How lenient should TPG's be on early copper. This one has a touch of roughness in areas, most notably to the left of the fraction on the reverse. It has strong central detail, but weak rims. Mainly, the reverse is very weak. I bought this coin for $125 and submitted it for economy grading ($20), thinking it MAY get a clean grade at AG03. Anyway, let the debate begin. What do you think of it. It's a rarity 4 variety and listed in PCGS price guide at $450.
I'd say AG03 was about right for the reverse. It looks like they let the obverse carry the grade, as it's approaching VG detail. It looks like a whole lot of weak strike going on, too. I think the grader probably thought AG03/G06, net G04. I'd probably be more comfortable at AG03 overall as well.
Even as a slab hater, I don't get my panties in a bunch over a G04 on that coin. Yeah, the reverse is a little weak for G, but overall the coin looks more G than AG.
Do I think it should have graded cleanly, no. If you had asked me prior to grading if it would have, I would have told you yes. It appears on these 1793-1796 coins that level of roughness is considered market acceptable. I have seen worse on a 96 liberty cap and it graded cleanly. To be fair, that's pretty much par for the course in terms of roughness on the 96 draped bust large cent. The planchets were sourced from England and most of them underwent corrosion on the ride over. Many rough 96 busts were rough when they left the mint.
Looking at the coin and the condition I say it's spot on. And for its age not a bad on at all! Shoot 221 years old I only hope I look that good!
To me I would have said g-details. I really don't mind it in a problem free holder, but I would not buy it as such. This is one of those coins if I saw it on ebay I would look at and then skip. That is just my humble opinion.
Should the coin have graded cleanly ? No, the coin is corroded, that is beyond dispute. And corroded coins are not gradable. But there is even more to it than that. The coin has 2 long and wide gouges on the obv, plus 1 large scratch and several smaller scratches on the obv and rev. This, all by itself, also makes the coin not gradable. As for the reasoning that the planchets were corroded so corrosion doesn't matter, I strongly disagree with that reasoning. Why ? Several reasons: 1 - with all other coins a severely flawed planchet is undeniably reason enough to render a coin not gradable. And a corroded planchet is most definitely a severely flawed planchet. 2 - had the mint not been in such dire straits and the country not desperately in need of coinage at the time, the mint themselves would have rejected the planchets and never used them to begin with. So it was only due to extraordinary circumstances that these coins were ever minted on those flawed planchets. 3 - there is no way to say with any degree of certainty that all of the corrosion present on the coin, was present on the planchet. Much, and in some cases maybe even all, of that corrosion could easily have occurred after the coin was struck. This is why the basic rules of grading (determining what makes a problem coin a problem coin) exist, why they are what they are, and why they were established to begin with, all long before the TPGs ever existed. But the TPGs have chosen to disregard the basic rules of grading whenever they see fit to do so, and to follow them whenever they see fit to do so. And the only reason they do this is to keep their customers happy and maintain their bottom line. That is not fair and accurate coin grading, which is what they are supposed to be doing. That is pacification.
PCGS's opinion is that it's market acceptable for a G4. At a higher grade, the scratches in the hair and corrosion would probably not be acceptable. If you EAC-graded the coin, you'd get a net grade lower than the details grade due to these problems. To determine value, however, you can't use PCGS pricing guides with EAC grades or EAC pricing guides with PCGS grades.
Watch this, everybody... I'm gonna freak Doug out by posting a coin almost 2000 years old that is still valuable and highly desirable even though it's not a TPG MS70! Just look at those porous surfaces, those edges... let it sink in, Doug. I hope this coin makes you lose sleep tonight.
I'm gonna have to agree with Doug & messydesk on this coin and would only consider/prefer a much better example coin with without the corrosion issues at a higher price point obviously. Personally I wouldn't want a coin that could crumble apart at any time in the future due to the corrosion issues. Take sports cards for example there are many low pop 10's (1-2 known due to miscut issues from the factory) that are exceedingly rare that folks pay stupid money for,for that very reason. And I wish the top 2-3 TPG's would adopt the same criterior when grading coins,much less controversy when it comes to market grading of said coins as it sets a standard market acceptability. Even the bottom feeders (aka like myself) should except & welcome this from the top rated TPG's.
