Understand that "Circulated" and "Uncirculated" (or, "MS") are terms of art. That's to say, they're employed to differentiate the condition of coins based on the presence or absence of wear on the face of the coins. They're not used, in other words, in the strict sense of whether or not you got the coins at the McDonald's drive-through window or straight from the U.S. Mint. From whence the coins were acquired is irrelevant to the condition of the coins, isn't it? Think of it like that. Evidence of wear on the face of the coins, circulated; no such evidence, uncirculated (or, MS). Hope that helps.
verdigris, I had to look that one up so thank you for that, found this in a bank roll last week. p.s. sorry for the pic quality, I'm new at this
right, but would the green make it lower than MS, if it had no wear? I've read both, that corrosion will lower a grade and I've read that it won't. Does it depend on the wear only? or the amount of corrosion?
Besides wear, damage (as in damage from corrosion, as well as other forms of damage) is also reason for a coin to no longer be considered MS.
In technical grading no it won't. It will lower value but not grade. if you are doing market or net grading then yes it can result in a lower net grade.
Good point, coins can grade high but with designations such as corrosion or tooling would put the "details" wording on slabs. I've personally seen AU details numerous times in slabbed coins, I might have seen MS details once or twice. In a sports analogy, it doesn't mean much that Barry Bonds hit 73 homers in one season if there's an asterisk next to the stat.