Options
Technical vs. Market Grading
kurtdog
Posts: 1,456
According to my particular method of insanity (a.k.a., "grading"), this one technically grades mid-AU while running, market-wise, with the low-MS grades and money. Now, take your best shot (just remember, keep it civil)... 
.jpg)
0
Comments
Collector of Early 20th Century U.S. Coinage.
ANA Member R-3147111
The coin posted is AU.
There I go being uncivil - sorry - this is actually a good question and good thread, it just that a better example might be an early large cent or better date coin in Broadstruck "AU 64" condition.
Lance.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Actually, I think the technical grade is low AU and the market grade is XF45 for the funky surfaces >>
I agree.
Anyway, the point I guess I was trying to get at was, while this coin is indeed a technical AU-55 (how I and a couple others, here, have it, anyway)...and, indeed, a $2 coin, in that grade...market factors can take a coin beyond, even from AU to MS money. In this case, true, just to a $10 coin, with a little bit of luck. But, in principal, at least, can I say we all agree? Maybe this wasn't the best coin to illustrate that with, I'll give you all that.
Let me put it another way. Have you ever opined on a "Guess the Grade" thread? You're technical grading, there, aren't you? You're grading by the book (or, by your understanding of same). That's what we're all doing, in fact (or, most of us), because, that's all we know. I'm saying, we ought to do that, but, not end there. That's just for starters. We ought to then place the coin in a market, or "money" grade. Now we're on par with the TPGs. We need to learn how to do that, however.
One of the big fallacies, IMHO, is looking at a TPG coin, and criticizing it for missing the technical grade. I've even seen TPG coins--hundreds of them, literally--in MS slabs, with touches of wear all over them. They let that go, as OneCent pointed out, at "cabinet friction." I think I can do that as well as they can on my coins to break the threshold on those into MS. I have cabinets, too. I'm saying, in short, that market grading is a loose and generous system of grading, and that, the sooner we can all learn how to play the game, the better off we'll all be for it.
Now, what do you think of that?
<< <i>RickO, thanks for the pleasant, little diversion, but now let's see if we can't resume our regular scheduled programming. Why should market grading be in the exclusive province of the TPGs, while the rest of us are all stuck with technical grading our raw coins, and letting them go at those grades? Does that seem fair? Go to the PCGS glossary. The last I checked, they don't even define technical grading. They define market grading, though, because that's what they do. There are a lot of dealers, here, who have raw coins, and sell raw coins. It's not just the public. It's not just a chump like me. And, yet, market grading enables one to cut corners, doesn't it? Just like on this, albeit, to some, rather poor illustration I provided on this '41-S.
Let my put it another way. Have you ever opined on a "Guess the Grade" thread? You're technical grading, there, aren't you? You're grading by the book (or, by your understanding of same)? That's what we're all doing, in fact (or, most of us), because, that's all we know. I'm saying, we ought to do that, but, not end there. That's just for starters. We ought to then place the coin in a market, or "money" grade. Now we're on par with the TPGs. We need to learn how to do that, though.
One of the big fallacies, IMHO, is looking at a TPG coin, and criticizing it for missing the technical grade. I've even seen TPG coins--hundreds of them, literally--in MS slabs, with touches of wear all over them. They let that go, as OneCent pointed out, at "cabinet friction." I think I can do that as well as they can on my coins to break the threshold on those into MS. I have cabinets, too. I'm saying, in short, that market grading is a loose and generous system of grading, and that, the sooner we can all learn how to play the game, the better off we'll all be for it.
Now, what do you think of that?
MS graded sliders tend to be classics and larger more popular coins which touches on the third aspect of market grading which is desirability. Where your example failed was you chose a coin with little desirability outside of finding one in change thus making it harder to be desirable where it would have to be very special where say a 1815/2 starts special and is often given the benefit of the doubt when in upper AU range with a high level of eye pop.
Your coin; the 41s would have to be priced at the grade lower(Market 45) then what it really is(AU53) to make it appealing (PQ) for a buyer since there is little market for ugly cir later date Lincolns. Where if you take a booming technical 58 1893s 1$ it could very well end up in a Market 62 slab because that grade is more in line with its deserved pricing.But rest assured it would not sticker<
<< <i>MS graded sliders tend to be classics and larger more popular coins which touches on the third aspect of market grading which is desirability. Where your example failed was you chose a coin with little desirability outside of finding one in change thus making it harder to be desirable where it would have to be very special where say a 1815/2 starts special and is often given the benefit of the doubt when in upper AU range with a high level of eye pop.
Your coin; the 41s would have to be priced at the grade lower(Market 45) then what it really is(AU53) to make it appealing (PQ) for a buyer since there is little market for ugly cir later date Lincolns. Where if you take a booming technical 58 1893s 1$ it could very well end up in a Market 62 slab because that grade is more in line with its deserved pricing.But rest assured it would not sticker<
But let's get past that, um, "controversial" illustration I provided. There's no "market standard" for "eye appealing." Eye appealing is in the eye of the beholder. In that respect, everybody else's eyes, including those of the TPGs, are a good as yours, or as good as anybody else's. And all of us have, from time to time, seen what we'd judge as downright ugly coins, in MS slabs. Since when does anybody, then, outside of the owner, get to "net" up or down his or her coins from the technical grade, based on eye appeal? Since when do you, or anybody else, for that matter, get to purport to speak for the "market?" I don't think you can. I do think the TPGs are better situated to make that call, though, just by virtue of the volume of coins they've dealt with, should that mean anything...
Dealers market standards for RAW Peace dollars have 5 grades in their realm-- GEM(ms 62 cleaned) MS(real AU)AU(real XF) VG(XF-fair) and PO-1(AG-VG) buyers tend to have different ones.
Point being it is a tug of war and no blank statement works and if you want to get ahead as a collector the only way is to know the series better then the dealers you are buying from. You will lose every time if you don't
<< <i>doesn't ownership add one maybe two grades to the coin????? >>
But selling it subtracts three!
60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
<< <i>Point being it is a tug of war and no blank statement works and if you want to get ahead as a collector the only way is to know the series better then the dealers you are buying from. You will lose every time if you don't >>
Now we're getting someplace, that's a given. I won't so much as take a poke at even a technical grade on a coin if I'm unfamiliar with the series. But, that said, why should dealers and/or private owners of raw coins be stuck with simply the technical grades on those coins (which, of course, I believe most, here, would agree, naturally have their own measure of subjectivity to overcome) when they go to offer said coins on the market? I guess my point is, we should all feel free to adjust said technical grades up or down for the market, where, at least, our understanding of the market should appear to warrant same. Let me, at this point, just give you one concrete example of how that might be done on this '41-S. In so doing, let's just go off these somewhat marginal photos, and all agree that the coin should "net" down for the market, to save any collateral discussions on that issue. I could see a dealer or private owner, for example, designating this coin on the flip, T-55 (for technical-grade), and M-45 (for market, or "offer-grade"). That's, in any event, how I've been doing it, just about ever since "market grading" entered my vocabulary. FWIW...