Sometimes Third Party Grading (TPG) is Mystifying

More people are less interested in the coin than the commodity. Grading and other scams add to the sense of worth in $'s and kudos. No doubt there is competition in the quality of the plastic tombs and people will want the latest museum quality tombs along with a higher re-grade and photo's of it being held by a Kardashian.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think we all use those criteria when purchasing coins for our collections . I've never purchased a coin because a dealer said it was a specific condition, or bought a slabbed coin because of the grade marked on it's insert. There are many collectors hooked on this "Registry" fad that are buying slabs & not coins. They are driven by a competitive challenge not related to numismatics. In the end it's the TPG companies who are reaping the benefits of the "Registry" fad.

 

Al, In order to give clarity to my reply I think you should have included Brian’s quote: “I am one who does not use, care, or understand the grading scales.” ……… that preceeds, but is an integral part of, my response.

 

James, I didn't use Brian's quote because of one word, understand . I do understand the grading scales & why most collectors use them. Before the Brown & Dunn era, when coin collecting was still a young hobby in the U.S., dealers were using nebulous descriptions for their coins that were useless. As the U.S. coin market grew (in the 1950s & 60s stamp collecting was more popular than coin collecting) it became necessary for coin collectors to get on the same page as far as describing the condition of a coin, hence grading scales evolved. Of course that doesn't mean we're all tied to using these standards, especially with ancient coins. I don't mock or belittle anyone who is tied to using these scales, it's a personal choice. I appreciate your point of view & Brian's too .

 

Oh, I understand the system. Just don't understand the objectiveness of a rigid system on extremely subjective coin. SO many moving parts, so many moving variables, all hand-made, and not from a rigid machine die stamping press.

 

The worst case of gradeflation I can remember is when an 1804 silver dollar began its graded life as a VG and after some time passed it became an AU. The reason; 'well this is a special item and cannot be graded according to normally accepted grading standards". The Wass Molitor you are using has 2 things going for it that puts in it this rarified air:
1. It has been salvaged from an historically important source: the SS Central America.
2. it's not a normally US minted gold coin it's a privately minted gold coin of which there are very few in existence, is a niche collectable, and the collector universe is tiny.

Coins such as these get preferential grading. Also it would be interesting to know who offered the piece as certain dealers/brokers/auction houses supposedly get "better treatment" when getting their coins graded.

The main issue is that you're trying to compare a $35,000-40,000 coin that is collected (invested) by a very few well heeled individuals to a common $1,000 coin that is collected by the "little people".

btw...to put this in an ancient perspective the au53 grade indicates that this coin (the Wass Molitor) is just a touch below FDC.

 

The Wass Molitor $10 coin sold for $19,704.38. Rarity isn't a logical reason to give a coin special treatment regarding condition, & rarity doesn't determine the value of a coin. U.S. coins have a huge following that has grown enormously over the last 30 years, & ancient coin collectors are minuscule by comparison. Fame, notoriety, historical importance & demand determines value. To illustrate my point lets look at two different coins. The coin pictured below, the Ides of March denarius, sold at auction for $546,250.00. There are at least 50 known examples of this coin.



The coin pictured below, McAlee 1006, is listed as Very Rare with only 5 known examples. If this coin sold for more than $150.00 I would be shocked.


Antioch-Syria, Philip II as Caesar, AD 244-247 (struck AD 244). Billon Tetradrachm: 10.7 gm, 26.8 mm, 7 h.

 

I absolutely agree; the coin should be the coin regardless of rarity or who sent it in to be graded; but unfortunately when it comes to grading US coins often it's a political determination rather than a technical determination.

btw: I got the $35,000-40,000 price from the "red book" for an AU grade so I guess the market adjusted for the truth with a hammer price of $19,000.

One of the principal reasons I'm moving from US coins to ancients is because I just can't stand the plastic.

 

B.A., I agree, bidders weren't fooled by the over-grading . Slabbed American coins have taken the fun out of collecting for anyone thinking of getting into American coins. I still enjoy looking at great old American coins but will never collect them again .

 

My coin is NOT the same as the one Al posted but makes a point that there are many small variations with many ancient coin types. I suspect some here will not see and many will not care for the difference. Take care when reading very specialized books that give rarity ratings. If you are selling a rare minor variation, you need to find two people who care and will bid against each other. Mine was $45 from a dealer not at all known for being low priced. To him, the fact that young Philip seemed to have acne (or is that a serious surface problem?) made this a coin to move on to a collector looking for budget coins. Compare the two coins and how much you care about the first one having a more rare minor difference. Considering wear, strike, centering AND that difference, would you pay the $150 that Al suggested? The seller hopes you will and that there is a second bidder also willing to drive up the price. For me? I'll keep my coin and consider it close enough because I am not addicted to rarity numbers based on minutia.

 

I've always found the MS numerical grading system mystifying. Maybe I'm missing something, but I found the whole MS grading scene a big turn-off and one of the main reasons I quit US coins and moved to world and ancient coins back in the 80's. Since the 80's it seems that the numbers bestowed on US and world slabbed, and even non-slabbed coins are even more fanciful. How on earth can one distinguish a MS 66 coin from a MS 70 coin? Perhaps some folks are bestowed with mystical powers to divine these numbers, but I think the whole approach simply layers numbers, as an objective, quantifiable artifice for what are mostly subjective aspects of any given coin.

The $10 gold piece shows the signs of having been salvaged. Gold does not corrode, but the surfaces appear, in the photo, to be quite abraded. That alone should give the coin a grade of VF with salvaged surfaces, even if the coin did not circulate. I think that would be more realistic than an AU 53 grade.

I guess XF is an appropriate grade for the solidus, based on the photos, but I guess the surface was given a 4/5 because of marks on the obverse. I've seen other coins with a rating of 3/5 for surface condition that appear to be in better condition than this coin. Again, I am skeptical of any attempt to quantify grading, designating the solidus as XF with minor marks or abrasion on the obverse, or something along that line would suffice.

 

I'm sure most collectors of Roman coins share your thoughts. Most collectors are satisfied to get a major type of a certain emperor or member of his family, but there are specialists who are very interested in collecting by varieties, obviously you're not. I must point out the difference between the coin you posted & my coin have more than a minutia of difference, your coin depicts Philip II as seen from behind & my coin depicts him from a front view. Even a person with limited vision can see this. Your coin, McAlee 1009, is very common & despite the obvious corrosion on the portrait not a bad looking coin & worth the $45 you paid for it. As the hobby of Roman coins grows you'll see more collectors interested in collecting by varieties, & studies by McAlee, Prieur, Cloke & Toone, Guy Lacam & many other experts are important tools being used by specialists.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath for the day when well-heeled collectors abandon rare and historical types like the EID MAR denarius for ultra-rare die varieties of common types. That being said, understanding a series in depth marks the difference between the numismatist and the trophy hunter.

Getting back to the title of this thread, do I sometimes find third-party grading mystifying? No. I always find third-party grading mystifying!

In the "olden days", the solidus would have been graded "good VF, polished". Technical grade would have been irrelevant for the salvaged piece. Or so it seems to me.

 

Very well written @robinjojo. I think your lead off paragraph is especially appropriate here.

 

Excellent post @dltsrq. I particularly like your second paragraph! Spot on, as they say.