kennedys bust, the line that was there was the result of being struck through a piece of wire/metal. Coin finally made MS 67, first in over a decade. Would/should have had a gold sticker if they saw the strike through? PCGS guide price now $ 2500, in 66 $280. Kept submitting for GRADE, not money.
Second coin, Coin was in Richard Green's set because it was the finest toned Kennedy of all the MS 67's out there. He would buy them and/or trade them so he saw all the coins in the early years and pops. As far as he knew, it was always in an MS 67 holder. Now in a Secure Plus MS 67 holder. PCGS guide price $1400.
Third coin, in an MS 66 holder. Color actually looks like a haze in hand. Felt guilty to return it, so I kept it. Although I now have 5 in the same grade. I call it a weak MS 66. PCGS guide price $275.
Fourth coin is NOW in an MS 68 holder, Pop Top Pop 1. Started as an MS 66, that's the earliest I was told. Made the rounds and was passed over by many dealers/collectors because it was in a 66 holder. I don't know how many resubmissions it took, but, it went to MS 67, then to 68. I guess it would have had the gold bean? PCGS guide price $15,000.
Which coin would you rather have now? I mean if you had a gun to your head and HAD to have one! LOL Thee 69-D is nice in the photo, but, ugly on the reverse in hand. I really feel the 1965 is very solid MS 67, possibly 67+/68. Won't resubmit. Both 64-D's are very beautiful. The MS 68 is a KILLER in hand! Both well toned coins are pretty and might make many feel the grade should be higher. Grading companies do this too. Plain silver, average toning might detract from the grade. Does happen with the TPG's and collectors. This is using comparative grading. Compared to all the coins, I would rather have the MS 68 when it was in the 66 holder.
This last coin was in a 66 holder, submitted 2nd time as free Secure Plus submission when they started. Jumped to 67+. Another gold bean sticker? Color can add or detract. Did the color add to the grades, or detract? More subjective grading. Did standards or the technicals change? 1 1/2 point upgrade when it was recently graded is huge difference.
In general I find the grading of Bust dollars to be rather loose. I’ve been consistently disappointed with the few examples I’ve seen that were called “Mint State.” They have often looked like very nice AU coins to me. In addition so many early dollars have been “played with,” it’s hard to find nice original surface examples.
The MS-66 that started this string appears to have totally original fields with full Mint State luster and details. My problem is that I find finger prints to be distracting, and I find it hard to use the terms “distracting” and “MS-66” together to describe a coin.
As for the pieces in my collection, which on a much lower plane than that of TDN, this is my favorite. It is an AU-58.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
<< <i>I believe that when you get to the highest grades in any particular series, the TPGs don't so much grade coins as they do rank them. This opinion is from the Gregg Bingham Book of Coin Grading and I absolutely believe it to be true. >>
I would agree wholeheartedly.
<< <i> I sure would not buy an expensive rare coin approved by CAC sight unseen. >>
This.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i> I sure would not buy an expensive rare coin approved by CAC sight unseen. >>
But, but, Dale...it has a sticker. A STICKER man!! Do you doubt the universally accepted STICKER?
<< <i>
<< <i> I sure would not buy an expensive rare coin approved by CAC sight unseen. >>
This. >>
I got burned on an expensive coin that had a CAC sticker. CAC backed their guarantee and bought that coin from me, but the coin still did not measure up. I bid on the coin based upon pictures, a previous sale where I traced the coin to another auction and the CAC sticker, but the coin was as graded.
As for the original question/statement I'd rather a box of dots than
have to make that determination.
Steve
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection