| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 2,218 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
495 Posts |
Not sure how to cost out the price of the different grades, Trends does not list them - wonder why?
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
403 Posts |
My rule of thumb has generally been to use a conservative algorithm as follows:
1. Find the difference between trending values of the adjacent grades immediately above & below your coin's.
2. Divide the difference by 3
3. Add the result from #2 to the adjacent lower published grade's trend
Example: 1947 Dot variety, 5c, certified AU-58
1. Adjacent trends at AU-50 and MS-60 are $200 and $275, respectively; $275-$200 = $75
2. $75 ÷ 3 = $25
3. $25 + $200 = $225
Some choose to divide in half, but as I said, I prefer to think in terms of conservative trending values on my stuff. Hope this helps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2187 Posts |
Quote:
Example: 1947 Dot variety, 5c, certified AU-58
1. Adjacent trends at AU-50 and MS-60 are $200 and $275, respectively; $275-$200 = $75
2. $75 ÷ 3 = $25
3. $25 + $200 = $225 If it grades AU55 or AU53, do we estimate its about $225 as well? I agree with being conservative, but I think the divided by 3 could work for a VF30 or an EF45 (where the grade is exactly in the middle of both). However, for AU58, you could divide in half and add it to the lower price. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
When you're talking full trends value, I weigh the price equal to the grade.
For instance:
AU50 = $100 trends and MS60 = $200 trends,
Then,
au53 = $130,
au55 = $150
and au58 = $180.
If grades are given split grades, then it follows the pricing should be equal to the coin's grade.
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
495 Posts |
|
|
Forum Kid
Canada
1074 Posts |
So I recently bought a coin in which no other lower grades were found, so I just did it in half. I bought a VF-20 and the EF-40 was 900-1000 dollars. If I didn't get a good discount then would half be fine?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1505 Posts |
Fellows, remember , there is NO official Vf25, VF 35 AU53 and MS61 in Canada.
I would challenge anyone to explain the difference between a MS60 to a MS61, or a AU53 to a AU55.
Personally I think it is a simply a $$$ thing.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
401 Posts |
I agree with the suggestion of non-linear interpolation, specifically for coins where there are significant changes in values between grades.
Look at the price points listed in a guide and then imagine a graph with prices on the vertical axis and grade on the horizontal. The flatter portions of this graph would be where a more linear interpolation is ok.
Using the AU50/MS60 $100/$200 example something like AU53 = $120, AU55 = $133, AU58 = $166 might be more reasonable.
Of course for coins sometimes a sweet 58 is better than a 60 but that is a different discussion...
Edited by paddy murphy
10/31/2014 1:34 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
154 Posts |
Personally, I am in skip79's camp. Despite the supposed AU 53 & 58 grades, I down-grade them to AU-50 & AU-55 for valuation purposes. I discount values significantly from MS. Mint state coins are in a class by themselves and being close still carries a significant non-linear discount factor.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1581 Posts |
> Some choose to divide in half, but as I said, I prefer to think in terms of conservative trending values on my stuff. Hope this helps.
Dealers ALWAYS seem to do this. But, since none of us rush out to buy at Trends and catalogue, the discount we want dominates 33%/50% of the difference.
> Of course for coins sometimes a sweet 58 is better than a 60 but that is a different discussion...
Yeah. That's a fascinating subject. The smart money will pay the big premium for the spectacular eye appeal examples which are technically degraded to AU-58 by a rub.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3486 Posts |
"The smart money will pay the big premium for the spectacular eye appeal examples ..."
YES!
Within every series there are coins who possess grade rarity which is not reflected in price sheets.
On top of that is the eye appeal which is in the eyeballs of the collector.
A strong strike in a particular date and mint dominated by weak strikes is also in play.
To reduce this to a 'percentage' scale is beyond my knowledge.
Just something else to consider.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
403 Posts |
And for the record (if it matters) I'm not a dealer. I'm simply a business-minded collector who habitually thinks conservatively when it comes to any type of forecasting and valuation analysis. Much like grading is subjective, so are the valuations, which at the end of the day are dictated by the market. Unfortunately there is no technical standardization of grading available for collectors & dealers alike, and there is certainly no standardized market trend that can be relied upon exclusively; unlike commodity indexes, stock exchanges, etc. Due to these factors, among other self-utilized business habits, I prefer to form conservative valuations -- especially for insurance and estate planning purposes.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5178 Posts |
AU-58 in general mainly consists of coins "degraded by a rub", and is better in eye appeal than MS-61 or 62 (aka "technically uncirculated but full of bag marks") almost certainly.
I could never understand why coins in the latter grade somehow still have (or at least are supposed to have) a bigger value than coins in the former.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1051 Posts |
Quote:
AU-58 in general mainly consists of coins "degraded by a rub", and is better in eye appeal than MS-61 or 62 (aka "technically uncirculated but full of bag marks") almost certainly.
I could never understand why coins in the latter grade somehow still have (or at least are supposed to have) a bigger value than coins in the former. I agree 100%. I own absolutely no coins graded between MS-60 and MS-62. To me, coins in that range are "problem coins" for one reason or another. |
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 2,218 |
|
Posted 10/30/2014 09:40 am
