Rare coins in new holders..... Buyer Beware?

bestday · January 22, 2017 9:26AM

GC has in auction of NGC 1889CC MS 60 in a new holder ... Noticed several other Pricey, rare coins with new PCGS ,NGC holders .Should these type of coins treated with a jaded eye, for just being crackouts... barely making grade ?

dsessom · January 22, 2017 9:30AM

Do the cert numbers check out?

Sonorandesertrat · January 22, 2017 9:32AM

MS60 is a relatively unusual grade, frequently used for an MS coin with one foot in the grave (i.e., a problem that is almost serious enough to 'kill' it).

grip · January 22, 2017 10:03AM

I thought they did away with that grade...MS60.

joebb21 · January 22, 2017 10:07AM

95+% of all certified coins today are crackouts. Some came from same grade holders, some higher holders and some lower.

Clearly someone at ngc believed the coin was deserving of an ms60 grade. Perhaps even the great one himself.

If you rely on 3rd party grading then the coin is what it is- an ms60.
If you dont then you can view the coin however you want.

Lastly- barely making a grade is still making the grade.

Determining quality within the grade is for the buyer to decide

oih82w8 · January 22, 2017 10:15AM

Another consideration is "reholder". I guess it depends on the Cert Number.

Sonorandesertrat · January 22, 2017 10:30AM

joebb21,
Do you think that the coin would have received an MS60 grade if it was a generic, say 1881-S?

coinsRgood · January 22, 2017 10:34AM

@joebb21 said:
95+% of all certified coins today are crackouts. Some came from same grade holders, some higher holders and some lower.

I really doubt that - - on what bases did you make that determination?

roadrunner · January 22, 2017 10:43AM

@coinsRgood said:

@joebb21 said:
95+% of all certified coins today are crackouts. Some came from same grade holders, some higher holders and some lower.

I really doubt that - - on what bases did you make that determination?

I wouldn't doubt that at all. I think if we eliminated the most generic coins that have little upside potential (like a MS64 common Morgan or MS65 common buff or merc, and MS61-63 generic gold) the number could indeed be that high. 100% of the better coins I've owned over the past 30 years no longer reside in their original holders. That's dozens of coins that I know personally and still track. Some of them have been through 3-4 times just to keep up with the "times."

Sonorandesertrat · January 22, 2017 10:55AM

coinsRgood,
Follow the money trail. Eliminate really common stuff (as roadrunner said), and look at the holders that the 'better' classic coins reside in. Almost every time a coin is sold to a dealer or sent to an auction house, it WILL be evaluated for upgrade potential. This inevitably results in a slow changeover to newer holders (NGC to PCGS; PCGS to added CAC bean) and gradeflation.

BillJones · January 22, 2017 11:15AM

Most of the coins I have purchased recently have been in new holders. For a few of them I've been able to determine that they had previously been graded, and had been either been cracked out and resubmitted or sent in for a review.

Here is an example of one of those coins. This 1839 quarter eagle had been in a PCGS AU-55 holder. Now it is in a PCGS AU-58 holder. The price difference according to "Coin Facts" is fairly large from $4,250 to $6,500. I paid a price that was in the middle of that range.

I find this piece pleasing to my eye, but in the "good old days" the grade really was AU-55.

So what do you do? Do you pass on this one and look some more, or do you take "the bird in hand?" It come from a dealer I like and trust, which is plus. The last FUN show showed me that the pickings for Classic gold are really slim. There's not much to buy out there, and the pieces I found were "close" were more marginal for the grade than this piece.

I would not reject a coin out of hand because it has been upgraded. You need to look at it and see if it pleases you, and if you can live the price.

This is supposed to be a "down market,' but I'm still looking for the "down." I bid 100% of the "Coin Facts" retail price on an AU-55, 1835 quarter eagle (a slightly better than average date) in the on-line portion of the Heritage FUN auction and, I still didn't get it. The coin was only okay. It had a decent look, but it had been lightly cleaned. In other words it was slightly "off" but it still sold at a premium.

So okay, where is the "down" market. It nowhere to be seen for me.

bestday · January 22, 2017 4:08PM

So ..is a AU 58 s better buy or more desirable than an MS -60 ?

bestday · January 22, 2017 4:11PM

@dsessom said:
Do the cert numbers check out?

Yes....Thought of bidding on the 1889cc

BillJones · January 22, 2017 4:26PM

@bestday said:
So ..is a AU 58 s better buy or more desirable than an MS -60 ?

It can be that way, but not always. I have an 1839-D quarter eagle in MS-60 that I am glad to have.

Pushkin · January 22, 2017 4:31PM

Often MS 60 is a grade that might turn you into stone if you look at it too long - many should come with some kind of danger sticker similar to a biological hazard sign. I've seen a FEW ok MS 60s, but they are are the exception. Many MS 60s are considered to be dregs (to use a term made famous by a well-know coin dealer). AU 58s are often coins with exceptional eye appeal and many collectors seek them out.

Has anyone ever seen a MS 60* from NGC or a MS 60+ from PCGS ? There is a reason. I suspect even the coin docs only use MS 60s as candidates to be "upgraded" to AU 58. This is just one person's opinion, if you own a MS 60 and like it, great, we all have our preferences and our differences, and the grading services do make mistakes.

logger7 · January 22, 2017 6:34PM

Good luck getting an MS60 coin to CAC unless it is really higher.

On higher value coins like this one you wonder why they didn't grade higher. https://coins.ha.com/itm/liberty-double-eagles/double-eagles/1866-20-ms60-ngc-like-the-1865-the-1866-is-more-difficult-to-locate-in-mint-state-than-the-1872-1874-and-1875-most-su/a/267-8003.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515 Look at a bunch with that year in MS60 at PCGS too and they look like they could upgrade a point.

On the holder change, isn't it quite possible to get a new cert. number at both services on a response regrade or whatever they call it now? Old grade is guaranteed.

BryceM · January 22, 2017 7:49PM

Buyer Beware always applies. There are horrible coins in old holders, new holders, and every holder from every TPG. Likewise, there are some fantastic coins in brand-spanking new plastic.

Those who rely on the number on the certificate instead of looking at the coin will have some nasty surprises from time to time.

U1chicago · January 22, 2017 9:20PM

@Pushkin said:

Has anyone ever seen a MS 60* from NGC or a MS 60+ from PCGS ? There is a reason. I suspect even the coin docs only use MS 60s as candidates to be "upgraded" to AU 58. This is just one person's opinion, if you own a MS 60 and like it, great, we all have our preferences and our differences, and the grading services do make mistakes.

I owned this MS 60 Star Morgan. The reverse was very nice...the obverse not so much. It was likely an MS 60/63 if both sides were graded separately.

http://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/310929/1884-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-NGC-MS-60-226-152-133-Toned

Pushkin · January 22, 2017 9:42PM

@U1chicago said:

@Pushkin said:

Has anyone ever seen a MS 60* from NGC or a MS 60+ from PCGS ? There is a reason. I suspect even the coin docs only use MS 60s as candidates to be "upgraded" to AU 58. This is just one person's opinion, if you own a MS 60 and like it, great, we all have our preferences and our differences, and the grading services do make mistakes.

I owned this MS 60 Star Morgan. The reverse was very nice...the obverse not so much. It was likely an MS 60/63 if both sides were graded separately.

http://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/310929/1884-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-NGC-MS-60-226-152-133-Toned

Thank you for the information. That is a very interesting coin - NICE reverse.

Walkerfan · January 22, 2017 11:46PM

I have no doubt that many of the coins in new holders have been upgraded. That doesn't bother me as long as they are technically solid, so I rely on my eye and buy the coin not the holder, which rings truer than ever these days. I feel sorry for the clueless collectors whose only course of action is to rely on either an insert number or a green bean.

ricko · January 23, 2017 4:55AM

It always comes down to the coin itself.... the trouble with gradeflation is, the more inexperienced collectors - just learning to grade... now have inflated standards they are learning from. And most will rely on the slab grade rather than reality. Cheers, RickO

jdimmick · January 23, 2017 5:11AM

Don't want to speak for ian, but call or contact him if you have a question. Several of these high dollar morgans came from same collector. I checked on a couple that intrest a customer of mine, and he told me his thoughts.

BAJJERFAN · January 23, 2017 10:46AM

@Pushkin said:
Many MS 60s are considered to be dregs (to use a term made famous by a well-know coin dealer).

At the risk of being a pedantic PITA, the term that dealer popularized is dreck and not dregs.

Pushkin · January 23, 2017 11:11AM

re: BAJJERFAN

Thank you very much for the correction. I apologize for my mistake and stand corrected. Facts are facts, not what we would like them to be, and I want to take responsibility for my errors. Besides, "dreck" is a much more colorful description.

Regards,

Pushkin

lkeigwin · January 23, 2017 11:12AM

@Pushkin said:

Has anyone ever seen a MS 60* from NGC or a MS 60+ from PCGS ? There is a reason. I suspect even the coin docs only use MS 60s as candidates to be "upgraded" to AU 58.

You won't see a 60+ (or a 61+, for that matter) because they are not eligible for plus grades. But the reason for that may support your feeling.
Lance.

Pushkin · January 23, 2017 11:22AM

@lkeigwin said:

@Pushkin said:

Has anyone ever seen a MS 60* from NGC or a MS 60+ from PCGS ? There is a reason. I suspect even the coin docs only use MS 60s as candidates to be "upgraded" to AU 58.

You won't see a 60+ (or a 61+, for that matter) because they are not eligible for plus grades. But the reason for that may support your feeling.
Lance.

Thank you for the info.

oih82w8 · January 23, 2017 1:06PM

@bestday said:
So ..is a AU 58 s better buy or more desirable than an MS -60 ?

In my collection...YES!

logger7 · January 23, 2017 1:36PM

Light scratch, otherwise better: http://i.imgur.com/SpT1NzA.jpg http://i.imgur.com/sAINPIj.jpg

Insider2 · January 23, 2017 1:38PM

@BillJones said:
Most of the coins I have purchased recently have been in new holders. For a few of them I've been able to determine that they had previously been graded, and had been either been cracked out and resubmitted or sent in for a review.

Here is an example of one of those coins. This 1839 quarter eagle had been in a PCGS AU-55 holder. Now it is in a PCGS AU-58 holder. The price difference according to "Coin Facts" is fairly large from $4,250 to $6,500. I paid a price that was in the middle of that range.

I find this piece pleasing to my eye, but in the "good old days" the grade really was AU-55.

So what do you do? Do you pass on this one and look some more, or do you take "the bird in hand?" It come from a dealer I like and trust, which is plus. The last FUN show showed me that the pickings for Classic gold are really slim. There's not much to buy out there, and the pieces I found were "close" were more marginal for the grade than this piece.

I would not reject a coin out of hand because it has been upgraded. You need to look at it and see if it pleases you, and if you can live the price.

This is supposed to be a "down market,' but I'm still looking for the "down." I bid 100% of the "Coin Facts" retail price on an AU-55, 1835 quarter eagle (a slightly better than average date) in the on-line portion of the Heritage FUN auction and, I still didn't get it. The coin was only okay. It had a decent look, but it had been lightly cleaned. In other words it was slightly "off" but it still sold at a premium.

So okay, where is the "down" market. It nowhere to be seen for me.

I have an observation and a question.

IMO, this coin has a very slight amount of rub and therefore someone who does not see it would grade the coin MS and someone who does see it should grad the coin AU-58.

I guess this is my question: The surfaces of this coin have what I should call an excessive number of contact marks. In all honesty it is a "dog." If someone grades it MS, it is a 60 MAX! Now, if someone grades it AU the choices are:

AU-Typical (50)
AU-Choice (55)
AU-Very Choice (58)

In the good old days, the condition of the coin's surface - chiefly the number of marks - determined where in the AU range the coin would fall. This coin is not choice in any stretch of the imagination, therefore, a coin that was this doggy could ONLY be an AU-50.

I just looked in the newest edition of the ANA Grading Standards. I know, no one uses the ANA standards. Nevertheless, I notice that the condition of a coin's surface with regard to abrasion and marks has been deleted completely (from the former editions) in determining the range of AU in the newest edition.

What gives? Any comments?

BillJones · January 23, 2017 2:37PM

The surfaces of this coin have what I should call an excessive number of contact marks. In all honesty it is a "dog." If someone grades it MS, it is a 60 MAX! Now, if someone grades it AU the choices are:

First, my photographs make every mark look bigger than they are when you see the coin in person. The mark that shows at all on this coin in person is the one in front of Ms. Liberty's nose which not all that bad. The rest of marks are circulation rubs that impair the luster to the AU-55 level in my opinion.

If you think that you are going to find a coin like this in an AU-50 holder in today's market, you have not been very active buying, selling and inspecting coins recently. Today's AU-50 is yesterday's EF-45, if you are lucky. More likely it's yesterday's EF-40.

Here is the dealer's picture of the coin he posted on the Internet.

Baley · January 23, 2017 2:42PM

@BryceM said:
Buyer Beware always applies. There are horrible coins in old holders, new holders, and every holder from every TPG. Likewise, there are some fantastic coins in brand-spanning new plastic.

Those who rely on the number on the certificate instead of looking at the coin will have some nasty surprises from time to time.

Once again, no need for me to compose a separate reply except to agree with BryceM's post, which I did.

coinhack · January 23, 2017 5:23PM

@BillJones

"If you think that you are going to find a coin like this in an AU-50 holder in today's market, you have not been very active buying, selling and inspecting coins recently. Today's AU-50 is yesterday's EF-45, if you are lucky. More likely it's yesterday's EF-40."

Interesting. That sounds something like the rant from ATS.

Edited to add quotes and fix my poor spelling

CascadeChris · January 23, 2017 6:37PM

GC has great photos. Learned from the best. If you think the coin warrants a 60 or is really a 58 or even a details, bid accordingly.

joebb21 · January 23, 2017 7:52PM

@Sonorandesertrat said:
joebb21,
Do you think that the coin would have received an MS60 grade if it was a generic, say 1881-S?

now that the auction has ended I will say I have no idea what they would have done if it was a generic date.

The pictures (which Im sure represented the coin well) looked like an about uncirculated coin with booming luster.
My initial picture grade was au55+/au58.

Perhaps in hand it looked nicer, but the circ look to me said do not bid.

segoja · January 23, 2017 10:32PM

NGC does issue 61+ grades. I recently sold a 79-CC GSA MS61+ I don't like it, as they should either say 61 or 62. It's splitting hairs too finely. I think any grade below MS63 should NOT have a + grade

BillJones · January 24, 2017 6:19AM

Interesting. That sounds something like the rant from ATS.

My comment about EF-40 coins ending up in AU-50 holders was directed toward NGC.

In general I have been disappointed with the quality of coins in AU-50 holders. Years ago AU-50s were really nice coins that deserved special notice. Today when I see one pop up on my want list notices at Heritage, I am almost always disappointed. It now takes at least a grade of AU-53 to make the grade from what I've seen. Once more years ago the AU-53 grade was rarely seen and mostly reserved for very scarce coins where the hairsplitting made a difference in the price.

thebeav · January 24, 2017 6:39AM

Here's an MS60 coin that I made, fairly recently, across the street. With the coin in-hand, it looks like an honest grade.

Walkerfan · January 24, 2017 11:43AM

@thebeav said:
Here's an MS60 coin that I made, fairly recently, across the street. With the coin in-hand, it looks like an honest grade.

That's one of the nicer, problem-free MS 60s that I've seen. Nice job.

Wabbit2313 · January 24, 2017 3:03PM

@logger7 said:
Good luck getting an MS60 coin to CAC unless it is really higher.

What? CAC is not ever going to sticker a coin unless it is above average for the grade. There are numerous CAC green and gold stickered coins in MS60. Most collectors would not send those in and it is a rare grade in comparison to the other MS grades. For instance, on Morgans, there are 1.1 million MS64 PCGS coins compared to only 8500 MS60 PCGS coins. (Rounding them)

That statement has zero basis in fact and zero basis in logic. CAC will offer an opinion and any label grade.

logger7 · January 24, 2017 3:36PM

I was speaking to probability and what is the definition of MS60's standard?

"MS60: An often unattractive, possibly impaired coin with surface distractions and scuffed, heavily bagmarked surfaces. Yet, no signs of circulation." http://www.pcgs.com/News/A-Quick-Reference-Guide-To-Grading-Mint-State-Coins

ANA: MS-60
A coin graded MS-60 will be unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted.

Contact Marks: May have heavy marks in all areas.
Hairlines: May have a noticeable patch or continuous hairlining overall.
Luster: Often impaired.
Eye Appeal: Poor. http://coins.about.com/od/ANA-Coin-Grading-Definitions/tp/ANA-Grading-Standards-for-Uncirculated-Mint-State-Coins.htm

Does that sound like a likely cac sticker coin? They can be as tough as they want; they can and often do reject nice coins without a rationale. Grading is after all supposedly not objective, but based on subjectivity and opinions. They don't want coins coming back to them with unhappy customers claiming they don't measure up so they are fussy. I'm not sure what the percentages are that sticker at various grade levels but it is probably lower than the average 40% in 60.

thebeav · January 24, 2017 6:09PM

I was under the impression that a CAC sticker was simply a confirmation of the assigned grade. I don't think it means that a 64 coin is really a 65 or a 63 is really a 64. It just says, "Yes, we agree that this is an MS62 coin"......or whatever the grade happens to be.

Wabbit2313 · January 24, 2017 6:29PM

@logger7 said:
I'm not sure what the percentages are that sticker at various grade levels but it is probably lower than the average 40% in 60.

You continue to make facts up. Now where are you getting 40% of coins sent to CAC get a sticker?

Wabbit2313 · January 24, 2017 6:42PM

@thebeav said:
I was under the impression that a CAC sticker was simply a confirmation of the assigned grade. I don't think it means that a 64 coin is really a 65 or a 63 is really a 64. It just says, "Yes, we agree that this is an MS62 coin"......or whatever the grade happens to be.

CAC says:

WHAT THE CAC STICKER MEANS:

• Verified. Your coin has been verified as meeting the standard for strict quality within its grade.

logger7 · January 24, 2017 6:55PM

@Wabbit2313 said:

@logger7 said:
I'm not sure what the percentages are that sticker at various grade levels but it is probably lower than the average 40% in 60.

You continue to make facts up. Now where are you getting 40% of coins sent to CAC get a sticker?

That's the statistics that I have read from numerous sources. And I referenced specific criteria and made reasonable conclusions based on how cac works. THEY DON'T STICKER PROBLEM COINS! THE DEFINITIONS I PROVIDED SAY PROBLEM TO ME. They don't cac coins with any type of issue--for them, not necessarily for the average collector.

Here are the MS60 definitions again, please share your unattractive coins with those issues with a cac sticker:

"MS60: An often unattractive, possibly impaired coin with surface distractions and scuffed, heavily bagmarked surfaces. Yet, no signs of circulation." http://www.pcgs.com/News/A-Quick-Reference-Guide-To-Grading-Mint-State-Coins

ANA: MS-60
A coin graded MS-60 will be unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted.

Contact Marks: May have heavy marks in all areas.
Hairlines: May have a noticeable patch or continuous hairlining overall.
Luster: Often impaired.
Eye Appeal: Poor. http://coins.about.com/od/ANA-Coin-Grading-Definitions/tp/ANA-Grading-Standards-for-Uncirculated-Mint-State-Coins.htm

Wabbit2313 · January 24, 2017 7:27PM

@logger7 said:

@Wabbit2313 said:

@logger7 said:
I'm not sure what the percentages are that sticker at various grade levels but it is probably lower than the average 40% in 60.

You continue to make facts up. Now where are you getting 40% of coins sent to CAC get a sticker?

That's the statistics that I have read from numerous sources. And I referenced specific criteria and made reasonable conclusions based on how cac works.

Well, when you show me that CAC has verified your crazy claim of 40% success on all coins sent in, I will be a believer. Until then, sorry, no way baby!

logger7 · January 24, 2017 8:06PM

I searched around, here is one estimate at 45%: "Recent statistics indicate that overall about 45% of all coins submitted to CAC are awarded green stickers." http://news.coinupdate.com/cac-provides-valuable-feedback-for-collectors-1406/ CAC has provided success rates at 65 and above level to the Rosen Numismatic Advisory which published some of that information.

Sonorandesertrat · January 24, 2017 8:14PM

"WHAT THE CAC STICKER MEANS:

• Verified. Your coin has been verified as meeting the standard for strict quality within its grade."

This is amusing. CAC stickers what it wants to market, period. Don't confuse this with 'quality within its grade."

thebeav · January 25, 2017 4:47AM

@logger7 said:

@Wabbit2313 said:

@logger7 said:
THE DEFINITIONS I PROVIDED SAY PROBLEM TO ME. They don't cac coins with any type of issue--for them, not necessarily for the average collector.

No need to shout Logger. We hear you just fine.
I just looked at the Heritage archives and there are plenty of MS 60 coins with stickers.
If MS 60 says 'problem' to you, that's OK. Really, it's fine. It's just not what the rest of us see.

Rare coins in new holders..... Buyer Beware?

Comments

Leave a Comment