| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,389 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
Graded NGC AU50!! Such an overgrade, I almost gagged when I saw it. This is why it's so important to concentrate your buying of Canadian coins with ICCS. This would NEVER happen with ICCS.  |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
WOW.. they called that AU-50.  Looks more like VF to me with all those scratches and dings. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5417 Posts |
Wow I'd net grade it VF-30.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
I'll probably get trampled on this post and I'm no where near an expert on NFLD coins and I agree the eye appeal on this coin is much to be desired (although the reverse looks better (it can be seen on ebay)) but this is where the grading methodology between US graders differs from ICCS. The US graders put more emphasis on technical detail whereas ICCS net grades on eye appeal which can yield inconsistent results (IMO). I guess one can say that that even technically this grade is high but that would largely depend on the strike. I wouldn't be surprised if ICCS only dropped this coin by a grade and no more. The 1882H below exhibits what looks like high point wear and yet is ICCS graded MS62. Although this might be a poor example of it, there are many examples that grade NGC/ICCS at par. The disparity seems to be greater with "problem" coins as the one above.  Edited by TheCoinHunter
11/20/2013 7:41 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
Maybe the coin just has a very weak strike...
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
108 Posts |
Wow TCH, what a crappy coin. How about I give you AU-50 market rate for it so you don't have to hem and haw over it anymore? :-p Kidding aside, the debate will continue to rage on so long as the ICCS grading standards are different from their counterparts down south. (Not saying one standard is better than the other.) At the end of the day, we protect ourselves by learning how to judge the coin along with recognizing the meaning of the TPG's opinion. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
if you take away the bag marks then it isn't a bad looking coin,
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
Are you sure you can afford it Jello? JK... Who's complaining about an MS62 on that coin? It was a generous gift from ICCS. I'm more than good with that. BTW It found a new home for a very reasonable 820.00
Edited by TheCoinHunter
11/20/2013 8:33 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
972 Posts |
Technically the coin might grade AU50. But IMO if any grading company is gonna just use technical grading for a coin like this they better include "details scratches" on the holder. If I purchased this coin as a AU50 and received that coin I would be very disappointed.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
No dispute there. Although IMO I would prefer more technical grades and see the grading companies implement additional "remarks". I'm note sure the marks on this coin would be considered "scratches" but certainly excessive "bag marks" (to put it mildly). I guess an argument can be used that the majority of coin collectors look for similar features and generally agree on a definition of good eye appeal, and if a grading company uses that as a main grading guideline, then the system works. I guess in the end it all comes down to the coin. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The coin above, a pretty looking thing its not.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
2495 Posts |
This coin doesn't even come close to a 'technical' au50, imho.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
108 Posts |
If the first coin were graded by Asyn, it would be MINT STATE for sure. Which is technically true, before it entered circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
This hobby would be boring if not for 'Asyn'. (lol)
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,389 |
|
Posted 11/20/2013 6:14 pm
