Gradeflation marches on...
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,164 ✭✭✭✭✭
Crossed at MS65+ after several years of multiple tries by who knows how many owners...
1
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,164 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Very attractive coin with some problems but eye appeal is everything these days. Care to tell which service graded it 64 (my maximum grade on a cloudy day one hour after eating lunch ...ZZzzz) and which service gave it the 65?
I would be more interested being in a grading room with you and knowing what YOU really think the coin grades.
A coin you used to own?
What was the impairment that held it back from crossing for so many years (in your eyes)?
Gradeflation has changed the way I evaluate and buy coins. I hate it and challenge that gradeflation will hurt collectors but continue to make CLCT shareholders happy.
Hm.
In another ten years it will be 66....
Cheers, RickO
Probably less than 10 yrs. The coin looks to be ok as MS65 to me. Though I can't say what's going on next to stars 2-3. I don't really consider the + sign an upgrade any more....it's more like keeping up with the Joneses.
Do I see scratches on the obverse fields (right side).?
Not sure why this is Gradeflation? It has always been a 65+ with CAC. The price of the coin has gotten whacked over the last 4 years at the exact same grade. Price deflation at the same grade. Both of my coins from this auction crossed successfully to PCGS right after the auction. (Edited: and got the CAC sticker again in the PCGS holder)
-
-
Here is another example. Back in the 1990s NGC graded this 1796 No Stars Quarter Eage AU-50.
This example also graded AU-50 was recently sold in a Heritage auction.
The recent AU-50 looks damaged with all the scratches on both the obverse and reverse.
Some of those are scratches are adjustment marks, but not all.
Are you referring to the adjustment marks on the reverse? But I do agree that there appears to be a huge gap in quality between the two AU50's that BillJones shared.
Primarily the ones on the obverse on Liberty's hat and collarbone.
But yes, the reverse has issues too, especially the horizontal marks on the shield.
I suspect both the horizontal and vertical scratches on the shield are adjustment marks.
Cleaned trident @ star 2-3,
Dark cheek in question, too.
Slowly but surely, the grades increase.
Or 64. Sometimes grading deflates, after market crashes.
Sure would be nice if coins were graded according to standards, not markets.
TD
This coin was never graded before 2013 and has been in the same grade holder since, having CAC approval the whole time. Here is it's original holder. There is NO gradeflation.
-
Really surprises me that is has a sticker.
Kind of takes some of the credibility out of the CAC model
Since it says "very brilliant," I'd say that old envelope toned the coin to its present color. The envelope obviously had a lot of sulfur in the paper because of the dark mark on Ms. Liberty's cheek. That's what the old timers used to call "envelope friction." For that reason I'm not sure that this coin would cross, but that's only a observation from a photo, which could be way off.
Bill, it did cross. That is the PCGS image in the original post. It is PCGS MS-65+, just as it always has been.
Ambushed by Wabbit!
Overgraded.
If its the same 1846 (looks like it is) the dark cheek has dissapeared, at least per the trueview(?) in the original post.
Crossing coins that didn't cross many times before is indeed a subtle form of gradeflation
Sure has. Looks like some excellent "spot conservation" was done. I've heard that conservators have even been known to dull back the conserved area with a little "skin."
Is there a way to definitively tell adjustment marks from PMD?
Seems the marks on the obverse would not be considered adjustment marks.
Usually adjustment marks are straight and in one direction. Sometimes they can crisscross if the adjuster really got into it. Any mark that is curved or not straight is post mint damage in my opinion. Obviously there is a certain amount of judgement involved. I believe that the planchet weight was always adjusted before the coin was struck, so the lines should appear to be "part of the coin," not something that has an "added on" look.
Many years ago a dealer tried to palm off an early half dime on me that had had initials carved into Ms. Liberty’s neck. I saw some parallel lines in that area and thought they were adjustment marks. Then I looked at the coin with a 10X and saw the initials under the lines.
The dealer’s quote on the coin sounded reasonable if it had not been damage. He asked me why I passed, and I told him. “Oh I was going to tell you about that,” he said …
Yea, right.
Was this coin conserved, perhaps by PCGS? I realize the slab photo is not a glamor shot and the Trueview is.
Maybe it's just a difference in photography and lighting.
Lance.
I have never, in all my crosses, retained the plus when crossing one of my NGC coins.
Probably $30k difference.
Lance, I wonder if it's just lighting? It will be interesting if the PCGS holder image ever shows up and if it still has Green/Newman. I still do not call an NGC 65+ CAC coin that makes it into PCGS same grade anything but a normal cross. CAC liked the coin as 65+. If someone scrubbed that spot off, I imagine the market will punish the next sale even worse.
CAC liked it as at least a B 65
The HA April 2017 auction image is not flattering at all, however, the spot appears more transparent, convincing me it is just lighting or shadow exaggerating the scuff, or whatever it is.
-
Given how grading works, unless every coin is photographed and cataloged so it can be identified on a regrade, is gradeflation just a natural result of when subjective grading meets determined submission?
That's why the current market grading paradigm is doomed to implode soon IMHO.
Or a necessity for continue revenue and profits?
Thankfully we have moderns that usually have only 2 grades. The lowly 69, and the lofty 70.
I own the $2.5 1798 from the Newman auction. It was in a NGC AU58+* holder and crossed as a PCGS AU58+. The original insert had it as uncirculated - brilliant. it's a gorgeous coin. It crossed the first time, so not the subtle grade-flation you mentioned earlier. Probably very uncommon.
A bit of a misleading title here... No gradeflation... just a crossover. Sure, market value is likely higher with PCGS, but we need an upgrade for there to be "gradeflation."
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Nicely done gif, thumbs up.
The 2-3 star trident area remains pretty static as the cheek appearance changes.
Doesn't look like a spot on the cheek to me. Looks more like an area of rub that gives the cheek area a slightly polished look... so that it looks darker at some angles and probably brighter and more reflective at other angles.
The area looks the same to me in all of the images, no conservation at all would be my guess.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
@Zoins said: "Given how grading works, unless every coin is photographed and cataloged so it can be identified on a regrade, is gradeflation just a natural result of when subjective grading meets determined submission?"
Determined submission should not matter although I've been told that one person connected to a TPGS (who shall remain unnamed as I did not hear it for myself) has said if a coin is worth sending in once, it is worth sending in several times. That does not prove anything about finally receiving an upgrade. IMO, the changes in the value of coins over time is the main factor for an upgrade. Another factor may be the changing desirability of characteristics such as toning. Most of you will recall that dull or darkly toned coins were hardly ever graded over MS-64. One other factor for upgrades (for the conspiracy crowd) is the identity of the submitter.
Grading a coin, and posting its image is a simple form of "computer" grading.
@illini420 said: "Doesn't look like a spot on the cheek to me. Looks more like an area of rub that gives the cheek area a slightly polished look... so that it looks darker at some angles and probably brighter and more reflective at other angles. The area looks the same to me in all of the images, no conservation at all would be my guess."
The flip-flop images in different lighting swayed me from my original post about conservation; and I was too much of a wuss to confess that I changed my opinion.
Now, I'm glad I didn't post right away. I just logged on to admit I was wrong and agree with you as I should have done yesterday BUT I no longer agree!
IMO, lighting plays an important part in the image. All the very dark areas of friction rub get lighter EXCEPT the two equal-sign-looking scratches (=) on the cheek. The dirt (?) in them remains dark. I'm back to a little conservation that has improved the coin's eye-appeal.
@ikeigwin: That is so cool they way you have done the lighting changes!!
I wonder if an attempt at polishing the two/three ticks at the cheek led to conservation "rub" at a later date??
BTW, a lovely coin, just looking at it is all.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Do you actually think this coin was polished? IMO, the shine we can see in the images (dark to shiny) is just the glare coming from the areas of rub with the smoothed-off microscopic surface.
In the early 1970's, before there were any grading services, an authenticator put a simplified image on the blackboard to show his students what friction wear and stacking rub would look like on an extremely magnified portion of a coin. You all have seen his often copied image of the sharp peaks and valleys he used to illustrate a coin's radials causing its luster.
When the points of the peaks get worn away (friction wear) or compressed (stacking rub) they reflect light differently. Incandescent light is best to see stacking rub (shiny) while florescent light (Oh, Horrors) is best to see wear - er, cabinet friction.
This beautiful coin has some areas where its original surface is impaired. I don't think anyone here would be surprised to learn that in some series, fully original coins w/o rub virtually don't exist! Seated Liberty dollars is one of them. We all live with it.
Let me end with this funny story. One year at the ANA Summer Seminar, after teaching students how to identify the characteristics associated with originality, luster, stacking, strike, and friction wear; the instructor I mentioned above let his class know that they each would need to decide for themselves how much friction or stacking they would allow on a coin before it was no longer Uncirculated in their eyes.
The very next year, while the instructor taught a similar class, one of the dealers told the class that his partner had taken the course the year before and he had not bought a coin since!
Back when I taught the ANA Summer Seminar Grading Class I used to suggest to the students that they take a BU 1964 quarter and study it, and then put it in with their pocket change and study it again every night to see it become less than "Mint State."
after several years of multiple tries by who knows how many owners...
the logical questions are two:
--- what do you realistically think the true grade is??
--- the assertion always tends to be that "gradeflation" is the fault of the TPG's, but given the cut/paste I would ask who do you feel is really at fault, the TPG or the owners who keep playing the game??
Not polished but wiped just locally over the imperfections. Yes, honestly I do, and it does speak for itself. The margins of the "scratches" (small though they may be) are somewhat blended by that action IMO. I suppose you could call it localized cabinet friction as well, and there is some argument for that at the hair, breast and arms and legs.
Well, just Love coins, period.
None of this matters. No one is at fault and our opinion is just that - an opinion that is negated by a TPGS label. IMO, this coin can be righteously graded from MS-63+ to MS-65 +. I would not grade it over MS-64 due to the things I see/think I see in the images; however, I am ignorant about market conditions and pricing. I'm also ignorant on the rarity of this coin in ANY condition.
I believe the coin is going to sell for whatever a knowledgeable collector/dealer wishes to pay based on his/her needs and the condition of the economy. Everything goes out the window if some nut overpays or if there is a bidding war.
And some still teach this : )
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Doing this will also show the difference between random hairlines and those from cleaning.