Subjectivity in Coin Grading

Penny lady, I know you said you were going to be at the Baltimore show. What is your table number, I'd like to stop by and say hello. I need a Hudson and New Rochelle Commemmorative if you happen to have one. See you at the show.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Dond, I'll be at table 855, and look forward to meeting you!. However, sorry, I don't have commens - I only sell Early American Copper, Flying Eagle, Indian, and Lincoln cents. In any event, I can't wait for this show - all initial reports are very positive - see you there!

 

And I would just like to add that I enjoyed the article. I think adding photos of examples would be a nice addition.I know you have some beauties.

By the way, I like starting sentences with "And" -- I read a fantasy novel years ago entitled "Lord Valentine's Castle"by Robert Silverberg. I do not remember much about the book, but one cool thing I do remember is the first word in the book is "And".
Good luck with the article and let us know if it publishes.

 

duplicate entry

 

Guy, is it anything that we would recognize?

 

......great read! don't worry too much about where to start what word here and there. when and if you send it to CW or NN they'll correct everything (or should) before they run the piece.

 

I don't know. It was called "Cole" and ran primarilly in smaller weekly papers in the northeast. the website is no longer up, so can't point you there. The book is still on Amazon though.
Guy~

 

As a newbie, let me ask for clarification on this interesting point. Are you saying that coins are submitted, cracked out and re-submitted, submitted to one or the other TPG's based on their favoritism for a particular uniqeness that a coin may have, just to get the highest grade meaning highest price?

 

I thoroughly enjoyed the article. It pulls together a lot of ideas that I've seen in various places, but never together in one logical explanation.

Good job.

 

Doug, I was asked to write articles for two publications but given no restrictions or specific topics, however, one of the publications is specifically related to my series. I am guessing I was personally asked to write articles, one, because they plain and simple need fresh material, and two, perhaps because I am a female dealer and might have a different perspective on the industry (just guessing on this one). But I don't think I have much of a different perspective than most smaller dealers, so I am writing a few articles on things that I personally feel might be of interest to collectors. The other article I'm writing is about a day in the life of a small dealer so collectors can get a little idea of what coin dealers go through to, particularly when setting up at shows. And to be honest, I get my "inspiration" from discussions here on CoinTalk. I noticed that some collectors have no idea what it takes to be a dealer, so that is what inspired me to write the second article.

And this article was not meant to be a guide on "how" to grade coins - my intention was more to emphasize "what" subjectivity is and how it specifically relates to grading coins.

Regarding your position that TPG's give key date or pedigreed coins a higher grade just because of what they are or where they came from - that's not something I necessarily agree with. Nor do I agree at all that TPG's "price grade" coins (to me, in any event, this is very similar to your first comment).

Whether this occurs or not, in my experience, I have not seen this to be true on a consistent basis, so I do not want to make that generalization. Perhaps you think this is just a "naive" view, but if I may say this respectfully, Doug, I personally feel some of your views are a little pessimistic and even cynical. Even though I am sure there are people who may agree with you, I don't necessarily feel this view has factual merit.

I have seen overgraded TPG coins in various years, not just key dates or pedigreed coins, and I have seen many key date coins and pedigreed coins be graded properly (IMO). And now and then, I've even seen coins of various dates and background be undergraded by TPGs (again, IMO).

So, Doug, if what you say were true, I would think it would be done on a more consistent basis. But in any event, changing grades to suit a date or owner, IMO, is speculation and opinion, and one I'm not convinced is standard practice by TPGs.

 

Scott, thank you - this is a very good point and I have modified my article to include this. Here is the new paragraph that includes this information
(notice, I kept the "And"!):

[FONT=&quot]There's no rule or standard that says, for example, a coin with 4 minor bag marks and only 2 specks should be graded MS63, whereas a coin with only 2 bag marks and 1 speck should be MS64. Or a coin that has a ton of luster but weak feather tips should be called MS64 compared to a coin that has a super crisp strike but more subdued luster might be MS65. In my opinion, this is where subjectivity most often creates inconsistency in grading. And the location of the marks or spots will also affect how the coin is graded. The portrait and date are the focal points of a coin - meaning, those are points where your eye is drawn to first when looking at a coin. So, for instance, blemishes on the obverse portrait of a coin will affect a coin’s grade more than if those flaws were near the rim, in the field, or on the reverse of a coin. But how much this affects the grade can be subjective – if the spot is dark or the mark is thick, will it affect the grade by 1 or 2 points? Or if there are several small spots or dings rather than one large one, how much will that affect the grade? Again, that opinion will be subjective based on the grader’s personal preference.[/FONT]

 

Well done, a good foundation to build on in future articles. :thumb: I also would nominate this thread, but, (here it comes) that feature is currently unavailable. Clinker Award Nomination? Yes!

 

Roslyn, thank you for your comments and input - they are much appreciated, sincerely. As I mention in my response to Doug, I don't necessarily agree that it is a regular practice of TPG's to grade key date coins higher just because of what they are. Perhaps some key dates have gotten higher grades, but as I said to Doug, I haven't seen this to be consistently true and personally don't think this is a standard practice.

Regarding your example of AU58/MS62, to be perfectly honest, sometimes it is hard for me to tell the difference between those two grades! I have seen such beautiful AU58 raw coins (in any year) that have just the tiniest flat area on a high point but has no breaks in the luster on the entire coin, and no other marks or wear. It is obvious the coin was not specifically "handled" so perhaps the flat point might have gotten that way simply as a result of pressure from being stacked or stored in an album - so is that considered "wear" and does it warrant an AU58 or MS62/63 grade? Many TPG's (and dealers or collectors) often grade this type of coin inconsistently, depending on the lighting or the eye or mindset of the actual grader.