1802 Draped Bust Cent - Grade Opinions Please

Thanks you, all, for your comments.

paralyse - you are quite right, the overstrike is the easiest way to identify S-238. I had forgotten this obvious attribute.

Regarding grade, well, I learnt that my example is positioned at CC #1 together with 3 other examples. The grade was XF40, EAC VF30. Yes, they are very tough!

These are the three other examples (I am reasonably sure).
Top left is the Holmes coin.

Put me in the AU-50 camp. Outstanding!

EAC is subjective net grading vs TPG which often issue a technical grade only with perhaps a + or * for eye appeal

The EAC technical grades max out (originally) at 60 and (nowadays) 63 which is a fully Uncirculated coin with fully intact mint luster, no signs of handling and very minimal surface disturbances (red/brown color doesn't come into play)

Two EAC graders can look at the same coin with a technical (sharpness) grade of, say, AU50, which by EAC standards is a nearly Uncirculated coin with at least 50% of the original mint luster remaining and slight traces of circulation

Depending on how those two graders like their coins to look, the net grade may be the same, a little lower, or much lower

Things like variations in color, surface porosity, planchet flaws, strike quality, surface disturbances/alterations, centering/die alignment, etc. will all be "valued" differently to different graders based on their preferences.

I consider OP's coin exceptionally attractive and only would drop it by 5 points (if at all) for minor surface disturbances (nicks/marks) -- a very strict EAC grader would probably be at 45/35 or even 40/35 for the same coin based on lost luster and a touch more circulation wear than you see on a strictly graded EAC 50 coin.

Than you alll, again for your comments and paralyse and CarrsCoins for you in-depth explanations of what EAC grading is about. I found them very interesting.

I admit I have trouble with EAC grading as well, specially in arriving at a net grade after deduction for flaws.
The Early Copper Grading guide has been very useful to me as it provides examples and guidelines.

Coming back to my example (which I bought at auction here in Europe), the EAC grading was arrived at, I suppose, based on the pictures I provided.

In-hand, it is actually nicer than in my pictures. As I mentioned, it actually has some remnants of mint lustre on the reverse. Very pretty, and in my humble opinion, quite possibly at the top of the best known examples.

EAC is just a coin club and does not offer grading services of any sort.

Some of the members of EAC did produce a guide (noted by Germanicus) on grading early copper, but it is only a guide.

CarrsCoins makes excellent points. Descriptive (net) grading is a way to help arrive at a price for a coin that would just be given a Details grade by a TPG. Unlike modern or later classic coins (e.g. Morgan dollars, Mercury dimes, Liberty Seated half dollars, whatever) early copper is rarely found in "perfect" condition and so issues such as porous or flawed planchets, light corrosion, old cleaning, etc. do not necessarily make a coin "undesirable" especially for scarcer varieties.

Since there may be fewer than 100 known examples of a variety, for instance, net grading allows a buyer or seller to determine a market value for that variety even with no photos at all. Start with a known sale result for an EAC graded coin. Let's say that at the last EAC sale an example of that variety with good eye appeal, no major issues and a sharpness grade of VF35 sold for $1,000. Your own example of the variety that you want to value has the same VF35 sharpness but has an old cleaning, a rim ding, a few light hairline scratches on the bust, and some light porosity or pitting on the reverse. You decide that you think your net grade would be around F12. Now you can look at other auction or sale results, or guides like CQR or Penny Prices, for identical coins graded F12, giving you some idea of a value for your coin.

The same cannot be said for buying a coin "sight unseen" based solely off a TPG grade like "VF details", a range which covers VF35 to VF20! The coin could have a very minor technicality that made it not straight grade on an otherwise very nice example, or it could have major damage or defects that completely devalue the coin or ruin its eye appeal, but without photos you have no way of knowing, and so you can't really put a value on it.

There is still trading that goes on within and without EAC of coins that have no photos available -- (mail lists, etc) -- net grading / descriptive grading gives you more confidence in purchasing such coins because you at least have some idea what's going to show up in your mailbox. It may seen anachronistic these days in this era where auction sites have all the high-res photos you could ever want of any coin you want to buy, but that wasn't the case 30-40+ years ago, where auction catalogues often only included plate photos of particularly noteworthy, rare, or valuable coins, and the rest of the listings were purely descriptive.

Personally, I enjoy descriptive grading, since I can tell you a descriptive grade on a coin I own and you'll have a very good idea of exactly what it looks like, without ever seeing it!

I agree with you, but would like clarification on a specific subject on EAC grading. Buying sight unseen EAC seems to have problems as well. Let's say there are two coins graded EAC VF-35, where one is a smooth chocolate with no distractions, and the other is uncirculated with corrosion and rim dings. Wouldn't the original VF-35 command a higher price being without problems?

Regardless of EAC etc. Jason (me) puts this coin at a minimum of a strong 45. 50 wouldn't be out of line imo. I've been doing this for a long time. This coin has very little to complain about.

I like this coin--it's a great specimen! I think AU(50) isn't out of line...