Some MS coins have slight friction wear in one spot from being in a cabinet drawer for viewing , others MS coins have very slight wear from being stacked and counted in banks , since these coins have never been in circulation , my question is should this affect the grade and to what extent , does it lower it to AU from MS , or just lower the MS grade . rzage:thumb:
According to the TPG's a coin with cabinet friction is still worthy of being graded as MS. Personally, wear is wear no matter how it comes about. For example, is there a difference between taking an unc coin, placing it in your pocket for a while, and having slight wear imparted to the coin by the cloth of your pants pocket - or by having the same unc coin slide around on the felt or velvet of a coin cabinet and having that impart slight wear to the coin ? To me there is no difference. As for stacking, that is little different either. Banks used to take large denomination coins such as half dollars, dollars and several of the gold denominations, and these coins were used as cash reserves and backing for paper money. But when banks did this, the coins were repeatedly counted over & over, every time the bank had to balance its accounts. And when they counted the coins they were stacked, by hand. The wear caused by this is no different than the wear caused by normal circualtion.
That's what kinda got me thinking about the other MS coins , was the article in Coin World stating how the banks routinely counted CBH and that this shouldn't be counted as actual circulation wear . rzage
But how would you know that any given coin didn't see actual circulation ? There is no difference in the wear - a break in the luster is a break in the luster.
But you could use that same arguement , that coins sealed in mint bags after they reach the banks , that when the banks throw the bags around the hits they are getting should then be considered post mint damage and thus by extension wear . rzage
It's post-mint damage, but that doesn't mean it's wear. Here is a partial list of post-mint damage which isn't wear : scratches, holes, corrosion, nicks, cuts, gashes... and that's just the environmental stuff. Add to that intentional abuse such as harsh cleaning, altered surfaces, altered mint marks, altered dates, artificial toning... Bagginess certainly lowers the value of a coin, but that doesn't mean it's wear i.e. circulated. There are plenty of baggy uncirculated coins with no wear.
I see roll spots alot, coins stored and jiggled in tubes, etc etc. No luster breaks, no " wear " but it has " wear ". I am contradicting myself on purpose.
I agree with you guys , :bow:I also think wear is wear , but after reading that article in Coin World where tpgs will excuse certain types of wear , I thought a thread on where to draw the line would be interesting , thanks for the opinions .:thumb: rzage
Flame me if you want, but I'll call a " Rollie " mint state. Uncirculated means exactly that. A coin may wear in the vault, but having never seen circulation, the answer is............... Roll wear is what? Thats a toughie. Help me out here. EDIT: How do you spell Roly, Rolly , Roolie, what ever, you get it right?
I have to agree with you on that, Doug. Regardless of whether or not is circulated, if it has wear, it has wear. Guy~
While I tend to agree that wear is wear -- it all depends on who is doing the grading as to what effect it has.
I would have to agree that wear is wear no matter how it comes about, because the truth it is a little hard to say that this was caused by that, and that was caused by this. If you want your coins to be MS?? you can think of a million reasons why it should be, but the truth is once the paper is off the press, the edges are easily ruffled. The great majority of coins don't come with a certificate of custody since the time they were relieved or delivered into the world from the mint, and even if they did I wouldn't believe it. I would tend to give more lenience to a coin that was produced in a manner that made it less desirable, than it's brother that rubbed up against a canvas bag or was bludgeoned by a 1000 of his cousins.
I tend to agree; many do. Which do you prefer - a prime AU58 with just a hint of rub, or a beat-down baggie MS61 with ugly toning ? Individual people vary, and individual coins vary. It's all case-by-case. But there are a lot of AU58s with great eye appeal which sell for less than MS60s. In both the Red Book and Greysheet, prices for AU coins are lower than low-end MS coins. To me, that's misleading.
I guess it depends on the coin. I really don't like the look of a circulated Morgan Dollar, and I really dont like the look of circulated gold coinage. However, Bust Halves kind of have an allure for me all the way down into the VF area. I guess it is all depending upon ther person, and what they like. Having said that... If you are buying material to resell, for the most part, I will go for the highest grade, because that is what other people want. If I think the coin is unnatractive I refuse to buy it, because I think other people will think the same thing. I have bought some pretty beat up MS Morgans that had just the right amount of toning to make them "neat". If a coin is appealing someone will want it. I use the same philosophy when I buy stuff for myself. If I like it, I tend to think other people will like it as well. This usually leads me down the right track.
And that is precisely the problem I have with it. Let's take this a bit further. According to the PCGS grading guide - " Perhaps the most difficult task when grading a coin is distinguishing wear from slightly incomplete striking. To cite just one example, experts constantly disagree over whether Capped Bust Half dollars have wear or are incomplete strikes. Indeed, there may be more arguments about this than any other aspect of grading." " The simple explanation is that wear "discolors" the surface of a coin, while an area with incomplete striking has the same color as the surrounding portion of the coin. .............." " Thus, what appears to be wear is sometimes incomplete striking, bag/roll friction, album slide lines, cabinet friction, flip rub, slight mishandling, or actual wear from slight circulation. The grades involved are AU58 and higher. This element of grading is not just about the difference in AU58 and MS60, since there is slight wear or friction in grades up to MS67." Now while all of this is important, there is 1 sentence in those quotes worth particular note in my opinion. Care to guess which one ?
You got it - sorta figured it would kinda stand out. Now ask yourself - do you agree with that ? Can a coin still have slight wear and still be graded up to MS67 ?