I am really glad, after being "unemployed" for past 4 1/2 months that I am going back to work next week, there are some really neat coins in that auction.
The first three coins in my area I looked at I would buy at estimate. That's a sure sign some estimates are low (as usual).
However with CNG they undergrade their coins, I have seen some coins graded CH EF that were FDC in other auctions, including Roma/ Ars Classica/ which are first rate auction houses. Most of CNG EF graded material would be "slabbed" as MS-65/66! It seems these days, perfect quality coins go way over estimates, some 10 times.
I actually think the other firms over grade their coins. CNG, IMO, is one of the most consistently accurate in their grading and especially their disclosure of issues.
Exactly! I think CNG/ DNW/ Kunker/ all grade very much according to code. If a coin is UNC./ mintstate/ FDC it should have no wear from circulation. Bagmarks/ adjustment marks are part of coin bulk storage/ minting process, so these coins can still be mintstate/ wear on high points=circulation/handling is a different story.
To me, the condition (but not "grade," which is a technical term with a definition I do not have the right to dispute ) of a coin takes into account detractions regardless of source. US collectors seem to think "bagmarks" are not circulation, but the same detraction from a scratch or rub suffered in "circulation" is somehow worse. All right, US-coin collectors define the US-coin-collecting game and that is their rules. But, I collect ancient coins and US-coin rules do not have to apply. A coin could be fresh from the ancient mint, but if it is weakly struck or off-center enough to clip the legend, then the condition plummets in my opinion, although the wear might be zero and the "grade" high. That is why NGC also has "strike" and "surface" factors (which they should have separately for the two sides--neither is necessarily the same on the two sides). In "Selections from the Numismatist: Ancient and Medieval Coins", published in 1960 (long ago) an article entitled "Some Notes on Grading Ancient Coins" by Mead Kibbey has, under EF "The grade indicates a full round flan, little or no wear, and no objectionable corrosion. All details of the design clear except perhaps a little wear on the highest parts or a single defect like a small nick." For "VF" it has "This grade permits some corrosive pitting, wear on the higher parts of the coin, but still calls for good centering of the die and legible inscriptions." The point is, the modern use of "grade" refers to wear from "circulation" alone (according to US-coin standards), forcing us to use "condition" or some synonym for it to (attempt to) describe desirability, if we use any term at all (I recommend not using any term, just a good photo.) But, like the article included in the 1960 book, it is important to take into account things that have nothing to do with wear like centering and corrosion (not to mention strike, style, surface, including patina, etc.). The idea that a detraction is somehow less important because it was not due to circulation is, in my opinion, not appropriate for ancient coins. One way to think of the quality of a coin is to imagine a discussion of the type in a book. Would the coin make a good illustration? Is the legend visible? If you want to illustrate a "Dacian Captive" type under Trajan in the book and the coin is off-center so much that the "DACCAP" in exergue is off the flan, it may "grade" EF or UNC or Mint State, but it is not a good example of the type.
This is a great, concise way to grade coins. I know of some collectors who will only buy ancient coins in NGC AU (or higher) slabs but don't look at the quality of centering or presence of key details. Imagining a perfect, FDC example as MS70 and marking down for wear/style/centering/marks/artificial toning/etc. is more effective than starting at "it looked like X when it left the mint".
I would love to bid/ buy some coins at CNG. But every time I look through their auctions, the prices put me off. Guess I'm too cheap or I got to be better at picking and choosing which ones to bid on.
