How about grading is in the eye of the holder....and then the beholder? It's still the 1950's for purist collectors doing it raw. For anyone else, it's 2017.
"What Pleases the Buyer Is What He Acquires"
I would only add, that too many are only pleased (or so they think) if the coin is also PCGS CAC'd. For raw coins, it's of zero consequence. Collectors of 70 yrs ago could indeed buy what they alone liked and it mattered little. Now you "almost" have to please yourself, the next potential owner, PCGS, CAC, dealer "XXXX," and who knows who else? Once everyone is pleased....then you can relax and be pleased as well.
Lamont would probably be tickled to know that his AU 1795 dollar from the 1950's is probably graded UNC today. And therefore would no longer meet his original intent of being able to handle his coins. He should have bought the real UNC.
Uneducated collectors jumping into the pool are no doubt pleased by what they acquire early on. That is, until they run into a more educated person who tells them they got duped. Then the new collector is no longer pleased.
BTW, It is a nice read. I have a few comments on the history of grading and grading services as I was around back then; however, the only correction I'll make to the article is that Sheldon did not used the MS-63 grade as it did not exist until years later.
I have oft admired an AU specimen in early copper or silver over its "unc" counterpart for similar reasons as the article states.. Even in grades of good over vg+
Very nice article. I added a few comments that are awaiting moderation.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Also won the PNG's Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
There is an argument that we should dispense with the letters and go to all numbers. As TDN and others have alluded to, some coins should go AU 62. I have also seen a few MS 55's for that matter.
Enjoyed the article.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Great article. Spot on. Speaks to the purity of collecting and not worrying about what happens when you go to sell, which is really where the trouble can start.
Agree that it's important to find coins that speak to you personally. No reason to collect for anyone else.
Sounds like Lamont Dupont is an Everyman collector and would not be necessarily chasing Registry Sets. Nice comment that he wants his coins to be used as intended:
he always told me, he liked a coin with a bit of wear, a slight but minor scratch... one that could have been handled by some famous person in history. He would say to me that this could have been in the pocket of Washington, Jefferson, Franklin or some early colonial person. They had the largest coin in their hands at one time, didn't need that much to buy, say, a loaf of bread when a loaf of bread sold for a half a cent or maybe a bit more, so they kept the coin in their pocket and sometime put it into circulation. And then it went through some other hands, rarely used but touched by them, so it has minor evidence of wear, and now I have it over 150 years after it was struck, so in its way it speaks to me and I think it might been handled by a forefather.
@breakdown said: "There is an argument that we should dispense with the letters and go to all numbers. As TDN and others have alluded to, some coins should go AU 62. I have also seen a few MS 55's for that matter."
WOW! That would eliminate so much BS going on today. Grade the coin for its condition of preservation and price it by its eye appeal, rarity, and actual value in the market. I've even seen AU-65's on occasion!
PS If this system ever was adopted, do you realize how many rare and valuable coins will grade MS-55 and MS-58 if they were ever cracked?
@Coinstartled said:
Part about Lammot du Pont was very good.
Agreed. The article references Lamont du Pont (sp?). Now if it is a reference to Lammot du Pont II (1880-1952) he was not exactly your typical "every man" collector. The du Ponts were known to have some very high powered coins in their holdings.
Comments
How about grading is in the eye of the holder....and then the beholder? It's still the 1950's for purist collectors doing it raw. For anyone else, it's 2017.
"What Pleases the Buyer Is What He Acquires"
I would only add, that too many are only pleased (or so they think) if the coin is also PCGS CAC'd. For raw coins, it's of zero consequence. Collectors of 70 yrs ago could indeed buy what they alone liked and it mattered little. Now you "almost" have to please yourself, the next potential owner, PCGS, CAC, dealer "XXXX," and who knows who else? Once everyone is pleased....then you can relax and be pleased as well.
Lamont would probably be tickled to know that his AU 1795 dollar from the 1950's is probably graded UNC today. And therefore would no longer meet his original intent of being able to handle his coins. He should have bought the real UNC.
Uneducated collectors jumping into the pool are no doubt pleased by what they acquire early on. That is, until they run into a more educated person who tells them they got duped. Then the new collector is no longer pleased.
Too long. What's it say?
@abcde12345 said: Too long. What's it say?
****BUY WHAT YOU LIKE****
BTW, It is a nice read. I have a few comments on the history of grading and grading services as I was around back then; however, the only correction I'll make to the article is that Sheldon did not used the MS-63 grade as it did not exist until years later.
I have oft admired an AU specimen in early copper or silver over its "unc" counterpart for similar reasons as the article states.. Even in grades of good over vg+
Enjoyed the read! Thanks.
Enjoyed it. Thanks for posting it.
It says send every coin to PCGS express service.
Don't quote me on that.
PART of what it says is:
What Pleases the Buyer Is What He Acquires
I mean what kinda heresy is THAT???
Part about Lammot du Pont was very good.
Good article, thanks for posting.
it says that all your coins are overgraded, while all of mine are undergraded.
great article!
That's a nice statement. A primer on collecting. Thanks, Bruce.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Nice article, I like the "old days" stories of when giants walked among men.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Well we do have Silverpop.
Very nice article. I added a few comments that are awaiting moderation.
And then the reholder.
nice read
But money is, or is not, in the wallet of the beholder!
Nice article. Thanks for sharing. Needs to be printed and given out at the front door.
Good read
Sounds like it's time for a new grading system.
What happened with EagleEye's proposal?
There is an argument that we should dispense with the letters and go to all numbers. As TDN and others have alluded to, some coins should go AU 62. I have also seen a few MS 55's for that matter.
Enjoyed the article.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Very well written. I felt like I was sitting in the shop next to Harvey as the story unfolded.
Great article. Spot on. Speaks to the purity of collecting and not worrying about what happens when you go to sell, which is really where the trouble can start.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Agree that it's important to find coins that speak to you personally. No reason to collect for anyone else.
Sounds like Lamont Dupont is an Everyman collector and would not be necessarily chasing Registry Sets. Nice comment that he wants his coins to be used as intended:
Very enjoyable article..... History with a personal touch. I especially like how the real definition of grading is clearly addressed. Cheers, RickO
@breakdown said: "There is an argument that we should dispense with the letters and go to all numbers. As TDN and others have alluded to, some coins should go AU 62. I have also seen a few MS 55's for that matter."
WOW! That would eliminate so much BS going on today. Grade the coin for its condition of preservation and price it by its eye appeal, rarity, and actual value in the market. I've even seen AU-65's on occasion!
PS If this system ever was adopted, do you realize how many rare and valuable coins will grade MS-55 and MS-58 if they were ever cracked?
Agreed. The article references Lamont du Pont (sp?). Now if it is a reference to Lammot du Pont II (1880-1952) he was not exactly your typical "every man" collector. The du Ponts were known to have some very high powered coins in their holdings.
Nice read, thanks for flagging that, Bruce.
Complete Set of Chopmarked Trade Dollars
Carson City Silver Dollars Complete 1870-1893http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=2722"