How turned off are You to this "smooth" Barber quarter?

Recently I purchased a beautifully toned raw 1900s Barber quarter that appeared to be in a lower MS grade. This coin had everything going for it.....nice beautiful, uniformed toning on the obverse and reverse with ample shades of blue edges and light purple in the center. It even had a die crack on the obverse that covered 6 of the stars. As far as eye appeal goes.....this was the Marilyn Monroe of Barber quarters. I louped it for a while and was content to purchase it.

A few days later I send the coin out to PCGS and it comes back as Smoothed, AU Details. Of course there`s no explanation as to which side was "smoothed" but I digress. My question is simply this.....how turned off are people to smoothed coins? I have seen some smoothers that the naked eye could spot as well as some that have people scratching their heads as to how it received that designation.....so You tell me. I apologize in advance for the lack of photo quality, as I`m currently in a Tim Hortons with a sub par camera.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

nice id buy it

 

I think all non-gradable coins should be returned without having to pay anything but shipping cost. I pay for a grade, not for them to tell me I have a smoothed coin. I think that if a TPG would adopt this practice it'll become number 1 in the long run. They will lose some business because of the non-graders, but gain way more from new submissions.

 

Beggars can't be choosers and my access to nice US coins is limited. However, if at the time of purchase, there was a more natural looking Barber quarter around, I wouldn't buy this one.

 

Hard to tell from the pics. It does look AT to me though.

 

I did not know that PCGS used the term "smoothed".

 

Hard to tell from the images but i still have to admit this is a very nice coin and if it was at the right price i would be be all over it !!

 

I would bet the coin was AT'ed to hide the processing (smoothing). Not a coin for me unless it was at a deep deep discount.

 

Maybe they called it "Smoothed" because they couldn't find any evidence that it was "Whizzed". I don't know!

Chris

 

I would guess the reverse was "smoothed" since you can see ridges in the fields.

 

Problem coins still have to be examined by graders and QC'd afterward. Some graders earn $100K a year. If you were earning $100K a year, would you want to give your time away for free?

Chris

 

They may have only noted smoothed, but it was also definitely artificially toned (AT) to hide the previous damage and work. This coin has multiple layers of problems.

 

I disagree. These are businesses, not non-profit organizations. If they don't charge for grading "problem" coins, then I see three things happening:

1. Increase in the amount of coins submitted
2. No accountability to the submitter to understand grading and/or how to identify problem free coins
3. Increase in price for grading coins that are problem free

I don't understand how you think getting more submissions is a plus for a business that can't charge for grading those problem coins. There will be a big increase in submissions from people who will be willing to "give it a shot" hoping the grader will miss something. If the coin doesn't grade, they're only out shipping. No way. Not a good business plan.

 

I have no idea what percentage of coins submitted are non-gradable but I am going to assume 15% is a good number. If for those 15%, they have someone spend 1 minute looking at them, put a sticker that explains why is non-gradable, then pass it on to be returned. I think a good grader would spot a bad coin in a matter of seconds to a minute.

1. I don't see how that's a bad thing. From the new submissions, most will be gradable thus they'll make money.

If now for every 100 coins, 85 are good and 15 bad, they get a fee for 100; if they don't charge for bad coins, or charge less, I expect the number submitted to increase, it'll no longer be just 100. How much will it increase, that's the question. If it goes to 150, and 15 percent are bad coins, 128 coins are good up from 100.

You might be right though that more people would submit bad coins, so the 128 might go lower.

Stiil, they'll have for 2 way shipping and insurance (even a fee, but not as much as a problem free coin), I don't think people will send bad coins hoping to fool the TPG.

2. They could add a sticker or other method.

3. I don't see why that would happen.

This is just an idea, of course a lot of research is needed.


Another idea would be to charge less for "problem coins".

It's all about the percentage in the beginning of my post. I think most of ct members here would submit their coins to a company that won't charge or charge less for problem coins.

The company will get a lot more business, but it's all about profit not turnover. It's risky but I wouldn't say from start it's a bad idea. Whoever does this it'll have the customer base, then you can work with the numbers.

The competiton in this market is non-existent, I think they're happy the way it is. they don't need changes. That's why this probably will never happen.

 

I think the grading companies have it just right. You are taking up the grader's time... and after all he is the talent... whether the coin grades or not... the talent guy still had to provide his service and spend his time.

Kinda comparable to not wanting to pay your doctor when they find something wrong with you.

 

I'll explain my thoughts more about item #3. You need to consider overhead of the TPG and chargeable output. If you don't charge a grading fee for problem coins, there is still a cost associated with looking at the coin. That cost will have to be covered by the coins you will charge for, thus the cost of grading coins you deem problem free will go up and keeping your margins constant so will the price. The cost does not go away just because you can't charge for it. So let's say a grader can grade 100 coins in an hour. Under the current system, 100 coins will be charged for grading. In your idea, let's just say 5 of the 100 were deemed problem coins. Now they will only be able to charge 95 coins. So the cost stays the same, now they have fewer billable coins, so they will charge more.

And I definitely think the submissions will increase significantly. If you can get a problem coin into a problem free holder, with the only risk S&H, it makes financial sense to give it a try and hope someone misses something.

 

If the TPG's had to refund the grading fee for problem coins, I would bet that there would be a lot more coins with issues ending up in problem free holders. Graders are paid to identify problems that a less trained eye may not pick out. If we decide to stop paying them for that service, why should they provide it? It's a classic case of "perverse incentives"...

 

A good grader probably reviews 10,000-15,000 coins per week.

Chris

 

I'd give more than a little bit of my time away to make 100k/yr

 

I'll go along with the LostDutchman and say, leave well enough alone. I think charging less would cause an over burden of iffy coins, including the obvious one's. People just love to get a bargain when paying less for information they did not want to find out, or can't find out. But in this case, they tell you the price you must pay for any information, good or bad, if you can't ascertain it yourself. You know this going in. You know it can happen. It does not come as a surprise.