the odd contradiction in cleaned coin values - a newbie perspective

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by TylerH, Feb 3, 2019.

  1. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    I'll disagree here, baseball. Market grading is taken too far. Too many times I see cleaned and scratched coins in straight graded holders, which, to a trained eye, are obviously silently net graded. It's aggravating because a VG detail scratched 1916-D is NOT on the same level as a problem free G6 1916-D, imo, yet that's what the label sometimes says.

    ETA: However, I've come to accept this practice as just something that happens in the marketplace and train my eye to seek out the truly original specimens, instead of complaining about it at every turn.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2019
    Eduard likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    EAC grading gives two clear, unambiguous grades: the level of detail and its value (if needed to be netted down for damage; never upwards). There is no room for guessing what was in the grader's mind at that instant. Last time I checked, the TPGs don't do that.

    What the OP is referring to is silently assigning a lower numerical straight grade to a problem coin without describing that it had been done so. That is completely different from EAC grading.

    Ancient coins are not net-graded. They are given an approximate grade, and problems are described if deemed significant enough to be worth noting.

    Maybe that would be the case if the TPGs were consistent about it.

    Is it good knowledge if that line changes from day to day or quarter to quarter?

    Or are sticklers to technical and unambiguous grading practices, like EAC folk.
     
  4. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    You just described market and net grading without even trying to. The same could be said for what the TPG's do.

    *Mic drop*
     
    baseball21 likes this.
  5. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    No I didn’t. Market/net grading goes:

    Nice EF tetradrachm, but due to some tooling on the reverse, the grade is VF.

    Technical grading goes:

    Tetradrachm, EF with reverse tooling.
     
  6. Clawcoins

    Clawcoins Damaging Coins Daily

    Just takes experience and knowledge ...

    like why does a pristine classic car cost so much until someone finds that there's bondo on the body. It "looks" pristine kinda like a "cleaned" coin.
     
  7. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    So how does tooling NOT bring the grade down? So the numerical grade should stay the same?

    You're also ignoring the fact that we have a details system for problems too severe to warrant a straight grade. TPG's DO mention problems.
     
    baseball21 likes this.
  8. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    PCGS VF-20. Obviously cleaned, but not net graded at all.

    60635930-56D5-484F-A297-F48608EDD134.jpeg FA096295-2C16-4419-A9FF-220B6B4E3FF3.jpeg 5C5EDF1A-0E8E-45C0-AF11-F5FBB69BAD9E.png 8546C9F8-3716-458B-B6B9-DF1AFF049C9B.jpeg

    PCGS XF-40. Nice original XF-45/AU-50 which was net-graded downward due to severe damage on the obverse (neck area).

    F72DC0DB-E75D-4762-9F54-E88631A3E69B.jpeg 1F290DB4-D548-4354-A2C7-71ABC132E90A.jpeg 382DCC92-3C2D-4CF8-8ED0-05EC2F46B4B7.jpeg 3076E2EB-CE76-4337-915E-E85F7BE94996.jpeg

    And this one was (properly) graded F details cleaned when I sent it in.

    24A997B6-1821-401A-8A1A-4F96283F3D81.jpeg F0468F7F-DBF3-403E-87FA-FB92C3EA1B71.jpeg

    These are all the same coin type, and they are all in the same generation of PCGS holders. If PCGS would pick a standard and stick with it, than I would be more willing to accept their grading practices regarding “problem” coins and net grading. But having three completely different standards is unacceptable.
     
    KSorbo, Ag76, Paul M. and 1 other person like this.
  9. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    They don’t use numerical grades. They simply describe the state of preservation and let the market determine its value. Ancient coin grading is completely different from modern coin grading, even at NGC (who does both).
     
    Paul M. and 1916D10C like this.
  10. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    Ok. I see your point. Good illustration. So what you're saying is their inconsistency is confusing.
     
    TypeCoin971793 likes this.
  11. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

  12. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    It is the most common of the type. The 1815 is scarce, but it isn’t the key date. It is about as rare as the 1822. The key dates are the 1823 and 1827. The 1824 and 1822 25/50 C are much scarcer and more valuable than the 1815.
     
  13. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    Hm. That's interesting. See Quarters and Halves arent my area of expertise, I was thinking the 1815 and 1818 got a key date pass. Weird.
     
    TypeCoin971793 likes this.
  14. Jim Dale

    Jim Dale Well-Known Member

    I can see both sides of the "coin". When I first started collecting coins, I bought a coin that looked pretty to me. It was a gold Liberty Head one ounce double eagle. I bought it for $1,300. It was ungraded, so, I had a friend of mine that was going to a show, and he said he would take it with him. He brought it back and it received a UNC Details: Scratched. I tried to find out what was meant by "Scratched" and in what way. NGC was the graded and I could never get a straight answer. Any ideas?
     
    1916D10C likes this.
  15. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    I can see both sides too. Typecoin in this instance, and Baseball make some valid points.

    The silent net grading practice has always quite bothered me.
     
  16. Bob Evancho

    Bob Evancho Well-Known Member

    Everyone wants a perfect coin. MS-70. Any coin below MS-70 is a problem coin with some type of issue. But TPG's don't details grade an MS-69 and say two small nicks or whatever the issue was that keeps it from MS-70. EYE APPEAL is the key. Should an 1893-S Morgan with strong strike getting a Details Grade AU-53 lightly cleaned be worth less than an 1893-S worn XF-40 straight graded with circulation marks and wear commensurate with an XF-40 be valued less. NO. From the PCGS grading guide XF-40=$9,000 and a straight graded AU-53=$28,500. There are no books that price coins based on cleaning from LIGHTLY RUBBED, WIPED, OLD CLEANING NOW RETONED, LIGHTLY CLEANED, MODERATELY CLEANED, HARSHLY CLEANED, ERASERED, BRILLO PADDED, WHIZZED OR SAND PAPERED nor other PROBLEM DETAILS. What percentage behind a straight graded price should a wiped coin be valued, 10%, 20%? What percentage behind a straight graded price should a lightly cleaned coin be valued 10%, 20%? Go to eBay and study the 1893-S Morgans in the Highest grades. Look at EYE APPEAL, look at black marks from contaminants even on the NGC-63. Study them. Buy the coin based on EYE APPEAL and not the holder.
     
  17. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    I always use percentages of problem-free values. I NEVER try to match that value up with a corresponding "net grade".

    A light wiping on an AU capped bust half? Value decreases by 20-40%, depending on how much eye appeal is affected. Same coin but whizzed? Value decreases by 50-60%. Graffiti? Value decreases by 50-75%, depending on severity. Holed? Value decreases by 90%.
     
    Bob Evancho and 1916D10C like this.
  18. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    If you have to justify a coin so carefully on its surface before buying, it is probably not for you. If it grabs you by the ears, and you can't leave the show/shop with out it, buy it if you can. Jim
     
    TypeCoin971793 and 1916D10C like this.
  19. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    I agree here. This is truth.

    And Graffiti, holed coins, and Tooling are absolutely unacceptable. When I hear/see tooling I just cringe. Holed coins especially. When I see an otherwise gorgeous 1822 Dime with a gaping hole I almost want to cry. Gah.

    How would you value a tooled coin, @TypeCoin971793 ?
     
  20. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    Depends. Is it a love token? Is it holed? Is it excessive damage? Were details added to make the coin look “better”? Was it just a poor, small, isolated cleaning job (spot removal, etc.)?
     
  21. 1916D10C

    1916D10C Key Date Mercs are Life! 1916-D/1921-D/1921

    Traditionally, when I think "tooled", I think details added or enhanced. Such as "LIBERTY" being re-engraved, Liberty's hair, eagle's wing, or stars enhanced.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page