| Author |
 Replies: 25 / Views: 6,072 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4963 Posts |
Quote:
Sorry I am not sure how to attach a post as I am new to the forum. This can be a bit of a hassle. To attach a picture, 1. If the picture is under 200KB, click upload picture when typing your post and select the file. 2. If it is over 200KB (which it probably is) Use the free image optimizer link to crop the photo and reduce the size until it is small enough to post, then save and post the picture. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1949 Posts |
Quote:
Sorry I am not sure how to attach a post as I am new to the forum.
jdmern mentions grades and I have to say your way off the mark.
The 1879 is Fine and not better .The 1951 has been cleaned of which is obvious and the 1970 proof needs to be thrown in the bin.
That is not ridiculous its a fact as someone who only buys english pennies I would be the first to acknowledge nice ones. As I prefaced before, I was throwing out grades as graded using a U.S. grading system- I certainly am well aware of the difference between the UK and the American grading system... Something I think is applicable to the OP is that there is absolutely a strong difference between the grading of MANY countries, and it is imperative to learn the differences and how to grade for yourself... For instance, if you are an American collector who is collecting Canadian, you would be foolish to not learn how both ICCS (Canadian Grading Company) and how the American TPGs grade... |
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
190 Posts |
I did not want to appear rude was just giving my opinion.
Although surely a coin can stand out as cleaned and the 1951 is 100%.
Happy collecting .
Pete.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
513 Posts |
Many thanks for the grading perspectives. I posted the coins expressly to get feedback on grading standards, especially UK standards so I can better understand how collectors/dealers in the UK feel about grading. So far, I'm hearing that there is no "details" correlation in UK grading--such coins are only good for the bin--and face (or other prominent) marks on a coin don't detract from grade, they simply make a coin uncollectable (again, for the bin). From other threads, I'm also reading that rim dings similarly relegate a UK coin to the bin.
Edited by Garoyn
10/01/2015 10:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1351 Posts |
By hiding rim dings in a plastic coffin is one reason I try to avoid TPG's |
|
Valued Member
United States
271 Posts |
Greetings.
Just received a number of UK coins and I realize that the grading system in the UK differs from the US. Is there a comparable "Photograde" site or system to guide me? I appreciate the verbal explanation here, but photos would help.
Stay well,
Diy89Nurm7
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16828 Posts |
NOTE to all readers: this thread dates from 2015. Replying to old questions or points of debate will unlikely receive a reply. Quote:
Just received a number of UK coins and I realize that the grading system in the UK differs from the US. Is there a comparable "Photograde" site or system to guide me? I appreciate the verbal explanation here, but photos would help. I'm not aware of any current photograde websites clearly illustrating the British grading system, but as a general rule of thumb: - Grade the coin as you would any other coin. - Assign a Sheldon number to it. - Subtract 20 points from the Sheldon number. - Convert the new number back into a grade. Exceptions: At the high end, MS-65 grades "Unc". 67 to 70 you might call "Gem Unc" or "FDC". At the low end, if your calculation returns zero or a negative number, just call it "Poor". Alternatively, find an old grading guide in a coin book from the 1950s or earlier. The British still grade by that old, strict standard, while the Americans (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) have suffered from severe gradeflation. Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
1879 - Bare fine
1951 - UNC but possibly cleaned
1970 - Impaired proof
Some of the comments here are harsh, calling people's coins crap and telling them to throw coins out.
That attitude deters new collectors.
Let us teach by example not arrogance and derision. Coins mean different things to different people. As long as the 1970 penny was cheap, who cares if its impaired - someone will love it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
735 Posts |
Hear, hear. Well said P.
I agree with your grade assessments too.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
945 Posts |
Just to add, the 1951 penny, although cleaned and with some damage to the obverse, is far from worthless. Both the 1950 and 1951 pennies were very low mintages and even in worn condition will make reasonable money. I would expect that one would make £25 or more, depending how forgiving any buyer might be on the obverse damage.
Also, with the 1879 penny, which I would grade in the UK at Fine or maybe Good Fine, there are numerous varieties for that year, which can make a big difference to the value.
|
| |
Replies: 25 / Views: 6,072 |
First Page
Posted 10/01/2015 8:17 pm
