The secret to collecting key dates (The elusive AU64 slider)

Best conversation I've seen in the short time I've been here. Come on, numismatic wisdom combined with classical languages and culture, with a dollop of philosophy as a side dish! What's not to like?!

I think that most reasonably serious collectors have encountered this AU vs. MS dilemma at one time or another, and that the only ones who resolve it systematically in favor of MS are those who are mostly concerned about their registry set ranks, which are calculated strictly on grade.

Insofar as digital (i.e., laser) grading is concerned, forget it. This is a topic that is of professional interest to me (I had a software startup that was doing savant-level image processing), and I personally do not expect to see this in my lifetime, if ever. I could write a doctoral dissertation on how hard a problem this is from a computer-science perspective. But I'll pass for now.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Of course you could always collect early date large cents and not have to worry about MS at all, at least not until you have millions of disposable income to play with.

 

IMO and in my experience, AU58 coins are generally superior quality coins, most of them suffering from what we used to call "cabinet rub".
A collector can get a beautiful AU58 coin for a mere fraction of the MS price in many cases.
Too many collectors get so hung up on the numeric grade supplied by the TPG that they fail to judge the coin itself.

 

Thanks for posting this observation with examples. As a newbie, it's nice to see the logical confirmation of my desire for a $10 gold Indian in a more economically feasible AU. I think this is a valuable lesson for all newbs who follow the mantra, "Buy it in the best grade you can afford." I have not been satisfied with the eye appeal of any 60-62s I've seen locally, and I appreciate someone with experience saying an AU can indeed be superior to an MS, when seen through a particular (but still numismatically correct) light.

BTW, it took me a minute to see the rhetorical value of AU-64 over 59, now I'm a believer. Cheers!

 

Yes, it is a good post. I have been a believer in AU for a long time as a great price point, (until the market caught up to me).

Its really a function of the great error US collectors decided in the 1840's. When starting this hobby, they made a rule that wear was worst than anything else, so therefor only coins without wear, (no matter how beat up, scuffed up, dinged, toned they were), were always superior in grade to a nice coin with wear. This is the real error. They should have said ding, scuffs, marks, and wear were all equally detrimental to coin grades, and treated them equally. If they had, a great many AU coins today would be 63 or 64, (well, nowadays they are), and a great many 61's would be 50 or even 45.

This is how ancient collectors grade, and I liked it so much it was one of the things that drew me to this part of the hobby.

 

Nice post.

Its good to be able to find coins in high AU grade that looks like it can pass for MS. Its going to be difficult to see them online though due to pictures. And I'm wondering if you do find one at a coin show or store, will the dealer jack up the price because it looks close to MS?

 

If anybody has ever gone with an AU-58 Saint or MSD over an MS Saint or MSD and has pics, post 'em.

 

Excellent post!!! Great info.

 

I think the original post pertained to key dates versus common date saints. The more rare saints would probably fall into this category. Most of PCGS graded gold I have is AU. But nothing I would consider an "AU64" slider. I do know if I say a common date saint in AU58 holder at spot I would probably buy it since it would fit nicely in my collection.

 

I am going to look very closely in the future at AU-58's for both Saints and MSDs to see what is there.

I wonder if the dealers (and Gray Sheet ?) have caught on and there's a 'kink' in pricing at AU-58 because alot of people prefer it over the low-60's MS's ?

 

What are MSD's? I missed that somewhere along the way. Seems like all the grade saints at the dealers I use have some MS63's, but the AU's are tougher dates and still run around 2k.

 

I also really love this conversation. I'm working on building what I call an 'uncirculated set' of silver washington quarters, none of which is slabbed. No doubt some of them would end up AU by the TPG's but I am buying them based on my own appraisal of their visual appeal. That's the way coin collecting used to be, back in the 70's when I first started, before the slab-invasion.

 

I'm going to dissent. Personally I have a need for all of the details to be intact. I don't buy any coins under 60. Just personally can't stand having coins with details worn off.

 

What do you do in the instances of weak strikes?

I think that's important too. If you have a weakly struck MS-63 and superbly struck AU-58 that is only slightly worn but still more details than the 63 that didn't strike up properly. Would you still buy the 63 over the 58?

 

Good point, treylxapi47. I've got a 1983P quarter that is so poorly struck (yet uncirculated) that the arrows the eagle is standing on are completely missing the horizontal lines! I can see the details of the chest feathers however. Plenty of luster. Wouldn't be surprised if a TPG graded it MS62 or better. However the strike is so bad I can easily imagine an AU-55 or even 50 having more details.

 

Oops wrong post.

 

Interesting that this thread started about 6 1/2 years ago. There's even a mention of the 'cent' vs. 'penny' numismatic vocabulary war in post #11.

 

Yeah, but I recently referenced this thread in a post in a current thread, which explains its resurrection.

 

Agree, and I think the reference of 64 with AU would be confusing to anyone who does not understand the grading scale, but to the point especially in the 2nd set of pictures, the AU looks better then the MS.

 

"Think outside the slab"? Consider that line stolen.