Condition and grade

I write web pages for beginners
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/
and other collectors
http://augustuscoins.com/ed/

A topic that comes up is grading, especially when the new collector is a convert to ancients from US coins. I have strong opinions about condition, grade, and slabs, which I have consolidated here:

http://augustuscoins.com/ed/numis/condition.html

The comments are edited from my previous CT posts. If you have concerns about grading ancient coins, take a look. After you read my three-part page, I welcome your comments and suggestions (Web pages are easy to change).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I would give that page an A++!

You asked for comments and suggestions; I had to try pretty hard to think of anything useful! I can only think of one thing that might be worth adding. I think modern collectors worry a lot about getting screwed by buying something that's graded too high. They'll likely bring that attitude when they try to move to ancients. (In the slab, they're looking for something that guarantees their investment.) Yikes, they'll ask, how do I guarantee my investment in ancients? All those factors I could be wrong about! This is too hard, aaargh! You don't really address this worry explicitly.

In part 3, your discussion strongly suggests that the value of ancient coins is quite subjective. I agree. It depends who is looking at the coin, and which of the many relevant factors matter to them personally. (Recently exhibited well in this thread.) Maybe that will scare these people off. (Maybe that's OK! ) But you could consider adding some comments to the effect that it's perfectly fine for the value of an ancient coin to be somewhat subjective. In a way, that should assuage their worry. There isn't some fixed value that the coin has right now, and which they could be misled about. The value is much more approximate and fluid than that. So they should just chill out and decide if they like the coin! Freedom!

You sort of say that already, ("With ancients there is far more leeway to like whatever appeals to you"), but I wonder whether a modern collector so steeped in the tyranny of grading might not get that particular message, among the other important messages you're conveying about the tyranny.

In honour of interesting & attractive low grade coins:


Caracalla, Emesa, 30mm, 19.40g. Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind / Stone of Emesa within hexastyle temple.

 

Great pages @Valentinian I do not disagree with anything you stated within.

Here is a low grade coin. I love the style of this. Though worn, the portrait on this coin has lots of charm and is imho an attractive coin.

Julius Caesar

 

Yeah, beater coins can be fun. It's all in the eye of the beholder.

 

Sorry, off topic, but does anyone else besides me never see the image in @Sallent's signature these days?

 

Something wrong with my signature? I can't see it now because I'm on my phone.

 

This is always what it looks like to me:

 

And when I go to the link (https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/bf3-jpg.673082/) I get an error:

 

Many of my coin images I posted no longer work since the board got updated, I mentioned to @Peter T Davis about it, but doesn't look like it will be address or fixed.

So that's why I am not posting in "pile on" thread like normal. It's a hassle to reupload time and time again.

 

I love your site @Valentinian and use it often.
Reading what @Severus Alexander added.. it's very interesting. I never collected modern coins and do not buy anything expensive so I never look at my purchases as financial investments.. I can see how difficult that transition must be for those collectors. Not just learning about ancients but having to actually "unlearn" many of the aspects of the hobby as they knew it.
It must be hard to get your head around the fact that you can buy a 1700+ year old coin in excellent condition and find it's only "worth" under $40 bucks....and most probably won't increase in value much if at all..

 

I believe that what Valentinian has discussed in his post is well thought out and is worth studying. I agree with him that assigning grades to coins in today's world is all but unnecessary. I almost never look at the grade listed. What I do is scroll down the page looking at the coins and when I see one I think I might like, click on it and look at it in detail. Only then might I actually look at the grade more to confirm my thoughts on the coin offered. I often tell people that I have two grades I either like the coin or I don't. If I like it I will try to buy it. If I don't ....

 

Those who have collected ancients for a while all have opinions. The problem is there is no consistent standard sent from above telling us how to rank a thousand ancient coins, all things considered, like there is for modern US. When it comes to condition, some will equate the term to grade as you separated the terms while some of us are completely driven by 'eye appeal' and include worn coins among our favorites.

Those whose primary concern is investment guarantees are the least likely to profit from what they put into coins. The learning curve required to 'know' coins is steep when there are a thousand different considerations. I understand the desire to have guarantees but the fact remains that the only way you will profit from what you buy is if you find someone willing to pay more than you did. Most of the people that get nothing out of their coins but financial gain will move along someday. Will they be replaced with a new crop of 'know nothing but buy anythings'? Time will tell. Those who get something out of the hobby other than investment guarantee can profit even if they never sell a coin. The only guarantee is that there is no guarantee.

Correct! People are looking for a single variable that will allow them to fix a value when such things are controlled by at least a hundred variables. With practice, one might cut down the number but such matters as who shows up to bid on a given day and how long a coin owner is willing to sit on his stock before dumping the losers for less than he paid remain harder to calculate into a 'value'. Right now I would like to cut down on the number of coins I own but need to decide if I would rather give them to the local high school Latin class or sell them for less than I paid 20 years ago. It seems odd but when dealing with dealers who consider their fair share half or more of the sale price because they will have a minimum of $50 (or another number) to handle a consigned coin and a postal system that charges as much to mail the item as the item is worth in some cases, the cheap out might be giving the stuff away. That is hard to figure into a value guarantee.

 

Me too, but happily so. I hate that CT allows banners and pictures in the signature line. Text links are fine-- they're not so visually disruptive. Pictures in the signature space are just annoying, especially if the person is a frequent poster. It's like having too many commercials on TV-- just get back to the programming already!

It's probably not a CoinTalk problem but a problem with where your pictures are hosted... or were they direct uploads?

 

One point in favor of grades for ancients - they are very helpful when buying bulk lots from respected auction houses, especially if is a large lot and not every obverse and reverse is shown in the photo.

Have you considered eBay, that is, without sneering? You can auction a coin with an opening bid of, say, $.99 and let the market decide what it is worth. You won't get dealer prices, but with eBay charging a 10% commission (and PayPal another ~5%), you'll end up getting more for your coin than you would selling to most dealers.

It takes a bit of work getting everything set up initially, but if you have dozens or hundreds of coins to sell, it might be worth the time investment. Another big bonus is that you get to correspond with other collectors whom you would never have known about otherwise because they don't belong to any ancient coin discussion groups.

 

I bet you're logged out.

 

I find the matter of grading almost entirely subjective. One dealers' EF might be another's VF. And then there is the matter of strike. Some coins are EF but struck from less than perfect dies, so is this reflected in a sober analysis of condition?

Ultimately, it is an emotional decision for many of us. Which coins speak to you? Those that do are the ones you should purchase. And, if you are lucky one day you will get your money back should you ever decide to sell.

 

Thanks, I wondered about that, but nope, that's not the problem. (So I guess you can see Sallent's banner? TIF can't.)

Erm, yeah, you're right... though I don't mind tiny banners like @Mat's at all. @Sallent's roach banner was a bit on the large side. (Hint, hint! )

I can think of one cheaper option, at least for CT members, which is also a lot less work. (Plus it's hard to do well on ebay it you don't already have a reputation as a seller.)

 

I'd prefer no pictures in the signature space but it's not my decision to make. Imagine if everyone posted a picture or banner in their sig space! ~1-2 cm of extra space vertically... that's 20-40 cm of wasted space and extra scrolling on a full page. Pictures which may generate a laugh at the first sight become tiresome when seen dozens of times per day. One of the perks of Supporterhood is not having to see ads. Images in the signature space are analagous to ads or commercials. Can I pay another small amount to have signature pictures hidden? We already have our avatars which are endlessly changeable and can be used to flaunt whatever a person wishes to be identified by or to brag about. Isn't that enough?

EDITED: I ranted for nothing . In your Preferences you can choose to hide signatures . It's not a perfect solution since I do want to see links to people's collections and such, but if the signature line image thing gets out of hand there is a way to stop seeing them.

...

Sorry to veer away from your topic, @Valentinian . Your beginner's pages are excellent. I particularly like the discussion about the massive output of ancient mints and the vast numbers of coins found every year.

As for your grading page, I agree with every word.

 

I very much liked reading the first section as you edited it for this page. Section 2 not so much. You wrote: "If you have the funds, buy super coins. But, if you don't, you can still appreciate the history and types and build an impressive collection (even if it only impresses yourself; Who else matters anyway?) It is not good for the hobby if fewer collectors want the myriad medium- and low-grade ancient coins that most can afford. Don't emphasize grade and don't subtly imply that grade is the key to a coin's desirability. It's not."

If you are suggesting here that the opinions of others about your collection don't matter and that you should not let them affect what you collect or how, I would respectfully have to disagree. By the same token, while the health of the hobby is important to me, I do not collect for the good of the hobby. I do not hold any hobbyist canons regarding grading as sacrosanct, but I do recognize that most people, collectors or not, prefer to look at a coin that is clear and presents well. I am therefore not appreciative of remarks that are intended to put down or make a person feel ashamed for seeking coins that grade well. So, at the risk of running contrary to the popular wisdom, let me state my own reasons for valuing higher grade coins, whether I may own them or not.

I like to study my coins in depth. But my interest is not primarily historical, nor is it focused in the technicalities of production. I am interested in the iconography of my coins and the clever ways the ancients used detail to nuance the form and function of a coin as a vehicle for expression - but even that is not the driver that keeps me at it. For my ancient coins my interest is almost entirely taxonomic. I like seeing how coins may be grouped according to the fine details in their designs.

If you understand taxonomy as a driver, then you can appreciate that to study detail you have to be able to see it clearly. Coins that are worn, poorly struck, covered by accretions, disfigured by damage, altered by unofficial hands of any time, are as welcome to me as scratchy records to an audiophile. If they are all we can get, we'll take them, but will keep looking and hoping that something better will come along. But don't expect me to crow over a wreck.

It's not about my ego. I do the best I can, whether anyone else likes it or not. But I am not content with ambiguity and do not wish to be associated with disseminating misinformation if I can help it. For this reason I want coins that are sufficiently clear that the eyes of others can agree with me about what I think I am seeing, or give me a good disagreement if that be necessary.

The coins I value the most are those which force us to re-examine or re-imagine the reasons why a design looks as it does. It needs to be clear for that to happen, and sometimes an "also-ran" will simply not do.

 

@lrbguy, I don't think @Valentinian's text suggests the thing you're worried about. He doesn't imply that prioritizing grade & detail is in any way shameful. He's just saying it's not the only thing that's acceptable for a collector to prioritize.

Maybe the sentence you find objectionable is this one. If it were edited (in red) as follows would that fix the issue you see?
"Don't emphasize grade as though nothing else could matter and don't subtly imply that grade is the one and only possible key to a coin's desirability. It's not." (Note that even for detail there's a lot more than grade that matters.)