Why do we need the grading services to tell us . .
Newmismatist
Posts: 1,802 ✭✭
Whether a coin has Full Bands (FB), Full Bell Lines (FL) Full Steps (FS), Full Head (FH) Full Torch (FT) - Have I forgotten any of the special designations (Acented Hair? AH?) that unless I'm missing something can be determined if we simply take the time to LOOK.
Now maybe I'm starting to get a bit curmudgenly, but are ALL coin collectors so blind and so stupid that we pay someone else to tell us what it is that we can plainly see (or not see) on a coin?
And to take this one step further, why on a very small porion of the coin. Many coins have the particular designated part visible, but other aspects of the coin exhibit lack of full definition. For Example: On SLQ's why not full toes (FT) in addition to FH, or FT & FH, or maybe full shield rivets (FSR) or full date (FD) so then we could have a coin that said 1919 MS65 FH, FT, FSR & FD - (and that's just the obverse) On the reverse we could add, Full Breast Feathers (FBF) Full Wing Edge (FWE) and Full Stars (FS) - maybe even Full "E Pluribus Unum" (FEPU). If we had all of these nifty designations, we we then know if the darn thing was fully struck, or maybe even struck from an early die state, but just FH ONLY tells us that the 2% of the obverse at the top got fully struck from a dies that hadn't yet become so used that the deepest recesses of the dies were now worn (or filled). How many FH SLQs have you seen that don't have the toes, some of the shield revits are missing and sometimes the date is 1/3 to 1/2 missing?
Now, I firmly believe that the prescence of full strike on a coin can add value to a coin, or conversely its absence can lower the value and desirability of a coin. But this is just ONE of several factors which overall contribute to the Eye appeal of a coin, some of which are as follows (there's probable more that I haven't thought of):
1. Condition,
2. Strike,
3. Luster, and
4. Toning
To the above can be added Die state (you get cameos & PLs from new dies, and full die characteristics when the dies are new).
Now rarity is not listed because rarity (availability of the particular date) is not part of grade - it enters into the valuation of the coin in addtion to the factors that give us the coin's grade which together indacte a value for the particular coin.
What I see is that the grading services are telling us the obvious and we, as collectors then pay for this unnecessary attribution AND we then place multiple values for this one small ( & on some coins, its small) aspect of the coin, disregrding all other characteristics of the coin.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Now that we are told which Roosies have FBs, are Roosies worth multiples if they have FBs?, same with the other series mentioned?
Or is it just a great marketing strategy, we get to pay for having our coins graded again?
If Yes - which series should we next regrade?
Full Breast Feathers (FBF) on Morgans (how about all those O mints)
If the grading services add enough of these attributions, then we wouldn't even need to look at the coins & we could buy and sell 'em using blue sheet bid and ask - we could have a matrix of all the various possibilities of what was (or was not fully struck up on the coin & price 'em accordingly.
Or am I just not getting it?
Now maybe I'm starting to get a bit curmudgenly, but are ALL coin collectors so blind and so stupid that we pay someone else to tell us what it is that we can plainly see (or not see) on a coin?
And to take this one step further, why on a very small porion of the coin. Many coins have the particular designated part visible, but other aspects of the coin exhibit lack of full definition. For Example: On SLQ's why not full toes (FT) in addition to FH, or FT & FH, or maybe full shield rivets (FSR) or full date (FD) so then we could have a coin that said 1919 MS65 FH, FT, FSR & FD - (and that's just the obverse) On the reverse we could add, Full Breast Feathers (FBF) Full Wing Edge (FWE) and Full Stars (FS) - maybe even Full "E Pluribus Unum" (FEPU). If we had all of these nifty designations, we we then know if the darn thing was fully struck, or maybe even struck from an early die state, but just FH ONLY tells us that the 2% of the obverse at the top got fully struck from a dies that hadn't yet become so used that the deepest recesses of the dies were now worn (or filled). How many FH SLQs have you seen that don't have the toes, some of the shield revits are missing and sometimes the date is 1/3 to 1/2 missing?
Now, I firmly believe that the prescence of full strike on a coin can add value to a coin, or conversely its absence can lower the value and desirability of a coin. But this is just ONE of several factors which overall contribute to the Eye appeal of a coin, some of which are as follows (there's probable more that I haven't thought of):
1. Condition,
2. Strike,
3. Luster, and
4. Toning
To the above can be added Die state (you get cameos & PLs from new dies, and full die characteristics when the dies are new).
Now rarity is not listed because rarity (availability of the particular date) is not part of grade - it enters into the valuation of the coin in addtion to the factors that give us the coin's grade which together indacte a value for the particular coin.
What I see is that the grading services are telling us the obvious and we, as collectors then pay for this unnecessary attribution AND we then place multiple values for this one small ( & on some coins, its small) aspect of the coin, disregrding all other characteristics of the coin.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Now that we are told which Roosies have FBs, are Roosies worth multiples if they have FBs?, same with the other series mentioned?
Or is it just a great marketing strategy, we get to pay for having our coins graded again?
If Yes - which series should we next regrade?
Full Breast Feathers (FBF) on Morgans (how about all those O mints)
If the grading services add enough of these attributions, then we wouldn't even need to look at the coins & we could buy and sell 'em using blue sheet bid and ask - we could have a matrix of all the various possibilities of what was (or was not fully struck up on the coin & price 'em accordingly.
Or am I just not getting it?
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
0
Comments
<< <i>You forgot AB (accented breast) on Type 1 SLQ's. >>
Damn! I didn't even know about that one. Are they doing FN's for the TY1 SLQ's
(Lucy don't read this - you don't need to know)
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
Yes - check out my comments earlier today on the Registry Board under the 1960(d) (no bell lines) Franklin thread
Wondercoin
~*Bugs*~
islemangu@yahoo.com
See Current Sales on Etsy
https://www.etsy.com/shop/Islemangu?ref=shop_profile&listing_id=4331147333
But, I agree with you. I don't need the 3rd parties to point it out to me. On the other hand, if you or I were PCGS, we'd keep coming up with recert gimics too.
<< <i>I am most certainly not going to take your word that your $200 coin has what I am looking for sight unseen and without knowing you personally. >>
That is why you do not buy coins sight-unseen....
Newmismatist has brought up a point that took me a number of years to get myself: As you gain experience grading and authenticating coins the 3rd party grading services FOR COLLECTORS becomes more and more useless or, I should say, irrelevant. In fact, I believe the services are there for the dealers. Because they are the ones who have to buy and sell many different coins from many different series and it is unrealistic to believe that they can become an expert in ALL coins in a reasonable amount of time. A collector, who usually concerntrates on a small number of series CAN become an expert in those particular series over time.
1) When you are a novice they provide "accurate" grading, which to a novice, is important because they don't know how to grade yet. The problem is that this "accuracy" is questionable at best plus there is also an issue that maybe a novice shouldn't be buying coins in the first place. But that's another discussion.
2) As you become more experienced and learn that "grade" and "quality" aren't necessarily the same thing you use the service to at least come up with a grade that is "in the ball park" and the collector him/her self can decide what the value of the coin is. The service provides authenticity...which is important.
3) Once you become an expert (at least an expert in the series you collect) not only do you NOT need a 3rd party to tell you the grade you can authenticate the coin YOURSELF. At this point, the services becomes moot.
jom
Yes.. I to was against the FB designation for Roosies when it first came out. But I'll tell you what. I've never
had so much fun hunting down these little round pieces of metal. I don't believe PCGS initiated all these
designations without strong initial collector support. Sure there is some monetary reasoning behind this
where PCGS profits from it. But!!! Its still supported by the collector and dealers sending in the coins. Look
at it this way... If you don't want to collect the designation you get to chose from a truck load of great coins
that lack the designation at a fraction of the cost. The only ones complaining are those who feel they have
been priced out of the top pop FS, FBL, FH, RD and FB coins. We the collectors set the prices for designated and
non- designated coins. Trust me when I say, the designations are here to stay and there will be more to come.
In my last deal with wondercoin he through in a flame suit....So I thought I'd try it out.
Onlyroosies
"Greg: I was one of the FEW who opposed adding an "FB" designation to Roosies. You may remember my comments on the subject; they were, at times, not very "pro-PCGS". My "colleages" pushed for the "FB" and to some it has been a real "money maker". I HAVE YET TO SELL A SINGLE SILVER FB DIME - in my registry set (#31 or something like that) I even note where I own 4 or 5 coins of each date. I am frankly disgusted by the whole affair (Ok - now amused in the words of E. Costello) - I could care less if I am costing myself thousands of dollars - I am sure I will make it up later when Registry fever reaches it peak and collectors fight for the dimes with the "most points" attached to them - again, "most points", not best dimes.
BUT, WHAT IS DONE IS DONE. The genie is out of the bottle and, as Greg said, the collectors are as much to blame as anyone else. It is the collectors who have decided MS67FBL coins are worth $30,000 each and their MS67 non-FBL counterparts worth around $500. It is the collectors who value key MS66FBL coins at $20k+ and their non-FBL counterparts at $500.
Greg: Now to address you question as to your pretty 1953(s) MS66. I own numerous coins just like it - several dated 1953(s). They are worth next to nothing (generally well under $1k) and may be that way for a long time. They are near "worthless" in the Registry - they are the dinosaurs of coin collecting - they are the castoffs of our time. They can go to their own party with non-FH SLQ's, RB Lincolns, non-FS Jeffs and non-FB Roosies and Mercs - but, don't expect many folks to attend that party. The other Registry party is serving up FB Mercs and Roosies, FS Jeffs, FH SLQ's and FBL Frankies (botom lines only OK) - champagne is flowing, dancing girls are coming out of cakes and the music is wild. The crowds are huge at the designation party - standing room only, while the non-designation coins have a few stranglers sitting around at their gathering drinking grape juice, reading books and talking about the old days. And, even though the non-designated coins look so darn pretty - no one is asking them out to attend the big bash down on Registry Blvd. Get the picture?
Wondercoin"
I always thought the next designation was going to be f.h. [full horn] buffalo nickles.
I don't buy designation coins when the difference in price gets to out of wack.
Les
<< <i>And, even though the non-designated coins look so darn pretty >>
Wondercoin - that's an excellent discussion re why we need to look at the whole coin & not just the thin little lines on the 2-3% of the reverse of the coin - There's some great collections waiting to be put together, if the collectors would just take the time to LOOK at the coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
K S
<< <i>We can all keep saying how much we hate these designations. The fact is there here and here to stay.
Yes.. I to was against the FB designation for Roosies when it first came out. But I'll tell you what. I've never
had so much fun hunting down these little round pieces of metal. I don't believe PCGS initiated all these
designations without strong initial collector support. Sure there is some monetary reasoning behind this
where PCGS profits from it. But!!! Its still supported by the collector and dealers sending in the coins. Look
at it this way... If you don't want to collect the designation you get to chose from a truck load of great coins
that lack the designation at a fraction of the cost. The only ones complaining are those who feel they have
been priced out of the top pop FS, FBL, FH, RD and FB coins. We the collectors set the prices for designated and
non- designated coins. Trust me when I say, the designations are here to stay and there will be more to come.
In my last deal with wondercoin he through in a flame suit....So I thought I'd try it out.
Onlyroosies >>
Just when I think I have read the most snobbish comment on the boards, someone else makes a post like this. LOL
<< <i>in short, all those "augmentations" are stupid.
K S >>
Geesh, could it have been any shorter? or any more true? nahh...don't think so.
I say what he said.
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
Novice: All slabs are the same and all are worth what the list price says.
Collector: I only buy one slab cuz they can do no wrong.
Advanced collector: I'll buy any slab IF the coin is all there and the price is right
Expert: I don't need no stinkin' slab!
<< <i>but are ALL coin collectors so blind and so stupid >>
Hey buddy, now this was a stupid thing to post! Watch how you phrase things around here. Yeah, I love buying the designations,
and if being stupid is what cause me to retire early with a very nice nest egg, then more stupidity for me!
You come off as yet another one of those elitest know it alls...... Hey, why post on this board? Leave it for us stupid people.
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
<< <i>Newbie: I don't need no stinkin' slab!
Novice: All slabs are the same and all are worth what the list price says.
Collector: I only buy one slab cuz they can do no wrong.
Advanced collector: I'll buy any slab IF the coin is all there and the price is right
Expert: I don't need no stinkin' slab! >>
hey tradedollarnut, that was remarkably perceptive. i like it!!!
K S
I expect that someday slabbing will be a prerequisite for insuring coins over $500 each.
I can tell you of a collector who documented his raw coins with purchase invoices from the early 1990's and I had to testify on his behalf as to the grades of his coins as the insurance company was only going to pay him original cost and not appreciated value even though he paid for such rider (replacement cost rider). Had the coins been slabbed he would have survived the financial fiasco much better. They would not accept the dealer's grade of the raw coin beyond the purchase price. Big time lawyers I have spoke with now agree that slabbing is a must if you are going to have a prayer against the insurance companies. Furthermore, I understand insurance companies are moving towards requiring a written appraisal updated every three years on each and every insured coin or in the alternative, a slabbed coin.
The insurance company in question (and others I checked) accept PCGS, NGC, ICG and ANACS for replacement cost. They do not accept the other grading services for replacement cost other than bullion related coins or coins in rolls. They read the coin hobby literature too.
Unfortunately, this includes the FB, FBL, DMPL etc. if the value of the coin is significantly affected.
<< <i>You forgot AB (accented breast) on Type 1 SLQ's. >>
Ahhh yes, the coveted "Full Tit" designation.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
they do keep the focus on nicer coins. Obviously not all nice coins get the designation
and not all coins that get the designation are extremely nice coins, but it keeps new-
bies and less advanced collectors looking at the details. It is here probably that the
effect on price occurs. Most advanced collectors already have a preference for nice strong
strikes and will notice how sharp it is so the designation will have little bearing on how he
values the coin. Less advanced collectors are at a greater disadvantage without the des-
ignations especially when it comes to buying the better coins; a newbie simply won't pay a
multiple of price guide value for a superb coin, but those with a designation are lifted to a
much higher level.
It really is collectors who have demanded this system and until collectors demand a more
complete grade than this is the next best thing.
<< <i>...is it just a great marketing strategy... >>
yes
I hear you. I think full strike designations are silly, particularly when you put it in perspective. I am enjoying your posts/threads a lot and agreeing 110%.
TDN,
Very pithy and precise newbie-expert progression. Truer words probably never spoken here.
Lucy,
I do not think Newmusmatist is out to offend as much as to stimulate discussion. If I were collecting circulation strike coins, I would undoubtedly go for the full strike peices, too.
Robert
<< <i>jom, not everyone will ship a coin to you for inspection! If you have to have every coin in hand, your limiting the amount of coins to choose from! Your going to miss out on a lot of nice coins and deals! >>
WSM: That is true! So therefore I won't be buying their coins if there is NO return priviledge because I do NOT buy coins sight-unseen. Period.
Whether or not I'll be missing out on a lot of deals is a matter of opinion. I just happen to not agree with yours.
jom
<< <i>If I were collecting Merc dimes, SLQ's, etc, I'd try to put together the highest graded, most eye appealing set and NEVER pay for a strike designation. >>
TDN - You sound like a COIN collector - I wasn't sure there were any left.
LucyBop - Certainly didn't mean to offend, more of a rhetorical question as to why we as collectors need the grading services to tells us what we can already plainly see. Maybe I should have worded it differently, but are all of us collectors so unsure of our own abilities that we have to pay them to tell us what is so obvious if we just look at the darn things. What's next? we'll have to pay extra if they added the word Franklin to the half dollar holder?
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
coins are impossible to buy in third party graders' holders without a strike des-
ignation. The only alternative to the designation is to buy them raw or break
them out.
<< <i>Some of these coins are impossible to buy in third party graders' holders without a strike des-
ignation >>
Yeah, but there are MANY coins in strike designation holders that are NOT full strike. In fact, I'd say the vast majority of them aren't....
jom
<< <i>Newbie: I don't need no stinkin' slab!
Novice: All slabs are the same and all are worth what the list price says.
Collector: I only buy one slab cuz they can do no wrong.
Advanced collector: I'll buy any slab IF the coin is all there and the price is right
Expert: I don't need no stinkin' slab!
TDN, I like your advanced defenition more then your advanced, I will buy raw or slabbed if the quality & price is there.
Les
MIRRORLIKE™ or ML™
Grading service for modern issue mirrorlike coins
FROSTED WHITECAM™ or FWC™
Grading service for proof coins with frosted white surfaces with no film or spots, is a grade above an Ultra or Deep Cameo Proof - the first off the dies.
Full Beak™ or FEB™
Grading service for Washington Quarters and Kennedy Halves that exhibit a Full Split Eagle's Beak on the reverse of the coin. (This is abbreviated "FSB" on the PDF on their home page)
Full Split Hand™ or FSH™
Grading service for Walking Liberty Halves that exhibit a Full Split Hand.
Full Tail™ or FT™
Grading service for Buffalo Nickels that exhibit a Full Tail on the Buffalo's hind.
I think Wondercoin's comments in connection with his opposition to the Roosevelt Dime designation are well stated and are similar to my views. However, as Wondercoin tells the story, I guess that I am proud to be one of those collectors that was not invited to the Registry Party and I can drink my Martini in peace... I am happy with the coins that I have and consider myself fortunate to own what I have, even though there are other collections that may be superior...I can live with that and still enjoy what I have and be proud and thankful... I never bought JDSU at $100 a share and Hell will freeze over before I pay $39,100 for a 1963 Proof Lincoln graded PR70 or $27,000+ for a 1950 Franklin graded MS67FBL. Perhaps there are some that understand the analogy.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>NEWMISMATIST makes some compelling arguments with respect to this series...the toes, the shield and breast feathers on the eagle on the reverse and... >>
CoinKat
I actually used the SLQs only because its one of the earliest series to acquire a designation that supposedly indicates a "superior" coin. This started long before slabbing, & I believe was in response to a major dealer who actively sells these coins, "promoting" them at significately higher prices then other gem SLQs - At the time I was actively collecting SLQs and I could NOT understand why such a premium was placed on the FH "designation" when often, other parts of the coins simply were not all there. I think if one would examine other series with designations, you would find the same anomalies - one part sharply struck, other portions of the coin weakly struck. This could be a function of the manufacturing process. If the dies became slightly out of allignment, an area could be sharply stuck (the head of a SLQ) and the portion of the coin on the same side but opposite (the Date on the SLQ) could be weakly struck. Or it could simply be a die with the recesses filled from the repeated striking process. In any event, my experience was that a full head SLQ was not necessarily a superior strike, a superior die state or even a superior coin. But this caught on & ever since no one seems to bother to look at the rest of the coin, or sometimes even the overall LOOK of the coin.
I think FB Mercs were the next series to obtain a special "premium" designation (or maybe it actually occurred contemporaneously with SLQs). I was also collecting Unc Mercs & the holy grail was a 1945-P FSB. Having looked at many 1945-Ps, I'm not really sure the split band was even in the dies, but I note that there are about 100 graded by PCGS, so, maybe they really do have FSBs, but all the ones that I saw that were called FSB were w/ flat bands & with only the bares hint of a split in the bands. My conclusion was that whether it did or did not have FSBs did NOT justify the prices being asked for what was otherwise a common coin. In my mind, a significant die characteristic that would justify a substantial premium was a 42/41, but whether a common 1945P had that miniscule part of the coin "fully" visible didn't add anything significant to that coin - there were lots of nice uncs available, & you could put together a wonderful set of UNC Mercs w/o having all of them FBs. Finding a gem 1919-S, with or w/o FBs, that was another story. I always thought that a great looking coin trumped one that had a particalr techincal "highlite" but otherwise was ordinary. I think the original designations for SLQs and Mercs was more of a marketing ploy than any significant analysis of what made one coin truly superior to another. It was like a "sound bite" - sounds good but lacks substance. At that time dealers with no real knowledge of which coins were the gems, which ones were truly rare and which were common, could market this "rare" aspect of the coin (FH, FB) w/o any other significant knowledge of the series. It was simply a marketing ploy, and it caught on, and we have it to this day. I'm not sure we as collectors have benifited from this, but we now place great emphasis on just this portion of these coins, to the detriment of many wonderfully beautiful coins which may be the really true bargains in numismatics.
I think if we would take the time to examine each of the various series that now have these special designations, we might find that while the special designation MIGHT in some instances indicate a superior strike (or an early die state), it is NOT necessarily a good predictor of a great eye-appealing coin.
But now, especially on modern series, in which nearly ALL the coins are common, there is a specific attempt to create a preceived rarity, and I think the purpose is twofold: To require coins that are common to be submitted for grading so that we can be "informed" whether we are the proud possessors of a common coin with a rare "trait"; and so that these common coins can be sold to a naive coin collecting public who simply don't take the time to determine whether there is really anything of significance which would justify paying a (substantial) premium for what is in all likelihood a common coin.
Marketing becomes key, and preception becomes reality.
More and more coins are being marketed by attempting to create some significance as to many very minor and insignificant aspects of the coin. I'm not sure whether collectors have demanded FB Roosies, or grading services NEED FB Roosies for their economic benefit.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
<< <i>...there is a specific attempt to create a perceived rarity... >>
pardon the chopping and dicing, but once again,
yes
YOU WENT OFF TOPIC WITH THAT.
With all due respect, I sure hope you are talking about modern proofs here, because if you are referring to MS moderns (i.e. "All the coins are common"), I suspect you are greatly lacking in the experience necessary to make such a comment. For example, have you ever tried to slab a DEL(d) or PA(d) state quarter in MS68? I mean really tried? Want to make the easiest $10,000 of your life (which you can then use to buy more classics)? Simply slab for me one each of these coins at PCGS before Halloween, 2003 and provided your (2) coins result in the pop becoming 2/0 for each of them at PCGS, just PM me to collect your $10,000 in exchange for giving me those (2) freshly made pop 2/0 coins. I would be greatly interested in the coins even as 3/0 or higher pops, but, my figures would adjust somewhat (you would still make a load of cash though, so don't let that possibility slow you down). So, my $10,000 is on the table for you to slab me the pop 2/0 DEL(d) and PA(d) state quarters in PCGS-MS68 and take the next 5+ weeks to do so. Surely a few hours work justifies the challenge to make $10,000 for 50 cents worth of state quarters and $24 in grading fees? Offer expired 10/31/03 because every offer should have a cutoff date, but, if you feel you are "really close" to landing my coins, just PM me I am will strongly consider providing you a reasonable extention to that deadline. Again, within my deadline, I'll pay you the $10,000 for the pair of these PCGS-MS68 coins provided the coins are both no greater than pop 2/0 at the time you request my cash
How about something a little more current? Slab me (2) 2000(d) Kennedy Half Dollars in PCGS-MS68 and I'll pay you $3000/pair for that $1 worth of "pocket change" (I need one for my #2 Kennedy set and #1 can use one as well - so make 2 while you are at it). Same deadline and pop 2/0 requirement please
I could offer thousands of dollars each for myriad Mint state moderns in a wide range of series, but, it would be futile, as you will likely not be able to deliver a single coin to me anyway. But, the eduation would be illuminating
Wondercoin
<< <i>YOU WENT OFF TOPIC WITH THAT. >>
Well...no...actually he didn't.
<< <i>For example, have you ever tried to slab a DEL(d) or PA(d) state quarter in MS68? I mean really tried? >>
Without trying to answer for Newmismatist I'd venture to say no he probably hasn't. I can also venture to guess why: Why bother trying to find and slab an MS68 example when he would probably be happy with a nice MS66 example (or even MS65)? Same goes for FH SLQ's or FB dimes. Why bother with paying the premium when you can get just a nice of a coin in the non-designation holder at far less cost?
I understand that many coins are rare in the upper echelon of grades. I'm pretty certain Penn state quarters are rare in MS68. I also know that MS68 SLQ's are rare too. I also know there probably doesn't exsist a gem 11-D half eagle. Whatever. But the point is much of these designations (or the grades themselves) seem to have been created for what Newmismatist said:
<< <i>and so that these common coins can be sold to a naive coin collecting public who simply don't take the time to determine whether there is really anything of significance which would justify paying a (substantial) premium for what is in all likelihood a common coin. >>
I think the key word here is "significance". Yes, MS68 Penn quarters or MS689 SLQ's are rare but are they really worth 10x or 100x there lower graded "brothers" in MS65 just because PCGS labels the holder "MS68" or "FH"?
I know collectors should buy and collect what pleases them but I think this issue is important enough to "suggest" that many collectors should take a good HARD look at what they are collecting and why. Somethiing to think about, no?
jom
PS: I hope this does not disintegrate into a modern/classic thing because that really isn't the issue. It's actually more of a "20th Century" coin thing.....
<< <i>
PS: I hope this does not disintegrate into a modern/classic thing because that really isn't the issue. It's actually more of a "20th Century" coin thing..... >>
Yes, there is a lot of truth to this statement, but even here it omits many other
coins to which it is applicable. It really applies to ANY coin which exists in sub-
stantial numbers. Morgan dollars obviously belong on the list since there are many
millions of these. People collect them in high grade because they can. But it really
also applies to coins like Indian cents from the 1890's. These coins are hardly scarce
in high circ grades and many of these coins have more detail than an unc. There is a
miniscule difference between a slider and an unc yet collectors pay far more for the unc
than they do for the slider even when the slider has far more detail due to a better
strike.
This all seems hardly relevant in any case since people do want to collect BOTH indian
cent AND states quarters. Even if you can prove scientifically that an MS-66 DE quarter
is a better value than an MS-68 DE quarter, so what? Does that mean no one is allow-
ed to collect the MS-68.
If someone is putting together a collection of ALL the clad quarters including the rarities,
is he to leave the holes for the common coins empty? If you agree he's allowed to fill the
hole than can't he also use the best coin he can find even if it has a market which assigns
it a high value among other collectors?
Even though the SLQ was the first coin to have the designation, as pointed out by Newmismatist, there are other factors to consider in evaluating the coin that get overlooked. Perhaps those that look at the entire coin for this series and make their determination on the entire coin will be better off in the final analysis...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Even if you can prove scientifically that an MS-66 DE quarter is a better value than an MS-68 DE quarter, so what? >>
I don't know but wouldn't the MS68 collector like to pay significantly LESS for the same coin? OR at least know for certain they are getting said VALUE for the coin in question even if it is a significant premium? To me the BEST way to do this is eliminate grades above MS67, put all those coins in MS67 holders and let the COLLECTORS decide if and how much they want to pay for the ones that are nicer. Let the MARKET decide what is nicer. Let the collectors decide what is worth more. Not the grading services who, IMO, are NOT as qualified to do this as an expert collector.
jom
the results of collectors requesting the grading services use them. Also, many, many people don't have the time to become experts on coins
so they rely on experts to help them make sure a coin is, or at least very close to, what the slab says. After you collect for a while, you realize that
not all MS66s are created the same. Then you probably don't need someone telling you the grade or designation.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
While I consider myself an expert in grading in several areas of the market, I am not an expert authenticator, nor expert at detecting AT or all altered coins. In buying raw coins at auctions I'd say my miss rate is around 20%. Every 2 out of 10 coins I'll take a hit on just because of the grade. Sometimes it's more, sometimes less. I took a friend along to grade with me at the Vermeulle sale and of the coins we decided to buy together (we agreed on them) Frankly, an accuracy of 80% for a grading service Grader is good in my opinion. Take 2 or 3 of those and you should get over 90% if the grading was done under scientific conditions. This is where grading services help. While I feel confident in my abilities I make mistakes.
Buying in holders absolutely minimizes your downside versus raw buying. Anyone on this forum who doesn't see this is either fooling themselves or is one of those chosen 50 or so that David Hall says can grade US Coins. I've dealt with a large number of the biggest and most successful US Coin dealers and not all of them can grade to the level of a seasoned grading pro....me included. That's where the grading service helps. Picking out nice coins in holders is a far easier task and with much less risk.
I whole heartedly agree with TDN on the "full anything" designation.
Just a bunch of hype that has made big bucks for many dealers and
top collectors over the years. I've never understood it and rarely get involved. I'll buy the 95% struck coins at no premium.
We all think we are a little better than we are. The services help equalize this out. The average Joe has a fighting chance at least if he can identify eye-appealing coins in holders. It ain't a perfect system as the grading services are not even close to 90% accuracy..maybe not even 80% when it comes to type or classics. I'm sure they are better at Morgans than they are for half cents.
roadrunner
<< <i>
I don't know but wouldn't the MS68 collector like to pay significantly LESS for the same coin? >>
Supply and demand dictates prices. If you pay a little less for an MS-68 it's
probably because it's low for the grade.
<< <i>OR at least know for certain they are getting said VALUE for the coin in question even if it is a significant premium? >>
Value is in the eye of the individual, not the coin. A coin's only truly inherent
value is face value, or melt value, or market value, whichever is highest. If
the there are too few people who see a coin's market value as being less than
what they are willing to pay then the price will fall. If more people believe the
market value is too low AND they actually purchase such a coin then the price
will increase. Just as value is in the eye of the individual so to is the market
blind to value. A coin can't increase in price just because everyone believes it
can or should nor can a coin fail to increase in price as the number of buyers in-
creases even if it's merely made of chocolate.
<< <i>To me the BEST way to do this is eliminate grades above MS67, put all those coins in MS67 holders and let the COLLECTORS decide if and how much they want to pay for the ones that are nicer. Let the MARKET decide what is nicer. Let the collectors decide what is worth more. Not the grading services who, IMO, are NOT as qualified to do this as an expert collector. >>
Why grade coins at all? The services could simply authenticate coins and bodybag
everything that is non-original. This would protect the uninformed from counter-
feits and we seasoned collectors know what a coin is worth to us anyway.
>>
<< <i>
I whole heartedly agree with TDN on the "full anything" designation.
Just a bunch of hype that has made big bucks for many dealers and
top collectors over the years. I've never understood it and rarely get involved. I'll buy the 95% struck coins at no premium.
>>
There's nothing wrong with 95% strikes or 50% strikes. In many cases the 50% strike coins may be the better buy. If you do buy 95% strikes it may well be better to buy the coins without the designation so that they cost less. Some coins don't even appear as 100% strike so there's no point in even starting collections of these coins if completion in this grade is critical to you. There's nothing wrong with collecting circulated coins too, and many people have a lot of fun collecting worn bust halfs or worn obsolete clad quarters.
But the fact remains that if you desire to find full strikes they will come with the designations in third party holders.
Some people also desire specific parts of the design to be present and these alone are worth a premium to them.
There has been a conditioning going on for decades and will continue to go on, that 'instructs' newbies that these FH or FB premiums mean something. 40 years ago they meant almost nothing. This has been a learned conditioning. No different than learning that tulips bulbs may be worth the price of a house. Do you think the Cameo craze came about by collectors desiring it or dealers pushing it? It makes a difference. Did Early Dollars go beserk because a ton of collectors jumped into the market all at once? Or did dealers commence the "push?" The auto companies conditioned people to want station wagons, jeeps, and now SUV's.
Once enough people are onboard it feeds on itself. If you don't have an SUV you must be a weirdo. In the 60's and early 70's each larger family had to have a wagon. Note that no one had an SUV 25 years ago or een desired one.
I guess the writing is on the wall. Eventually if they stay in business
long enough, PCGS will designate specific strike and attributions for every series out there. Yes, we will have 'full strike" designations for most every series or coin out there. It means continued revenue
for the grading services. But not all of us have to come out to play.
roadrunner
<< <i>Why grade coins at all? The services could simply authenticate coins and bodybag... >>
You are taking my point a little bit to the extreme. I'm not suggesting NOT grading coins at all. My point is that maybe we can make the grading servies 100% accurate rather than the 80% Roadrunner suggests. How? By limiting the number of grades in MS from 11 to 4 or 5. That way the services would probably hit right on with the grading given the amount of latitdue with only 4 or 5 grades. All the "in-between" values can be determined by the market.
Actually, I think the original idea of grading was to be able to communicate to someone who couldn't actually see the coin what it's condition is. The services shouldn't be asked to do anymore than that. Simply authenticate AND give a rough grading of the coin. THEN the parties involved can determine what price they want to pay. This, to me, gives the best of both worlds. You get the protection Roadunner suggests AND you get away from the absolute dependence the market has with the services. Let the market decide!
jom
<< <i>
There has been a conditioning going on for decades and will continue to go on, that 'instructs' newbies that these FH or FB premiums mean something. 40 years ago they meant almost nothing. This has been a learned conditioning. No different than learning that tulips bulbs may be worth the price of a house. Do you think the Cameo craze came about by collectors desiring it or dealers pushing it? It makes a difference. Did Early Dollars go beserk because a ton of collectors jumped into the market all at once? Or did dealers commence the "push?" The auto companies conditioned people to want station wagons, jeeps, and now SUV's.
Once enough people are onboard it feeds on itself. If you don't have an SUV you must be a weirdo. In the 60's and early 70's each larger family had to have a wagon. Note that no one had an SUV 25 years ago or een desired one. >>
For better or worse this is a trend which has been building for forty years. It has really
accelerated though in the last twenty years. There are fundamental changes in the way
coins are collected and made which have fueled these trends. There has also been the ad-
vice from hobby leaders to buy the best you can afford for very many years. These leaders
are not all from dealers seeking profit at the expense of the gullible. Indeed, it usually comes
from those who are primarilly writers or collectors. Obviously this has been sound advice in
the past from a financial perspective. Whether or not it remains sound advice in the future
remains to be seen. But some things are certain; it's now possible for the first time to collect
any series of US coin in high grade to the degree that the coins exist and the individual can
afford it. The more recent coins will almost certainly always be collected by at least a few in
high grade due to their typical poor quality and normal great availability in lower grades.
Of course you're referring to collectors as a group when you're implying they can be led around
by the whims of others, and the point may have some validity, but certainly on the individual
basis most of us have made our own decisions about what to collect. Nobody has twisted my
arm or led me by the nose into these coins and I'd bet most would agree that this doesn't apply
to them either.
<< <i>
I guess the writing is on the wall. Eventually if they stay in business
long enough, PCGS will designate specific strike and attributions for every series out there. Yes, we will have 'full strike" designations for most every series or coin out there. It means continued revenue
for the grading services. But not all of us have to come out to play. >>
Ideally it would be nice to see the grading companies actually adopt grading standards and
employ a descriptive grading system at least for the moderns. Such a system would imply to the
collector just what is full and what is not. This would cause the importance of the strike desig-
nations currently in use to fade as collectors became increasingly concerned with overall strike
rather than small attributes of strike.
>>
<< <i>
You are taking my point a little bit to the extreme. I'm not suggesting NOT grading coins at all. My point is that maybe we can make the grading servies 100% accurate rather than the 80% Roadrunner suggests. How? By limiting the number of grades in MS from 11 to 4 or 5. That way the services would probably hit right on with the grading given the amount of latitdue with only 4 or 5 grades. All the "in-between" values can be determined by the market.
>>
This would tend to decrease the numbers liners somewhat but to increase the difference in price.
It would serve to hurt the uninitiated the most because there would be a greater spread between
the low end of the grade which they'll tend to accumulate and the high end of the grade which they
will tend not to have.
Ideally coins would be graded consistently to very narrow discrete levels which would have bid and
ask prices at each level. This is, of course, virtually impossible using the current system.
1.The top tier and mid tier grading services have probably allowed
the enormous growth in the coin collecting fraterity.
2. They have reduced in great measure, Newbies being taken to the cleaners en Mass.
3. They have made collecting and pricing of coins more orderly and defined.
4. At this point in time, Im not sure human abilities can get any better then they are
when it comes to grading.
5.I personnaly would not put big money into coins if it were not for 3rd party grading.
6. I do select carefull from among PCGS graded coins. Choosing those coins in the upper third
of the grade I prefer, that give me the PQ qualities I like.
Camelot