Guess the Assigned Grade 1943-S Jefferson Nickel

So all this angst boils down to the fact that you don't have enough money to play the game? TYPICAL!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You are making a lot of assumptions with your statement. The amount of money I have is completely irrelevant. I once spoke to a multimillionaire who has more money than I will probably ever have. He bought many of these "Top Pop" coins, and he strongly recommends AGAINST buying them. He regretted spending so much on them, and considered them bad investments as the value always went down when more were certified.

I cannot say if my opinions would change if I suddenly got a billion dollars or if I had been raised in a billionaire family, but I doubt my oppinion of value would change if the former magically becomes true. Once frugal, always frugal. So many more much-more-interesting coins can be bought for $4000 instead of a coin graded a single point higher. I used the example of a car to show that there are better ways to spend that kind of money, whether it be practical things for the financially-restricted, or more-interesting coins for those in the top 1%.

In addition, your comment completely ignores the fact that many high-grade early US pieces are overgraded or have problems that are given a pass (cleaning, scratches, etc.). The amount of money I have is irrelevant in this case as well.

 

The key point here is "looking at pictures." Pictures will never completely portray a coin, and you can't really understand a picture unless you've seen plenty of that type in hand.

I'm not going to make any assumptions about your budget except: you haven't looked at a whole lot of these coins in hand. I'll assume you aren't terribly familiar with the 5-6 figure coins. That's ok - most collectors aren't.

I will say that I've seen a large number of these types of coins in hand. I make a point to look at them whenever I go to large shows. There is no chance that I'll own any in the near future, but I like looking at them. I enjoy early US type. I'm far from a specialist in the area, but I'm familiar with it. I've held million dollar coins. I've examined multi-million dollar coins under my loupe.

Just like any other series, you have to look at a whole lot of them to really understand them. I guarantee you, the graders have looked at more of them than you have. They've looked at thousands of them. They've spent many, many hours studying them. They understand the strike, they understand the minting process, they understand how the coins have been handled and stored and treated for the past couple hundred years. I absolutely guarantee that anyone at a TPG knows far more about a 1794 dollar than you ever will. That is an expensive coin. I've seen a dozen in hand - how many have you seen? The TPGs have seen even more than me.

I've seen hundreds of Seated Dollars in hand. I've seen dozens of problem Seated dollars in hand, and even more on-line. The TPGs have seen even more.

Yeah, the TPGs may make mistakes sometimes. But the fact is, these people are chosen because they are extremely knowledgeable and very accurate - they have the experience to grade and detect problems. They understand what is (generally) market acceptable. There are coins with dipping, cleaning, scratches, etc., in the slabs - and usually, they are there because they are considered market acceptable. You've seen a few coins, and a few more in pictures online - they've seen hundreds of thousands of coins, over decades of experience. You may think you know what you are doing - but the harsh reality is that the graders at PCGS and NGC can walk circles around you before you've even blinked. Sorry if this sounds mean, its just the truth.

I realize this will be a controversial post. I realize it may sound like I'm being mean. The harsh reality is that the vast majority of the armchair quarterbacks on this website have nowhere near the experience or knowledge that the TPG graders have. We enjoy our hobby - but for us it is a hobby. For them, it is a business, it is their job. They are good at their job, or else they wouldn't have a job. The professionals (generally) know more than the hobbyists - otherwise the hobbyists would out-profit the professionals.

So, TC'93, you can talk a big game - but there is a lot more to the world than I think you realize.

 

Who are you trying to convince? Me or yourself? And it is too late, you already admitted that you don't collect the coins you complain about. When I asked you if you even collect the coins you complain about, you replied:

In furtherance to Jason's post, you are 20 years old and don't have money. Nothing wrong with that, we were all 20 & poor once. The difference is that you want people who have been collecting coins for decades to believe that you are some numismatic guru when it is evident that you don't have the requisite experience to criticize the grading of these series because you have never collected them.

 

I have seen dozens of six and seven-figure coins, and have held a few. Because of my age (dealers didn't really trust me) and other logistical reasons, I have only gotten to hold a select few of them.

I have seen a few 1794 Dollars (including the Contoursi specimen), but I never really had a chance to examine them for the above reasons. I have examined 1795 dollars, however, as well as many other 4 and 5-figure coins (proof seated dollars, UNC large-size Bust Quarters, early US gold, etc.).

As for the rest of your post, I agree.

I guess I will keep my heretical conservative standards to myself. Apparently the market does not like hearing that if a coin has wear, it is not MS, and if a coin has been cleaned, then it is not problem-free, regardless of how rare and special the coin is. Bill Fivaz was the first to point this out to me. I think he has seen a few more coins than the both of us combined, and I trust his opinion. What I have seen in many slabs confirm his statement.

 

As you like to point out with your constant name dropping, they really aren't your standards, you are just adopting the standards of others. What you seem not to understand no matter how many times you are told is that we don't mind you having conservative standards. The problem arises when you deem your standards correct, and those who disagree with you are wrong and foolish. Coin grading is subjective and following strict unyielding rules will result in just as many "incorrectly" graded coins as does the application of market grading. What's worse, is that at the ripe old age of 20, you refuse to understand that we have had this same discussion with untold numbers of newbies who don't understand the methodology employed by the TPGs.

 

Interesting timing. Just got this one in hand and even though the cheek is very clean I think the surface marks in the field (which are more prominent in hand) would normally have this in a 65 holder. It hits the mark of light pastel toning with superior luster to a T though and was given the 66 bump. It's a beautiful coin and I personally have no problem with the holder it's sitting in, but I'm sure many would prefer better surfaces over the + eye appeal from the luster and color.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

So my grading philosophy is not my own. So I borrowed a lot of it from people and members on these forum whom I trust. If you are using TPG standards, are you not adopting their standards? There really isn't anything wrong with that. My philosophy just happens to be in the minority.

Okay, so I started looking at a bunch of Top-Pop since our first discussion, and I will consent that they are superior in quality. I do not see the significant added value of a single point to the grade (though in some cases I can), but it is not my money, so it is not my prerogative to judge whether or not someone is "right" or "wrong" for spending their money on something they like. I was wrong. Happy?

I have isolated my two major gripes with the TPGs above, which you dismissed. Designating a circulated coin, however lightly circulated, as uncirculated is a misnomer and is inherently wrong. What's unreasonably strict about that? It's like saying the gas tank of your car is full after driving ten miles from the station. No matter how you spin it, it remains incorrect. Sure, preach all you want about the virtues market grading, but PCGS and NGC are called Third Party GRADERS, not Third Party Valuers.

My other gripe is grading problem coins as problem-free. Many collectors (and dealers!) believe that buying a straight-graded coin guarantees that their coin does not have problems. However, I have seen hundreds of cleaned/scratched/corroded coins in straight holders. This hurts the hobby. For example, I was at the Raleigh show, and there was an elderly gentleman looking to buy a trade dollar. He was at a dealer who had several in stock, including an ANACS AU-58, no details. The dealer claimed that it was "as original as could be." I asked to look at it, and I see a blast-white coin with no luster with surfaces covered in hairlines. Obviously it was not original, but both parties believed so since it got a straight grade. This has to stop.

Now deciding what is market-acceptable is very opinion-based. I can live with a cleaned coin that does not show obvious hairlines and otherwise looks natural. But anything obvious should not be given a pass, no matter how rare and special the coin is. The PCGS PF-68 1804 Dollar has a counterstamp in it. Many straight-graded seated dollars and capped bust halves have their patinas completely stripped and still exhibit many hairlines. Many straight-graded large cents have corrosion or are scratched. I can go on and on. Since market-grading is a thing, net grading down is an option (ANACS tried and gave up, and I have seen a couple net-graded PCGS slabs), but this would also cause confusion in the marketplace (dealers trying to pass net-graded problem coin as undergraded). But nothing I say with change anything, so all I can say is CAVEAT EMPTOR!!!

 

Not to jump in the middle here, but this statement is troubling. Semantics being what they are, the TPGs do assign a value when they assign a grade, and the market accepts that this is what they're doing.

What I think people have been trying to point out is that this is what the TPGs do. When many people grade, they do so by the TPG standards, because the primary concern is value, not actually grade.

 

Really? There are many members of this forum who despise the TPGs, their method of grading, and hold conservative grading ideology. One needs look no further than the single most vocal member of this forum, the site administrator, Doug.

I'm happy you listened, researched my claim, and learned. As for the value of these "+" graded coins, only you can decide how much they are worth to you. When you enter the arena of registry quality coins, especially those with impressive rainbow toning, the price guides basically become meaningless. For example, is the coin featured in this thread worth $900? How much is it compared to a generic untoned MS67 worth $100? How much is it compared to an MS68? Each collector must decide for themselves how much these coins are worth. You don't get the luxury of validation at this level. So how much are these coins worth in your eyes? Remember, there is no right an wrong, only opinion.

As Jason and I have told you, both of your points have been hashed and rehashed countless times on this forum and others. If you really want to discuss them again, we can. I told you earlier that adhering to hardened rules regarding grading will result in more unjustly graded coins than the application of market grading that uses a holistic method of grading. With respect to the line between mint state and circulated, you take Doug's long standing position that wear is wear, it doesn't matter how it got there. The TPGs don't take that same position. They will routinely grade coins that display cabinet/roll friction on the high points of the design and grade those coins as mint state. Take Saint Gaudens Double Eagles for example, almost every single Saint in existence has some measure of high point friction. By your standard, there would be no mint state examples, and every Saint that currently resides in a mint state holder would have the exact same grade: AU58. Is that fair? Does that give an accurate representation of the value of the coins? I don't really want to get into a debate about the grading of Saints because I'm still emotionally drained from arguing this same point with Doug 5 years ago. If you would like to read the debate, it can be found here.

totally confused. difference between proof and ms?

Don't worry, the title of the thread does not have much to do with the subsequent discussion.

I would like to address your analogy though, as it perfectly illustrates the position of the TPG. You state that a car can't have a full tank of gas after driving it 10 miles. When you filled the gas tank, could you add one more drop of gas without the tank overflowing? How about another quarter gallon? Half gallon? The point is that the tank isn't really full, we just consider it full. And where do you draw the line of what constitutes a full tank? That is exactly what the TPGs do with respect to the issues that you are raising. They simply draw the line in a different place than you do.

Here is the problem, you say that you have seen "cleaned" coins in problem free holders. My response is, of course you have. The TPGs don't have a rule that a cleaned coin must be considered a problem coin, and neither do you. The TPGs state quite clearly that a coin can't be "harshly" cleaned. That is much different than being cleaned. After all, if you submerge a coin in acetone to remove organic material from the coin, you have cleaned it. If you submerge a coin in an acid based dip, you have cleaned the coin. And while acetone might not change the coin at all, dipping a coin strips the outer layers of metal right off the surface of the coin. And while dipping certainly changes the surface of the coin, it is still not deemed a "harsh" cleaning method by the numismatic community. So that leads us to mechanical cleaning which typically leaves the coin damaged in the form of hairlines or worse. But what if an old AU coin was lightly cleaned so that the hairlines imparted on the coin were indecipherable from those caused by light circulation? You see where I am going? A light mechanical cleaning can still be deemed market acceptable by the TPGs. Now, are there coins that are harshly cleaned that end up in TPG plastic? Of course there are, and you are right to complain about harshly cleaned coins in TPG plastic. The real problem is what constitutes "harshly?" What constitutes circulation wear? What constitutes a "full" tank of gas?

And in this paragraph, you actually admit that there are levels of cleaning that you are willing to accept as problem free. We can argue all day about individual coins that reside in TPG plastic, but once you accept that they simply draw the line in a different place than you do, you will then be in a position to release your frustrations.

And while you might have a problem with counterstamps or chopmarks, my guess is that most collectors of a significant rarity like an 1804 Silver Dollar would not have that same reservation. In fact, the counterstamp would then serve to bolster the originality of the coin. Aren't the Brasher Dubloons counterstamped with his initials? Again, this whole discussion is about where we draw the lines of market acceptability. If your lines are different, then simply don't buy the coins that don't meet your standards. That is what the rest of us do!

 

IMO, friction is not the same as circulation. If the Saint has wear from a bag yet never circulated, it is still uncirculated. I draw the line where the luster becomes noticably impaired. The coins I deal with often are not victims of cabinet friction, so I would like to know if cabinet friction does noticably impair luster.

Fair enough.

That form of cleaning does not necessarily damage the coin, so rightly does not necessarily deserve a "details" grade. It is worth noting, however, because the skin is not original.

 

I enjoyed the recent series of really nice early type coins you posted, although I must confess I'm really not sure what point you were trying to make.

 

The point was that several of the early coins are overgraded (they are not too hard to find), but I find that there are several others that are accurately graded (which are also not to hard to find). I had to have a balance to appease Lehigh, and to show that I am not ignorant enough to think that every TPG grade is wrong. They are wrong on just some of them, and the forum affirmed my suspicions on the ones I posted.

 

I told you, the members of this forum don't know how to grade those coins, myself included. And you subjected them to Heritage's overexposed beauty shots, not the real appearances found in the slab photos. Furthermore, the AU58* you posted, just about everybody thought the coin was MS64-65. So it seems, the forum affirmed my suspicions as well.

But I would like to get back to the subject of this thread. How do you value the registry quality coins in a series? You seem to have no problem with the fact that a generic basically untoned 1943-S MS67 Jefferson Nickel should be worth $50-$100. But what value would you place on the blue toned MS67+ and the MS68* shown below?





As I stated earlier in this thread, even when the blue toned example resided in an NGC MS67 holder, it sold for between $250-$325. Now that it resides in a PCGS MS67+ holder it garnered an almost $900 price tag. What value would you assign it? And don't tell me that you wouldn't buy it, and you would rather spend your money on a car. If someone handed you this coin and asked you to appraise the coin as a numismatist, what would your answer be? After that, do the same with the MS68* that retails at over $3K.

 

As a buyer, I have two values. For my collection, I'd still hover at around $90 because I don't see the added value. As a dealer, I would pay for the plastic at a higher, but not "fair," price (around $300 or so) because I have no idea how long it would take to sell, nor how much the value would drop as the population grows. I would price at the going rate for the plastic, and I would accept offers much lower than that to get rid of it.

Realistically what I'd do as a dealer would be to take the coin, piggyback on another dealer's submission to Heritage, and give the seller 90-95% of what I get from the sale.

For this case, I would open the PCGS price guide and tell them $900, as that is the value the market has assigned for that number on the label. Not what I'd pay, but apparently what someone else would pay.

 

You say this in a negative almost condescending tone (not just here but in other posts as well). What you are posting here is literally the exact same thing as every item in the entire world that you can buy or sell.

Ferrari's sell for 500k+, if I had that money I would never spend that much on a car. People do and that's their decision I have no issue with it.

Rolexes sell for 10s of thousands of dollars. I'm cool with my $50 watch that works. The people that want a Rolex I completely get it.

Could go on and on. Top pop coins that go for thousands more than a coin 1 point lower or one "+" lower may not make sense in your world but there are plenty of people who have different goals with their coin collection than you do. There's no reason to be condescending or judging of how other people want to put their collection together. Happens too much around here.

 

As I have said earlier, people can spend their money however they want. I don't care. It's not my money.

 

But it sure seems like you care with how often you make condescending comments about this exact topic.

 

When you say "I don't see the added value", does that mean that you don't think that eye appeal and attractive toning is worth a premium? And if you don't think eye appeal is worth extra money personally, do you understand that many others in the numismatic world will pay handsomely for an attractive coin?

I would like to point out, that this is a coin, not "plastic". While there may be some deep pocket collectors who simply buy the highest graded plastic they can find in order to reach the number 1 spot in the registry, I can tell you from experience that most registry collectors are educated and knowledgeable numismatists who put painstaking effort into assembling their collections.

Your comments after "As a dealer" are hysterical to me. You won't pay a fair price because you don't know how long it would take to sell or how much the value would drop as the population grows. Part of being a dealer is understanding the market. If you are going to make that argument, you need to make the assumption that you are a dealer who doesn't deal in registry quality coins. Dealers can make huge scores on selling toned registry quality coins, precisely because there is no price guide for the coins. But rather than learn how to use this to your advantage, you would rather settle for 5-10%.

As for the appraisal, what if the guy responds by saying "yes, I know what the PCGS Price Guide says, I was looking for a professional opinion!"

 

By that I mean I see nothing special about them other than their uber-high grade and stellar eye appeal. I prefer coins with interesting stories and beautiful designs over common coins with stunning preservation. I acknowledge that there are many individuals who will pay up for the best-of-the-best coins. I am not one of them.

I like rainbow-toned Morgans. They are pretty, but I could never convince myself to pay a premium for one. I eventually found one for sale for a little over melt, and I happily bought it.

Fair enough.

And I don't deal with them. I never have. My comment was if I pretended that I set up shop at a coin show tomorrow with my current abilities, experience, and interests. If I had been a dealer for 10 years, I may have had a different outlook.

These coins are so subjective in value that they are only worth what someone is willing to pay for them. Take the MS-67+ quarter in the other thread. NGC said it was worth $7000. I would not have paid that, and judging from the auction result, no one else would have either. Yet in cases like your nickel, you were willing to pay $253 while NGC said it was worth $90. Now PCGS says it is worth $900. There is no way to tell for sure. The PCGS price guide often gives a good idea of what the market it willing to pay (though usually a bit high).

And, to be honest, I don't know what my Morgan is worth, and I have had it for over six months. It was worth more than $17 to me, so I bought it. It was worth more than $60 to a dealer, so he offered $60. It was worth at least $140 to PCGS, so they called it MS-65. Is it worth more than $140 to someone else? Probably. But until it sells, I have no idea.