Guess 53, 50 on a bad day 55 on a good day. Grading Dahlonega or Charlotte coins at the major TPG's often involves the 'swag' method unless one of the few grader's knowledgable in this field is present in the grading room. IMHO
That is an outrage. Why is it so low?? Unbelievable.
Always took candy from strangers Didn't wanna get me no trade Never want to be like papa Working for the boss every night and day --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
RYK if that's the new grade welcome you are now a seasoned Dahlonega collector having recieved the 'initiation rites' I reverently refer to as the 'dry shove'. I'm a charter member and keep a jar of vaseline handy during submission cycles. Don't despair the condition can usually be improved by a technique known as 'paying for the plastic'. In fairness to PCGS these are difficult coins to grade and sometimes the graders of the day seem to have little experience with southern gold (same at all the major TPG's...IMO).
Good point Dahlonega...plus, you still have a killer coin Robert. Doesnt matter what PCGS says, although I like the plastic to agree with what I think on my coins!!
Could they have netted it for a rim file or other impairment we arent aware of?
If this coin is XF-40, then it was AU-53 when it left the Dahlonega Mint. >>
That's like me cracking a 67FB Merc that is a lock 68FB, and have it come back a 66FB. Resubmitting it again and having it come back a 65FB. Resubmitted it a 3rd time and it came back a 64FB. This actually happened!
You had a rookie look at this coin with about as much care as he/she would look at a (no offense) $10 value modern coin.
I appreciate all of the comments, both public and private.
I would not have sent the coin for regrade were it not for the fact that I did not have a good picture of the coin, and I wanted to try the True View™ service. I figured since I was going to lose the green insert anyway, I might as well go for the upgrade. I am disappointed that PCGS failed to grade the coin correctly, but as we all know, grades are only an opinion. Their being wrong only lessens the value of their service to me going forward. Analogous in my professional life, if a radiologist like myself blows an easy diagnosis, the referring doc will naturally lose confidence in him/her and tend not to trust him/her in the future.
At least two people PMed and suggested that if I submit the coin raw, I will get a better grade. One even suggested that they always hose you on regrades. While that may be the case, I am not one who is suscepible to "variable-intermittent" reward (ie. I hate gambling!). Plus, I do not want to financially reward PCGS' error and reinforce an egregious practice. Frankly, I feel most sorry for those whose economic viability is tied to the grading process--it is an absurd way to make a living, IMO.
I have often said that if you want to own a coin in a specific coin in a specific brand holder at a specific grade, you should buy it that way. Let someone else take the heat in the grading process.
I am not inclined to use PCGS for grading southern gold coins for me in the future, but I will certainly continue to buy southern gold (and other) coins in PCGS holders and whatever other holders nice coins come in. I think that in the Southern Gold Society should develop our own grading standards, including those that emphasize originality, and include them in/on the slabs (ie. EagleEye's PhotoSeal) in such a way that the SGS opinion supercedes the TPG grade for the knowledgeable buyer.
Just some random musings before I go to the bathroom and look for the vaseline...
It seems that PCGS has done it again. As I have noted before in this forum, you have to send the coin two or three times before someone at PCGS finally gets it right. Maybe you should send the coin across the street. Somebody at PCGS didn't do their homework.
If this coin is XF-40, then it was AU-53 when it left the Dahlonega Mint. >>
MS40 is not a grade, unless PCGS has already gone with the new 100 point system... Time for a crack-out and send it across the street. Seriously.
"I am not inclined to use PCGS for grading southern gold coins for me in the future..." --RYK
Good for you for; they must earn your business, and so far they've slapped you in the face.
Please update this thread after you get a real TPG service to grade it.
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
The coin is correctly graded as XF40. PCGS seems to be saying that poorly struck coins, once they lose their original flow lines, assume the grade their details would dictate. I agree with this completely. I never bought in to the grading school that says the poorly struck coins should be awarded high grades simply because none look any better.
Look at the picture carefully, Flow lines are only gone in the most open fields where the wear occured. I know grading is subjective, but on some coins it is obvious.
Look at the picture carefully, Flow lines are only gone in the most open fields where the wear occured. I know grading is subjective, but on some coins it is obvious.
In this case, sell me your XF, southern gold.
coinlieutenant >>
My comment is on grading...not pricing. The XF-40 may be one of the finest known and may bring big bucks as such.
<< <i>The coin is correctly graded as XF40. PCGS seems to be saying that poorly struck coins, once they lose their original flow lines, assume the grade their details would dictate. I agree with this completely. I never bought in to the grading school that says the poorly struck coins should be awarded high grades simply because none look any better. >>
I agree. A coins grade should be based on its current detail/condition. A coins hypothecical condition when it was first struck should have no bearing on a worn coins grade. If the current posting of "MS40" is correct, then 2 different PCGS graders in 2 different era's (old green slab & today) have graded it the same.
I don't understand the "weak strike" argument. Is your contention that a mint state coin from a weakly stuck coin should be the same grade as a sharply struck coin from another mint? Is it also your thinking then, that all coins start life as 70's? I am seriously trying to understand the logic. My thoughts are that all freshly struck coins start life somewhere between 60 and 70. The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. Just my 2cents on the subject. Later, CCG
<< <i>The coin is correctly graded as XF40. PCGS seems to be saying that poorly struck coins, once they lose their original flow lines, assume the grade their details would dictate. I agree with this completely. I never bought in to the grading school that says the poorly struck coins should be awarded high grades simply because none look any better. >>
I agree. A coins grade should be based on its current detail/condition. A coins hypothecical condition when it was first struck should have no bearing on a worn coins grade. If the current posting of "MS40" is correct, then 2 different PCGS graders in 2 different era's (old green slab & today) have graded it the same.
I don't understand the "weak strike" argument. Is your contention that a mint state coin from a weakly stuck coin should be the same grade as a sharply struck coin from another mint? Is it also your thinking then, that all coins start life as 70's? I am seriously trying to understand the logic. My thoughts are that all freshly struck coins start life somewhere between 60 and 70. The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. Just my 2cents on the subject. Later, CCG >>
When I was first collecting back in the 1960's the subject of grading weakly struck coins was just as lively as today. Back then it usually centered on Buffalo Nickels. We used to say that some dates/mm's of the Buffalo series went from BU to VF in two weeks flat.
All coins begin as some mint state grade. The gold coin in question here probably merited no more than a 61 even when it was fresh from the dies becuase of its weak strike. As soon as it started picking up wear it assumed the grade dictated by its details. That's how I think grading of weakly struck coins should be done.
Pricing is another matter entirely. Coins like the gold coin in question are just not handled well by standard pricing guides. Specialists in the series will know how nice it is in comparison to other surviving specimens and will value it accordingly.
Not all coins start at MS70...a weakly struck coin like Robert's would start for me at around 63 or 64 and then come down...for a coin to start at 60 or 61 with no marks is a bit harsh I think. It would have to be an absolute blob to start it as a 60. Wear IMO, is relative to many things...the coin still has lots of luster in my opinion and that has to be one determinate. Wear would be relative to the coins starting point, not overall detail. Luster is one determinate of that and I dont think PCGS took that into account.
<< <i>The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. >>
My comment above was just a general statement about coin grading and had nothing to do with Roberts coin. Although I'm pretty old, I didn't get to see it when it was freshly struck.
PCGS Grading Standards MS-65: coin will be well struck MS-64: strike will range from average to full MS-63: strike will range from slightly below average to full MS-62: strike will can range from very weak to full AU-58: range from below average to full...a very weak strike will be downgraded to AU-55 AU-55: slighlty weak to full AU-53: weak to full AU-50: weak to full EF-45: below average to full...weakly struck coins that show wear consistant with EF-45, the grade will probably be EF-40 or lower
To me the grade range on this coin should be anywhere from EF-45 to AU-53. The more I look at the coin it should have a good shot at AU-50. The radial lines on the stars are basically all there. There is very, very little wear on the eagles wings, if there was that much wing detail on a seated coin I think it would grade AU. There doesn't appear to be any wear on United States Of America. Look how crisp and sharp the lettering is for an EF-40. I think your only mistake was to send it in in the holder. With that said, I think they should have at least 45'd it for you. Unless there is something going on with the coin that is being missed. The holder could be hiding issues with the edges???
Here is the crux of the problem: grading is relative. On technical merits, you can say the coin is whatever you want it to be. However, in order for grading to be credible, it must be consistent. I have put this coin next my 59-D $5 in a PCGS XF-45 holder and my 57-D $5 PCGS XF-45, and the 55-D is, at the very least, their equal, definitely better in the luster department. Similarly, if I put the 55-D $5 next to my 44-D $5 in PCGS XF-40, the 55-D is far better. These apples-to-apples comparisons lend credibilty to my lock XF-45, shot AU-50 claim.
Here are some additional photos (mine, not True View):
1844-D $5 PCGS XF-40 (by the way, Dahlonega experts graded this as a 45):
1848-D $5 PCGS XF-45 (my first Dahlonega $5 and what I consider to be a solid XF-45):
Comments
If this coin is XF-40, then it was AU-53 when it left the Dahlonega Mint.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Bet that's the old grade. If it goes through grade review, the cert number changes.
RYK - did the cert number change?
siliconvalleycoins.com
if that's the new grade welcome you are now a seasoned Dahlonega collector having recieved the 'initiation rites' I reverently refer to as the 'dry shove'. I'm a charter member and keep a jar of vaseline handy during submission cycles. Don't despair the condition can usually be improved by a technique known as 'paying for the plastic'. In fairness to PCGS these are difficult coins to grade and sometimes the graders of the day seem to have little experience with southern gold (same at all the major TPG's...IMO).
Coin is cracked...Phil images it with the new cert # on the label...then it goes to grading.
When the grade pops up, that is the grade, UNLESS the same thing that happened to me happens to RYK, but in a good way.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Could they have netted it for a rim file or other impairment we arent aware of?
J
siliconvalleycoins.com
<< <i>That is a load of bs. That coin is AU every day of the week. >>
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
<< <i>1 22126559 1855-D $5 Large D USA MS40
If this coin is XF-40, then it was AU-53 when it left the Dahlonega Mint. >>
That's like me cracking a 67FB Merc that is a lock 68FB, and have it come back a 66FB. Resubmitting it again and having it come back a 65FB. Resubmitted it a 3rd time and it came back a 64FB. This actually happened!
You had a rookie look at this coin with about as much care as he/she would look at a (no offense) $10 value modern coin.
I think Dahlonega pretty well summed this up in his posts above.
I would not have sent the coin for regrade were it not for the fact that I did not have a good picture of the coin, and I wanted to try the True View™ service. I figured since I was going to lose the green insert anyway, I might as well go for the upgrade. I am disappointed that PCGS failed to grade the coin correctly, but as we all know, grades are only an opinion. Their being wrong only lessens the value of their service to me going forward. Analogous in my professional life, if a radiologist like myself blows an easy diagnosis, the referring doc will naturally lose confidence in him/her and tend not to trust him/her in the future.
At least two people PMed and suggested that if I submit the coin raw, I will get a better grade. One even suggested that they always hose you on regrades. While that may be the case, I am not one who is suscepible to "variable-intermittent" reward (ie. I hate gambling!). Plus, I do not want to financially reward PCGS' error and reinforce an egregious practice. Frankly, I feel most sorry for those whose economic viability is tied to the grading process--it is an absurd way to make a living, IMO.
I have often said that if you want to own a coin in a specific coin in a specific brand holder at a specific grade, you should buy it that way. Let someone else take the heat in the grading process.
I am not inclined to use PCGS for grading southern gold coins for me in the future, but I will certainly continue to buy southern gold (and other) coins in PCGS holders and whatever other holders nice coins come in. I think that in the Southern Gold Society should develop our own grading standards, including those that emphasize originality, and include them in/on the slabs (ie. EagleEye's PhotoSeal) in such a way that the SGS opinion supercedes the TPG grade for the knowledgeable buyer.
Just some random musings before I go to the bathroom and look for the vaseline...
It seems that PCGS has done it again. As I have noted before in this forum, you have to send the coin two or three times before someone at PCGS finally gets it right. Maybe you should send the coin across the street. Somebody at PCGS didn't do their homework.
Overland Trail Collection Showcase
Dahlonega Type Set-2008 PCGS Best Exhibited Set
Oh well... the coin is what it is, and I would imagine you'd be able to count on prospective buyers recognizing it when the time comes to sell.
In any case, good pic & a damned nice coin.
<< <i>1 22126559 1855-D $5 Large D USA MS40
If this coin is XF-40, then it was AU-53 when it left the Dahlonega Mint. >>
MS40 is not a grade, unless PCGS has already gone with the new 100 point system...
"I am not inclined to use PCGS for grading southern gold coins for me in the future..." --RYK
Good for you for; they must earn your business, and so far they've slapped you in the face.
Please update this thread after you get a real TPG service to grade it.
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
Look at the picture carefully, Flow lines are only gone in the most open fields where the wear occured. I know grading is subjective, but on some coins it is obvious.
In this case, sell me your XF, southern gold.
coinlieutenant
siliconvalleycoins.com
<< <i>291,
Look at the picture carefully, Flow lines are only gone in the most open fields where the wear occured. I know grading is subjective, but on some coins it is obvious.
In this case, sell me your XF, southern gold.
coinlieutenant >>
My comment is on grading...not pricing. The XF-40 may be one of the finest known and may bring big bucks as such.
I was only saying that if you grade your southern gold like that as XF, I would love to buy it from you.
siliconvalleycoins.com
<< <i>The coin is correctly graded as XF40. PCGS seems to be saying that poorly struck coins, once they lose their original flow lines, assume the grade their details would dictate. I agree with this completely. I never bought in to the grading school that says the poorly struck coins should be awarded high grades simply because none look any better. >>
I agree. A coins grade should be based on its current detail/condition. A coins hypothecical condition when it was first struck should have no bearing on a worn coins grade. If the current posting of "MS40" is correct, then 2 different PCGS graders in 2 different era's (old green slab & today) have graded it the same.
I don't understand the "weak strike" argument. Is your contention that a mint state coin from a weakly stuck coin should be the same grade as a sharply struck coin from another mint? Is it also your thinking then, that all coins start life as 70's? I am seriously trying to understand the logic. My thoughts are that all freshly struck coins start life somewhere between 60 and 70. The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. Just my 2cents on the subject. Later, CCG
My #1 Low Ball Peace Dollar Set
<< <i>
<< <i>The coin is correctly graded as XF40. PCGS seems to be saying that poorly struck coins, once they lose their original flow lines, assume the grade their details would dictate. I agree with this completely. I never bought in to the grading school that says the poorly struck coins should be awarded high grades simply because none look any better. >>
I agree. A coins grade should be based on its current detail/condition. A coins hypothecical condition when it was first struck should have no bearing on a worn coins grade. If the current posting of "MS40" is correct, then 2 different PCGS graders in 2 different era's (old green slab & today) have graded it the same.
I don't understand the "weak strike" argument. Is your contention that a mint state coin from a weakly stuck coin should be the same grade as a sharply struck coin from another mint? Is it also your thinking then, that all coins start life as 70's? I am seriously trying to understand the logic. My thoughts are that all freshly struck coins start life somewhere between 60 and 70. The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. Just my 2cents on the subject. Later, CCG >>
When I was first collecting back in the 1960's the subject of grading weakly struck coins was just as lively as today. Back then it usually centered on Buffalo Nickels. We used to say that some dates/mm's of the Buffalo series went from BU to VF in two weeks flat.
All coins begin as some mint state grade. The gold coin in question here probably merited no more than a 61 even when it was fresh from the dies becuase of its weak strike. As soon as it started picking up wear it assumed the grade dictated by its details. That's how I think grading of weakly struck coins should be done.
Pricing is another matter entirely. Coins like the gold coin in question are just not handled well by standard pricing guides. Specialists in the series will know how nice it is in comparison to other surviving specimens and will value it accordingly.
Not all coins start at MS70...a weakly struck coin like Robert's would start for me at around 63 or 64 and then come down...for a coin to start at 60 or 61 with no marks is a bit harsh I think. It would have to be an absolute blob to start it as a 60.
Wear IMO, is relative to many things...the coin still has lots of luster in my opinion and that has to be one determinate. Wear would be relative to the coins starting point, not overall detail. Luster is one determinate of that and I dont think PCGS took that into account.
J
siliconvalleycoins.com
<< <i>The poorly struck coin that started life as a 60 or 61 just doesn't take as much wear to get down to a 40 as the coin that started life as a 65 or 66. >>
My comment above was just a general statement about coin grading and had nothing to do with Roberts coin. Although I'm pretty old, I didn't get to see it when it was freshly struck.
My #1 Low Ball Peace Dollar Set
MS-65: coin will be well struck
MS-64: strike will range from average to full
MS-63: strike will range from slightly below average to full
MS-62: strike will can range from very weak to full
AU-58: range from below average to full...a very weak strike will be downgraded to AU-55
AU-55: slighlty weak to full
AU-53: weak to full
AU-50: weak to full
EF-45: below average to full...weakly struck coins that show wear consistant with EF-45, the grade will probably be EF-40 or lower
To me the grade range on this coin should be anywhere from EF-45 to AU-53. The more I look at the coin it should have a good shot at
AU-50.
The radial lines on the stars are basically all there. There is very, very little wear on the eagles wings, if there was that much wing detail on a seated coin I think it would grade AU. There doesn't appear to be any wear on United States Of America. Look how crisp and sharp the lettering is for an EF-40.
I think your only mistake was to send it in in the holder. With that said, I think they should have at least 45'd it for you. Unless there is something going on with the coin that is being missed. The holder could be hiding issues with the edges???
siliconvalleycoins.com
Here are some additional photos (mine, not True View):
1844-D $5 PCGS XF-40 (by the way, Dahlonega experts graded this as a 45):
1848-D $5 PCGS XF-45 (my first Dahlonega $5 and what I consider to be a solid XF-45):
1857-D $5 PCGS XF-45
1855-D (for comparison)
What did it grade?????????? How 'bout AU58. Hmmm...??
siliconvalleycoins.com
siliconvalleycoins.com
Tom