NumisMaster Logo
Home
Register
Sign In
Free Newsletter

Collector Info
In Print
Site Map
Yesterday's AU May be Today's MS Coin
slabbed coinBy F. Michael Fazzari, Numismatic News
August 27, 2009
slabbed coin

Before teaching at the American Numismatic Association Summer Seminar, at the end of June I purchased copies of Making the Grade by Beth Deisher and Grading Coins by Photographs by Q. David Bowers to use for the beginning grading class.

I wished to demonstrate to my students that the criteria for particular grades have changed with the publication of each major grading reference from Brown & Dunn, through Photograde, the ANA Grading Standards for United States Coins, Making the Grade and now the new Bowers.

Guess what? One of the best kept secrets and a source of confusion for beginning collectors regarding the way professional dealers and grading services view the uncirculated grade has finally been exposed in very clear language. While reading the introduction of Grading Coins by Photographs, I came upon these statements: "the interpretation of Uncirculated or Mint State is more liberal than it was 30 or 40 years ago" and, "Today, such coins that used to be graded About Uncirculated (AU) are now often graded as MS-60, MS-61 and MS-62."

I couldn't believe it.

Although this fact was nothing new to me, I was shocked to see it expressed in print. The truth is finally out in the mainstream as exposed by no less an authority than Dave Bowers in association with leading numismatic grading experts.

Has what you just read registered? Hallelujah. The gate is open, the muzzle is off and the dog is out.

Many coins that are AU by the old standards are now considered Unc.! Let's examine this situation to see how it may affect you and your collecting habits.

The word "uncirculated" itself is problematic. For many, the word implies that a coin never circulated in commerce; yet in order to grade properly, you must forget this concept and judge each coin on its own merits.

I have personally picked a flawless $1 gold coin from a pile of assorted coins, dirt and debris dumped on my desk from a rotting black change purse.

As soon as that coin was carefully removed, it became a gem uncirculated specimen with no marks, no hairlines, and blazing full mint luster even though it had definitely circulated. How does that happen? You might be interested to know the rest of the story.

After selling it to an investor (her first gold coin purchase), the coin was returned in a week for a refund. She had showed her purchase to several dealers in order to satisfy herself of its grade. It came back to me as a hairlined AU-55.

Grading is evolving and will continue to evolve. Many reading this column remember when the grade "about uncirculated" didn't exist.

Years ago, as soon as an uncirculated coin showed signs of wear, it was graded extremely fine. Let that sink in and visualize how attractive an extremely fine coin once was. Even coins graded very fine at the time had much of their mint luster remaining. That was in the past; but it does illustrate how much standards can change over generations.

Long ago, it was easy to determine if a coin was uncirculated. Uncirculated coins had no trace of wear. I can remember a case where a major auction house threatened to sue us for grading a $1 gold coin AU-58. The firm said they had sold the coin to the consigner as Choice Uncirculated (MS-65 at the time) and it deserved to be auctioned at the same grade when he wanted them to sell it.

The coin in question was a slider. It had nice fields and luster but there was friction wear on its high points. It possibly resides in an MS-63 or MS-64 slab today, depending on its eye appeal. Soon after, another auction firm started using the term "cabinet friction" to describe similar "uncirculated" coins with a trace of friction wear! You see, a coin was uncirculated if you missed the wear or ignored it and about uncirculated if you saw the wear and loss of luster or were a strict grader.

On Page 19 of Grading Coins by Photographs there is a photo of a $20 coin begging the question is it AU-58 or MS-64? I can remember a Federal Trade Commission court case with just such a range of grading opinions from the expert witnesses. I graded the coin technically. The knee, breast and wing had dull hairlined patches - traces of wear, therefore AU.

Other experts either didn't see the wear or used market standards to reach grades of MS-63 or MS-64 for the same coin. This situation has not changed in all these years except that now leading numismatic grading experts finally have acknowledged as much in print.

As a matter of fact, the strict interpretation of uncirculated went by the wayside at least 25 years ago. I was there to see it happen and speak against it.

Why should "standards" change? There are many reasons, including the need by collectors to buy coins in the highest grades. Additionally, strictly uncirculated coins by the old standards are truly rare for some coin types.

I can still remember the astonishment I felt while holding the first Barber half dollar that we graded Choice Uncirculated (65) for our internal records at ANACS in Washington, D.C. The coin was a completely original, perfect gem that looked like a modern silver Eagle! I had never seen such a fully lustrous Barber coin before. It made all the halves I had previously seen at coin shows being sold as uncirculated look like dull sliders.

Thankfully, with the coming of the major grading services, today's collectors can find coins as nice as that Barber relatively easily.

I teach my students that they must set their own standard for the uncirculated grade. They need to decide how much "rub" they will tolerate on a coin before it becomes about uncirculated to them no matter what the coin's grade is on the holder.

Since grading is still evolving, the more conservative they are, the better. More people will wish to purchase their coins when the time comes to sell.

I use this example in class. The diamond trade has a standard of 10-power magnification to determine that a diamond gets a flawless rating. Nevertheless, when I go to buy a diamond and the dealer puts four "flawless" gems under his scope for me to view at 10X, I reach up and zoom to the highest power. Then I'll pick the stone with the fewest defects at that power. The standard for "flawless" may change in the future; yet I'll be covered.

It's good to be a conservative grader when buying, but loosen up when you sell. I learned that lesson when one of the nation's best graders and biggest dealers looked through a group of coins I offered for sale. He flipped the pages and stopped at a blazing AU-58 1917 Type 1 Standing Liberty quarter.

"How much?" he asked.

I told him he didn't want that one because it was an AU.

"How much?" he insisted.

I gave him a price; he pulled it out and wrote a check. I'm sure that beauty became an MS-64 overnight. I was a strict grader with little knowledge of the coin market at the time.

I still maintain tight technical standards for uncirculated coins in my personal life; yet this view of coins must be relaxed in a grading service atmosphere.

Since 1986, the major grading services have strived to equate a coin's grade with its value. A quick way to explain this rational is to compare two coins, a strictly original, fully lustrous, bag marked, truly uncirculated MS-61 with a lustrous, virtually unmarked, AU-58 slider. Everyone prefers the attractive slider in this case and it sells for more money.

Realistically, if you are patient, you can find identically graded uncirculated coins in slabs but one will have full luster and no rub while the other will have a market acceptable amount of wear. That's what Bowers alludes to when he writes that the interpretation of uncirculated has become more liberal. Dealers accept a certain amount of friction on many of the uncirculated coins they buy and sell because there are not enough truly uncirculated coins around in some coin series to meet the demand from collectors.

A former colleague of mine once facetiously said let's call every coin submitted for authentication genuine. That will make the counterfeiter happy, the dealer happy, and the customer happy. In much the same way, graders could call every coin with lots of luster uncirculated. This would make everyone happy.

Now, that's a novel thought.





Add to: del.icio.us   digg
With this article: Email to friend   Print

Comments
On August 28, 2009 Steve Kimbrough said
Mr. Fazzari,
On 4/9/1977, I purchased a 1913 ty 1   5 cent for Steve Ivy graded Gem BU 70 (perfect in all respects). In May,1990, PCGS graded it MS 66. When informed of this, Mr. Ivy responded " ...in 1977, the Sheldon Scale was just coming into general use and the intermediate grades (61-64/66-69) were not generally used. Therefore the use of the grade 70 denoted a coin which was better than 65. ...I feel... your characterization of this situation as a problem is fundamentally unfounded."
Any chance this coin will rebound to MS 70? Any truth in Mr. Ivy's remarks?
On August 28, 2009 Akhenaten II said
I'm sorry but grading is a scam.  Just a way for dealers to artificially inflate values.  And collectors buy into this crap.  This article illustrates that perfectly. Grading for currency is even more blatantly offensive.  I have seen MS68 or 69's that are absolutely no way "perfect".  Scam Alert! Boycott graders!
On August 28, 2009 Alan Hepler said
Thanks for a great article. Grading is subjective, yes, and the difference between a 69 to 70 beyond the perception of most. I have sent circulated coins to get graded only to get MS 62 AND UP! For buying, it is great as I do not even have to see a coin to buy it. Rarely, am I surprised. Yes, some lesser companies overgrade....so much so even I can see the difference. But, maybe, after reading this, they don't? I do believe`that their are standards which get applied to each coin which is not fair. For example, a Morgan with a MS-65 GRADE when compared to a Washington quarter at MS-65 is hard to conceive as they quarter is spotless, no major dings yet a 65. The Morgan may have a small ding, a bag mark and be a 65 too? One hears all sorts of stories about cleaned coins passing and the like. Basically, it looks like we are again all on our own again as the standards are changing. If so, then free submissions for the change should be the order of the day. Now ebay sellers can list XF COINS as UNC and not be technically mislesding as they can hide behind this article as defence. This is not a good news article to me. The premiums on OGH slabs just got a major boost as did coins ranging from XF to MS. I can see the ads now XF coin undergraded....looks MS TO ME...upgrade potential!!!!
On August 28, 2009 John said
It's called inflation. Adjusting standards clearly raises the values of slider coins.  Creating minute grade variations also moves wobbler coins along. Who really is soooo good that a given coin can be graded MS-66 vs MS-67? How many others are also so good that they all agree with one another far more often than not?  I have a hard enough time grading papers of college students using 5 point differences (70-75-80 etc.)to have any confidence I can consistently distinguish a 75 paper from a 76 or 74 one. To that extent, I agree with Steve Ivy's response to Steve Kimbaugh.  Back in 1977 we didn't have one point variations in MS.  If the coin is desirable in appearance, pay a fair price for it regardless of grade.  Don't pay a premium price for a highly graded coin on technical merit alone; that valuation may not last.
On August 28, 2009 Edwin Jiang said
In regards to Mr. Kimbrough's question:  I also purchased a number of coins from Steve Ivy in the late 1970's.  In retrospect, I found him to be a very liberal grader (and a bit overpriced) for the time.  For example, an 1887-O Morgan Dollar that he graded MS-65 when he sold it to me about 1977 only came back as an MS-63 from NGC when I had it graded about 5 years ago.  The coins that I later found to be overgraded were certainly pretty coins, but the grading services found some technical flaws.  Maybe Steve Ivy was practicing "market grading" rather than "technical grading" at the time.  Just goes to show that there is certainly variance of opinion about grading even among the "experts".
On August 28, 2009 Joe said
There are only two grades on a coin, same as 50 years ago, Yours and Mine.
On August 28, 2009 Dennis said
I never did understand tech grade and market grade. I come from the old school when AU was used as a way of saying uncirculated with cabinet friction. Frankly I prefer the way collectors of world coins grade. no numbers it's either good,very good.,fine,very fine ,extremely fine, AU, UNC or BU  and possibly GEM BU it is a lot less confusing and we are not so much concerned with making an extra buck as we are enjoying the beauty of the coin. We need to go back to the simple ways because I believe all this MS stuff was just to make the extra buck.
On August 28, 2009 Dennis said
I agree with the grading from the old days of Good, VG,Fine, VF etc.It seems to get the MS 60 etc. you have to send your coins away to get a certificate of grading. I suppose the richer collectors can do it that way but the average person who started a collection as a young person can't be expected to afford the higher more expensive way of having their coins graded.When I buy the latest coin book I like to see that the coins have increased in value but most peoples coins end up at the unc. end of the scale for their very best coins. I quess I'm from the old school
On August 29, 2009 george said
Dennis said "Frankly I prefer the way collectors of world coins grade. no numbers it's either good,very good.,fine,very fine ,extremely fine, AU, UNC or BU  and possibly GEM BU it is a lot less confusing and we are not so much concerned with making an extra buck as we are enjoying the beauty of the coin."

One of the really nice things about some of the better European auction houses is that if the coin is in a slab as a so-called "MS-63", the lot description gives this information but then the auction house offers its own grade (e.g. "fast stempelglanz" (almost unc) or "vorzuglich" (EF), something seldom seen here.
On August 29, 2009 Mike said
Excellent article...I'm NEW to collecting.I SEEM to have got it into my head that GRADING "IS" a BIG DEAL!!! I have "8" grading books...(Including Bowers NEW one!) My favorite is "Making the grade". (I LIKE PICTURES..!!!) Being NEW...I've "slabs" and RAW coins. (I prefer RAW...Has an "Ol' school sence to me!) History and KNOWLEDGE are the JOYS... INVESTING and COSTS can be "REAL KILLERS!!!" CHANGING STANDARD S(*&@$!!! HONEST grading would seem to me to KEEP those DESIRED QUALITIES of "GOODNESS","FUN","INTEREST",A LARGER sence of "VALUE!!!" as "GREATER ideals"...(VS. PROFIT, RIP-OFF,CHEATS,OPPORTUNISTS!!!)[TAKING ADVANTAGE!!!]I ALREADY have BIG ISSUES with MOST (82%) dealers! GRADE equals $$$!! "BUYER BEWARE...!!!" KNOWLEDGE IS POWER! "DO YOUR HOME WORK!!!" "KNOW the DIFFERENCE!!!" (Look at LOTS of coins!!!) I WANT to KEEP a LOVE for the hobby!
On August 29, 2009 Mark Van Britsom said
very seldom do i comment on something , this is a contraversal issue to be sure, the one comment i read , there are only 2 grades , yours and mine , are to some degree a true statement when we grade based upon opinion, however grading by the better grading services is based more on fact and history ( there are certain coins that were not struck well or others which were struck way better than the average coin that was produced in a given year and series and the grading companies know these secrets, full steps, full head, full bands, full bell lines, struck with a certain die  etc...and experience. Grading services see large percentages of coins, especially the expensive and rare ones so they have alot to base a grade on and be very accurate, it may be possible to have an uncirculated coin and yet because the strike is so poor that it will look to the eye as a worn coin does.Out in the regular market or on the internet it's funny how a coin that is worth 10 cents in good or almost good condition is not generally condition disputed but a 1909-s VDB can be in fair or almost good and be called good to very good, as if the owner can just wish the coin into gaining some of it's long lost metal back again..deep down we all know what the grade is and we just hope ourselves into believing that the coin is in better condition than it really is,it's like a game that we play on ourselves, this allows us to feel better about the money we spent on it or how much better of a great find it was out of pocket change,the guidelines are out there and if we stick to them and we remain honest to ourselves and each other coin buying could be safe and easy, but , such is not the human condition...   
On August 30, 2009 edward kostlevy said
interesting.ive c ollected coins since i was introduced to collecting at a free methodist church camp at chetek,wis.when i was in high school im a 1967 graduate we still had silver coins another lyndon johnson boondogle that clad would circulate with silver its well known the public wasnt that dumb.the horrible  dishonesty in coin collecting and in general in our society is unbelievable.in 2003 my friend and i were conned to invest in a bogus corporation monster hall raceway of unity,wi. the corporation was actually paying the landowners mortage.it had no value and huge debt.the wisconsin dept of financial instutions ruled the stock sale a securites fraud yet no one has been arrested these people lined there pockets  with our money and my friend was murdered before he could testify before the wis dept of finanical institutions.the is also huge insurance land and timber fraud in this case and no on e is arrested. edward l kostlevy p.o.box 376 colby,wi 54421
On August 30, 2009 Jon Stewart said
I have collected coins since the days of silver change in the pocket, when my grandfather handed me a very circulated Indian Head penny from the year of his birth.  Since then, the only criteria I have had is that I try to aquire coins that are attractive to me, yet within my budget.  If I happen to get a slabbed coin that fits with my collection of unslabbed coins, that useless piece of plastic is quickly discarded and the coin joins its fellows, whether that is in an album, a plastic case for the "set", or other method of storage and display.  I am in the hobby for my own satisfaction and nothing more.  There is more satisfaction for me knowing that many of my coins actually participated in the commerce of their years than having passed their years in some vault, never seeing the light of day.
I pity the collectors of the future who will be collecting only mint-rolled specimens of coins that never saw life as coins, but only as mass-produced bits of metal hoarded by investors hoping for future profit.  The true rarities of tomorrow will be the George Washington dollar coins (and their like) possessing the beautiful, natural patina acquired by jingling around in an early 21st century pocket.
On September 24, 2009 RL FARROW said
Had to comment on Jon Stewart saying that the true rarity would be the GW Dollar. That will be the ultimate rarity. I tried to buy some Cherries on the side of the road in Washington last year and the young lady refused to take the coins. She said they were fake. Go figure.

Something to add? Notice an error? Comment on this article.
 



About Us | Contact Us | Privacy | Your data is secure
©2010 F+W Publications, Inc., Iola, Wisconsin. All rights reserved.