Numismatic and History Discussion Forums > Ancient Coin Forum
Speaking of Grading
Joe Sermarini:
Centering and complete legible legends are certainly a plus, but for some collectors they are not as important. I was talking to a collector yesterday who consigned a coin that was a little off center and had small edge chips that took part of the legend. He felt his coin was far more attractive than another example on coin archives on a nice round flan with complete legends but a weakly struck portrait. He was trying to convince me to list his coin for a higher price than the other coin and more than I wanted to ask. Personally, I thought the two coins were near equally flawed, had near equal eye appeal, and were equally valued.
Ron C2:
Joe, you are hitting on exactly what I love about ancients.
In modern coins, I've seen people de-slab a coin and send it to the same grading service multiple times until they get a (partially subjective) grade score that matches their expectations. Interestingly, this strategy often works.
For ancients - I don't even look at a seller's grading. I ask myself if I am going to be happy with the coin in my collection and if I find the condition acceptable for my perception of the coin's rarity. The only person I need to convince is me.
If I were a dealer, my perspective might be different, but in the end, a coin is worth what the next prospective owner will pay for it. No more, no less. And in my view, whether it's subjectively graded gVF or aEF likely makes little difference to the "hammer price".
emcee:
have noticed that a lot of NGC slabbed coins currently listed on eBay are not graded and, probably not coincidentally, not worth bidding on . I have a few that are and am satisfied that the grade is at least close. Having the authentication is what adds value. I have a couple or Roman Imperial coins slabbed by a second tier grading service that are graded MS 60 (a bit generous) and MS 63 (a lot generous). How you can grade ancients using Scovill scale standards escapes me.
Virgil H:
Have things changed with the authentication thing or was I wrong from the start? I thought NCG specifically stated they did not guarantee authenticity, although they would say something about a forgery if they noticed it. I thought all they "guaranteed" was grading. Here is the quote I just pulled off their web site. It is a wide open CYA statement that does not guarantee they are actually authenticating that a coin is ancient:
Authenticity — NGC Ancients will only grade coins that it believes to be genuine. Authenticity and attribution represent the opinion of NGC Ancients and are not guaranteed, nor is any guarantee implied. Please see the NGC Ancients Coin Grading Guarantee for complete information.
This is like the House inspector who cannot be held accountable for missing those major problems with a house (been there and been out thousands for trusting him with no recourse).
Virgil
cicerokid:
The plastic tombs are for Americans so they can slot them between their baseball Mickey Mantel card collection featuring Babe Ruth signed autographs in plastic !!!
I have been looking at some coins laterly so how can heavily worn coins from worn out dies be 5/5 2/5 NGC EF...............when I would say it's really FINE maybe Poor /Fine in the good old realistic days. When did worn and mushy looking details from worn dies and honest wear and tear ever be awarded EF status.
This is all nonsense
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version