What grades do you think the services should start awarding? How about AU59? F18? G05?

dan1ecu · January 31, 2004 12:40PM

What are some grades that should be added to the scale to more accurately distinguish coins of differing quality?

Dan

kranky · January 31, 2004 12:45PM

I don't really see a need for additional grades, but I fear it's inevitable anyway. Actually, I bet they start using half-point grades in MS before they add any more grades for circulated coins.

airplanenut · January 31, 2004 12:48PM

I think AU58 should be replaced by 60-70... basically, a 58 is a 63+ coin with a rub... why not we show what it would be if for not that rub?

jcping · January 31, 2004 2:18PM

AU60, AU61, AU62, AU63, AU64

Personally, I don't think AU65 is reasonable, nevertheless, we could see AU65 and AU66 in the market.

Pushkin · January 31, 2004 2:52PM

MS64 1/2, MS65 1/2

The PQ grades.

RotatedRainbows · February 1, 2004 12:35AM

What are some grades that should be added to the scale to more accurately distinguish coins of differing quality?

Since NONE of the services have the ability to accurately and consistently grade coins using all the different grades now they should eliminate many of the middle grades (ask anyone who has submitted a coin 3 or more times and received different grades each time). There is no need for many in-between grades like F15, VF25 & 35, XF45, AU55, MS62, MS64 & MS66 because they are way to subjective and strictly the opinion of the grader ON THAT DAY and can and do change. Third party grading is a good concept but has never and will never live up to the original concept of placing a definitive value (being able to trade sight unseen) on every coin graded. Again just ask anyone who has submitted a coin more then one time to the same service (not a different service) and received different grades each time. Has third party grading helped collectors?? Absolutely, but it has just spawned a new industry for the con men who resubmit coins many times until it is finally overgraded (or in their opinion finally graded like they want). If the services would just confirm that the piece is authentic and not harshly cleaned and put their opinion MS63 or MS65 etc. then let the buyer decide the value using their opinion of the eye appeal (god forbid we would ask the collector to use their own brain

) things would be better for everyone accept the grading services of course as they would lose a LARGE portion of their revenue since the number of resubmissions would drop so it is safe to say it will never happen.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled conflicts.

fcloud · February 1, 2004 12:57AM

Maybe we could have AG03.75 for those 1916-D coins that just miss the 04 but are high end 03!. LOL We have enough grades, your still buying the coin and not what the holder says, aren't you?

CoinHunter2003 · February 1, 2004 1:12AM

I'm with you RR. Too many grades now. Using more grades is just
a way to milk more $ from the xash cows.

Alex

flaminio · February 1, 2004 1:43AM

A computerized system could (theoretically) assign a technical grade to whatever precision the market demands. So, if you wanted to see an AU59, or an AU58.7 it could be done.

(Note: this would be a technical grade only. Other factors that enhance or detract from eye appeal are subjective and would not be considered.)

Now, as to whether this should be done... I don't personally see a need for it.

291fifth · February 1, 2004 1:44AM

The last thing we need is more grades!

BAJJERFAN · February 1, 2004 1:51AM

xf should be 40,45, 50 and 53 au should be 55 and 58 only

there is no way that a 50 should even be close to about uncirculated or almost uncirculated

coppercoins · February 1, 2004 2:25AM

291fifth stated it best and shortest...we don't need MORE grades.

BillJones · February 1, 2004 2:29AM

Yes, we don't need more grades. We seem to have enough problems with applying consistent standards to the grades we already have.

jeffnpcb · February 1, 2004 2:31AM

People complain with times on submissions now! Try to get a grader to fine cut a grade in 15 seconds or less. We just extended submission times by another 30 days!

jdimmick · February 1, 2004 2:53AM

I totally agree that we have enough grades currently. The 10 (11 with 70) point mintstate scale is suffient, as well as the circulated scale. What I would like to see is a better pricing data by all the publications to differentiate between Au-50 and Au-58, as well as MS-60 thru 63. There needs to be a better job done here on investigating current pricing trends as well as education on the specifics of this grade range as it relates to a specific series.

In several cases, but not all, prices of Au-58 coins should be listed higher than Ms-60 listings. However, In some series like Morgan $, there is a specific reason why Ms-60 takes a significant jump on certain dates, and that is becuase the threshold of "Is it truly and UNC coin, regardless of the eye-appeal" or has it seen the slightest bit of circulation. Dates like the 95-O are quite scarce in true MS, but quite numerous in slider AU's. And this is where the collecting public has a hard time determining if that Nice eye-appealing 95-o is more in demand and should it command a higher value than say a baggy Ms-60 coin that is technically uncircualted, but far more scarcer? In this specific date, I would say NO, but others definitley a yes!

There are several series that I would much rather have a truly eye-popping Au-58 than a MS-61 I can think of several Indian head cents in this category as well as Buffalo nickels.

flaminio · February 2, 2004 3:02AM

<< <i>What I would like to see is a better pricing data by all the publications to differentiate between Au-50 and Au-58, as well as MS-60 thru 63. >>

The only valid pricing data is, IMHO, actual sales. You need to scour eBay, Teletrade, Heritage, and whereever else to find out what coins are really selling for, rather than some fiction published by PCGS or whomever.

Let me link you something interesting, from the world of Magic: The Gathering:

MTG Price Guide

What they've done is written a program that collects data from eBay and collates it into a fairly useful price guide. For example:

Card Price StdDev Average High Low Change Raw N
---- ----- ------ ------- ------- ------ ------ -----
Academy Rector, 4.21, 1.27, 3.91, 5.51, 0.49, 0.00, 65

This tells me that for the card named "Academy Rector" there were 65 successful eBay auctions, with a low price of 49c and a high price of $5.51. The average price is $3.91, and the recommended "price" if you were selling one would be $4.21 (a number determined by a formula too arcane for this discussion).

It seems to me that if a bunch of Magic geeks can put together an absolutely useful resource such as this, it would be no problem for Coin folk to do a similar project.

jom · February 2, 2004 3:34AM

<< <i>Yes, we don't need more grades. We seem to have enough problems with applying consistent standards to the grades we already have. >>

Totally agree. In fact, we have TOO MANY MS grades as it is....

jom

dorkkarl · February 2, 2004 3:41AM

yep, ditto here. there are TOO MANY grades today.

for closed-collar strikes, get rid of g-6, vg-10, f-15, vf-25, vf-35, xf-45, au-53, 58, ms-61, 62, 64, 66. grading services are just blatantly not capable of being consistent enough for such grades.

on open-collars, here are the only grades they should assing:

poor, fair, ag, good, fine, xf, ms-60, ms-63, ms-65, ms-67, TEN SIMPLE grades.

K S

Baley · February 2, 2004 6:54AM

I'd like to see AU 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 for gem coins with a touch of rub on the highpoints.

I'd like to see MS 65.5, 66.5, and 67.5 for "liner" coins where the whole point is too big a price jump,

for example, if an MS 65 peace dollar is $1,000, and an MS66 is $10,000, you could have an MS 65.5 that would be worth around $4000 or $5000 or $6000.

I'd like to see a grade that reflects "surface preservation" broken out of the composite grade for coins with fantastic originality or attractive toning, and such a scale might go up to 75 or so.

paigowjohnny · February 2, 2004 6:56AM

poor-fair-ag-g-vg-f-vf-ef-au-ms60-ms 63-ms65-ms65+ (for all those moderns out there that NEED to be slabbed)

Sometimes older and simpler is better

LAWMAN · February 2, 2004 6:57AM

There are too many grades. How about a High AU (BU with rub) and a Low AU (actually shows wear)? I do think there should be split grades for the Obv. and reverse, say over MS 65 or 66.

topstuf · February 2, 2004 7:12AM

Time to go to the 0-100 scale. Special discounts for re-grades. All new pop reports. More opportunity to pay for grading. Less to waste on coins. RAH !!!

Or a "Preferred" designation to existing grades. Turn up the volume.

Maybe a really BIG slab to grade slabs so the old ones will still exist, but inside NEW ones that are at "introductory" rates.

Or...or....or.....

What grades do you think the services should start awarding? How about AU59? F18? G05?

Comments

Leave a Comment