FA: 1821 Small Date Bust Dime PCGS AU-58 Rare only 19 graded

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:45:24 -0600, "Jorg Lueke"
wrote:
People have been saying that AU 58s are better than MS60s for decades.
While AU58s might end up with a more affordable and attractive collection
as far as price goes have AU58s surpassed MS60s at any time in the past 20
years?

I think you hint at the crux of it... more affordable... AU-58s being
less expensive than MS-60s, but providing more "bang for the buck" for
those with fewer resources. If everyone in the market went after
AU-58s, however, MS-60s would soon be seen as the bargain, and a
correction would occur.

Chuck

wrote:
Chuck,

Most MS-60 coins are quite unattractive, whereas a properly and
conservatively graded AU-58 looks more like a MS-63 with a tiny whisper
of rub. Frankly, it SHOULD be worth more than a typical MS-60, and
actually, that seems to be the case in the real world.This is
particularly true for pre-1840 coins. Often, a real nice AU-58 Bust
Half will sell for more than a MS-60 example, particularly if the
former has lots of luster and is not darkly toned.

Ira


Ira I agree and have stated that several times. A properly graded AU-58 should be a MS-69
with a slight rub and should, IMHO, should be priced out at what is currently a MS-67.

A coin with many or deap bag marks is much less attractive than a near perfect coin with
a small break in luster from minimal circulation or slicking around in a display or drawer.

This would also stop some need to market grade those better looking AUs as MS.
--
George D
Phoenix, AZ
AAA, AARP, ANA, NRA, RCC ?+1, PIA, PIAAZ, GATF 85006-3032-18-4


Please use this address to mail me. Or remove the arizona in the link.
Remember there is no Arizona.


ALL emails incoming and outgoing are run thru Norton and AVG anti virus.

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 03:26:37 GMT, George D
wrote:
wrote:
Most MS-60 coins are quite unattractive, whereas a properly and
conservatively graded AU-58 looks more like a MS-63 with a tiny whisper
of rub. Frankly, it SHOULD be worth more than a typical MS-60, and
actually, that seems to be the case in the real world.

Ira I agree and have stated that several times. A properly graded AU-58 should be a MS-69
with a slight rub and should, IMHO, should be priced out at what is currently a MS-67.

A coin with many or deap bag marks is much less attractive than a near perfect coin with
a small break in luster from minimal circulation or slicking around in a display or drawer.

That's an interesting comment, George, an AU-58 being an "MS-69 with
slight rub" (although Ira says looks like an MS-63 with rub). Not only
does PCGS disagree with you (see their descriptions of AU-50 to MS-70
below), but their descriptions are consistent with AU grading of the
past... it's nothing new. AU-50 to AU-58 essentially vary by degree of
wear; no mention is made of bag marks/hairlines, just as they aren't
mentioned for EFs and lower... all AUs can have these... an AU-58 can
have just as many as an MS-60 or an AU-50 might. MS-60 to MS-70 vary
by, essentially, "eye appeal". Read the descriptions below for AU-58
and MS-69, and tell me if the first sounds merely like the second plus
"a slight rub". You did refer to a "properly graded" AU-58 coin,
correct? Or are you suggesting PCGS's own descriptions of grade are
incorrect?

AU-58s can no doubt be beautiful coins, and many may prefer them even
to high-MS coins for various reasons, but hype gets to be a bit much
sometimes.

Point to ponder: why is there no "PCGS AU-59" grade?

Chuck


PCGS Grading descriptions:

AU-50
This is for "About Uncirculated" (the grade) and "50" (the
numerical designation of that grade). Also called "Almost
Uncirculated-50." This is the lowest of the four AU grades, with the
others being AU53, AU55, and AU58. Between 50% and 100% of the
surfaces will exhibit luster disturbances, and perhaps the only luster
still in evidence will be in the protected areas. The high points of
the coin will have wear that is easily visible to the naked eye.

AU-53
This is for "About Uncirculated" (the grade) and "53" (the
numerical designation of that grade). Also called "Almost
Uncirculated-53." There is obvious wear on the high points with light
friction covering 50-75% of the fields. There are noticeable luster
breaks, with most of the luster still intact in the protected areas.

AU-55
This is for "About Uncirculated" (the grade) and "55" (the
numerical designation of that grade). Also called "Almost
Uncirculated-55." There is slight wear on the high points with minor
friction in the fields. Luster can range from almost nonexistent to
virtually full, but it will be missing from the high points. The grade
of "Choice AU" equates to AU55.

AU-58
This is for "About Uncirculated" (the grade) and "58" (the
numerical designation of that grade). Also called "Almost
Uncirculated-58." There is the slightest wear on the high points, even
though it may be necessary to tilt the coin towards the light source
to see the friction. In many cases the reverse of an AU58 coin will be
fully Mint State. Less than 10% of the surface area will show luster
breaks. The grade of "Borderline Unc" equates to AU58.

MS-60
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "60" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This is the lowest of the eleven Mint
State grades that range from MS60 through MS70. An MS60 coin will
usually exhibit the maximum number of marks and/or hairlines. The
luster may range from poor to full, but is usually on the "poor" side.
Eye appeal is usually minimal.

MS-61
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "61" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This grade meets the minimum requirements
of Mint State plus includes some virtues not found on MS60 coins. For
instance, there may be slightly fewer marks than on an MS60 coin, or
better luster, or less negative eye appeal.

MS-62
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "62" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This grade is nearly in the "choice" or
MS63 category, but there is usually one thing that keeps it from a
higher grade. Expect to find excessive marks or an extremely poor
strike or dark and unattractive toning. Some MS-62 coins will have
clean surfaces and reasonably good eye appeal but exhibit many
hairlines on the fields and devices.

MS-63
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "63" (the numerical
designation of that grade). The equivalent of "choice" or "Choice BU"
from the days before numerical grading was prevalent. This grade is
usually found with clean fields and distracting marks or hairlines on
the devices OR clean devices with distracting marks or hairlines in
the fields. The strike and luster can range from mediocre to
excellent.

MS-64
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "64" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This grade is also called "Borderline Gem"
at times, as well as "Very Choice BU." There will be no more than a
couple of significant marks or, possibly, a number of light abrasions.
The overall visual impact of the coin will be positive. The strike
will range from average to full and the luster breaks will be minimal.

MS-65
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "65" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This grade is also called "Gem" or "Gem
Mint State" or "Gem BU." There may be scattered marks, hairlines or
other defects, but they will be minor. Any spots on copper coins will
also be minor. The coin must be well struck with positive (average or
better) eye appeal. This is a NICE coin!

MS-66
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "66" (the numerical
designation of that grade). This is not only a Gem-quality coin, but
the eye appeal ranges from "above average" to "superb." The luster is
usually far above average, and any toning can not impede the luster in
any significant way. This is an extra-nice coin.

MS-67
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "67" (the numerical
designation of that grade). A superb-quality coin! Any abrasions are
extremely light and do not detract from the coin’s beauty in any way.
The strike is extremely sharp (or full) and the luster is outstanding.
This is a spectacular coin!

MS-68
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "68" (the numerical
designation of that grade). A nearly perfect coin, with only minuscule
imperfections visible to the naked eye. The strike will be
exceptionally sharp and the luster will glow. This is an incredible
coin.

MS-69
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "69" (the numerical
designation of that grade). Virtually perfect in all departments,
including wondrous surfaces, a 99% full strike (or better), full
unbroken booming luster and show-stopping eye appeal. You may have to
study this coin with a 5X glass to find the reason why it didn’t grade
MS70.

MS-70
This is for "Mint State" (the grade) and "70" (the numerical
designation of that grade). A perfect coin! Even with 5X magnification
there are no marks, hairlines or luster breaks in evidence. The luster
is vibrant, the strike is razor-sharp, and the eye appeal is the
ultimate. Note: Minor die polish and light die breaks are not
considered to be defects on circulation strike coins.

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 03:26:37 GMT, George D
wrote:

wrote:

Most MS-60 coins are quite unattractive, whereas a properly and
conservatively graded AU-58 looks more like a MS-63 with a tiny whisper
of rub. Frankly, it SHOULD be worth more than a typical MS-60, and
actually, that seems to be the case in the real world.

Ira I agree and have stated that several times. A properly graded AU-58 should be a MS-69
with a slight rub and should, IMHO, should be priced out at what is currently a MS-67.

A coin with many or deap bag marks is much less attractive than a near perfect coin with
a small break in luster from minimal circulation or slicking around in a display or drawer.


That's an interesting comment, George, an AU-58 being an "MS-69 with
slight rub" (although Ira says looks like an MS-63 with rub). Not only
does PCGS disagree with you (see their descriptions of AU-50 to MS-70
below), but their descriptions are consistent with AU grading of the
past... it's nothing new. AU-50 to AU-58 essentially vary by degree of
wear; no mention is made of bag marks/hairlines, just as they aren't
mentioned for EFs and lower... all AUs can have these... an AU-58 can
have just as many as an MS-60 or an AU-50 might. MS-60 to MS-70 vary
by, essentially, "eye appeal". Read the descriptions below for AU-58
and MS-69, and tell me if the first sounds merely like the second plus
"a slight rub". You did refer to a "properly graded" AU-58 coin,
correct? Or are you suggesting PCGS's own descriptions of grade are
incorrect?

AU-58s can no doubt be beautiful coins, and many may prefer them even
to high-MS coins for various reasons, but hype gets to be a bit much
sometimes.

Point to ponder: why is there no "PCGS AU-59" grade?

Chuck



I guess I was using my description of what I accept as a AU-58. IF third party graders can
each make up their own grading descriptions I guess I can too :-)

AU-59 must exists somewhere or it throws off the entire balance of the universe. :-)

--
George D
Phoenix, AZ
AAA, AARP, ANA, NRA, RCC ?+1, PIA, PIAAZ, GATF 85006-3032-18-4


Please use this address to mail me. Or remove the arizona in the link.
Remember there is no Arizona.


ALL emails incoming and outgoing are run thru Norton and AVG anti virus.

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:55:31 -0600, Byron L. Reed
wrote:

[snip...]

A true AU58 should be more pleasing (and therefore valuable) than a
true MS60, but most people pay for the higher number.

By definition, an AU58 is "choice," while a MS60 is "typical." In the
case of MS60, "typical" means rather beat up and unattractive.

Of course, the whole concept is meaningless, because most current
MS62s and 63s are yesterday's AU58s. Today's 58s are yesterday's 53s
and 55s which usually are not preferable to the lower MS grades.

[...snip]

What about coins where e.g. due to dings/bag marks/etc. the obverse
grades AU-55/58, whereas the reverse would grade a clear MS-65? I just
bought such a Morgan dollar (1881-S) last week.

Is this just the realm of "problem coins"? And what can we do to
"solve the problem"?

We all know that no two sides of a coin are created (uh... graded...)
equal g.

--
Bob Hairgrove

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:49:20 +0100, Bob Hairgrove
wrote:
What about coins where e.g. due to dings/bag marks/etc. the obverse
grades AU-55/58, whereas the reverse would grade a clear MS-65? I just
bought such a Morgan dollar (1881-S) last week.

Theoretically, bag marks alone should not relegate a coin to AU, there
should be friction/wear involved. I'm sure you could find someone's
grading system where that's not the case, though! According to PCGS,
however, in the case of a 58/65 the reverse grade is normally to be
ignored, in favor of the obverse grade.

Chuck

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:49:20 +0100, Bob Hairgrove
wrote:

[...snip]

What about coins where e.g. due to dings/bag marks/etc. the obverse
grades AU-55/58, whereas the reverse would grade a clear MS-65? I just
bought such a Morgan dollar (1881-S) last week.

Is this just the realm of "problem coins"? And what can we do to
"solve the problem"?

We all know that no two sides of a coin are created (uh... graded...)
equal g.

Doesn't apply. No number of bagmarks and the like cause the coin to
be circulated. They simply cause it to become a "problem coin" (as you
correctly called it) when the damage is severe enough that it won't
reasonably rate an MS60. A number of bagmarks sufficient to cause an
uncirculated coin be to be ungradeable as would also be enough to
drop them out of every circulated grade, too. The solution to this is
the old fashioned was of doing things - properly describe the coin
with real words. Following that, the next best option is to net grade
like ANACS does (MS60, but . . . )

BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: http://tinyurl.com/pt9r
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: http://www.byronreed.com