Is the NGC * Designation Too Arbitrary?

[gmarguli]

The arbitrariness of the * designation is questionable. While I've had mixed feelings about it, I've come to like the idea of recognizing coins with exceptional eye appeal.

 

As I understand it, only a very small percentage of coins get the * designation. Perhaps NGC will comment on the approximate percentage?

 

Most of the coins I've seen with the * designation were proof coins with a one-sided cameo. However, I've come to question MANY of the mint state coins I've seen with the * designation.

 

Here are a few examples of what I would consider bland coins getting the * designation:

 

An average looking Ike dollar (being sold by Satan)

 

A Morgan with OK toning, but hazy fields

 

A white Roo......oh sorry, almost fell asleep. A white Roosevelt dime

 

 

Now, one of my reasons for questioning the arbitrariness of the * designation is very self serving. I've sent in several coins that I thought could garner the * designation, but none did.

 

I sent in a rainbow Illinois commem. No *

I sent in a blue BTW. When's the last time you saw a blue BTW? No *

An Arkansas with a red/blue/green rainbow. No *

An Iowa that looks like it was struck in copper and has a rainbow running thru the reverse. No *

A Rhode Island with orange/red/purple/green/yellow. How many Rhode Islands have you ever seen with these colors? No *

 

None of those coins get the *, yet one of a billion white Roosevelts gets it? So does an Ike that looks average....

 

What are other people's feelings and experiences with the * designation? Good? Bad? Indifferent? Is it too arbitrary? Will it die like the (W)hite designation or is it here to stay?

[John Maben]

Greg,

 

Are we too tough in assigning star? I could see how you might feel that way. But, arbitrary? No. We have a pretty tough policy in that if a single grader who views the coin has an objection to the star, it's gone. This, again I suspect, is a case of pictures doing nothing for the coins. I see it ALL of the time. We are careful in giving a star to a white coin just as we are in giving it to a toned coin. It must be special. Great luster, no distracting spots or fingerprints, etc. The Ike and the Roose look like they are very satiny with pristine surfaces. As for your coins, I dunno. There are nice looking coins, great looking coins, knock your socks off coins. Maybe your coins have good eye appeal, are pretty, but we thought they would not be seen as "exceptional" in the eyes of nearly everyone........If you are ever baffled and need an explanation, let us know and we'll give you one after a review of the coins.

 

John

[mommam17]

Greg- Beautiful coins. Someone,obviously, will pay a premium for them. I don`t try for stars but sounds like they are well deserving. I`d be happy just to have such awesome coins.

[ArtR]

Greg

Last month I looked at a group of 25 nice toned Morgans that a dealer friend had just received back from NGC. Of the 25, six received the * designation, even though the six were nice coins, there were several that to my eye were much more deserving of the designation, in fact I purchased two, and neither one were star coins.

 

Like anything else, I guess it is all in the eyes of the beholder. What is exceptional eye appeal to one person is not necessarily exceptional eye appeal to another, be you a grader or collector.

 

 

 

[michael]

for me i am neutral on the star designation but if i had to give a explaniation i would have you reread artr

and john maben

 

waht both of them said

 

for me that is why i am neutral on the star as it is really subjective based on the eye of a specialist

 

and depending on how long you have been doing this there are many coins i see in my area of speciality

that are to me monster star coins three times plus! and yet someone beginning collectors would say the coins

are NOT as they do not have the understanding of seeing waht i have the last 35 years nor do they have the

crazy

extrememe passion that i do!

 

well who knows! but that is why i am neutral on the star designation and that is what makes a market

 

in fact great markets for coins is when there are many wide variences of opinion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

sincerely and respectfully submitted, michael

[keithdagen]

..

 

[keithdagen]

I sent in a rainbow Illinois commem. No *

I sent in a blue BTW. When's the last time you saw a blue BTW? No *

An Arkansas with a red/blue/green rainbow. No *

An Iowa that looks like it was struck in copper and has a rainbow running thru the reverse. No *

A Rhode Island with orange/red/purple/green/yellow. How many Rhode Islands have you ever seen with these colors? No *

 

Let's see some pics and let us judge

[braddick]

I like the STAR and hope NGC keeps it. I can only answer for that Ike dollar- as I've purchased a couple of coins from this "Satan" dealer and his coins generally look better than his SCANS, especially WHITE, SATINY coins like this one offered.

 

I think, from the few rainbow toned NGC coins I've seen, the STAR is given to reward not just the color, but the booming luster under the color. If the coin has tremendous color without the blast luster under it, it probably doesn't qualify for the STAR.

 

Here's another way of looking at it: Maybe one of your MS65 coins 'could' have qualified for the STAR, but in a MS64 holder? Which would you rather have?

[prooflike]

I think Braddick has hit it, luster seems to be pretty important in getting that star along with strike, obviously not just color.

[Hoot]

Maybe one of your MS65 coins 'could' have qualified for the STAR, but in a MS64 holder?

 

I hope not Pat. NGC has said repeatedly that the star has nothing to do with the grade.

 

As for myself, I think the star is fine. I can say for certain that all of the coins that I have seen with a star deserved it. I've seen other coins without the star that I thought "how could they have not been given a star?" Yet, I bought a PF68ucam 1968 Kennedy with the star designation off eBay. The coin was white and incredibly beautiful. I've had one coin given the star and it was a truly beautiful piece (1952 Jefferson), but a scan simply cannot tell the story.

 

Greg - I'd love to see your coins. They are probably stunning. Maybe you should send them back for review and astk the question directly to NGC. I'd like to hear the answer.

 

Hoot

[ArtR]

I think, from the few rainbow toned NGC coins I've seen, the STAR is given to reward not just the color, but the booming luster under the color. If the coin has tremendous color without the blast luster under it, it probably doesn't qualify for the STAR.

Pat

At times it don't seem to be like this. The particular Morgans I mentioned to include the two I purchased had that real great blast of luster, and was the primary reason why I put them above the coins that received the star. One in particular was a 83P with monster color, and the flash of an 81S.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[John Maben]

Art,

 

Usually when a toned Morgan (or any other toned coin for that matter) does not get a star and it appears it should have it is for one of the following reasons:

 

1) A single or multiple distracting spot(s) or blemishes

2) A fingerprint that is easily noticed and can be in either the toning or the untoned areas

3) The toning has areas (usually toward the outer rings) that has progressed too far (dark brown, very dark purple, or black)

4) The toning is too inconsistent

5) One side of the coin is just average

 

There could be other reasons as well. We are considering a lot in each decision that goes into each coin. Many will look at the coins we reject for star in awe and not understand it while others will, completely. We want the star coins to please as many potential buyers as possible.

 

John

[John Maben]

Here are some more possible reasons:

 

6) The toning is too "thick"

7) There is no, or very little, underlying luster

8) The underlying luster is not natural looking indicating a light cleaning which probably occured before or during the toning process

 

Most numismatists appreciate toning if it appeals to them. What appeals to each of us, varies. In a nutshell, because of this, we are really picky! If we were more liberal with the designation it wouldn't mean as much and would actually create confusion beyond what Greg is expieriencing. I also think there are many NGC coins without stars that are fantastic coins with very good eye appeal.

 

John

[gmarguli]

Let's see some pics and let us judge

 

Sorry, but I can't scan toned coins at all. They come out looking gray and lifeless. I tried scanning the rainbow Illinois and the Rhode Island and they both came out so blah that John and everyone would think I was crazy thinking these were deserving of a * designation.

 

However, I've been looking into getting them professionally photographed. I'm going to move most of them to the safety deposit box and it'd be nice to have a picture of them so I can enjoy them without having them in my hand.

 

[John Maben]

Greg,

 

Talk to Dave Lange about Photoproofs, maybe the Passport version......

 

John

[keithdagen]

Greg,

 

For those that come out dull, the best pics I have gotten come from scanning the coin at an angle. Best results so far come from taking a PCGS slab, and placing the coin that you want to scan on the edge of the PCGS slab. Since it has that kind of recessed area on both sides, it makes a great resting groove. NGC slabs don't work as well for the leaning part, becuase they don't have a groove you can rest your slabs on.

 

Or, you can just send them all to me, and I can try scanning them for you. Don't bother with return postage.

[RotatedRainbows]

When I scan coins I use a foam insert from an air-tite holder or if you have a rubber doughnut from an old PCGS slab you cracked that will work as well. As for the Star* designation I have had toned coins Star* that I did not think would and others I thought were locks that did not receive it so I think it really comes down to "Is this the type of toning almost everyone will like" or "the type of toning that only appeals to a certain segment of collectors".

[gmarguli]

John,

 

All my coins are stunning with exceptional eye appeal. What is the use of me paying 5% over Bluesheet if they aren’t? Just kidding.

 

Thanks for your response.

 

I think my biggest problem with the * designation is NOT that my coins did not receive it, but rather many of the coins that I have seen with it do not deserve it in my opinion and then I look at my coins which have great toning and sell for multiples of bid and they didn’t get the * designation. It is a little confusing and maddening.

 

I am sure that Ike I posted a link to has really lustrous, satiny, and pristine surfaces, but to me that is not a big deal. It is not hard to find an Ike - especially a 1972-S, like that. I was always under the impression that to receive a * designation the coin really had to jump up and dance. For a 1972-S Ike, I would guess that 5%-10% probably have lustrous, satiny, and pristine surfaces. It is just rather common for this coin. Also, the Ike seems to have several spots which I thought would preclude it from receiving the * designation? I’ve linked two photos of this coin with red dots below the spots.

 

Reverse

Obverse

 

I looked over my coins that I thought had a shot at the * designation.

 

My Rhode Island doesn’t have the greatest luster (decent, but not exceptional and it is somewhat muted due to a dusting of tone over the coin) and the reverse isn’t special. The funny thing is that there was a similar looking one for sale (mine is honestly better ) at 5X bid and the seller of that coin was also moaning about not getting a * designation.

 

While I did not submit my Iowa personally, I was told it was submitted after the * designation was already in use for commems. I think the coin is stunning. This is a coin I would be interested in hearing why it didn’t receive the * designation. It’s got great luster, but maybe the toning is a little thick - for lack of a better word? You really forget the coin is silver and not copper when looking at it.

 

I’ve also got two coins in at NGC right now that I feel should get the * designation. One is a MS clad Kennedy with magnificent blue toning around the rims and a red center and the other is a silver proof Ike with Peacock-esque toning. I’m very interested in seeing if these coins make the * designation.

 

 

[John Maben]

I really dislike images! My interpretation of the areas you are calling spots is that they are actually frost breaks or minor surface irregularities, not spots. Anyway, thanks for the above thoughts I will respond later tonight when I have more time.

 

John

[John Maben]

Greg,

 

It doesn't surprise me at all that you've seen star coins that you believed didn't deserve it, especially when compaired to your coins. However, I'd bet if those same star coins were shown (in real life, not images) to a group of knowledgeable collectors and dealers the vast majority would think we nailed it. Likewise, if we were to show your coins (in real life, not images) to the same group the majority would understand why they did not get the star, so long as they also understood what it takes to make a star.

 

I agree that 1972-S Ikes can come really nice and satiny looking. This particular one must have been a stand out because we are aware of these things.

 

When I was a dealer, I had a tendency to like my coins just a tad better than the person I was selling them to, but a tad less than the person I was buying them from.... sound familiar?

 

As professional graders, we disassociate our individual likes and dislikes where necessary to adhere to the given standard.

 

When I was a dealer I also had a tendency to view the grading of coins as being black and white, that is to say I knew what my standard was, and if the service graded if differently, they were wrong, not me. I now realize that my standard at that time, while consistent with my beliefs was what I believed the services standard should be and that I could not or would not accept that they disagreed with me. Does this sound familiar to anyone?

 

So, IMO, here is some valuable advice; remind yourself when necessary that the grade of a coin is not always as cut and dry to others as it may be to you because grading is not absolute and is not completely precise, and is in fact still a matter of opinion to a degree. Therefore, others will see coins differently than you and this is not a bad thing.

 

John

 

PS- I am adding this after sleeping on it.

 

I did not mention that it is possible one or more of your coins should have been assigned a star. I always encourage submitters to request a review when they disagree strongly. Frankly, this will result in a change of grade or designation only occasionally, but even when there are no changes at least the submitter is more comfortable knowing we took the extra time.

[Oldtrader3]

John: I agree with you on the scan "spots". On my scans, I have noticed that usually these spots are small luster breaks, not ticks. Many of these breaks appear on scans as much more dramatic than on the actual coin, because they are more shiny than the surrounding areas. The relected light is much more intense than surrounding toning and therefore commands much more attention on scans.

 

Greg: I have the same problem as you do on beautifully toned coins appearing darker and lifeless gray in scans. Scans have a red and blue nanometer shift that records quite different colors than are seen visually. This shift must compress the wave length into the gray zone. I have noticed also that this shift can not usually be color corrected in the scan. I am starting to try experiments with a digital camera for coin pictures. Maybe that is a way around scanning problems on toned coins.

 

The main issue that I have with the star designation is that many of my NGC coins were done before the designation came into effect. I have considered this and decided that I do not want to deal with resubmitting all these coins that I think might make the * grade.

[John Maben]

OldTrader,

 

Maybe we should offer a "Star Search" service at major coin shows? Perhaps with a lower fee for rejected coins, and coins returned the same day.....

 

John

[Oldtrader3]

Both those suggestions are great ideas. It would be nice if I could drop off some NGC coins in the morning at a show and pick them up later in the day. Also, a lower "scanning fee" would be nice for those coins that do not make the * designation. The regular fee could be charged for the coins that make the grade and everyone would be happy (at least I would).

 

I am a little tentative about designations other than grading. After trying to figure out the "W" designation, I was more confused than enlightened. I sent in some coins that I felt were pretty equivalent and some made ithe "W" and some didn't. That threw me a little. I guess that I have to try the * and figure out what works and what doesn't. Thanks,

[EVillageProwler]

Something that Charles wrote struck an idea in me...

 

Grading, in all its form, is fundamentally fraught with error because it is the rendering of an opinion. It's a judgement call done by fallible human beings; it is not science.

 

When we attach specifiers like FS, FBL, FH, FSB, Full as well as W, *, CAM, DCAM, PL, DPL, RD, RB, BN and anything else we can come with now or in the future, we are merely adding even more subjectivity and increasing the likelihood of a mistake (or, disagreement) into the grading process.

 

Human subjectivity has a pretty broad range. We can narrow it only through experience and not by fiat. And, we should accept that it is going to be arbitrary and try to come up with processes that factor in the undeniable.

 

EVP

 

[GDJMSP]

Grading, in all its form, is fundamentally fraught with error because it is the rendering of an opinion. It's a judgement call done by fallible human beings; it is not science. ........... And, we should accept that it is going to be arbitrary and try to come up with processes that factor in the undeniable.

 

Why EVP - if I didn't know better I'd swear that sounded an awful lot like the ideas regarding grading that I have been writing about for a long time now.

 

Welcome to the club

 

[EVillageProwler]

I also complain about the grades I get from time to time, but I generally do so via email amongst my friends. I seldom complain publicly because I don't want to feed the false notion that grading can be pinned down.

 

EVP

 

[RotatedRainbows]

I think the extra specifiers are more to help sight unseen (internet buying) then anything else since so much buying is done that way now compared to 10-15 years ago. It does give more guidance to which pieces are above average for that date/grade in terms of eye appeal so you don't have to take the sellers word for it (and we all know sellers can stretch the truth).

[John Maben]

OldTrader,

 

We were very strict in assigning "W" as we are with star. To our surprise,

there were not enough collectors and dealers who wanted or cared for the "W" designation which is why it is history.

 

John

[gmarguli]

Personally, I never understood the W designation. I sent in some blast white coins and they didn't get the designation. Not that I cared. I guess like many others, it just wasn't a designation for me. I'm a tone guy.

 

I also saw several coins with extremely light gold toning that got the W designation.

 

I never understood the standard.

[michael]

after thinking about the star and doing some research on it and seeing many star coins in person

 

i like the star designation lots!!!!! now of all the services that ngc offers grading cameo designations

 

all is an art subjective and the star i am sure is the most subjectuive of all

 

but for the most part they try to put it on coins that all would agree have ezxceptional eye appeal really neat

 

it is hard to show it in a scan you need to see the coin sight seen they do a good job at ngc and of course with the star many will be disappointed when they do not get it

 

such is life

 

in coins there will always be disagreements but overall the advanced dealers and collectors i consider fair and hionest and really knowledgable i have talked to agree the star coins over 95% are really exceptionally eye appealling coins and all i have seen within my speciality have been real monsters

 

here is a star coin the first graded and currently omnly graded atar coin the series and again only star is only for eye appeal not for pq high end for the grade it might be high end but the grade has nothing to do with the stsr the coin must have exceptional eye appeal

 

i could write volumes about the star and if you wanted to call me i could tell you about it the best way is just to see as many sight seen coins are you can

 

IT IS TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO JUDGE STAR COINS FROM SCANS!!!!!!!!!

 

herr is a star ngs ms 68*