Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;TypeCoin971793, post: 4612286, member: 78244&quot;]Here’s the crux of it all. This is implicitly understood. This is also why so little emphasis is placed on the grades of ancients, because it doesn’t matter until you get into FDC territory. A general grade is given to give a prospective buyer an idea of the quality of the coin they will receive. At least, this was the case before pictures in catalogues and the internet. Now putting a grade is just a formality which carries very little meaning unless it is a very high grade.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I guess because moderns collectors are obsessed with rarity, and coins without circulation damage (wear) are far more rare than those with it. Coins were meant to be used in commerce, and most were. Thus they place a particular emphasis on the presence of wear. </p><p><br /></p><p>Other damage, like bag marks or hairlines, occur on almost every single coin. Those without them are exceptionally rare and priced at the top of the scale, as they should be. Those with an excessive number of bag marks or hairlines from rubbing other coins should be priced lower than those with just the slightest hint of circulation wear. The market is slowly shifting that way. The adoption of AU-60 to 70 would cement that to be the case.</p><p><br /></p><p>Let’s go back to the MS-62 nickel with the details of a F/VF coin. A normal F/VF coin has extensive damage (wear), while the weakly struck coin has only bag mark damage. Then why should the weakly-struck coin be punished equally as the damaged coin? Answer: it shouldn’t.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in