<< <i>I think you're getting all bent out of shape about nothing, fastfreddy. Besides, how do you know this wouldn't grade MS63 if resubmitted to NGC, or submitted to PCGS? AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction.
Ray >>
I don't and neither does he. If he THINKS its 63 or 4 maybe he should slab it first before claiming a higher grade on a coin he just broke out of an NGC AU58 holder. At the very least he should mention he broke if out of 'a' holder because he THINKS it's a higher grade. If you bought this coin and agreed with his grade and then found out later it was in an AU58 holder would you care? I would.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
<< <i>TPG's may get it wrong at times and seem at times to be conservative in grade but they don't miss by 5 or 6 points at that level of preservation. >>
You are wrong. It can and does happen. 5th Edition ANA Grading Standards page 9 "Several years ago Kevin Foley, editior of The Centinel,, offcial journal of the Central states Numismatis Society, sent in 10 different coins to four different professional grading services. In not a single instance could all four services agree on even a single coin, and in one instance, that of a 1919 Standing Liberty quarter, professional opinions ranged from AU-55 to MS-65." >>
OK, so you can site one example. What about all the other several hundred thousand+ or so coins that get cracked, resubmitted and grade the same? Is this just an anomoly that got missed in your old citing from 'several' years ago? Don't you think they are getting better? I think so and companies like CAC are helping this. Look, I am not trying to defend TPG's but many more times than not they get it right. Just try and cross a 58 coin over or crack a 58 and send it. Guess what. It comes back 90%+ as a circ. grade. I have tried this. Have you? >>
I've personally submitted coins that have varied 8 points----AU55 to MS63. I've had examples go PR58 to PR63. I had a Morgan Dollar go MS64 to MS67 (after a dip). Sometimes there are just some true head scratchers...
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin. >>
An honest seller would disclose this in fairness to a prospective buyer. I know, 'fair's' got nuttin to do with it... >>
If an honest dealer disagrees with a prior grade, I believe they are not obligated to disclose that grade upon sale, and can still be considered honest. This is just a difference of opinion between you and me.
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin. >>
An honest seller would disclose this in fairness to a prospective buyer. I know, 'fair's' got nuttin to do with it... >>
If an honest dealer disagrees with a prior grade, I believe they are not obligated to disclose that grade upon sale, and can still be considered honest. This is just a difference of opinion between you and me. >>
Hay, as long as you sleep good at night.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
Yes, but is that really "circulation"? >>
Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period).
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
<< <i>Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period). >>
No, with this I disagree, but only technically.... This is why we have terms like "bag marks". I was under the impression that circulation implies wear earned while traveling through the channels of commerce. Of course, this argument takes us down the same road as AT vs NT, which we all recognize as a grade "A" kerfuffle.
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
Yes, but is that really "circulation"? >>
Cabinet friction is a form of mishandling. And mishandling (Friction, finger print, etc) again however slight is still circulation. I know hairs are being split here and no one truly knows what has happened to a coin over it's life - especially the older the coin is.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
<< <i>Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period). >>
No, with this I disagree, but only technically.... This is why we have terms like "bag marks". I was under the impression that circulation implies wear earned while traveling through the channels of commerce. Of course, this argument takes us down the same road as AT vs NT, which we all recognize as a grade "A" kerfuffle. >>
So a bank vault is not considered commerce? I know splitting hairs.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
So by the same logic which would allow returning coins that don't grade as high as you hoped,should buyers send the seller cash for the raw coins bought off ebay at au/problem prices that do grade as ms?(Not talking about fakes or major problem coins sold as ms coins)
A listing of all the sellers who have always disclosed to their customers (whether collector/investor or dealer) that a particular coin in their possession was upgraded. The idea that full disclosure should be norm is a little far-fetched...even if on principle it sounds nice and I tend to agree with it. But that's not reality and never will be. Just go check with your local used car dealer if you want another lesson in this subject.
What a coin once graded is basically irrelevant. It's just an opinion. I've had several seated coins over the years that received 3 separate MS grades on 3 different submissions. One went from 64 to 63 to 65 (value of $7000 to $3500 to $15,000). Should I have disclosed to the dealer who bought it that it upgraded 2 pts? It wouldn't have mattered, he still would have bought it for the same money. And at auction I purchased a superb gem "proof" 1882 seated half that imo was gem unc. It came back MS65 the first time. Considering that I paid 66+ money for it should I have been satisfied with that grade? It was sent right back to the same service and graded MS67 the 2nd time. So when I sold this coin (to a dealer) should I have informed them that originally the coin was a gem proof but now it's gem MS67...and that it "upgraded" 2 points? In fact, the coin's true market grade was MS66...something this particular TPG never did get right. Both 65 and 67 were the wrong grades......but as always, those are just opinions that can change.
Now if someone is altering the coin between submissions that's a different ball game.
A listing of all the sellers who have always disclosed to their customers (whether collector/investor or dealer) that a particular coin in their possession was upgraded. The idea that full disclosure should be norm is a little far-fetched...even if on principle it sounds nice and I tend to agree with it. But that's not reality and never will be. Just go check with your local used car dealer if you want another lesson in this subject.
What a coin once graded is basically irrelevant. It's just an opinion. I've had several seated coins over the years that received 3 separate MS grades on 3 different submissions. One went from 64 to 63 to 65 (value of $7000 to $3500 to $15,000). Should I have disclosed to the dealer who bought it that it upgraded 2 pts? It wouldn't have mattered, he still would have bought it for the same money. And at auction I purchased a superb gem "proof" 1882 seated half that imo was gem unc. It came back MS65 the first time. Considering that I paid 66+ money for it should I have been satisfied with that grade? It was sent right back to the same service and graded MS67 the 2nd time. So when I sold this coin (to a dealer) should I have informed them that originally the coin was a gem proof but now it's gem MS67...and that it "upgraded" 2 points? In fact, the coin's true market grade was MS66...something this particular TPG never did get right. Both 65 and 67 were the wrong grades......but as always, those are just opinions that can change.
Now if someone is altering the coin between submissions that's a different ball game.
roadrunner >>
Well, for me I think the slab would confirm the grade only after the coin is examined independantly by a buyer. Hopefully, the conclusion it is at grade or better in the eyes of the porential buyer. My issue is that he took a graded coin broke it out and is selling as MS63 raw. I feel this example is different than the examples you gave. Why? Because the independent a TPG has rendered an opinion in which it has no basis in the outcome of the potential sale. If the seller claims it's better than the stated grade he should state so and not hide behind this game of crack out/upgrade hocus pocus. Again, some dealers do state what holder it came from (if they know) and some will include the old holder if it is now a raw coin.
It is not that life is short, but that you are dead for so very long.
Comments
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin.
<< <i>I think you're getting all bent out of shape about nothing, fastfreddy.
Besides, how do you know this wouldn't grade MS63 if resubmitted to NGC, or submitted to PCGS?
AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction.
Ray >>
I don't and neither does he. If he THINKS its 63 or 4 maybe he should slab it first before claiming a higher grade on a coin he just broke out of an NGC AU58 holder. At the very least he should mention he broke if out of 'a' holder because he THINKS it's a higher grade. If you bought this coin and agreed with his grade and then found out later it was in an AU58 holder would you care? I would.
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on.
<< <i>
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin. >>
An honest seller would disclose this in fairness to a prospective buyer. I know, 'fair's' got nuttin to do with it...
Is it wrong to buy a coin as high AU, even in a holder, that you believe is MS? I have.
Is it wrong to crack them out? I have done that too.
Is it wrong to sell the coin raw after cracking it and say that it is MS? Probably. Definitely wrong without some sort of disclosure.
And, doesn't eBay police the usage of terms like MS for raw coins? Saying "looks UNC" is different from saying "MS-63/64".
But... if you can get it re-graded as MS, then do what you want. Once it's in new MS plastic, the slider question is closed.
Empty Nest Collection
<< <i>
<< <i>TPG's may get it wrong at times and seem at times to be conservative in grade but they don't miss by 5 or 6 points at that level of preservation. >>
You are wrong. It can and does happen.
5th Edition ANA Grading Standards page 9
"Several years ago Kevin Foley, editior of The Centinel,, offcial journal of the Central states Numismatis Society, sent in 10 different coins to four different professional grading services. In not a single instance could all four services agree on even a single coin, and in one instance, that of a 1919 Standing Liberty quarter, professional opinions ranged from AU-55 to MS-65." >>
OK, so you can site one example. What about all the other several hundred thousand+ or so coins that get cracked, resubmitted and grade the same? Is this just an anomoly that got missed in your old citing from 'several' years ago? Don't you think they are getting better? I think so and companies like CAC are helping this. Look, I am not trying to defend TPG's but many more times than not they get it right. Just try and cross a 58 coin over or crack a 58 and send it. Guess what. It comes back 90%+ as a circ. grade. I have tried this. Have you? >>
I've personally submitted coins that have varied 8 points----AU55 to MS63. I've had examples go PR58 to PR63. I had a Morgan Dollar go MS64 to MS67 (after a dip). Sometimes there are just some true head scratchers...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin. >>
An honest seller would disclose this in fairness to a prospective buyer. I know, 'fair's' got nuttin to do with it... >>
If an honest dealer disagrees with a prior grade, I believe they are not obligated to disclose that grade upon sale, and can still be considered honest. This is just a difference of opinion between you and me.
<< <i>
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
Yes, but is that really "circulation"?
Empty Nest Collection
<< <i>I have seen coins with AU rub in MS holders, and had the rub qualified as "cabinet friction" by knowledgeable graders.
Is it wrong to buy a coin as high AU, even in a holder, that you believe is MS? I have.
Is it wrong to crack them out? I have done that too.
Is it wrong to sell the coin raw after cracking it and say that it is MS? Probably. Definitely wrong without some sort of disclosure.
And, doesn't eBay police the usage of terms like MS for raw coins? Saying "looks UNC" is different from saying "MS-63/64".
But... if you can get it re-graded as MS, then do what you want. Once it's in new MS plastic, the slider question is closed. >>
I agree 100%. Ebay and the Ebay community does police the use of grade numbers in the title and sub-title not the description in the body - I believe.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> It's one thing to buy a coin crack it and say it 'looks' MS but you must disclose what it was if you know. >>
Not true. A seller is under no obligation to disclose the past history of a coin. >>
An honest seller would disclose this in fairness to a prospective buyer. I know, 'fair's' got nuttin to do with it... >>
If an honest dealer disagrees with a prior grade, I believe they are not obligated to disclose that grade upon sale, and can still be considered honest. This is just a difference of opinion between you and me. >>
Hay, as long as you sleep good at night.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
Yes, but is that really "circulation"? >>
Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period).
<< <i>Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period). >>
No, with this I disagree, but only technically.... This is why we have terms like "bag marks". I was under the impression that circulation implies wear earned while traveling through the channels of commerce. Of course, this argument takes us down the same road as AT vs NT, which we all recognize as a grade "A" kerfuffle.
Empty Nest Collection
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>AU58 coins are really mint state coins with cabinet friction. >>
Wear is wear no matter how sliight. That is why coins don't get cabinet friction at the mint because they don't put them on a flat surfaces to store and look at them umteen times before they are passed on. >>
Yes, but is that really "circulation"? >>
Cabinet friction is a form of mishandling. And mishandling (Friction, finger print, etc) again however slight is still circulation. I know hairs are being split here and no one truly knows what has happened to a coin over it's life - especially the older the coin is.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, circulation is anything happening once it leaves the mint (period). >>
No, with this I disagree, but only technically.... This is why we have terms like "bag marks". I was under the impression that circulation implies wear earned while traveling through the channels of commerce. Of course, this argument takes us down the same road as AT vs NT, which we all recognize as a grade "A" kerfuffle. >>
So a bank vault is not considered commerce? I know splitting hairs.
A listing of all the sellers who have always disclosed to their customers (whether collector/investor or dealer) that a particular coin in their possession was upgraded. The idea that full disclosure should be norm is a little far-fetched...even if on principle it sounds nice and I tend to agree with it. But that's not reality and never will be. Just go check with your local used car dealer if you want another lesson in this subject.
What a coin once graded is basically irrelevant. It's just an opinion. I've had several seated coins over the years that received 3 separate MS grades on 3 different submissions. One went from 64 to 63 to 65 (value of $7000 to $3500 to $15,000). Should I have disclosed to the dealer who bought it that it upgraded 2 pts? It wouldn't have mattered, he still would have bought it for the same money. And at auction I purchased a superb gem "proof" 1882 seated half that imo was gem unc. It came back MS65 the first time. Considering that I paid 66+ money for it should I have been satisfied with that grade? It was sent right back to the same service and graded MS67 the 2nd time. So when I sold this coin (to a dealer) should I have informed them that originally the coin was a gem proof but now it's gem MS67...and that it "upgraded" 2 points? In fact, the coin's true market grade was MS66...something this particular TPG never did get right. Both 65 and 67 were the wrong grades......but as always, those are just opinions that can change.
Now if someone is altering the coin between submissions that's a different ball game.
roadrunner
<< <i> Shortest book in numismatics?
A listing of all the sellers who have always disclosed to their customers (whether collector/investor or dealer) that a particular coin in their possession was upgraded. The idea that full disclosure should be norm is a little far-fetched...even if on principle it sounds nice and I tend to agree with it. But that's not reality and never will be. Just go check with your local used car dealer if you want another lesson in this subject.
What a coin once graded is basically irrelevant. It's just an opinion. I've had several seated coins over the years that received 3 separate MS grades on 3 different submissions. One went from 64 to 63 to 65 (value of $7000 to $3500 to $15,000). Should I have disclosed to the dealer who bought it that it upgraded 2 pts? It wouldn't have mattered, he still would have bought it for the same money. And at auction I purchased a superb gem "proof" 1882 seated half that imo was gem unc. It came back MS65 the first time. Considering that I paid 66+ money for it should I have been satisfied with that grade? It was sent right back to the same service and graded MS67 the 2nd time. So when I sold this coin (to a dealer) should I have informed them that originally the coin was a gem proof but now it's gem MS67...and that it "upgraded" 2 points? In fact, the coin's true market grade was MS66...something this particular TPG never did get right. Both 65 and 67 were the wrong grades......but as always, those are just opinions that can change.
Now if someone is altering the coin between submissions that's a different ball game.
roadrunner >>
Well, for me I think the slab would confirm the grade only after the coin is examined independantly by a buyer. Hopefully, the conclusion it is at grade or better in the eyes of the porential buyer. My issue is that he took a graded coin broke it out and is selling as MS63 raw. I feel this example is different than the examples you gave. Why? Because the independent a TPG has rendered an opinion in which it has no basis in the outcome of the potential sale. If the seller claims it's better than the stated grade he should state so and not hide behind this game of crack out/upgrade hocus pocus. Again, some dealers do state what holder it came from (if they know) and some will include the old holder if it is now a raw coin.