2011 Mint Set has a special finish???

Back to the OP if I could interrupt for a sec. I was curious about ANACS slabbing mint sets as SP. I thought maybe that they were giving that designation if the coins were submitted in the OGPs. So I called them and asked and according to the gent I spoke to they are not calling mint set coins SPs anymore. When I told him that somebody had seen them on tv being sold as such, his comment was "oh, it must have been one of the other departments that made a special deal." So apparently their designations are for sale.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree that grading standards can change over time. As is evidenced by your story of the change in grading on non-circulation coins as Proof 70 or MS70 (for commems and bullion).

BUT, I don't agree with you that in 2005 something happened that loosened standards in general for grading circulation and mint set U.S. coins. The evidence in the series I know best (the SAC dollars) simply doesn't support that "observation". Indeed, more than 90% of all of the MS69 graded coins from 2000-2003 were graded by the end of 2004. The populations reflected this at that time. If what you claim were true, then I would expect a large influx of MS69 graded coins starting in 2005 for these older years, and that's simply not the case for the SAC series. I base my opinions on evidence, not on "gut feel" or coin forum rants.

------------------------------------------

There are several things that may be muddying one's ability to assess the change clearly.

Firstly, "making" top population coins has become a livelihood for some. For example, for ultra modern coins, Mark DiLauro (datentype on eBay) is phenomenal at cherry picking superb coins and making top population coins. The point being, just because Mark can find an MS69RD 1992 Lincoln in 2011, doesn't mean that it's over graded...it simply means he came across it. One cannot infer a causal link between the time it was graded and the grade received without a LOT of hand waving.

Second, other approaches have come into use that also yield higher numbers of ultra-high grade coins (mass submissions of onced-over mint sets, which is the method I believe John Maben Rare Coins uses -- moderncoinmart.com online). More coins graded leads to more ultra-high grade examples (assuming they exist at all).

Lastly, because the US Mint is not very forthcoming with the details of improvements to the minting processes, it is simply not the case that a circulation strike coin from the mid-1980s is the same beast as a circulation strike coin from 2011. Think Jefferson Nickels. In some of the 1980s years, full steps are the exception and quite rare. In 2011 finding a nickel in a mint set without full steps is the exception -- and if it doesn't quality it is usually because of a nick or bag mark, not because the design is mushy. 1881-S and 1880-S were good years for Morgan dollars. Ask any collector, they will agree. This is reflected by their abundance of high graded examples. Well, 2005 was a good year for Lincoln Cents (business strike). Ask any serious collector and they will agree. This is reflected by their abundance of high graded examples.

A combination of the issues above can explain both an increase in post-2005 coins grading MS69, but can also explain why you feel some of the pre-2005 years now have an "abundance" of MS69 examples (which were graded post-2005). For some "data", consider that NGC has graded 50,555 Lincoln Cents dated 1959-1999. Of those, a total of 47 coins have been given the MS69 grade. Unless you know of someone who has been tracking the NGC pops for the past 20 years, there is no way to determine when those 47 coins were assigned their grades. But, in my mind less than one coin in 1000 submitted attaining the MS69 grade for modern issues isn't really outside the realm of possibility. For comparison, 1 in every 500 of the 1880-S Morgan $1 grades MS68 or better.

In summary, this topic has been beaten to death by the two of us. I do collect coins in this time frame, and I have been for many years. I have dozens of coins graded both before and after 2005, and there is nothing in my mind that stands out as a "difference" between them. I have specific evidence from the SAC $1 series, which actually doesn't fit at all your argument. In short, we will have to agree to disagree that 2005 was some "special" anchor year in the loosening of grading standards.

 

What do you guys think about the grading standards more recently? (2009-2011 on the business strikes)

 

I am quite positive Doug. These were 2011 coins in ANACS SP graded holders. That was what prompted this whole thread. I was wondering if this was an ANACS (for sale) thing, or if all TPGs were grading Mint Set coins as SMS, because all of the Mint Set coins seem to have a regular circulation finish.

 

i got curious about this i went to hsn network then to coins then sp and they are there sp68 28 piece set

 

are they 2011s???

 

yes

 

$399.95 (you save $50) for the 28 piece set.

You can watch the video too, they probably talk about the special finish.

 

i just want to say that they are in sp holders but i dont belive they are satin finish coins but that is just my thinking

 

I just watched the video. The host said it was a satin finish, the expert described them as a special brilliant finish only available in the Mint Set coins.

 

that was my whole point, Doug.

It basically puts in neon the fact that ANACS will slab to suit large submitters. I understand what you've said about special labels, but that's not what these are. These are a strike designation. I guess the real trick would be to crack one out and re-submit it. See if it comes back with a Specimen grade or an MS grade.

But that would only be worth it if ANACS certification of these coins was worth something in the marketplace, which it isn't.

 

where is the video???

 

Go to the HSN website, search sp68. When you get to the product page, there is a link to the video on the left side just under the fancy box the coins come in.