Shoulda had some heavy hitter submit the coins for you. Betcha the results would have been different.
You want an FBL designation? Submit to PCGS... they seem to enjoy giving FBL designations to about any Frankie out there, actual bell lines are immaterial.
<< <i>Had you submitted each of those coins with a group of average white MS65's or MS66's, they would have had a better chance of going star* imo. When submitted in a group of great looking coins, they get to cherrypick which ones stand out among the standouts. Coins are often judged by the company they keep. That's a very misunderstood part of the grading "conundrum." But if you talk to dealers who submit coins to make a living, this is a huge part of the game with many subtle aspects. I almost look at is as trying to lead the graders to the right answer...so don't make it any harder for them to agree with your conclusions. >>
Interesting post. I wonder if the same can be said for grades at other TPG's.
Think of the implications...
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>Had you submitted each of those coins with a group of average white MS65's or MS66's, they would have had a better chance of going star* imo. When submitted in a group of great looking coins, they get to cherrypick which ones stand out among the standouts. Coins are often judged by the company they keep. That's a very misunderstood part of the grading "conundrum." But if you talk to dealers who submit coins to make a living, this is a huge part of the game with many subtle aspects. I almost look at is as trying to lead the graders to the right answer...so don't make it any harder for them to agree with your conclusions. >>
Interesting post. I wonder if the same can be said for grades at other TPG's.
Think of the implications... >>
How can this theory be accurate , the graders are grading 100's of coins a day, who knows maybe more, so they get a batch of coins and now they are just going to compare it with the others in the said batch and thats that. Too simple of a theory in my opinion, lets give these graders some credit , they aren't stupid, they are grading 1,000's and 1,000's of coins over a course of time, they will not be influenced simpleton as described period end of story. >>
It's kinda a reverse of the "setup coins" theory. Often times, if someone wants to try to get a certian grade for a coin, they'll send it in mixed with a batch of coins that are very solid for the desired grade. The idea is that the grader gets in the swing of assigning that grade, giving the borderline coin a better shot. It often works, too.
In this case, it's the reverse. Put in a coin that really stands out amongst a bunch of others that don't.... it certainly seems to make sense.
<< <i>How can this theory be accurate , the graders are grading 100's of coins a day, who knows maybe more, so they get a batch of coins and now they are just going to compare it with the others in the said batch and thats that. Too simple of a theory in my opinion, lets give these graders some credit , they aren't stupid, they are grading 1,000's and 1,000's of coins over a course of time, they will not be influenced simpleton as described period end of story. >>
I tend to agree with Realone, but it doesn't stop submitters from attempting to employ this strategy (or any other goofy one you can imagine).
I have complained many times about the star designation, but I don't think NGC was wrong in this case. Here's my opinion of the pieces:
1957 25c: Spectacular coin and color. If this didn't get a star, something would definitely be wrong. 1957 10c: Very nice piece, but I've found that monochrome dimes tend not to receive the star. Occasionally one that has immensely bold color and electric lustre will get it, but this seems a bit light in color. At the very least, I think NGC is being consistent on this one. 1958-D 10c: Again, nice color, but from the photos, it looks a bit dark and perhaps has a tad less lustre than they're looking for. Compare it to the 1957 quarter and you can see how much brighter the toning could be. 1954-D 50c: I'm not sure how much of the color I can accurately gauge from the photo, but my guess is they were looking for a bit more color, and perhaps more lustre (I can't tell from the picture). I'll agree that it's an attractive coin, and I would think it's one that could go either way. As to its eye appeal for the date, I'm not sure how much that factors into their decision. 1958-D 50c: Another attractive piece, but I'm not wild about it. I would say the color's a bit too dark, especially on the high points on the obverse, along with perhaps slightly too little lustre. I personally don't like the broken areas on the obverse, and NGC tends not to, as well. 1949-D 50c: It's a nice coin, but it's too dark and too mottled to get the star. I wouldn't expect NGC to give it the star, even though there are spots of brighter color--they're not fans of mottled toning. As for the FBL designation, it looks like there's a hairline that curves from the left of the crack through the top band of bell lines, and perhaps the lines are just a bit weak immediately left of the crack. NGC requires all 6 lines to be full, and I think this one just misses.
<< <i>
<< <i>Not the technical grade. The star is for eye appeal. >>
Check the population reports and registry sets and keep telling yourself that if you want to believe it. >>
If you send a coin in for a grade review, it can come back with or without a star. If you send it just for a designation review, only the star is reviewed. A low-end 65 with amazing color can still receive a star; the eye appeal is not a judge of the solidness of the grade, but just the coin's overall look. Yes, points are changed in the registry and the star is separated in the population report, but I would agree that the star and the grade are independent of each other. If a coin could be a high 64 or a low 65, and receive the star either way because of its toning, the two must be independent; if they were dependent, the star would only be applied when the coin is high for the grade, in the case, the MS64 holder.
airplanenut, if the coin is sent in for a grade review, is the review limited to the star designation? I am not certain I understand this part of your comment. Can it come back with lower or higher grade with/without a star? Respectfully, John Curlis
<< <i>airplanenut, if the coin is sent in for a grade review, is the review limited to the star designation? I am not certain I understand this part of your comment. Can it come back with lower or higher grade with/without a star? Respectfully, John Curlis >>
Charley, NGC has multiple reviews (like PCGS). Let's say you have a Franklin Half graded MS65. When you send it to NGC, you can choose:
Grade review: The coin's grade is reviewed, and so are the designations. The number can change, and FBL and/or star can be added Designation Review: The coin is sent as an MS65 for evaluation regarding only the star and/or FBL designation. True, if NGC realizes the coin is severely mis-graded they can change it (I think they can even do that on a reholder) it's unlikely.
Similarly with PCGS, you can do the same thing, though only the FBL would be checked, as they don't have the star designation.
Comments
The moral is...........one out of six ain't bad AND, if you think you know better, keep it to yourself.
Ray
You want an FBL designation? Submit to PCGS... they seem to enjoy giving FBL designations to about any Frankie out there, actual bell lines are immaterial.
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
<< <i>If you really think it deserves a star then pick up a Sharpie and draw a star on the slab. Who cares what NGC has to say about it. >>
Jade Rare Coin eBay Listings
I believe that this is the case for NGC star designation. I like that 49-D and it does look close for FBL, but it's a tough call.
It's really easy to fall in love with the colors on these coins, and I have no doubt that it's even harder to keep your objectivity when you own them.
The quarter is the most attractive of the 6 coins, imo. And it does look like a star to me. A super mellow coin, SkyMan!
I knew it would happen.
Usually a single grader with multiple
personalities is used.
Camelot
<< <i>They don't actually use three graders.
Usually a single grader with multiple
personalities is used.
LOVED it Bear!!!
U.S. Type Set
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>Had you submitted each of those coins with a group of average white MS65's or MS66's, they would have had a better chance of going star* imo. When submitted in a group of great looking coins, they get to cherrypick which ones stand out among the standouts.
Coins are often judged by the company they keep. That's a very misunderstood part of the grading "conundrum." But if you talk to dealers who submit coins to make a living, this is a huge part of the game with many subtle aspects. I almost look at is as trying to lead the graders to the right answer...so don't make it any harder for them to agree with your conclusions. >>
Interesting post. I wonder if the same can be said for grades at other TPG's.
Think of the implications...
I would have also starred the 54D Franklin. They all look great.
Looking to rid yourself of the 54D?
Scott
submitting coins for grading is a crapshoot
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Had you submitted each of those coins with a group of average white MS65's or MS66's, they would have had a better chance of going star* imo. When submitted in a group of great looking coins, they get to cherrypick which ones stand out among the standouts.
Coins are often judged by the company they keep. That's a very misunderstood part of the grading "conundrum." But if you talk to dealers who submit coins to make a living, this is a huge part of the game with many subtle aspects. I almost look at is as trying to lead the graders to the right answer...so don't make it any harder for them to agree with your conclusions. >>
Interesting post. I wonder if the same can be said for grades at other TPG's.
Think of the implications... >>
How can this theory be accurate , the graders are grading 100's of coins a day, who knows maybe more, so they get a batch of coins and now they are just going to compare it with the others in the said batch and thats that. Too simple of a theory in my opinion, lets give these graders some credit , they aren't stupid, they are grading 1,000's and 1,000's of coins over a course of time, they will not be influenced simpleton as described period end of story.
It's kinda a reverse of the "setup coins" theory. Often times, if someone wants to try to get a certian grade for a coin, they'll send it in mixed with a batch of coins that are very solid for the desired grade. The idea is that the grader gets in the swing of assigning that grade, giving the borderline coin a better shot. It often works, too.
In this case, it's the reverse. Put in a coin that really stands out amongst a bunch of others that don't.... it certainly seems to make sense.
<< <i>How can this theory be accurate , the graders are grading 100's of coins a day, who knows maybe more, so they get a batch of coins and now they are just going to compare it with the others in the said batch and thats that. Too simple of a theory in my opinion, lets give these graders some credit , they aren't stupid, they are grading 1,000's and 1,000's of coins over a course of time, they will not be influenced simpleton as described period end of story.
I tend to agree with Realone, but it doesn't stop submitters from attempting to employ this strategy (or any other goofy one you can imagine).
1957 25c: Spectacular coin and color. If this didn't get a star, something would definitely be wrong.
1957 10c: Very nice piece, but I've found that monochrome dimes tend not to receive the star. Occasionally one that has immensely bold color and electric lustre will get it, but this seems a bit light in color. At the very least, I think NGC is being consistent on this one.
1958-D 10c: Again, nice color, but from the photos, it looks a bit dark and perhaps has a tad less lustre than they're looking for. Compare it to the 1957 quarter and you can see how much brighter the toning could be.
1954-D 50c: I'm not sure how much of the color I can accurately gauge from the photo, but my guess is they were looking for a bit more color, and perhaps more lustre (I can't tell from the picture). I'll agree that it's an attractive coin, and I would think it's one that could go either way. As to its eye appeal for the date, I'm not sure how much that factors into their decision.
1958-D 50c: Another attractive piece, but I'm not wild about it. I would say the color's a bit too dark, especially on the high points on the obverse, along with perhaps slightly too little lustre. I personally don't like the broken areas on the obverse, and NGC tends not to, as well.
1949-D 50c: It's a nice coin, but it's too dark and too mottled to get the star. I wouldn't expect NGC to give it the star, even though there are spots of brighter color--they're not fans of mottled toning. As for the FBL designation, it looks like there's a hairline that curves from the left of the crack through the top band of bell lines, and perhaps the lines are just a bit weak immediately left of the crack. NGC requires all 6 lines to be full, and I think this one just misses.
<< <i>
<< <i>Not the technical grade. The star is for eye appeal. >>
Check the population reports and registry sets and keep telling yourself that if you want to believe it.
If you send a coin in for a grade review, it can come back with or without a star. If you send it just for a designation review, only the star is reviewed. A low-end 65 with amazing color can still receive a star; the eye appeal is not a judge of the solidness of the grade, but just the coin's overall look. Yes, points are changed in the registry and the star is separated in the population report, but I would agree that the star and the grade are independent of each other. If a coin could be a high 64 or a low 65, and receive the star either way because of its toning, the two must be independent; if they were dependent, the star would only be applied when the coin is high for the grade, in the case, the MS64 holder.
<< <i>airplanenut, if the coin is sent in for a grade review, is the review limited to the star designation? I am not certain I understand this part of your comment. Can it come back with lower or higher grade with/without a star? Respectfully, John Curlis >>
Charley, NGC has multiple reviews (like PCGS). Let's say you have a Franklin Half graded MS65. When you send it to NGC, you can choose:
Grade review: The coin's grade is reviewed, and so are the designations. The number can change, and FBL and/or star can be added
Designation Review: The coin is sent as an MS65 for evaluation regarding only the star and/or FBL designation. True, if NGC realizes the coin is severely mis-graded they can change it (I think they can even do that on a reholder) it's unlikely.
Similarly with PCGS, you can do the same thing, though only the FBL would be checked, as they don't have the star designation.