| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 2,938 |
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
Ok so how many of you think this coin deserves AU 58 ? From what I see with all the lack of detail in the hair , the beard , even the fields have quite a few marks even though small, and the color .... To me I would say EF 45 maybe I'm wrong but sure dont look like it should be this high.. Would love to hear why it does or does not http://www.ebay.com/itm/1904-Fifty-...0f91b&_uhb=1 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
I would have said, without seeing the coin in person, AU50. Not really a looker.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9866 Posts |
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
Edited by DBM
04/20/2014 11:44 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 1844 Posts |
nice comeback DBM but the seller never quoted a grade its just a starting point ..And guarantied they are more willing to negotiate on a sale than the other seller , just saying  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5417 Posts |
I think you guys are grading too harshly. In my opinion and experience I have found that Edward VII's are the hardest of all Canadian Series' to grades except for perhaps a few choice dates of Newfoundland 20 Cents. Weak strikes and worn die play a huge role in this, because the beard and crown detail is so lightly raised that a slightly weak strike or worn die may come off as wear. That said, there seem seems to be a but too much wear in the mustache to make a full AU-58 so I'd be content at AU-53 or AU-55.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
would it be wrong to put a side by side of the 2 coins mentioned here ? I dont want to cross the line and or have the other seller get upset... Its not about them but about ICCS
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
9866 Posts |
artdio, always keep in mind the lacksadaisical nature of all our Canadian coin institutions and accept that your own opinion is the only one that matters.
I would say AU50 weakly struck.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
You guys are completely missing the important point.
Looking at how ICCS grades, it's definitely a high AU and possibly a very low MS coin.
Argue all you want about 'lack of detail' but this type of coin is graded very consistently by ICCS as an au58.
Once again for all the non-listeners....ICCS grades by 'fields' and not by high points.
If you would only understand and 'accept' this, then many, (but not all) the 'How did ICCS grade this as...?" threads would be no more.
I've seen thousands upon thoudsands of ICCS graded coins since 1990 and I realized back then that I should adjust or convert my grading standards to ICCS's if I was to survive in the business (or hobby).
If you don't and stand fast to your own way of grading, you're in for a very frustrating time.
If, as DBM says "accept that your own opinion is the only one that matters", that's fine and I can understand that, but one thing goes with this...
You haven't a leg to stand on in criticising ICCS's grading since it is a grading system totally alien to yours.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
@ double if your talking fields with ICCS then how can you honestly say that 1904 merits a high AU but you critisize my 1910 with near perfect fields..Then you say the high points mean nothing to them..I say hog wash..
I have owned more than a few thousand ICCS coins and I can tell you this put 2 and 2 together and no matter what you think thhis weak strike nonsense is bull....That coin is worn down and the fields are dull and several marks... DBM is correct in a way because no matter how you think of it its their opinion only and does not make it right... Its all in the eye of the beholder.. what one thinks is ef another might say MS so its up to who ever buys a coin I guess...If they love what they see then who cares what any one else thinks the grade is... I know what mine looks like and I sure know enough about grading to know its alot better than AU 58 .....
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1192 Posts |
I'd have called it AU-55. As others have said, Edward coins are hard to grade due to worn out dies and weak strikes. Not the most flattering photos either.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
artdio...I can agree with you saying 'this weak strike nonsense is bull'. I have a hard time justifying ICCS's MS grades on some weak strike KGV nickels. But the fact is.....THIS IS THE WAY THEY GRADE! You also go on to say "DBM is correct in a way because no matter how you think of it its their opinion only and does not make it right... Its all in the eye of the beholder". True, perhaps to a collector. But you are not just a collector. You who sell quite frequently high ticketed items on ebay should have the sense to 'get on board' with how ICCS grades. Don't you think it would help your profit margin greatly? What bothers me, is you want it BOTH ways to your advantage. Not only do you want to grade your 'raw' coins at the very highest possible grade but you also expect the very highest price for them when you sell on ebay. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't work with our astute Canadian collectors. If they are to spend thousands of dollars on your coins, you should have them graded by our Canadian number one grading company and accept their grading philosophy. That is why I've been saying, if you're in the business of flipping coins, you better know what ICCS looks for in a coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
9866 Posts |
You are absolutely right doubleeagle59, if you're regularly flipping higher value coins, whether you like them or not ICCS graded is a must for highest return and cash flow.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
Doubleeagle, you are correct in half ..I am mainly a collector selling off the extras or lower grade stuff I have accumulated.. I do at times sell some quick flips dont get me wrong. Personally I dont care much for ICCS and I dont beleive they dictate the market any longer. The only reason I sent the 1910 to them was to prove a point.. I knew they would give me the lower end of things.. and for 20$ it was worth the proof. you say and I quote " What bothers me, is you want it BOTH ways to your advantage. Not only do you want to grade your 'raw' coins at the very highest possible grade but you also expect the very highest price for them when you sell on ebay. If you knew anything about me and the way I sell you would recant this statement.. Perhaps I will at times look at the possible highest grade but who doesn't BUT NEVER do I expect to get it.. In fact I can say without a doubt I am the easiest guy to deal with The 1904 DBM mentioned of mine has a price tag of VF 30 ? the coin is that for sure.. I priced it lower and if an offer came in at 60% of trend I would likely take it..Now try to get those mark downs from coin dealers ..NO way As for accepting their grading philosophy why should I ..They do in fact play favorites even if you dont care to admit it... You want a great example. 1902 half I sent in came back AU 58 I was on the phone within seconds.. Gave the coin to a well known dealer he sent it in..Guess what MS62 ? now how do you justify that upgrade ? Anyhow the folks who have made me offers over the years on any coin I sold can and will attest that I am more than fair on any offer if its not a low ball.. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
artdio...I do apologise if I've offended you in anyway.
I've always defended ICCS mainly for two reasons:
One, because I use to grade for over twenty years and know first hand how difficult it is to maintain a consistent grading standard over the years.
I didn't grade coins, but I graded diamonds.
It is almost impossible to grade coins year after year and expect everything to line up at the end of it all.
Of course there's going to be examples where you and I say 'what the heck was ICCS doing on this one?'
They're only human and they can't get away with any mistakes as each mistake they make will be on paper, so over the years, there's going to be plenty of examples.
and the second reason is I've known Brian and Scott Cornwell for over twenty years and both in my opinion are ethical, hard working and very decent individuals.
I find it insulting to them when their company is knocked for 'playing the game' or being underhanded.
Trust me, go to any Ontario coin show and there's about 3 or 4 coin dealers that I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them.
Brian and Scott are two that I would trust completely.
Now getting back to your example in the previous post.
AU58 to ms62 is without doubt, the hardest range of grade to stay consistent over time and grade accurately.
I don't doubt at all the grade of au58 and then ms62.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
Double...no offence taken at all , and this is one reason I say the 1910 was graded way to low.. In hand you would clearly see its much much better than what they say.
There was a time when they were fairly consistent I agree but the time also comes when the mighty $$$$ can sway your line of thought... I have been to their shop on more than one occasion and I have sent him some very rare and high end coins over the years... I have been at this since I'm 12 and now 54 so I am not a nubbie to the grading game either. my data base has probably over 10,000 pics of ICCS , PCGS , NGC and a couple others.... To be quite honest had they of given the 1910 a grade of MS 62 I would have still been upset but it would have made much more sense than what they called it... I am looking for a PCGS dealer and just for kicks I would like to send it to them just to see what they say.... as for the ICCS holder it will be filed along side the several hundred that I have removed over the years...
Not saying they are wrong always or they would be out of business, but trust I have seen way to many bad calls to respect their opinion any longer..
|
| |
Replies: 20 / Views: 2,938 |
Posted 04/20/2014 11:35 am
