CoinTalk members understand the grading system for coins and paper currency, but what about exonumia? Do you use the same thought process for medals as you do coins? They are rarely ever circulated. How about tokens? Do you grade them more like ancient coins than modern coins? Is there an allowance for cleaning? I'm finally entering my casino chips into my exonumia collection. How do you distinguish between an average, slightly used or new casino chip? That is the jargon used by chip collectors for grading. Obviously wear, but what about a very small blemish or one extremely small chip off the clay disc? Or do they have to achieve the MS/PF70 state that coins have? Is there a published standard for these items? I know there is a big difference in the value of a slightly used verses new casino chip. Is it all subjective without guidelines? The pricing guides and books don't offer much help either. Rarity will help identify the value but not help with it's grade.
I can't help you with casino chips but my medals and tokens I grade them the same as coins without focusing on a number. In my spreadsheet I'll describe them as UNC, AU, EF, etc. and if there is damage I include the details. So I may describe a token as "UNC - harshly cleaned" or "EF" or "AU - thumbprint." I do this so when I decide to make a purchase I'll reference my spreadsheet to see if I have the token (with lots of tokens this becomes important) and if yes, what kind of condition it's in. This way it makes it easy to identify if you have something or if something is worth upgrading. I imagine it's similar with the casino chips. For your records, consider assigning a grade as average, new, slightly used and record whatever details like "slightly used - chipped rim at 3 o'clock" or "AU - chipped rim at 3 o'clock." Even though you say the casion chip collectors describe their chips as average, new, slightly used I can easily see those translating into: average = XF, slightly used = AU, and new = UNC. If it was my collection, I would stick with P, G, F, VF, EF, AU, UNC with the details and I would not use the numbers unless they were slabbed.
I started collecting, both, medals and casino chips about 20 years ago. Grading medals would follow the same guidelines as coins, but it becomes a little more difficult because there are no set guidelines for the plethora of medals in the marketplace. There are just too many different designs. Actually, I think you'll find that most medals will fall into the circulated categories because very few were issued with presentation cases. Of the several hundred medals that I own, only about 2 dozen came with presentation cases, and another 36 (ANA Conventions) were housed in 3-medal Capital holders. It was just too expensive. I have 48 medals that are graded by NGC, and all are MS because they were protected by cases. As for casino chips, I don't know of any (reputable) grading service that authenticates them. Your clay chips were probably produced before the 60's when most casinos were changing to composites to make it more difficult to counterfeit them. Prior to the early 90's, I don't know of any casino that produced commems. Most were made as house chips, and obviously had some circulation wear. You can usually detect this wear by rounded (instead of sharp) edges. Yes, small chips and blemishes can affect the grade much like coins. Chris
Chris or Jwt708; Would you say that a casino chip in new condition would be the equivalent of a MS70 coin; almost non-existent? I have seen the pit boss bring unused new chips into a game, and I can find very minor defects with them. Just before the Aladdin closed, they were selling new chips to the players, right on the casino floor. I watched them open a package at our table and I purchased some. Even money, no less. When I study my photographs, I can find discrepancies. So the term "new" or "uncirculated" has no meaning in this sense?
SaltySam try this. Just scroll down a bit. https://www.google.com/url?q=http:/...hvDCXA&usg=AFQjCNH-CXRes_BNDKHeWA4EOFsBswFXNQ
There used be a chat room for chip collectors that I used to lurk in. Can't recall the name but it was a pretty lively crowd. I'm sure the room is still around. Also, ICG was trying to get a foot hold on slabbing chips but there was alot of resistance from collectors at the time. Maybe that's changed by now. At the time I believe there was even an on-line pledge that collectors could sign, vowing not to buy slabbed chips. But again, that was awhile ago.
That is an excellent link longnine009. That is the first published guideline I have seen that has thorough information and explanations. My guess is it's based on un-aided eye evaluation, where applicable. That link is now in my favorite list. :>)
Well...this is all my opinion...so you know...everyone has one. Anyway, in my eyes, I can receive a coin fresh from the mint with issues like bag marks, etc. For me, I just grade my exonumia like coins because I'm more familiar with the Sheldon then anything else. Now I reviewed the link longnine009 posted and the grading, to me, it doesn't sound very far from Sheldon's. By all means use the convention that makes the most sense!
