When each of us (and even if we grade just somewhat) look at a coin with purchase in mind do we notice the Technical aspects first or the Market Aspects first. I'll leave the category criteria up to you, but they are separate, definitive, and definable. Take Care Ben
Those are two different questions : "Which is the trump ?" and "Which do you notice first ?". I first notice market aspects, because eye appeal rules for me. When I'm done, all aspects come into play, so there is no trump per se. It's all one big melange. Since a beautiful VF is better than a crummy XF, I would say technical takes a back seat. Similarly, which do you prefer : a fabulous AU58 or a baggy MS61 ? For me, it's the lower technical grade.
??? - not based on our recent conversations I think it's somewhere in the middle of the two - take out market demand\rarity and anything else the shifts with market fluctuations and then I think you have a better option..
The very first thing I consider is always the technical aspects of the coin. The reason I do this is because market aspects can make the "grade" go either way. I do not want to consider an "MS" coin that is actually AU if I'm "in the market" for an MS coin. And I'm not just talking about slabbed stuff either. First and foremost, I look for wear, even on MS "graded" coins. Even the slightest evidence of wear and I'll pass. No three strikes here in my game, just one. Since I find oddities to be amusing, I will consider purchasing filled die and weakly struck coins for the sake of having them, if they're in the primary condition I am looking for. Market aspects then become secondary...strike, luster, eye appeal, etc. Let me give you another example. Toning. I like certain types of toning on certain types of coins. I absolutely love purple toned copper cents. A nice gold Jefferson is also always up for consideration. My silver I want to be exactly that...silver. Same with gold. Now, toning is surface damage. And toning will also make it harder to see overall flaws at first, and even second, glance. Now, if I want to have a truly uncirculated piece with an exceptional strike, toning will somewhat get in the way of making out what I need to see. Yes, the toning is absolutely beautiful, and extremely attractive, but it could well hide flaws that I do not wish to have on my coin. The underlying knowledge that my coin is as close to how it came "off the press" is more important to me than what other people ("the market") determine is "acceptable".
an excellent insight, bone because I think this is something that reveals a bit about each of us as collectors. I personally look at eye appeal first, and honestly i agree with NP, I would rather have a nice VF than a crummy XF. For someone who favors the technical aspects of grading as much as I claim to do, I sure do pay more attention to the market factors on a coin. But then again, there's this little detail of having money involved that makes me favor looking at it from a market standpoint.
i completely agree that eye appeal is the first factor that i take into consideration. i have to like the coin before i will purchase it. the next step is evaluating what the coin is worth to me personally regardless of what it has been graded. i am trading $ for a given coin and that can be extremely subjective to the individual. very best wishes to all.........steve
Eye appeal, then magnification inspection. If that coin meets my standards, it would probably be nice enough for anyone else. jeankay
I agree. I prefer to have a nice looking coin to a higher graded coin. I'm not overly impressed with grading and AU suits me fine over many MS coins.
I would say for coins up to XF I would go with technical grade and strike. For AU and MS coins I will go to eye appeal. I don't know if market grading applies much to me because most of the coins I buy wouldn't be affected much either way.
Coins I plan on selling to a book, I tech grade Coins I plan on selling at a coin show I market grade
