@CoinCast said:
NewP. Why does that exist? Sounds silly.
For the new collectors here, a "newp" is short hand for a new purchase. Like many pursuits, coin collecting and dealing has its own lingo. Dealers and collectors frequently ask other dealers if they have any "newps" in the hopes of getting "first shot" in the hopes that the dealer will "flip it" which is coin lingo for a quick resell for a modest profit.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Ok no one had said it so here’s mine: Advanced collector.
BS. Advanced just means they have more money than they know what to do with most of the time.
The term EF. It's XF. It just annoys me. Tennis players sometimes use a score like 30-5. They want you to know they have been playing tennis for a really long time. It is 30-15.
@oldabeintx said:
The term "widget" sucks some of the fun out of the hobby, so I find it offensive. The rest don't bother me, some add to the charm.
"Widget" is an arrogant elitist term used by those snobs that would call someone else's coin "dreck". Not every collector can afford to buy only trophy coins.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@oldabeintx said:
The term "widget" sucks some of the fun out of the hobby, so I find it offensive. The rest don't bother me, some add to the charm.
"Widget" is an arrogant elitist term used by those snobs that would call someone else's coin "dreck". Not every collector can afford to buy only trophy coins.
Now that you mention it, "dreck" is even more offensive.
@oldabeintx said:
The term "widget" sucks some of the fun out of the hobby, so I find it offensive. The rest don't bother me, some add to the charm.
"Widget" is an arrogant elitist term used by those snobs that would call someone else's coin "dreck". Not every collector can afford to buy only trophy coins.
I agree that widgets and dreck are condescending.
As a young collector years ago, I used to search junk boxes for older European coins and look them in my copy of Craig's Coins of the World 1750-1850. I learned a lot about history and believe that cultivated my lifelong love for the subject. Later in college, I would find low grade early cents for $2 or $3 and learned how to attribute them with a used copy of "Penny Whimsy" . I eventually became a member of EAC for about 10 years.
Did the same thing with low grade and uncleaned ancients in the early 2000s. It was a challenge, but learned how to use Roman Imperial Coins and other references, all the while learning about the coins and history.
All of these would be considered dreck, and granted, most of it isn't worth much, but I can't begin to put a value in the knowledge I gained from them and how it expanded my enjoyment of numismstics. So when I read the "Let them eat dreck" type of posts, I'm glad I did.
Tennis players sometimes use a score like 30-5. They want you to know they have been playing tennis for a really long time. It is 30-15.
Tennis is a difficult game to play and even harder to master, I respect that. what I see as BS is the scoring system, unless it has a reasonable, historic basis it is just BS, 15-30-40-deuce-love?? explain that to me.
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
Market grading is not new. It was always around. It was used by people who actually bought and sold coins as an indication of value. Since those people influence the value of coins more than a collector, what happens in the coin market is up to them. What is not new anymore are the TPGS that are determining a coin's value rather than individual dealers. Besides, if an AU coin is being sold for Mint State money and people are happy with that or if the same AU coin is bought for Mint State money and people are happy with that, what does it matter? The coin market has set a price for the coin no matter what its actual condition. As a collector, a person can choose to play along or not.
What I cannot explain to someone with a straight face is "grade-inflation." I can explain why it must occur to reflect the increased value of a coin but IMO it is not needed. Just because an Au coin has gone way up in value does not make it Mint State. After all, isn't that what's going on in your post?
@keets said:
Tennis is a difficult game to play and even harder to master, I respect that. what I see as BS is the scoring system, unless it has a reasonable, historic basis it is just BS, 15-30-40-deuce-love?? explain that to me.
As a fan of tennis, I looked into this within the past year. There is in fact a logical basis for it. I'd refer you to Google.
Someone here on the forum called me out on this one some 18 months ago or so, not really a term that bugs me, but the recent posts showing a 100 pictures of the same area of the same coin, one or two should suffice
I agree. And if it's too minor that it can't be seen with a 10X glass why bother?
Mottled toning always caught my eye. But add some pepper?
Got to love Jhon E Cash.
The frosty surfaces are glowing with fantastic rainbow hues with a predominant peach-lavender central obverse surrounded by lime and powder blue shades. Hints of pumpkin orange, emerald green, and magenta grace the surface near the rim by the date. On the reverse, the lustrous surface is peppered with mottled russet toning with no detriment to the blazing luster.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I think market grading exists because some people want coins that are worth more to have higher grades.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I think market grading exists because some people want coins that are worth more to have higher grades.
I think market grading exists because some people want coins that are worth less to have higher prices.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
No, eye appeal is certainly a factor in assigning a numerical grade within the correct technical grade range.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
No, eye appeal is certainly a factor in assigning a numerical grade within the correct technical grade range.
Tom, how long would you say that eye appeal has been a component of technical grading?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
That’s a tough question for me to answer, as I don’t know if I can separate myself from “market grading”, completely. Edited to add: However, I think eye appeal is a legitimate component of technical grading, but not to the extent that it is for “market grading”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
here's what makes me crazy:
--- Technical Grade, MS64.
--- Market graded because of "eye appeal" --- MS65.
--- Dealer priced because it's "choice" for the grade, at a level consistent with MS66.
I see this all the time and have just learned to accept it.
as I have said in other threads for many years, the TPG's should just grade coins and let the open market price coins. I think this phenomenon, for lack of a better word, is a large part of everyone's interpretation of grade-flation. I assume there are such coins included in my collection and I think it is OK because we tend to see what we own as better than what it really is. that's the basis for "ownership adds a point" to coins.
MS70 and PR70.
Look long enough and you'll find something wrong with it.
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS). Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
I guess market grading is the one that drives the most people crazy
It's hard for me to understand eye appeal as a component of technical grading because eye appeal seems subjective by its very nature, and thus not "technical".
@Zoins said:
I guess market grading is the one that drives the most people crazy
It's hard for me to understand eye appeal as a component of technical grading because eye appeal seems subjective by its very nature, and thus not "technical".
What about luster? Do you consider it a component of eye appeal? And do you consider it at all technical?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Market grading to me means more leniency in grading key dates as well as the aforementioned very slight wear on the high points on some "Mint State" grades MS60-62."
@keets said: Tennis players sometimes use a score like 30-5. They want you to know they have been playing tennis for a really long time. It is 30-15.
Tennis is a difficult game to play and even harder to master, I respect that. what I see as BS is the scoring system, unless it has a reasonable, historic basis it is just BS, 15-30-40-deuce-love?? explain that to me.
I actually looked it up. The gist of it is the scoring system was made intentionally complex to keep commoners from taking interest in the sport. Kind of like polo, cricket, and the old British monetary system.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
This is true. Technical grading has been discussed in length on other forums and in grading classes. Eye appeal has nothing to do with a coin's technical grade. That is one reason technical grading does not work except to describe a coin's actual condition. Blotchy brown stains cannot lower the grade of a technically graded Mint State 68 SE. Eye appeal is everything when a coin is market graded. It's actual condition is not important. There was a uniquely colored Twenty dollar gold piece that sold for a gazillion multiples of its technical grade due to its color and commercial value.
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
I know who you are Mr. DeLorey and you have a valid opinion that I happen to agree with. I read that you were one of the first graders at ANACS. Therefore, I cannot see what I wrote that would get you to "Bleep." Grading is one thing and pricing is another. It is unfortunate that the two different things have been combined into the commercial system. Thus, I say with all due respect that the coin business may have passed you by because grading has not described a coin's actual condition for a very long time! The grading you espouse along with many old numismatists (my dad was one - so you are at least fifteen years my senior) was virtually buried completely by 1987 after the dealer run TPGS took off. Were you at ANACS when their technically graded MS-65's became MS-63's?
Tarnish in place of toning bugs me. Not a lot, yet enough to justify entry into this thread's topic. I think it's used by some so as to bug me (and others) too which also bugs me.
One term that always drives me nuts is "condition rarity".
I mean really? How can someone pay a bazillion dollars for a coin that has a mintage of a bazillion?
We as consumers of these coins rely on the grading services, and when it comes down to splitting hairs between a "common BU grade" and a "not so common BU grade" how can we be sure?
@oldabeintx said:
The term "widget" sucks some of the fun out of the hobby, so I find it offensive. The rest don't bother me, some add to the charm.
"Widget" is an arrogant elitist term used by those snobs that would call someone else's coin "dreck". Not every collector can afford to buy only trophy coins.
The "dreck dwellers" in their own way do their part to support/prop up the hobby. All collectors are welcome. We need them too.
Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
This would be a great introduction to an in depth article on the subject of Grading vs Pricing for Coin World or the Numismatist magazines.
Hopefully all non counterfeit coins "existed from the beginning" which is a dictionary definition of original.
Only one coin of a series can be "the first or earliest", another dictionary definition of original.
"Not a copy or an imitation", another dictionary definition qualifies all coins other than counterfeits as original.
So that leaves the last obscure definition of original as arguably applicable to those who describe their coins as "original" - "eccentric or unusual person" or in this sense an "eccentric or unusual [coin]" - something that rarely applies to those who use the term "original" for coins, though it may well apply to the person so claiming.
Right or wrong. I always interpreted technical grading as a coins condition upon leaving the mint w/o toning, a marketing asset. Yes, the luster exits so there is that consideration. Then through the coins path through the ravages of circulation, it's condition can still be tech. graded, Poor,AG, Good etc. My feeling is since the toning came long after the minted coins birth, and not having anything to do with the actual minting process at the point of creation, the existence of toning indicates to me is where the coin enters the marketing realm. Adjoining the technical grade evaluation. Two separate considerations. Maybe splitting hairs somewhat, but it just seems to me they are created at two different points, hence tech. grade and market appeal as pointed out in the above stated analysis.
Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
@shorecoll said:
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
I know who you are Mr. DeLorey and you have a valid opinion that I happen to agree with. I read that you were one of the first graders at ANACS. Therefore, I cannot see what I wrote that would get you to "Bleep." Grading is one thing and pricing is another. It is unfortunate that the two different things have been combined into the commercial system. Thus, I say with all due respect that the coin business may have passed you by because grading has not described a coin's actual condition for a very long time! The grading you espouse along with many old numismatists (my dad was one - so you are at least fifteen years my senior) was virtually buried completely by 1987 after the dealer run TPGS took off. Were you at ANACS when their technically graded MS-65's became MS-63's?
Yes, I was there when our technical grade MS-65 became a market grade MS-63. Just a few months earlier, our technical grade MS-65 was a market grade MS-67. Which one was correct? Please see my comments in this thread, especially Part 3:
Please tell me which is more desirable, a stable, consistent grade, or one that swings wildly with the market? Consider the housing market. The house I am currently living in has five official bedrooms plus my office, which legally cannot be described in a real estate listing as a bedroom because it does not have a closet. In the hot real estate market of 2019, could I have listed the house for sale as a 6-bedroom home because the demand for houses was high? I don't think so.
I have no idea what the current demand for housing is during the COVID-19 crisis, but let us assume for the sake of argument that the housing market has crashed. Do I now have a 4-bedroom house?
I am currently replacing one of the decks. It is 22-feet long, and has a fantastic view of the mountains. That gives it great eye appeal, so shall I tell the builder to list it in the official drawings as a 25-foot deck (which it cannot be because of property line setbacks) so that I can advertise it as such if I ever sell the house?
Yes you are correct that proper, consistent, technical grading is dead and buried. In its place we have a market-driven bubble just waiting to pop when some large economic disruption crashes the coin market. Surely that cannot happen.
Fortunately I am no longer in charge of the grading universe, it having passed me by in favor of what we have now. Like Mr. Holmes I am "tending bees in Sussex." The Moriarty's of the world are somebody else's problem.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
QDB used to speak of market cycles that drove grade-flation. In high demand times where more people wanted MS-66's, they simply re-classified MS-65's as 66's or 67's and in low demand times they might be 64's and 65's (or even 63's in the above example). Is that the danger we're facing now? It certainly might be in the commem market.
Comments
Spot free when the first thing you see is a spot.
Clean surfaces. Does it mean you cleaned it or is it spot free?
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
For the new collectors here, a "newp" is short hand for a new purchase. Like many pursuits, coin collecting and dealing has its own lingo. Dealers and collectors frequently ask other dealers if they have any "newps" in the hopes of getting "first shot" in the hopes that the dealer will "flip it" which is coin lingo for a quick resell for a modest profit.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Blast White"
Ok no one had said it so here’s mine: Advanced collector.
BS. Advanced just means they have more money than they know what to do with most of the time.
The term EF. It's XF. It just annoys me. Tennis players sometimes use a score like 30-5. They want you to know they have been playing tennis for a really long time. It is 30-15.
AU58+ with a CAC sticker.
The term "widget" sucks some of the fun out of the hobby, so I find it offensive. The rest don't bother me, some add to the charm.
"Widget" is an arrogant elitist term used by those snobs that would call someone else's coin "dreck". Not every collector can afford to buy only trophy coins.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Now that you mention it, "dreck" is even more offensive.
I agree that widgets and dreck are condescending.
As a young collector years ago, I used to search junk boxes for older European coins and look them in my copy of Craig's Coins of the World 1750-1850. I learned a lot about history and believe that cultivated my lifelong love for the subject. Later in college, I would find low grade early cents for $2 or $3 and learned how to attribute them with a used copy of "Penny Whimsy" . I eventually became a member of EAC for about 10 years.
Did the same thing with low grade and uncleaned ancients in the early 2000s. It was a challenge, but learned how to use Roman Imperial Coins and other references, all the while learning about the coins and history.
All of these would be considered dreck, and granted, most of it isn't worth much, but I can't begin to put a value in the knowledge I gained from them and how it expanded my enjoyment of numismstics. So when I read the "Let them eat dreck" type of posts, I'm glad I did.
Tennis players sometimes use a score like 30-5. They want you to know they have been playing tennis for a really long time. It is 30-15.
Tennis is a difficult game to play and even harder to master, I respect that. what I see as BS is the scoring system, unless it has a reasonable, historic basis it is just BS, 15-30-40-deuce-love?? explain that to me.
Find a scientist in any technical discipline and explain to them with a straight face market or commercial grading vs technical grading. Market grading is that once-upon-a-time enough industry powers-that-be decided that these circulated coins get to be called uncirculated and we'll all shut up and buy them.
I'm new here but I have read a lot on this subject. I have a science background so I understand the difference. It is very simple to understand and you have explained it nicely. Technical grading was too strict. It was invented in the 1970s by people who did not buy or sell coins and was only used to describe a coin's actual condition.
Market grading is not new. It was always around. It was used by people who actually bought and sold coins as an indication of value. Since those people influence the value of coins more than a collector, what happens in the coin market is up to them. What is not new anymore are the TPGS that are determining a coin's value rather than individual dealers. Besides, if an AU coin is being sold for Mint State money and people are happy with that or if the same AU coin is bought for Mint State money and people are happy with that, what does it matter? The coin market has set a price for the coin no matter what its actual condition. As a collector, a person can choose to play along or not.
What I cannot explain to someone with a straight face is "grade-inflation." I can explain why it must occur to reflect the increased value of a coin but IMO it is not needed. Just because an Au coin has gone way up in value does not make it Mint State. After all, isn't that what's going on in your post?
When someone says of your $10 to $20 retail value coin "It really has no value..."
As a fan of tennis, I looked into this within the past year. There is in fact a logical basis for it. I'd refer you to Google.
I agree. And if it's too minor that it can't be seen with a 10X glass why bother?
Mottled toning always caught my eye. But add some pepper?
Got to love Jhon E Cash.
The frosty surfaces are glowing with fantastic rainbow hues with a predominant peach-lavender central obverse surrounded by lime and powder blue shades. Hints of pumpkin orange, emerald green, and magenta grace the surface near the rim by the date. On the reverse, the lustrous surface is peppered with mottled russet toning with no detriment to the blazing luster.
http://www.jhonecash.com/coins/coin_show_archives.asp?cert=90116358
The words 'BLAST WHITE' in the description on a 150 year old 90% silver coin.
I think they meant to say 'DIPPED WHITE!!!'
Stay safe!
Dave
I think market grading exists because some people want coins that are worth more to have higher grades.
The sound of the word "cud" just bothers me...
LRC Numismatics eBay listings:
http://stores.ebay.com/lrcnumismatics
What in the (Bleep) is "GRADING" if it is not "describ(ing) a coins actual condition"??????????? That should be the textbook definition of "GRADING." "PRICING" is something else entirely!
When ANACS started grading coins in 1979 we used "technical grading" in the interests of something called "accuracy." Dealers use "market grading" in the interests of something called "greed." And the collecting hobby is far worse off for it.
“first strike”, “monster”, > @Zoins said:
I think market grading exists because some people want coins that are worth less to have higher prices.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
When I hear the term market grading I think of all those coins with a trace of high point wear (super sliders) that are in MS61 or 62 slabs. These coins would trade in the marketplace as a mint state coin even though they are technically high end AU.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Eye appeal is a grading factor in market grading but not in technical grading. Right?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
No, eye appeal is certainly a factor in assigning a numerical grade within the correct technical grade range.
Tom, how long would you say that eye appeal has been a component of technical grading?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Firm in reference to price.
That’s a tough question for me to answer, as I don’t know if I can separate myself from “market grading”, completely. Edited to add: However, I think eye appeal is a legitimate component of technical grading, but not to the extent that it is for “market grading”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think of those and higher grade coins, as well, which look as if they have received an extra point or more, due to color.
here's what makes me crazy:
--- Technical Grade, MS64.
--- Market graded because of "eye appeal" --- MS65.
--- Dealer priced because it's "choice" for the grade, at a level consistent with MS66.
I see this all the time and have just learned to accept it.
as I have said in other threads for many years, the TPG's should just grade coins and let the open market price coins. I think this phenomenon, for lack of a better word, is a large part of everyone's interpretation of grade-flation. I assume there are such coins included in my collection and I think it is OK because we tend to see what we own as better than what it really is. that's the basis for "ownership adds a point" to coins.
MS70 and PR70.
Look long enough and you'll find something wrong with it.
Jesse C. Kraft, Ph.D.
Resolute Americana Curator of American Numismatics
American Numismatic Society
New York City
Member of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), British Numismatic Society (BNS), New York Numismatic Club (NYNC), Early American Copper (EAC), the Colonial Coin Collectors Club (C4), U.S. Mexican Numismatic Association (USMNA), Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC), Token and Medal Society (TAMS), and life member of the Atlantic County Numismatic Society (ACNS).
Become a member of the American Numismatic Society!
I guess market grading is the one that drives the most people crazy
It's hard for me to understand eye appeal as a component of technical grading because eye appeal seems subjective by its very nature, and thus not "technical".
What about luster? Do you consider it a component of eye appeal? And do you consider it at all technical?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
At a PCGS luncheon several years ago QDB ended a presentation by poking a little fun at PCGS. "Of course it is EF, not XF", he insisted.
AU is NOT almost uncirculated.
Lance.
Jumbo Shrimp always confused me.
Market grading to me means more leniency in grading key dates as well as the aforementioned very slight wear on the high points on some "Mint State" grades MS60-62."
I actually looked it up. The gist of it is the scoring system was made intentionally complex to keep commoners from taking interest in the sport. Kind of like polo, cricket, and the old British monetary system.
This is true. Technical grading has been discussed in length on other forums and in grading classes. Eye appeal has nothing to do with a coin's technical grade. That is one reason technical grading does not work except to describe a coin's actual condition. Blotchy brown stains cannot lower the grade of a technically graded Mint State 68 SE. Eye appeal is everything when a coin is market graded. It's actual condition is not important. There was a uniquely colored Twenty dollar gold piece that sold for a gazillion multiples of its technical grade due to its color and commercial value.
I know who you are Mr. DeLorey and you have a valid opinion that I happen to agree with. I read that you were one of the first graders at ANACS. Therefore, I cannot see what I wrote that would get you to "Bleep." Grading is one thing and pricing is another. It is unfortunate that the two different things have been combined into the commercial system. Thus, I say with all due respect that the coin business may have passed you by because grading has not described a coin's actual condition for a very long time! The grading you espouse along with many old numismatists (my dad was one - so you are at least fifteen years my senior) was virtually buried completely by 1987 after the dealer run TPGS took off. Were you at ANACS when their technically graded MS-65's became MS-63's?
Net grading for problem coins, since every coin is net graded.
I don't like the term "market acceptable." There is one dealer whose obviously cleaned coins are described as market acceptable.
Tarnish in place of toning bugs me. Not a lot, yet enough to justify entry into this thread's topic. I think it's used by some so as to bug me (and others) too which also bugs me.
One term that always drives me nuts is "condition rarity".
I mean really? How can someone pay a bazillion dollars for a coin that has a mintage of a bazillion?
We as consumers of these coins rely on the grading services, and when it comes down to splitting hairs between a "common BU grade" and a "not so common BU grade" how can we be sure?
Here's an example and this is the starting bid!.....
https://greatcollections.com/Coin/816174/1942-D-Mercury-Dime-PCGS-MS-68-FB
The "dreck dwellers" in their own way do their part to support/prop up the hobby. All collectors are welcome. We need them too.
This would be a great introduction to an in depth article on the subject of Grading vs Pricing for Coin World or the Numismatist magazines.
"Original"
Hopefully all non counterfeit coins "existed from the beginning" which is a dictionary definition of original.
Only one coin of a series can be "the first or earliest", another dictionary definition of original.
"Not a copy or an imitation", another dictionary definition qualifies all coins other than counterfeits as original.
So that leaves the last obscure definition of original as arguably applicable to those who describe their coins as "original" - "eccentric or unusual person" or in this sense an "eccentric or unusual [coin]" - something that rarely applies to those who use the term "original" for coins, though it may well apply to the person so claiming.
Fresh
Rare
Monster
Moose
Expensive dreck
Sticker rarity
Oh yeah, and everything with a tinge of color even if virtually monochrome Is dubbed as "rainbow" toning.
Right or wrong. I always interpreted technical grading as a coins condition upon leaving the mint w/o toning, a marketing asset. Yes, the luster exits so there is that consideration. Then through the coins path through the ravages of circulation, it's condition can still be tech. graded, Poor,AG, Good etc. My feeling is since the toning came long after the minted coins birth, and not having anything to do with the actual minting process at the point of creation, the existence of toning indicates to me is where the coin enters the marketing realm. Adjoining the technical grade evaluation. Two separate considerations. Maybe splitting hairs somewhat, but it just seems to me they are created at two different points, hence tech. grade and market appeal as pointed out in the above stated analysis.
Yes, I was there when our technical grade MS-65 became a market grade MS-63. Just a few months earlier, our technical grade MS-65 was a market grade MS-67. Which one was correct? Please see my comments in this thread, especially Part 3:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1035459/any-of-you-og-s-wanna-tell-us-about-the-1980-s#latest
Please tell me which is more desirable, a stable, consistent grade, or one that swings wildly with the market? Consider the housing market. The house I am currently living in has five official bedrooms plus my office, which legally cannot be described in a real estate listing as a bedroom because it does not have a closet. In the hot real estate market of 2019, could I have listed the house for sale as a 6-bedroom home because the demand for houses was high? I don't think so.
I have no idea what the current demand for housing is during the COVID-19 crisis, but let us assume for the sake of argument that the housing market has crashed. Do I now have a 4-bedroom house?
I am currently replacing one of the decks. It is 22-feet long, and has a fantastic view of the mountains. That gives it great eye appeal, so shall I tell the builder to list it in the official drawings as a 25-foot deck (which it cannot be because of property line setbacks) so that I can advertise it as such if I ever sell the house?
Yes you are correct that proper, consistent, technical grading is dead and buried. In its place we have a market-driven bubble just waiting to pop when some large economic disruption crashes the coin market. Surely that cannot happen.
Fortunately I am no longer in charge of the grading universe, it having passed me by in favor of what we have now. Like Mr. Holmes I am "tending bees in Sussex." The Moriarty's of the world are somebody else's problem.
QDB used to speak of market cycles that drove grade-flation. In high demand times where more people wanted MS-66's, they simply re-classified MS-65's as 66's or 67's and in low demand times they might be 64's and 65's (or even 63's in the above example). Is that the danger we're facing now? It certainly might be in the commem market.