None of the price guides I have show the price of a coin in AG condition. Is it 10% below a Good coin or more ? I don't need to know exact just a rough idea in the difference in price.....Thanks again !
That's because with extremely rare exceptions, unless they are gold or silver they are essentially worthless, and if they are gold or silver they are worth less than bullion value. Sorry!
i wouldn't see why they would be worth less then bullion value - they should be worth exactly they weight in pure silver / gold, no less... but yeah coins in AG condition usually have their face value or bullion value... and at least 40% lower than G condition if its still more than face or bullion... that's my opinion from what i've seen
AG coins are heavily worn and only identifiable by type and date... it's not a collectible grade and therefore not listed in numismatic reference books, unless in cases of extreme scarcity.
As mentioned above the only time you will see a coin graded AG or P1 is when the coin is so scarce that there just are not enough to go around. In such case this would commenly be used as a "filler" coin neccesary to complete a set until such time or means makes a higher grade available. A coin in good condition is really the lowest I would have as a collector because below that grade a coin really becomes little more than a round piece of metal with perhaps a portion of design sort of visible. Not really interesting from a collectors veiwpoint.
I go minimum Bullion Value, but if the value is above the bullion value in AG, I will usually take between 25-40% off the G condition granted still being above bullion.
It all depends on the rarity of the coin. If it is a common, bullion value only. If it is rare than somewhere between 10 to 60 percent devaluation from the good price depending on the strengths and weaknesses of the particular coin. Like my 16d merc, with just a hair touch more rim it would qual as a g-4 so I would only give it about a 30% devaluation from the established good price.
Very true. Noting the famous Red Book on page 9 of the 2007 edition it lists About Good (AG-3) as very heavily worn with portions of lettering, date and legend worn smooth. The date may be barely readable. Throughout the Red Book there are coins with a G or G-4 grade column but none with a AG-3 column. Don't know why the expression of GOOD was ever started as a grade for a coin that is actually Poor, Garbage, Junk, etc. Why didn't they just say BAD. Good almost means something that is good, not bad.
"Worth" is a slippery term. Perhaps I should have said "They would be saleable for less than BV" No dealer will pay bullion value for junk coins simply because there would be zero profit potential in the deal: A smelter will only give them BV less a small discount no "investor" would pay full BV, especially for such a small quantity no knowledgeable collector wants it at any price, unless it is a very hard-to-find date/mint mark
I think we must have different definitions of "collector". I know people who collect for completeness sake first and grade/value is not their first concern (except as it relates to getting a cheap price). For those people (who I would still call collectors, although they may not be particularly discerning numismatiats), the AG coin is superior to the more expensive and only marginally more attractive G coin. I disagree with this logic, but my disagreement with it doesn't disqualify them from being collectors. this is similar to the people we all know who are putting together AU statehood quarter collections from their pocket change. They are collectors even though they are not acing as discerning numismatists!
People collect holed coins, so it isn't completely unreasonable to suspect that AG coins are collectible also for some people at some level. Perhaps a complete date and mintmark set of Morgan dollars in AG condition would be unique enough to be admired by some [non numismatists] as one touched by tens of millions of Americans during that time period, it would be uniform in appearance, and it wouldn't cost an arm and a leg to assemble. I'd rather own that than a BU collection of statehood quarters.
Better look at the Red Book again. Early date Half Cents and Large Cents have an AG column with several coins listed for over a Thousand dollars each. The 1794 Starred reverse lists for$ 4,200 dollars in AG and $8,500 in Good
I don't think it would be a bad idea, but it isn't what I plan to do. I just think that too many people in the hobby adhere too closely to the ancient wisdom passed down to them instead of thinking in broader terms and expanding the concept of what is considered a worthwhile collection. Many people are locked into the mindset to "buy key dates," "buy the best coin you can afford," "stick with third party graded coins," "collect by date and mintmark or typeset only," "never buy a cleaned coin," etc... This creates what I consider an unusual situation where 90%+ of all coins still in existence have little or no value in a collection even if they are pretty old unless they are very scarce. There is something wrong with that situation, but I know I'm not going to change it. Time will along with future collectors yet unborn who can think outside the box.
