Why do only some coins get designations?

[BKW]

I was thinking about the extent to which the TPGs create a market verses whether they simply verify a demand that already exists. I was thinking about this specifically with respect to designations.

 

For example, we all know that some series have consistently weak strikes in certain areas and coins exhibiting full details are graded by the TPGs with designations such as FBL, FB, FH, etc. These coins carry a premium (sometimes rather large) over their non-designated counterparts and have higher registry points associated with them.

 

However, not all coins which typically show poor strikes in certain areas receive a designation or carry much of a premium over full-stike examples. One that springs to mind is the Liberty Nickel. The corn ear at the lower left of the wreath on the coin's reverse is often weakly struck; yet no TPG to my knowledge designates those coins showing a full strike as “Full Cob” (or some related designation). Neither do these examples carry much, if any, of a premium in my experience.

 

Do you think this is because most collectors aren’t necessarily concerned with a full strike on certain issues? If the TPGs started designating V-Nickels do you think we would all of a sudden see collectors’ demand for “Full Cobs” increase and higher premiums paid for these coins? To what extent do you think the registry game plays a part in the premiums we see for designations? Are there other series you can think of that the TPGs don’t currently designate but might in the future?

 

 

[cpm9ball]

Honestly? I'm glad that they haven't gotten carried away with all of the possibilities.

 

Let's see.........

 

We could have "Full Talons" on the SBA.......

 

Or, "Full Hand" on the Walker.......

 

How about "Full Breast" and "Flat Chested" for the Morgan.......

 

Why don't we just say the coin is what it is?

 

Chris

[Keigwin]

Do you think this is because most collectors aren’t necessarily concerned with a full strike on certain issues? If the TPGs started designating V-Nickels do you think we would all of a sudden see collectors’ demand for “Full Cobs” increase and higher premiums paid for these coins?

I would hope collectors are smart enough to go after strong strikes. It's one of the top three things I look for immediately (the others are color and luster). I think most folks know that FH, FS, FB's, etc. don't necessarily have exceptional strikes.

 

I really don't want to see the TPG's designating WLH's with Full Thumb and CBH's with Full Clasp. The whole designation process is a bit silly IMO, and kind of out of hand.

Lance.

[BKW]

I would hope collectors are smart enough to go after strong strikes. It's one of the top three things I look for immediately (the others are color and luster). I think most folks know that FH, FS, FB's, etc. don't necessarily have exceptional strikes.

 

I really don't want to see the TPG's designating WLH's with Full Thumb and CBH's with Full Clasp. The whole designation process is a bit silly IMO, and kind of out of hand.

Lance.

 

I would agree with you there Lance. A designation dosen't mean the rest of the strike is strong. You have to look at the totality of the coin. I guess the main point of my post was why did the TPGs start designating certain coins and not others. Is it because collectors wanted it that way or because they (the TPGs) thought it would be good marketing?

[MarkFeld]

I would hope collectors are smart enough to go after strong strikes. It's one of the top three things I look for immediately (the others are color and luster). I think most folks know that FH, FS, FB's, etc. don't necessarily have exceptional strikes.

 

I really don't want to see the TPG's designating WLH's with Full Thumb and CBH's with Full Clasp. The whole designation process is a bit silly IMO, and kind of out of hand.

Lance.

 

I would agree with you there Lance. A designation dosen't mean the rest of the strike is strong. You have to look at the totality of the coin. I guess the main point of my post was why did the TPGs start designating certain coins and not others. Is it because collectors wanted it that way or because they (the TPGs) thought it would be good marketing?

My guess is that in a number of cases, someone with some clout (and money on their mind) lobbied for the use of the designations (such as "FH", "FBL", "FB"). But those were in use before the major grading services were even in existence. Some of the others were later introduced by the grading companies, themselves.

[BKW]

My guess is that in a number of cases, someone with some clout (and money on their mind) lobbied for the use of the designations (such as "FH", "FBL", "FB"). But those were in use before the major grading services were even in existence. Some of the others were later introduced by the grading companies, themselves.

 

Thanks Mark. Do you think in this age of "pluses," "stars" "green beans" etc. we will see more designations introduced by the TPGs? Not that I am necessarily for or against such an idea; just curious.

[MarkFeld]

My guess is that in a number of cases, someone with some clout (and money on their mind) lobbied for the use of the designations (such as "FH", "FBL", "FB"). But those were in use before the major grading services were even in existence. Some of the others were later introduced by the grading companies, themselves.

 

Thanks Mark. Do you think in this age of "pluses," "stars" "green beans" etc. we will see more designations introduced by the TPGs? Not that I am necessarily for or against such an idea; just curious.

I don't think so, or at least, I hope not. That type of focus on (and "value" for) one aspect of a coin's strike, while excluding others, has always bothered me.

 

In addition to that, as I have posted a number of times previously, often, a grading company's opinion/decision regarding a designation can be as subjective and inconsistent as one for a coin's grade.

[gmarguli]

My guess is that in a number of cases, someone with some clout (and money on their mind) lobbied for the use of the designations (such as "FH", "FBL", "FB"). But those were in use before the major grading services were even in existence. Some of the others were later introduced by the grading companies, themselves.

 

Thanks Mark. Do you think in this age of "pluses," "stars" "green beans" etc. we will see more designations introduced by the TPGs? Not that I am necessarily for or against such an idea; just curious.

I don't think so, or at least, I hope not. That type of focus on (and "value" for) one aspect of a coin's strike, while excluding others, has always bothered me.

 

You really don't think that the TPG will introduce more of these designations? I share your hope, but I think it is practically guaranteed that they will introduce more of these designations. There is a ton of money to be made by them by taking a series that is heavily graded and adding a new layer to the "finest" examples. The risk the alienation of some collectors, but overall it appears to be a money maker to them.