do grading companies consider date and mint when grading?

I have heard that there is a raging debate in numismatic circles on
whether the grade of a coin should be relative to the ideal for the
type of coin being graded (e.g. Morgan $1's) or the relative to the
best example possible for the date and mint of the coin (e.g. 1891 -P
Morgans, which never have decent lustre). For example, some say no
1891 -P could be an MS-70, because no full lustre 1891 -P's were
minted. Others say an 1891 -P should be given an MS-70 if it is
perfect other than its crappy lustre.

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

Tetradrachm

"Michael Benveniste" wrote in message
...

"Tetradrachm" wrote in message
...

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

PCGS does so explicitly. In it's glossary, PCGS gives the following
definition:
Market Grading: A numerical grade that matches the grade at which
a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS.


That sounds confusing to me. Does this mean that they'll take my 1878-CC
Morgan and try to match the grade to a similar1878-CC that they've
previously graded and give my coin the same grade? If it best matches a
MS63, is that how they will grade it? This sounds like basic technical
grading. Their statement still doesn't clearly describe the standard they
used to grade the earlier coin. Where/how does market price enter into the
process?

I feel so stupid asking this.

Bruce

"Tetradrachm" wrote in message
...

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

PCGS does so explicitly. In it's glossary, PCGS gives the following
definition:
Market Grading: A numerical grade that matches the grade at which
a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS.

I've never been able to dig out a similar statement from NGC or ANACS.
My own experience will all three services is that the more popular the
series, the greater variation of grading standards within the series.

--
Michael Benveniste --
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $250. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

Michael Benveniste wrote:

"Tetradrachm" wrote in message
...

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

PCGS does so explicitly. In it's glossary, PCGS gives the following
definition:
Market Grading: A numerical grade that matches the grade at which
a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS.

I've never been able to dig out a similar statement from NGC or ANACS.
My own experience will all three services is that the more popular the
series, the greater variation of grading standards within the series.

Amen. People can grapple tooth and nail over slabbed grades for Morgans
and Lincolns, Buffs and Saints, but 'off series' are less subject to
grading variation because their is less market pressure (price
variation) attached to single point differences.

Alan
'who cares if your BTW is MS-66?'

"Tetradrachm" wrote:
I have heard that there is a raging debate in numismatic circles on
whether the grade of a coin should be relative to the ideal for the
type of coin being graded (e.g. Morgan $1's) or the relative to the
best example possible for the date and mint of the coin (e.g. 1891 -P
Morgans, which never have decent lustre). For example, some say no
1891 -P could be an MS-70, because no full lustre 1891 -P's were
minted. Others say an 1891 -P should be given an MS-70 if it is
perfect other than its crappy lustre.

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

From the ANA Grading Standards book, page 15:
"A coin which is MS-65 from a technical or numerical viewpoint but which is
lightly struck can be described as MS-64, MS-63, or some lower grade,
without mentioning the weakness; this is the practice of most third-party
grading services at present."

The book goes on to discuss more nuances between technical and market
grading. The above quotation notwithstanding, PCGS and NGC do seem to grade
on middle ground (between technical and market grading) for particular
issues. For example, they allow more bag marks on GSA CC Morgans, and weaker
strikes (and worn die states) on S- and D-mint Lincolns from the 1920's than
they would on other issues from those series.

--Chris

On the NGC FAQ page, all of the links work EXCEPT the one to the question
"Is NGC grading 100% consistent?" at least from my IE browser. A manual
scrolldown through the list of questions and answers shows the consistency
question to be conspicuously absent. Harrumph!

"Michael Benveniste" wrote in message
...

"Tetradrachm" wrote in message
...

What is the policy of the major grading companies on this issue? Do
PCGS and NGC consider date and mint when grading, or just type?

PCGS does so explicitly. In it's glossary, PCGS gives the following
definition:
Market Grading: A numerical grade that matches the grade at which
a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS.

I've never been able to dig out a similar statement from NGC or ANACS.
My own experience will all three services is that the more popular the
series, the greater variation of grading standards within the series.

--
Michael Benveniste --
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $250. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

"James McCown" wrote in message
om...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
news:QHr_b.421$Ri6.193@lakeread04...

That sounds confusing to me. Does this mean that they'll take my
1878-CC
Morgan and try to match the grade to a similar1878-CC that they've
previously graded and give my coin the same grade? If it best matches a
MS63, is that how they will grade it? This sounds like basic technical
grading. Their statement still doesn't clearly describe the standard
they
used to grade the earlier coin. Where/how does market price enter into
the
process?

I feel so stupid asking this.

Bruce

What it means is that if your 78-CC were an 89-CC, it would get an MS-64.

In PCGS' mindset: rarity = higher grade.

So then would it be correct to reword:

"Market Grading: A numerical grade that matches the grade at which
a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS."

to read:

"Market Grading: A numerical grade that quantifies the desirability of
and
demand for a particular coin in the marketplace. The grading
standard used by PCGS."??


Bruce

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message news:QHr_b.421$Ri6.193@lakeread04...

That sounds confusing to me. Does this mean that they'll take my 1878-CC
Morgan and try to match the grade to a similar1878-CC that they've
previously graded and give my coin the same grade? If it best matches a
MS63, is that how they will grade it? This sounds like basic technical
grading. Their statement still doesn't clearly describe the standard they
used to grade the earlier coin. Where/how does market price enter into the
process?

I feel so stupid asking this.

Bruce

What it means is that if your 78-CC were an 89-CC, it would get an MS-64.

In PCGS' mindset: rarity = higher grade.

You've hit the nail on the head. Remember the 1933 Saint "What grade is it?"
When the Saint was going up for auction, we ended up with a pool to guess how
much it would bring at auction. As a lurker on the PCGS board, most of those
folks were concerned about how it would grade.

Some of us got the catelog and offered our own opinions. We all agreed it was
low MS (60-63 tops). Then David Hall and company got to it and announced it
was an MS-65.

Basically, so what? Even if it were G-4, I believe it would still have brought
$7,590,020.00. There's still only one.

I guess the bottom line I'm bringing here is that if a coin is a key or
semi-key (like CC Morgans), it would grade higher than a common date of the
same series.

Jerry

"James McCown" writes:

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
news:QHr_b.421$Ri6.193@lakeread04...

That sounds confusing to me. Does this mean that they'll take my 1878-CC
Morgan and try to match the grade to a similar1878-CC that they've
previously graded and give my coin the same grade? If it best matches a
MS63, is that how they will grade it? This sounds like basic technical
grading. Their statement still doesn't clearly describe the standard they
used to grade the earlier coin. Where/how does market price enter into the
process?

I feel so stupid asking this.

Bruce

What it means is that if your 78-CC were an 89-CC, it would get an MS-64.

In PCGS' mindset: rarity = higher grade.