What about grading coins AU-63, AU-64 etc...

EagleEye · January 4, 2008 12:50PM

So many Pre-1838 coins in holders are obviously not MS, yet the holder declares that they never saw circulation. Sure, market grading being what it is, these coins are usually very nice and deserve the premiums they get, but what premium do you put on a true Mint state 1799 Eagle in a, say MS62 holder next to a obviously lightly worn example in the same holder?

There are many other series that have many, many AU's in MS holders. Territorials come to mind. So many obviously worn slugs are sitting in MS holders.

Perhaps these coins should be labeled AU60. AU63, AU64, and AU65.

What do you think?

ziggy29 · January 4, 2008 12:57PM

If the TPGs are determined to stick with market grading, I'd like to see these grades. I'd much prefer to see a PQ technical AU-58 coin market graded as AU-62 or AU-63 than put in a mint state slab. I accept that the choicest AU coins can be worth MS money but I hate to see them slabbed as MS.

ahooka454 · January 4, 2008 1:04PM

i acctually thought about that for a few minutes. i like the sound of it. what all series would this apply to?

TheRegulator · January 4, 2008 1:05PM

I would be against it. A coin is what it is, and the role of grading is to best describe the piece. If it's a knockout piece for the grade, let that be reflected by the price.

ziggy29 · January 4, 2008 1:07PM

<< <i>I would be against it. A coin is what it is, and the role of grading is to best describe the piece. If it's a knockout piece for the grade, let that be reflected by the price. >>

I agree, mostly. But would you prefer to see a very choice AU coin graded as AU-63 or MS-63?

Like it or not, market grading is a reality. And as long as that's true, I'd much rather see an AU coin "priced" at 62 money be listed as AU-62 than as MS-62. I'm tired of seeing choice AU coins given MS grades.

ahooka454 · January 4, 2008 1:11PM

i think the price reflects the quality of the coin. the grade should only help determine the state of preservation and quality of the coin. i think the grading scale posted here wouold work, i dont see an issue with the pricing of the coins. if a au62 is the highest, why would the price be effected? the grading is all i am concerned with, the price will be determined by us, the buyers.

EagleEye · January 4, 2008 1:22PM

I would be against it. A coin is what it is, and the role of grading is to best describe the piece. If it's a knockout piece for the grade, let that be reflected by the price.

Yes, I agree the grade is supposed to describe the condition of the coin. However, should all AU-63's be valued by the off-chart auction result of a MS-63?

EagleEye · January 4, 2008 1:24PM

Wow! ahooka454, you've got almost as many posts as me in 1 month and I've been posting since 2002! You've got a lot on your mind!

DMWJR · January 4, 2008 1:31PM

<< <i>i acctually thought about that for a few minutes. i like the sound of it. what all series would this apply to? >>

Ahook, an internal monologue is supposed to be internal. We don't have to read every thought that goes through your head "for a few minutes" LOL

Batman23 · January 4, 2008 1:39PM

I personally think that the 1-59 price guide and the 60-70 price guide should overlap. A very nice AU-58 should stay AU-58 and not be moved to MS-62. Now an AU-62... nice concept but how about using an AU-57 and AU-59 first? Now if you had an overlapping price guide at 60 and used all the higher AU numbers that are there but not used, that makes more sense to me than putting AU coins in MS holders.

As a note... I look for AU-58 holders. I generally do not look at MS-62 holders.

GoldenEyeNumismatics · January 4, 2008 2:06PM

Look's like JK has already poked fun at this issue:
link

BRdude · January 4, 2008 2:16PM

I believe market grading is the worst thing that has happened to the hobby. A coin is what it is, AU, MS whatever Everyone knows price guides are guides.. Many AU coins are worth more than MS money mainly because of superb eye appeal.. To heck with a bunch of AU anything but 50-59. Just add more reason to market grade.. I am for coin gradeing services to do their job, ethically, honestly, and GRADE THE COIN AND LABEL IT WHAT IT IS. Let the market say how much it is worth.

ahooka454 · January 4, 2008 6:15PM

yes sir. lots. all coins and related goodies. sorry if that upsets anyone. just dont have alot of people to talk coins with. i think this could work, if the right people were involved.

i have a dumb question, is there any way for a pc to honestly grade a coin. scientifically. whatever, just so it was a science and not an opinion?
i know i dont know nearly what some of you know, but it seems like it could work. granted it should be finalized by a person,(eye appeal, luster) should be determined by human eyes. i just think with all this technology, we'd have come up with something by now. the coin industry is making how much a year?

PerryHall · January 4, 2008 8:04PM

If a coin has wear, it should be graded AU58 or lower. If a coin is in a 64 holder and there is "obvious wear", then it's misgraded. I don't think we should screw around with the grading system that we currently have. Maybe we should go back to technical grading and scrap this market grading nonsense.

jhdfla · January 4, 2008 8:24PM

<< <i>So many Pre-1838 coins in holders are obviously not MS, yet the holder declares that they never saw circulation. Sure, market grading being what it is, these coins are usually very nice and deserve the premiums they get, but what premium do you put on a true Mint state 1799 Eagle in a, say MS62 holder next to a obviously lightly worn example in the same holder?

There are many other series that have many, many AU's in MS holders. Territorials come to mind. So many obviously worn slugs are sitting in MS holders.

Perhaps these coins should be labeled AU60. AU63, AU64, and AU65.

What do you think? >>

There are a number of coins in the seated series' that exhibit wear on the thigh, and yet are in mint state holders. In reality AU58++ coins, but having what used to be called "cabinet friction" or some euphemism like that. I've had several discussions with people that grade coins for a living and are dealers on this subject. What I came away with is it's treated much the same as a hit or mark on the coin, and the grade dropped accordingly. For example, I had an 1850 Seated Quarter that was from the Benson collection purchased out of a Goldberg's sale in Feb. 2001, lot 1626 sale #8.

Goldberg archive, 1850 Q. lot #1626

This coin definately had rub on the thigh... but otherwise was gorgeous. I'm sure the coin is at least in a 64 holder today. Would it be fair to put a coin like this in an AU holder? It maybe was an AU from a technical viewpoint considering the rub on the thigh, but the reverse was mint state, and it would not have been fair to put this coin in an AU holder, so I don't agree with the idea of au63, au64 on a coin like this... however, I don't agree with the notion that this coin is most likely in a 64 or 65 holder today (it's in a registry set, you can find it).

Wish I still held this one, I got it for $1725. w/ the juice and it would bring a lot more today. Financial cash flow problems and being out of work forced it's sale... I would gladly buy it back today anywhere near that level, it was a nice coin.

John

edited for sucky spelling

shorecoll · January 4, 2008 10:30PM

Something needs to be done, this may be as good as anything. People say "learn to grade", so you learn a little and start realizing there is wear on those MS63 bust halves and large cents. So you a) question your sanity or b) don't trust anybody else's grading (making it very difficult to buy coins). AU63, etc. would at least level the field a little. "Yes, there's wear but I still want 63 money" makes more sense than "It must be your glasses, there's no wear on that coin".

UtahCoin · January 4, 2008 10:32PM

I have always thought it wasn't right....
A MS67 Morgan with a hint of rub is AU58
A MS60 beat to death Morgan with a hint of rub is AU58

Arizonadesertrat · January 4, 2008 10:37PM

I think, as I have written before, that market grading is a destructive influence. Grading isn't the same as pricing, and 'market grading' attempts to (con)fuse the two issues. The result is very bad for end users (particularly collectors) because the 'grades' of 'market-graded' coins will fluctuate with time, as the coin market fluctuates. We are in the midst of a bull market, and a coin that is market graded, say MS63 (or 'AU63'), will not necessarily bring 63 money when the market cools off. In a bear market, market-graded coins will not likely be viewed so charitably---I suspect that savvy collectors and dealers will call such coins overgraded (because standards tend to tighten up in bear markets).

What the hobby desperately needs is a grading standard that is inviolate, not one that is subject to manipulation as is the case now.

I do think that exceptionally nice AU coins that are market graded upwards (into the low MS range) tend to make learning to grade more difficult for novices. In this sense, perhaps an AU63 grade might be better than an MS63 for such coins.

Market grading is about one concept----extracting more money from buyers. If I have an exceptionally nice Capped Bust half that is technically AU58 and want MS63 money for it, I would have to sing my heart out to get my price (and likely be unsuccessful). However, if I send it in to PCGS/NGC and it comes back (market graded) MS63 or even MS62, then prospective buyers won't complain as much about the stiff 63 price that I want and making the sale would be much easier. Using AU market grades in this example doesn't really change anything, and instead raises the issue of what to do about differentiating AU63 from MS63 in a price structure.

Market grading lessens buyer price resistance. It's that simple. Is this good for collectors? NO

AboutRareCoins · January 4, 2008 10:42PM

Usually when a piece like the one descibed sells, be it at auction or private party, the individuals are experienced enough to make the destinction between an AU62 and a true MS62. This is where the market and or the parties involved consider quality of the coin first and price second and they have the experience to do so and feel comfortable doing it.
As far as the TPG's doing this and doing that, they will do what they will do to GROW or stay in businesses. I've got no ax to grind, it's just capitalism.
The people in the know usually buy the coin not the plastic and if they can't make the destinction, they'll enlist the help of individuals who can.
Things are the way they are and I guess the people who will do best are the ones who figure out the game and play it instead of trying to push a 1000# boulder up a muddy hill and really get no where.
Just my 2 cents for what it's worth.

EagleEye · January 4, 2008 10:48PM

No problem, ahooka454!

You post all you want. Slow down and put caps and returns in your sentences for easier reading. (Unless that's your "style")

It raises another question - Should a dealer acknowledge the wear or just mention the grade and let the buyer decide.

There are many glaring examples of obviously AU coins in MS holders. There are exceptions as well.

For Bust Halfs there is a situation that because the way they were stored. They nearly all have what we used to call "compression marks" - These are rub areas on the high points caused by the coin rubbing against each other while they were stacked in crates, sitting in the banks. For Morgan Dollars we have bag marks, Bust Halfs have compression marks.

Territorial gold were stored in terrible conditions. Big, heavy slugs jostled around in bags on bumpy stagecoaches.

Also, Indian $2-1/2 and $5 are designed so the field is the rim. This means that you can't grade them by looking at the fields.

pmac · January 4, 2008 10:56PM

Sounds like if the letter designations were dropped and just using the number designations are the question. How's that?

Arizonadesertrat · January 4, 2008 11:14PM

If wear is evident and the coin looks to have been market graded (MSxx), then I would mention this. From your entries on your website, you tend to note disagreements with TPG grades/varieties on holders already. Regarding other issues, involving various kinds of abrasions and other contact marks, mentioning these would be helpful to inexperienced customers. The latter don't know what is typical for a given issue in various grades (because they don't have the opportunity to see enough coins in hand).

Notwithstanding another post, I do think that many collectors (if not most) do not completely understand what it is that they are attempting to purchase at any given time. This is why phenomena like promotions and market grading produce results for sellers.

TwoSides2aCoin · January 4, 2008 11:43PM

<< <i>I have always thought it wasn't right....
A MS67 Morgan with a hint of rub is AU58
A MS60 beat to death Morgan with a hint of rub is AU58 >>

It's a peculiar situation that's been talked about so many times and each series has it's own set of problems between the AU and MS designation. What if a PROOF is touched ? Does it become AU 58 Non CAMEO ?

speety · January 5, 2008 1:11AM

I too like this idea.

I believe TDN talked about this many times a while back?

Barbercoin · January 5, 2008 1:24AM

I agree with a couple of postings... a coin should be graded on its own merit. Let the market decide its value.

jedm · December 20, 2018 9:20PM

Bringing back the AU-64 debate from ten years ago.

Wabbit2313 · December 20, 2018 10:57PM

DANGER, 10 YEAR OLD THREAD ALERT.

CaptHenway · December 20, 2018 11:59PM

Hell no then, hell no now!

JimTyler · December 21, 2018 9:31AM

AU63 is an oxymoron. You want a grade to distinguish these coins come up with something new.

OldEastside · December 21, 2018 9:40AM

Hmmm.................I do have some MS nickel rolls in 54S, 55P, 58P that are horrifically struck on worn dies and ugly planchets that I would conservatively grade a MS25

Steve

RogerB · December 21, 2018 9:41AM

Nope. "About Uncirculated AU" is a unitary designation. It marks the initial appearance of discernible wear on a coin. If the numbers 60-70 are reserved for coins that are uncirculated, then the "AU" term is incompatible with any number from 60-70.

The suggested mule falls in the misleading category along with "Virtually Uncirculated," 'Looks Uncirculated," "Uncirculated with Rub," and other confusing terms.

Baley · December 21, 2018 10:24AM

@pmac said:
Sounds like if the letter designations were dropped and just using the number designations are the question. How's that?

Bingo!

cameonut2011 · December 22, 2018 7:52PM

@tradedollarnut - It looks like Rick Snow beat you to it!

golden · December 22, 2018 8:02PM

No,no and no!

Baley · December 22, 2018 8:06PM

@RogerB said:
Nope. "About Uncirculated AU" is a unitary designation. It marks the initial appearance of discernible wear on a coin. If the numbers 60-70 are reserved for coins that are uncirculated, then the "AU" term is incompatible with any number from 60-70.

The suggested mule falls in the misleading category along with "Virtually Uncirculated," 'Looks Uncirculated," "Uncirculated with Rub," and other confusing terms.

So, there is absolutely zero wear, and there is 12 or more points of wear? Nothing in between? We cannot comprehend such a thing as 2 or 5 or 9 points worth of wear?

TheRegulator · December 22, 2018 8:30PM

We cannot comprehend such a thing as 2 or 5 or 9 points worth of wear?

Yeah, they're called AU58, AU55, and AU50.

ARCO · December 22, 2018 8:44PM

Market grading hurts the hobby IMO, because it places arbitrary and subjective standards to coin grades. Grades reflect prices, and this distorts the pricing mechanism. Technical grading is the only type of grading that is healthy for this hobby. The market can set prices based on market appeal and the coins non-technical aesthetics and eye appeal after the technical grade has been assigned.

As a buyer I will pay a premium for a beautiful and choice AU58 (go to the Heritage auction archives and you can see other buyers do too) and less for a beat down ugly AU58, but I will know that they are both AU58 coins based on their technical grade.

I don't want PCGS or NGC telling me what type of coin is preferable with the grades they assign, I want to decide that for myself and my pocketbook.

With market grading I lose trust with the TPG's and this hurts the whole hobby.

ricko · December 23, 2018 8:30PM

This has been a topic discussed here several times over the years....Never any resolution. More and more we talk about the shortcomings of grading and the designations....Someday we may actually see change.... Cheers, RickO

savitale · December 23, 2018 8:53PM

It would be hard to imagine folks sending in their MS62 coins to be reholdered as AU62.

Baley · December 23, 2018 9:04PM

@savitale said:
It would be hard to imagine folks sending in their MS62 coins to be reholdered as AU62.

Yes, that's true.

But it would sure be nice to get my AU 58 coin, which is so nice that I paid 62 money for, reholdered as AU62, so my widow and orphans don't get ripped off someday..

cameonut2011 · December 23, 2018 11:02PM

@Baley said:

@savitale said:
It would be hard to imagine folks sending in their MS62 coins to be reholdered as AU62.

Yes, that's true.

But it would sure be nice to get my AU 58 coin, which is so nice that I paid 62 money for, reholdered as AU62, so my widow and orphans don't get ripped off someday..

You could leave detailed instructions that resolve that problem.

Baley · December 23, 2018 11:08PM

Yeah, i can leave a note that says,

"Technical grading hurts the hobby IMO, because it places arbitrary and subjective standards to coin prices. Technical grades do NOT reflect values or prices, and this distorts the market mechanism. Market grading is the only type of grading that is healthy for this hobby. The market can set prices based on market appeal and the coins non-technical aesthetics and eye appeal after the technical grade has been assigned."

cameonut2011 · December 23, 2018 11:10PM

@Baley said:
Yeah, i can leave a note that says,

"Technical grading hurts the hobby IMO, because it places arbitrary and subjective standards to coin prices. Technical grades do NOT reflect values or prices, and this distorts the market mechanism. Market grading is the only type of grading that is healthy for this hobby. The market can set prices based on market appeal and the coins non-technical aesthetics and eye appeal after the technical grade has been assigned."

High end - worth more money than assigned grade (MS62 value)

cameonut2011 · December 23, 2018 11:14PM

@Baley said:
Yeah, i can leave a note that says,

"Technical grading hurts the hobby IMO, because it places arbitrary and subjective standards to coin prices. Technical grades do NOT reflect values or prices, and this distorts the market mechanism. Market grading is the only type of grading that is healthy for this hobby. The market can set prices based on market appeal and the coins non-technical aesthetics and eye appeal after the technical grade has been assigned."

What happens when market preferences change again and those numbers and relative prices on the slabs are wrong again? You won't be around to help them. Your argument makes no sense. Technical grading doesn't price coins; the market does that. As I have said ad nauseaum, coin value is multifactorial.

ms70 · December 24, 2018 4:19AM

There's nothing wrong with the grading standards or grading scale.

If there's a gripe talk to the graders.

jedm · December 24, 2018 6:07AM

@cameonut2011 said:

@Baley said:
Yeah, i can leave a note that says,

"Technical grading hurts the hobby IMO, because it places arbitrary and subjective standards to coin prices. Technical grades do NOT reflect values or prices, and this distorts the market mechanism. Market grading is the only type of grading that is healthy for this hobby. The market can set prices based on market appeal and the coins non-technical aesthetics and eye appeal after the technical grade has been assigned."

High end - worth more money than assigned grade (MS62 value)

I agree. I simply note mine like this: AU63 or AU 64

CCGGG · December 24, 2018 8:16AM

I'd rather not see AU's elevated into what we now see as MS's grades. However, I often see coins graded as MS 63 or above that have excessive bag marks or heavy toning (or just poor eye appeal) that I can't see giving them a grade of 63 or higher. They may very well be uncirculated but they are certainly "not even close" to way they were minted. Maybe those coins should be in 60 to 62 MS slabs.

cucamongacoin · December 24, 2018 3:26PM

There are so many in this category, that it would seem there is no way to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

What about grading coins AU-63, AU-64 etc...

Comments

DANGER, 10 YEAR OLD THREAD ALERT.

Leave a Comment