I noticed that ANACS will do a "net grades" appraisal of a coin. That is, there is a coin that I am looking at that has "fine details" but corrosion on the reverse. They give the coin a "NET VG 8." Do PCGS, NGC, or any of the other grading services give net grades?
A net VG8 as a lesser value than a "normally-graded" VG8. A "net" coin usually implies that the coin is damaged, which brings down the value significantly.
But if a net VG8 is of lesser value than a normally graded VG8, why don't they call it a net G6 or net G4?
Sometimes a coin will be significantly more worn on one side than the other. Could that also result in a net grade?
Because appearance-wise they call it a VG8, but because it is stated that the coin is damaged, it commands less of a premium.
This is just a throwback to the old dealer standards of averaging the grades of both sides of the coin. Today, it is considered proper to grade a coin based on the side of the coin that has the lower grade. A net grade does not follow current standards and should be considered as damaged with a significantly lower value than a properly graded counterpart.
Sorry, typing error. I meant "net grades aren't* necessary to do that" Meaning you don't need a net grade to put a value on a damaged coin.
If I remember correctly, the (or one of) OP's main interests are early US copper, so depending on how he plans to collect, perhaps he should speak to one of the EAC guys on the board, or at least somewhat familiarize himself with different standards. http://www.eacs.org/ http://www.eacs.org/region8/ http://www.uscents.com/coppergrade/index.html http://www.earlycoppercoins.com/What-is-EAC-grading_ep_45-1.html
I thought PCGS was doing "details" grades on their slabbed problems coins now (instead of grading them "genuine" like the did prior). So, they are saying what the grade would be without the damage. I have always had a problem with net grading because the TPG is attempting to deduct grade points based on damage yet it is universally accepted that damaged coins can't be graded. I'm OK with the details grades though.
To me, the grade is based on damage. Face value or melt value. Yeah, sometimes it is a shame. Pretty coin, except for that slice someone made with a hacksaw. What I call junk coins. Most of my junk collection is either damaged coins or so worn there is no date.
They are. They only did the Genuine slabs for about a year. The way I learned Net Grading in EAC that was how it worked. The Net grade equaled the point where you you would pay the same for the damaged coin as you would for a problem free lower grade coin. If you have an XF-40 sharpness coin with problems and you would pay more for a problem free VG-8 than the damaged coin then you haven't net graded it low enough, it's a net Good or less.
How does a details grade give you a value? I think even damaged coins should get some sort of actual grade based on the damage. Not just called genuine Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is...there is no definition as to how much damage affects the value. That is the issue...each coin must be judged individually. Net grading was a failed attempt by lower tier TPGs to assign a grading score to damage...since this is not an accepted thing to do it never really caught on with collectors. The whole point of slabbing damaged coins is to determine if the coin is genuine as it will always be a damaged coin and any grade assigned is irrelevant. That said, the details grade does tell what the coin would have graded IF if wasn't damaged...but it really has no tie to the value of the coin. IMHO, outside of exceptionally rare pieces...you can't pay low enough for a damaged coin.
