AU 58 with Nick on Coin?

I just bought a 1905-S 5 dollar gold piece liberty head on ebay. It is slabbed and graded by NGC. The grade is AU58. THe coin looks great but has a fairly deep nick on the bridge of the nose. Otherwise the coin is beautiful. Does this sound like an accurate grading with a nick like this? I will post a picture of the coin at:

http://www.jpfotos.netfirms.com/coin.htm

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Got it working!

I guess my pictures were too big so now it's working..Thanks Joe

 

Thanks

I was most worried by the nick. I feel pretty confident with the grding now. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't some glaring mistake that would indicate the coin had been tampered with since grading. You know how eBay can be sometimes! Thanks again...Joe

 

Judging by the wear, I see it as an AU58. Since even an MS63 coin can have some significant bag/contact marks, I don't think that AU58 is an impossible grade for this coin. With gold being so much softer than the other metals, it is going to mark easier with less friction than other coins. If that nick had been considered as damage to the coin instead of a contact mark, NGC would have bb'd it.

 

My understanding, is that an AU-58 is a "very choice" almost uncirculated coin.

That's not what I see in the picture.

 

I think it's on the border between 55 and 58. One could make a case for 58, but it's not a particularly "choice" 58 if so.

Here's an example of an AU-58 in my collection for comparison:

 

In comparison with that, I would have to say that jp's coin is AU55. Very nice, Ziggy.

 

If you had 2 coins with identical luster, eye appeal, and amounts of wear but one had a significant hit on the nose, seems the one without the hit should be graded higher. If the one with the hit is AU58, the one without should be AU59..??

 

Not really, not by the technical grading standards as they are today. Technical standards generally hold that hits, blemishes, scratches, et cetera, influence mint state grades but not the circulated grades. (Of course, in many borderline cases [say between F-15 and VF-20], graders will consider the eye appeal as a tiebreaker.)

In circulated grades, the technical grade is based on the wear, and as long as any damage isn't excessive for the grade, it can be given that grade. For a 58, basically you should have essentially full luster and just a slight trace of wear. It doesn't matter if the fields are pristine or have a few hits; from a technical grading standpoint, both are AU-58 coins.

Having said that, from a *market* grading standpoint, it's not unusual to find particularly nice AU-58 coins (the type I'm looking to find for my type set) "market graded" in MS-61 and MS-62 holders. Even when properly described as a technical AU-58, these often sell for MS-61 or MS-62 prices anyway (which I know all too well from experience), as they're often more attractive than even some MS-63 pieces. In fact, sometimes I think my greatest competition for these coins are from "crackout artists" who want to resubmit the coin and get it into a 62 or 63 holder.

There have been some people who believe there should be an AU-59 grade, where eye appeal is specifically a part of the technical grade (like it is for mint state coins). Others believe that since the market already values the choicest AU-58 in the mint state tier, you might as well grade them according to where the market would value them, such as "AU-61" or "AU-62."

So the bottom line is, both the nicked and not-nicked coins are 58s. But sight seen, the latter will draw a higher price despite the same technical grade.

 

Except, Ziggy, your coin has sharper detail in the hairlines. I was not basing my opinion of jp's coin on the nose hit. The detail in yours is significantly sharper.

 

Susan, I was referring to the comment from cdb1950 about whether or not a less nicked-up coin should get a higher grade (like AU-59) on that basis alone. Once could argue that it should, but current technical grading standards don't really account for that outside of mint state coins.

Having said that, I've seen more worn and luster-broken coins in so-called "first tier" slabs graded AU-58 than the one originally posted here.

 

jp1164,

I checked out your pic and agree with GDJMSP on the grade. I wouldn't worry about the nick on the nose. Remember gold is a very soft metal and any kind of a hit can put a ding like that in it. It probably happend in shippment from the mint. I would just enjoy owning it.

catman

 

Gold Deal...?

It's real difficult judging grade from a photo. Your coin looks undergraded to me. I can't find any signs of wear on it at all. Can You..? if so, where.

It looks like one of those coins that was sent to PCGS by an person instead of a company and never got the correct grade. Have GDJMSP look at it as well as National Treasure...

catman

 

If you look at it in the light, you can see an ever so slight luster break on the cheek. Also, there appears to be a bit of rub in some of the hair curls to the left of "Y" in LIBERTY. Very little, but I see it.

It's a true slider in every sense of the word. It is a technical AU-58, but I suspect that at least 2/3 of the time this would get slabbed as an MS-62 or MS-63 coin. Then again, that's exactly the kind of coin I'm looking for in my type set. The difference between me and a lot of other folks looking for these coins is that I'm not cracking them out to look for a bump-up on resubmission.

 

I was being 'funny' when I suggested AU59. My implication was that I think that AU58 should be reserved for the cream of the AU crop, and anything less should be graded less. Bottom line, I think a nice AU with a hit in the obverse prime focus area is not the cream of the AU crop and should be graded AU55.

BTW, I have also seen some AU58 slabbed coins that were not as nice as this piece, so I guess the grade is appropriate for the times.

It is a nice looking coin! I would be happy to own it.

 

Personally, I agree. But as with grade inflation and "market grading" elsewhere, an increasing number of AU-55ish coins are winding up in 58 holders just as a lot of true 58s are winding up in MS-61 and MS-62 holders.

But seriously, there are a fair number of numismatists who believe there *should* be an AU-59 grade (or something like that) which indicates not just the slightest wear, but also premium eye appeal. This is largely because there is such a disparity in eye appeal (and market value) among AU-58 coins. Some are barely worth 55 money, if that, and others can easily sell for an MS-63 price.

Of course, if they strictly adhered to grading standards and didn't "market grade" 55s into 58 holders and true 58s into 62 holders, that wouldn't be necessary.

 

I thought this was the original intention of the AU58 grade.

 

Set your own standards...!

You Ziggy,

If I were you I wouldn't worry about Market Value Grading and all those rules that are floating around. My suggestion is that you pick your own grading standard such as Photograde or ANA grading guide and buy and sell by that. Let dealers conform to your standards instead of you conforming to there's. If they are using the book then discuss grades with them. If there not using the book than ignore any grade they claim. If you do this your collection will achieve a nice balanced appearence. You will see a rise in value as well. Learn to grade and don't be afraid..! Grading won't kill you. Beware of attempting to be over perfect...

catman