| Author |
 Replies: 65 / Views: 7,210 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9870 Posts |
That one has true signs of circulation wear in the braid,laurel leaves,date,and inner circle of beads.AU50 IMO.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
1461 Posts |
So are we saying that every ICCS coin is "over graded"? It would seem so going by this thread. What happened to the ever so strict Canadian ICCS standards? Apparently the coin community is even stricter than ICCS. You guys are tough. Although started with grading, this has turned out to be an exercise in consistency and ICCS' grading methodology more so then the grades.
Edited by TheCoinHunter
11/02/2013 3:03 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
TCH, I guess my comment was mostly about trusting professional graders in relation to my limited ability to grade. When a TPG puts MS-anything, they're staking their reputation on their judgement that the coin is "uncirculated". I (probably unreasonably) trust that they have experience with the range of strikes for a particular coin. So if I suspend disbelief, I presume that the 1882 *in their opinion* is truly uncirculated, that it's a better than average strike for that year, and some excess mint marks dropped it to MS-62. The 1880 AU-55 does confuse me, as it appears to my non-expert eye to be uncirculated but cleaned. Frankly I wouldn't know how to distinguish MS-60 with a poor strike from AU-55 where the loss of detail is from circulation. I guess the lesson here for me is not to trust a professional grade as much as I may have in the past. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
The argument that an 'MS' cannot ever be in circulation to be MS is true folly.
Most if not all pre-1940 coins that are graded ms60 to ms63 have probably been in circulation a very short time.
Now, getting back to the examples above...
I don't really have an answer to why they are grading as such.
Only to say, without doubt, the most difficult grade range to grade consistently and accurately at any time is au55 to ms62.
The same coin at one time looks like a fabulous circulated coin (au58) and on another day looks like a marked up mint state coin (ms62).
Very, very difficult to grade and therefore I'm not one to criticize the grade.
|
|
Valued Member
83 Posts |
I think that some of the argument / discussion / opinion that has been forthcoming on this interesting debate has gotten side-tracked with semantics - and it is not unusual for people to have different understandings of the proper accepted definition of certain words.
In this case, the meaning of "circulation" as it has been used is a bit of a red-herring.
Rather than get muddled up in whether or not a coin fits definition of being "circulated" - and in the case of TCH's example I completely disagree with premise that the coin taken out of drawer and then given a shine with a cloth creating hairlines on it can any longer warrant assignment as MS.
Clearly, it cannot even be arguable, that the coin any longer can be categorized as being in the "state", (or condition it was in), when it was "mint"ed.
That's why there are, as TCH states, 11 designations of MS - this allows for varying degrees of post-strike wear in the minting process and transportation from the mint, as exampled by bag marks, etc.
Scott's Canadian Coins
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
ScottCC.....
I have a hypothetical situation for you.
Say I get a business strike coin straight from the Mint (freshly struck mint state coin) then proceed to walk to the nearest store where I purchase an item using this coin (take it from my pocket, hand it over to the clerk). Then the clerk notices it's in 'great shape' and takes it out of the till, goes home and places the same coin in his/her collection. (in the process of said transaction, a few minor marks occur on the coin).
I have to ask you..."is this coin "Mint State" and thereby should it be graded anywhere between ms60 to ms70?
Edited by doubleeagle59
11/02/2013 4:36 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
kbbpll. I couldn't agree more and no way was that a criticism. It would seem that I'm making a case against professional grading, but all I'm trying to do is understand ICCSs grading methodology. It's one of the few times where I had a set of coins graded by ICCS that left me completely perplexed. Possibly because as previously mentioned, I grade many foreign coins through NGC,PCGS & ANACS and although all vary slightly, they tend to follow similar methodology and consistency so I know what to expect. A point made by one poster here is that once you see enough ICCS coins, you'll learn the secret formula. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I guess it's all perspective and you have to see the coins in the same light as ICCS. At least for now. When in Rome...
DE59. I agree, I've argued that point on MS60 coins throughout this thread. Also agree that it's a tough range. But this is where a formula that relies too much on "appeal" fails and tends to produce incontinent results. Putting my dealer hat on, it's also a tough grade range (more specifically AU) to sell. AU coins almost always sell closer to EF than MS. Last thing a dealer wants is an expensive AU grade coin in their inventory. Not affordable by many, not desired by people who can afford. There are exceptions of course.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
Scott. I understand you trying to define the word in it's "purest sense", however all of the TPGs and most professionals would disagree with you with respect to how that defenition gets applied across the grade scale.
Edited by TheCoinHunter
11/02/2013 4:47 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
One last thing about these 'inconsistent' grades we've seen with these examples.
Remember...we're talking about GOLD coins.
One thing I have learned over the years (or should I say NOT LEARNED)...is how to grade GOLD!! (it's a whole different grading ballgame with gold coins).
Edited by doubleeagle59
11/02/2013 4:49 pm
|
|
Valued Member
83 Posts |
Again, you seem to be stuck in trying to define whether the coin has been "circulated" - in the strictest dictionary definition of the word, "to move around, as from person to person or place to place" - then the coin in your example has indeed been "circulated".
I do agree with your assertion that many coins that have been graded by MS may have indeed seen some level of limited circulation - as I'm sure we can all agree, that with some marks it may be impossible to ascertain whether they occurred at mint or during post-mint handling, or during a limited form of "circulation".
And just as I'm sure we can all agree, that sometimes the graders just don't take much time in actually examining a coin, to properly determine and assign the proper grade.
The real question you pose is whether the coin can and should be assigned a grade at some level of "mint state" - and in my opinion this should be determined by assessment of the degree of markings on the coin - and opinion as to whether the marks occurred during mint processing, or during limited circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
DE59. This is where you might have a point. As you previously stated, I think fields in general play a much bigger role in gold coins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
ScottCC...I agree with everything you said in your above post except the very last words where you say ....... "as to whether the marks occurred during mint processing, or during limited circulation" (to determine the assigned graded of mint state or circulated).
Now I ask you...."how in blazes is one supposed to figure that one out?"
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
TheCH.....Yes, I agree.
Like I said before...sometimes with ICCS a coin with 'wear' but with MS fields will get the benefit of the doubt as being MS.
Right or wrong, we can debate this forever, but the key is to realizing ICCS definitely leans towards the 'MS" side.
|
|
Valued Member
83 Posts |
TCH: Quote:
I understand you trying to define the word in it's "purest sense", however all of the TPGs and most professionals would disagree with you with respect to how that definition gets applied across the grade scale. Really It's quite apparent that " you" disagree - but as I see it the preponderance of facts and opinions thus-far submitted does not disagree. Go back and re-read some of the fact-based information I have cited from respected professionals in the field and the industry "standards" that have been established as 3rd party graders explain their methods of grading, and the numismatic standards set by bodies such as ANA, etc. All submit that a "mint state" coin cannot have marks or damage inflicted upon it that did not occur outside the minting / bagging process. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
ANA MS-60 definition posted for the 3rd time. Definition: ----- A coin graded MS-60 will be unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks, or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines, or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted. ------- And although I may subscribe to the fact that in some cases the origin of some the above imperfections can be determined, many on a 100+ year old coin can't. Was the mark made by a mint employee, delivery handler, counter, etc... This is why an MS60 grade would probably never apply to a coin minted by today's process.
Edited by TheCoinHunter
11/02/2013 5:28 pm
|
| |
Replies: 65 / Views: 7,210 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 11/02/2013 2:54 pm
