totally confused. difference between proof and ms?

GD and Eddie: you guys realize if we went by your criteria, that 90-99% of the MS coins might go down to AU ?

If I own a classic Porsche with 3,000 miles of 'wear' (odometer) on the car, it depreciates. But if that 3,000 miles is strictly from driving inside auditoriums and indoor arenas to get it setup for auto shows, isn't that different than 3,000 miles of city/highway driving ?

Obviously, I think this is what we are debating on the 'wear' thing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Population reports on the side, one question always nags me. During the great silver melts we can only guess at how many 90% coins went to the pot. It would be a miracle but if some wizard could ever figure a formula as to approx. how many were destroyed I think a lot of the more common dates of all the series would see a dramatic increase in price and decrease in availability. Wishful thinking but with all of the modern tech at hand....?

 

Same thing, every mile that you put on the odometer is reducing the desireability of your car by the astute collector.

I restored classic cars for a spell and still own a couple of my favorites. My 58 vette and 72 442 will never be for sale. The 58 hasn't started since it was restored after it flooded for Katrina, but the 72 is a really fun resto-ride that my old man bought back in 71.

 

There is enough population of high quality coins that the great melts have not affected too many dates, but there are a few victims that have become condition rarities. Time will tell though, hoards of nice coins are "uncovered" quite regularly. At one time, CC Morgans were nearly unobtainable in high grades, but the GSA thought otherwise and flooded the market. Some prices incorrectly reflect the former collector desirability and relative rarity of the coins.

 

GD and Lehigh, I want to THANK YOU BOTH for a fascinating back-and-forth. While my eyes have glazed over at times, I really do appreciate both of your viewpoints. I'm more in Lehigh's camp, but I can appreciate GD's arguments and where you are coming from.

All the 'wear' arguments have me asking a few questions:

1. If it is virtually impossible for a coin -- MSD, Saint, whatever -- to come off the press and go into bags and then avoid the 'wear' that comes from bouncing around a coin bag, would this imply that most MS coins would therefore come from someone grabbing them special off the press and avoiding the bag ?
2. Is it a fundamental distinction between the non-circulation wears that Lehigh cites and the wear references GD sites ? In other words, is it possible that for simplicity sake that the TPGs ASSUMED that any 'wear' from bag rolls and other non-circulated 'wear' would be LESS than that from a coin circulating in the general economy, even if only for days/weeks before it was pulled ?
3. GD, what % of current MS coins for a popular series like MSDs or Saints would get demoted down to AU if your stricter standards were employed ? It seems like it would be ALOT -- no ?
4. GD, if alot of MS coins are by your standards only AU, how do you buy stuff ? You won't pay up for what you think are overgraded coins -- do you buy alot of non-TPG raw stuff ?

Again, a fascinating back-and-forth. As important as I think the debate is, I think the overgrading in general and counterfeit issues are more important to 99% of the hobby. But you guys have provided an important service -- thank you !!

 

You have asked the fundamental questions that have eluded a consensus for decades now to two very astute numismatists. Way to stir the pot, points for you.

And I agree, this debate which I've had the pleasure of reading a few times before has been invaluable to my own way of thinking about grading and collecting. I'm not sure if either has changed my mind, but both give very compelling cases to think about.

 

I disagree.

A bunch of gold coins going straight from the press to a bag means you bounce around infrequently against other new coins. The bag might be moved weekly or monthly or whatever.

That is nothing -- and this is likely the thinking behind the original distinction as Lehigh references the TPGs difference between the 2 'wears' -- compared to bouncing around in a pocket next to keys....going to a soda jerk to buy lunch and then jingling around inside a cash register...off to a department store....then a bank....then a vending machine...then repeating every few days or weeks.

I understand the simplicity of saying 'wear = wear' but it seems to me that the TPGs understood that 99% of circulation wear would be worse/more severe than that from uncirculated wear from the press to a bag to a bank or collector or numismatist.

I think if this was as egregious as some here believe that some of the great numismatists like Bowers, Akers, etc....would have long spoken up.

I also think that since most of the ANA folks who wrote these rules up are still alive, someone should ask them once and for all what they meant.

 

I'm totally confused............. but that's every day

 

If the TPG's have been 'grading on a curve' all these years -- the market grading -- then stopping and going back in time to a more restrictive standard is NOT feasible.

 

I never said that TPGs are grading on a curve nor did I ever insinuate that as fact.

We all understand that some friction occurs after leaving the dies and is on its general way through normal channels. From what I have learned over the years, the debate is the difference between die state and mint state. Some would argue that once a coin sees friction, that it could no longer be mint state, but others would say that a coin needs to make it's way through commerce to actually he circulated. Both are correct definitions in my mind, but where is the line. Can you define "circulation" in every aspect?

It's a bit like the argument of wether or not Pluto is a planet. Most of us who learned that Pluto is a planet back in the day would say yes, but others would correctly point out that other (larger round objects) can be found within the solar system. The question is, what defines a planet? Is it that a mass has to be large enough to have enough gravity to have an influence on the shape of the mass, or is it just the ones we keep for posterity? Either explanation is correct in my eyes, and that's the way I like it, it keeps the question and mystery going.

If ever I had all of the answers, I would find myself very bored.

 

That's their hard luck. At least the grade is accurate for coin collectors and isn't sugared-off for slab collectors.

Goldfinger, if the "wear" doesn't show on the coin, it isn't wear, and if it does, it is wear. Quit trying to play word games. If the auditorium "wear" is wear, that Porsche is AU.

 

Nope, and this is why this debate about 'wear' is like those Venn Diagrams we saw as kids. Both have their separate universes and they overlap about 5-10%. We are debating about that overlap.

Hypothetical: A coin 'circulates' in a town for 3 months. But instead of being handled like regular change, people note it is a gold/silver coin and it is handled with meticulous care....kept in a cash register in a velvet pouch...handled on edge when exchanged.

OTOH....an uncirculated coin is moved every day in a heavy coin bag....takes a beating every day....ding-ding-ding.....lots of wear.

That's the conundrum that the TPGs and ANA folks probably never thought about when they talked about 'wear' and why they just ASSUMED (Odd Couple moment: "Never assume....." ) that 'wear' from Mint State coins in a bag would always be much less than the 'wear' from circulation. In fact, it appears they don't call the rubbing/friction/dings that the former encounter 'wear' which GD and others apparently do. Therein lies the crux of the matter.

My astronomy club actually had the lead guys on opposite ends of this debate, Alan Stern (head of the New Horizons Probe which reaches Pluto in 3 months) and Neil DeGrasse Tyson of Hayden Planetarium.

 

I'm not playing games. Would you pay the same price for a Porsche with 3,000 miles of city/highway driving and another Porsche with 3,000 miles from driving INSIDE on rubber floors ?

 

GD, thanks for your responses...I did not know you no longer collect coins, you must have had some collection if you started in 1960. The Good Old Days !!

I agree....buy the coin, not the slab...but that usually means don't be afraid to pass because a coin might be overgraded 1 grade or sometimes even 2 grades. You are talking about something entirely different, namely that the vast majority of MS coins are not even MS, forget about being off 1-2 grades.

That's scary.

 

But is Sperber saying that they are mostly off 1, maybe 2, grades...or is she saying that the coins are being graded incorrectly in the aggregate (i.e., MS vs. AU) ?

I think Laura's main peeve is counterfeiting and coin doctoring. I have seen some of the coins her firm sells and they are nice but not without the same flaws you have cited.

 

I wouldn't pay the same for EF as I'd pay for AU, no. In other words, your example is fallacious, as the odometer reading isn't wear on the tires and body, it's miles on the vehicle. That's the same, no matter where the vehicle is driven. Thus, a Porsche driven 3000 miles in a Chicago winter, and one driven 3000 miles in a Los Angeles winter, are necessarily going to show different degrees of wear on the tires and body. Ergo, keep swinging.

 

So you admit that 'wear' from mint bags is different than 'wear' from going in and out of our pockets...to a cash register...to a vending machine....back to the cash register....in someone's piggy-bank...etc. etc. etc. ?

Have you converted ??

 

From my just-arrived The Official ANA Standards For Grading Coins 7th Edition:

Wear: The abrasion of metal from a coin's surface caused by normal handling and circulation.

Now I'm more confused than ever....it seems like the ANA is saying NORMAL handling and NORMAL circulation is what constitutes wear.

All of these bag marks, frost marks, etc., that some of you are referencing would seem NOT to be considered 'normal' wear.

I'm not saying what you guys are saying is WRONG -- I'm just saying that the plain or interpretive meaning of this definition (is there another ?) seems to allow for minor non-circulated 'wear.'

Heading back to the foxhole...........