EAC Grading -Or- Why Did That Dude Just Tell Me My PCGS MS-61 CAC Large Cent Is An AU Net VF35.

@ paralyse - thats really cool about the continental currency. ive never had the opportunity to handle one of those. Mark has an excitement for numismatics that is truly contagious. last time I saw him he pulled me and my girlfriend over and pulls out a mint red double struck 1797 Half Cent and casually hands it to her, whom he had never met before. the time before that it was a red 1796 Half Cent. passionate people are my favorite kind! I love how willing to share coin collectors are.

when my father first got interested in large cents he was having some trouble with attribution. He had made a couple purchases from a dealer named Rod Burris. Rod heard dad was trying to learn attribution and decided to help. he mailed dad a double row long box of attributed large cents with stickers over the attributions. dad had maybe bought $50 worth of large cents total and rod just mailed him 200 large cents to play with. return them when your are done. no worries. I am always amazed at how trusting and kind the people in numismatics are.

@westcoin - wow. thats quite a saga. it seems like the story kind of peters out there at the end. was there ever any resolution to that coin? I'm curious if it was found to be altered or if it was in fact a struck counterfeit.

Perhaps I should chime in? Now what if one has a corroded coin from before 1830, say that the planchet blank was manufactured overseas in Europe and then shipped over here to be minted, but before it got here, salt water got onto the planchet therefore corroding it. So would it be considered unfair to have said coin in a holder with a details grade modifier if those defects happened before minting? Though it is possible that the coin could have corroded after minting, therefore there might be minor differences in the pits appearance to determine which type of corrosion happened. So one could technically have a gem uncirculated 1812 large cent with lots of corrosion pits due to its manufacture overseas but minted in Philadelphia; should it really receive a details grade because of that?

@mrwhatisit - Your question is pretty interesting and really gets at the heart of what we are trying to do with grading. what westcoin has said is pretty spot on. I have a couple points I would like to add.

if grading is viewed as a means to determine a price then collectors have decided that a corroded planchet is less valuable than an undamaged planchet. planchet quality has an impact on price. aesthetics matter. this is market (slab) grading.

if grading is viewed as a means to describe the amount of wear on a coin then nothing pre-strike should impact the grade. its all mint made. can you prove that the corrosion is pre-strike? this is technical grading.

if grading is a means to rank the best extant examples than things like planchet quality should absolutely be taken into account. a theoretical perfect example would be well struck, well centered and struck on a quality blank. I think this is what eac grading is trying to accomplish.

while the bolton blanks were not in good shape they are not uniformly poor quality. its possible to find honey-tan colored classic head cents. they are scarce, and have strong demand compared to their uglier brethren. the blank at the bottom of the barrel was exposed to different conditions than the one in the center or the one on top.

i think in the case of the large cents struck from bolton blanks the poor quality is taken into account when grading. if you look around you will see a lot of strait graded mid range classic heads that would be in details holders if they were late dates with the same surface quality. classic heads are given a bit of leeway for poor surface quality. with that said a corroded blank will never get top marks. its more a case of the quality examples being elevated above the rest of the pack.

there arent any rare varieties in the classic head series. this allows everyone to be choosier. nobody has to accept a G4 scudzy example if they don't want to. the copper specialist can track down the golden-tan example and pay stupid premiums above retail while the 7070 guy can get a nicely detailed example for their type set that maybe has a bit darker and more granular surfaces while still feeling like they have a great coin. both of these collectors have great coins.

if all things were equal would you rather own a tan or a black example? how much of a price difference would you need before you would want the other coin instead?

With the major TPGs, no question. But not with EAC.

@robbudo - I agree with what you are saying to some extent. as an example there are quite a few chain cents in strait graded TPG holders that would get a details designation if they were coronet cents. if you have a lot of examples to choose from you can be more selective about what constitutes a quality coin.


1812 S-289. R-1. large date or wide date depending on who you ask.

this coin is available in all grades up to AU. it becomes hard to find and financially prohibitive pretty quickly once you start talking about mint state examples.

this example is very late die state. its a small miracle that the dies stayed together as long as they did. substantial die flow everywhere. the deteriorated state of the dies make this coin pretty tough to grade. I'm less confident in my grading here than I have been on any of the other coins we have talked about so far.

Obverse: rim bump at k9. some small nicks in the field near the second star.



the field looks a little strange above the date. it might be a cuprous oxide spot which is a sort of copper rust. a scratch across the bust and some small nicks too.




there are a couple fresh copper spots on the top of the hair and one on the rim. those will tone back eventually but are evidence of recent mishandling.


some more minor nicks by the stars


Reverse: minor nicks in a variety of places. light scratch across (unite)D STA(tes).


lines in the center of the reverse are from clashed dies. they look a bit like nicks but are mint made. notice the lines above the C and between NT. no grade deductions for mint made imperfections.


the reverse rim is kinda pink adding to my belief that this coin was recently handled in a way that wasnt ... shall we say . archival.



when offering seminars on copper grading my example coins get handled by a bunch of people with varying degrees of care. I will frequently get my coins back with pink rims and small bright copper spots. they tone back to the appropriate brown colors without any outside intervention.

there are only 2 of those problems that I consider to be worth net grade deductions. the rim bump and the potential cuprous oxide spot. they are both deal breakers to a number of collectors. the minor nicks and scratches are all acceptable. there are enough minor imperfections that I think the coin ends up as an average.

technical grade is tough for me to feel confident in. I think that this coin is in the XF range. the wreath only shows wear on the highest points on the leaves and there isn't a lot of wear there.



the obverse appears worn enough to warrant a VF grade however I think most of the rounded look is die wear rather than wear on the coin. the flow lines are worn off of most of the obverse fields.

slab grade - I think it should strait grade 40 but I wouldnt be too shocked by it getting as low as a 25. it really doesn't have much wear so I guess 45 or 50 might even be possible. they could details it for the rim bump but I dont think they would. really depends on who your graders are and how much experience they have with this series.

eac I'm going to call it a 35 net 20. this is assuming that the obverse spot is indeed cuprous oxide. if its just the light then I would call it 35/25.

1794 S-65. R-1. Head of 1794. Shielded Hair Variety.
-
this is the variety I see with the most inconsistent grading. its also one of the most common varieties of 1794.

the dies for the S-65 were vertically (axially) misaligned. the obverse of the coin is always bold and well struck to the lower left and weakly struck on the upper right. the reverse eventually cracks and sinks inward obliterating much of the design.

the obverse alignment means that the hair and date are always bold and well struck. the detail in the hair is preserved to a much greater extent than what you will see on any other variety of this year. the date is always bold and legible. this means that this variety is quite popular with type collectors. who doesn't want to see the date on their 1794? it also means that the coin is often over graded. a coin that the wear of a vg may have the hair detail and date closer to what you would expect from a vf or xf coin.

the cracking, crumbling and failure of the reverse die has the opposite effect. the back is often obliterated even in higher grades. late die states have almost no central reverse in any grade up to and including mint state.

here is my example.



it has some nicks. the most egregious is a horizontal dig at around k4. there is another one on the neck below the ear. I grade this coin a 10 net 7 EAC. I frankly have no idea what to expect from third party grading on this variety. it would strait grade but the number is hard to predict. between G6 and VF35. most likely 12 or 15.

here are the good 6 and vf 35 reference coins from photograde. note the lower obverse on the 35 example. the hair and date is what most people look at when grading this coin. note the central reverse on the good 6. its in better shape than the reverse on my S-65. this is a huge part of why people struggle to be consistent when grading these coins.



by knowing that this variety comes with odd striking patterns you can save yourself a bunch of money. Good 6 is $585 on PCGS price guide. Very Fine 35 is $3,850. this isn't the only variety that comes that way. there are a number of varieties that come poorly struck, or with details like the date totally obliterated.

interesting. ill do some learning and poking around and see what I can figure out.

how long have you had your coin?

edit:

i have checked the books and the auction records. I didnt see anything about such a flaw. later die states have the hair fully formed, so its not die grinding or polishing. I dont think a strike through would behave like that.

i have some suspicions about what might be going on but I need to learn a bit more.

i have reached out to a couple people to get additional opinions. ill update again when I have more to add.