Perfect or Numismatically Perfect?

There has been a lot of discussion across several threads about MS and PF-70 coins and a major point of contention is the usage of the term "perfect".

My personal thoughts are that nothing is perfect, and under increasing magnification, you are bound to eventually find flaws in any coin, or anything, for that matter.

I also think that it's kind of ridiculous to say that literal "perfection" is required in order to garner a grade of 70, instead all that is required is that a coin meet the TPGs established criteria for the grade, and it is a 70. That's it, plain and simple.

So my question revolves around how we as a hobby, make it easier to understand?
Many people that I know, use the term "numismatically perfect" which means that as far as numismatics is concerned the coin is perfect, in that it meets all criteria for the grade to a reasonable standard of magnification.

The people who have a hard time accepting the term "perfect" seem willing to allow this term. I think it is a good "compromise" of terminology. It serves it's purpose. It describes the coin as the numismatic community sees it, and it let's my (personal) OCD get past the word "perfect".

What say you, oh mass of CT people?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

At some point this just becomes semantics.
You're not debating coins, you're debating definitions of words. 70 is the highest grade you can get, therefore it's a perfect 70 out of 70. There are no more points to acquire, therefore it's perfect.

 

Except when you get a CAC bean.

 

Its a conundrum, I agree OP. It is not helped by not having precise guidelines issued by the TPG. For giggles, (since I do not care about the designation myself), I have looked at lots of 70's at a show once. There is distinct variability in quality of coins getting a 70, so therefor there are premium and inferior 70's out there. Without the TPGs letting us know the EXACT reason why a coin is the "highest" grade this leads to confusion and consternation. There ARE "better" 70's out there, and "worst" ones, but most collectors do not know this since they have been told by dealers that a 70 is "perfect".

 

Do they CAC 70s?

 

ANA Grading Standards: MS70 - A flawless coin exactly as it was minted, with no trace of wear or injury. Must have full mint luster and brilliance or light toning.

Chris

 

Since when has TPGs followed ANA guidelines?

One of the little known secrets for new coin collectors. TPGs make up their own grades to suit themselves, and completely ignore ANA grading standards. Don't believe me? Look at 100 slabbed coins and ANA grading standards and try to tell me with a straight face TPGs care at ALL about ANA standards.

The problem is, if the TPG agreed to follow ANA standards then there would actually be something to hold them accountable. If they control their own definitions, then they can never be held accountable to anything, since by definition a AU55 coin is what THEY say it is, not the ANA, and if THEY slabbed it AU55, then it IS a AU55 by THEIR definition.

Cool trick, huh?

 

No idea actually. Does CAC even CAC modern (i.e. post 1964) coins? Not many pre-1965 coins get graded 70.

 

Yes, and car dealers will quote you the Blue Book value the moment you drive a brand new car off the lot!

Chris

 

I've seen what I would call an MS or PR-70 coin, but call it that purely as the standards allow as perfectly minted. Depending on the level of magnification, I'm sure a flaw in every coin without exception.

 

But Chris, medoraman is right. PCGS publishes their own standards, NGC doesn't (to the best of my knowledge), but neither of them uses or claims to use ANA standards for grading.

 

IMHO, no one can argue that at 1000X no coin is perfect.

Also, no one can argue with anyone's personal standard of perfection. As one poster wrote: "...all that is required is that a coin meet the TPGs established criteria for the grade, and it is a 70. That's it, plain and simple." Well stated! The TPGS's have their own standards of "perfection." Problem is, we are right back to what type of/how many/how noticeable/what side of the coin/mint made or not, etc. the defect on the coin (taking it out of true perfection) is.... My personal standard is simple: PERFECTION at whatever power I wish to crank my stereo microscope up to!

From many years of personal experience and many thousands of coins, if I cannot see a defect of any kind on a coin using a stereo microscope at 7X to 10X, I will rarely be able to find one on the coin at 80X either! So much for the MYTH of magnification and defects.

IMO, the OP's question is a very simple concept to grasp and answer. All 70's are not equal. There are many thousands of perfect coins graded 70 with absolutely no defects when examined at powers of magnification well above the standards set by any of the TPGS's. That being said and provable to anyone who looks at numerous slabs, each of us and each TPGS (baring mistakes) gets to decide what a coin graded 70 should look like.

 

Yes they do, but just Ikes. Even so, if a 70 gets a green bean, that does not mean it has upgrade potential it just means "The CAC GREEN Label signifies that a coin has met Certified Acceptance Corporation's stringent grading standards." Now if it were to get a gold sticker, well, we'd have a conundrum on our hands.

 

At the moment I don't believe there are any 70s that would qualify for what they accept. It's not entirely out of the question one could happen, but it very well could be a deliemma they never have to deal with.

Clad and Silver MS Ikes (no proofs) and a couple various Lincoln DD dates

While it is true that the TPGs grade to their own standards saying that they completely ignore and just make up their own grades really isn't accurate. There are many similarities between their standards and the ANA. It's also not true that nothing holds the TPGs accountable, the market holds them accountable. If the market doesn't like the work they are doing their reputation fades and they either go out of business, sell the company, or operate as a 2nd or 3rd tier service. Plenty of TPGs have come and gone or seen their market position drastically changed by being held accountable for their work by the market

 

Or a plus or minus or star????? If not now, I can see that in the future as we try more and more to achieve "perfect"

 

But the market only holds them accountable to a point.

True accountability would mean a penalty for being wrong and restitution made to the parties harmed.

If nobody buys their slabs, that surely penalizes the TPG, but it doesn't compensate the owners of their products, so... Is that accountability??? Only somewhat, and that's if we're generous in our definition.

 

MS-70 Star... I gotta wrap my head around that...

It sounds like the next step. Oh, Gawd, help me!

 

What is the owner really out though, the grading fee? If it was something they purchased willingly on the market they must have agreed with it or liked something about it.

Plus we are talking about grading, just because people disagree doesn't necessairly right or wrong. Sure someone is wrong if they call an MS coin VG but 95 percent of the time its more like people saying its wrong and should be a 64 not a 65 or things of that nature. That's hardly something that punishable action requiring restitution.

Also in the case of PCGS it is a publicly traded company. The market absolutely can hold them accountable real quickly with how investors handle that stock and would be dumping it if it got to the point that some body like the ANA would be needing to step in to teach them how to grade as was suggested.

 

Except in rare instances when a true grading error is made (missing rim file or repair) a person will have little luck getting satisfaction because the TPGS is grading BY THEIR STANDARD. Agree with it or so what and who cares. We vote with our money.

 

Wrong? Who decides what is right or wrong? It's not like a law that says you cannot drive over 55mph, it's all subjective.

The Market decides what they will accept and the market has decided that the top tier businesses fit the need for giving 70's to coins that fit their standard.?. May not be what you or others feel is accurate but it is accepted for the most part. I am okay with PR70 or MS70 as it should be what is perfect to the eye. When I get an ASE proof I can generally determine what would get a 70 and what would get a 69. That means there is a discernable difference, right? Should a coin with no discernable issues get a grade less that 70 and then what would that be based on?