UPDATE: IMAGE LINKS ADDED! What do you think of the "AU-58+" grade?

[$ilverHawk]

 

 

"First, you misunderstood what I said: The answer I gave had absolutely nothing to do with uncirculated coins, it was about close to MS vs. extremely close to MS. I was saying that I think the coins that people call AU63 should instead be called AU58+, and that there is a long president for doing this with raw coins. By definition, there is a number between 58 and 60, and raw coins are often described as AU59+.

 

Second; the ambiguity in this case comes with the "one or more" line. What is the exact quantity defined by "one or more?" That line is laughably absurd, and I am not alone, or original, in my thinking. "

 

First, about close to extremely close to MS by definition is an AU coin, you are describing the definition of a circulated coin not an uncirculated coin. I did not misunderstand.

 

Second, "one or more" refers to the amount of rub/friction marks..There are several generally accepted AU grades, AU50, AU53, AU55 and AU58. It is well within the scope of any grading parameters to assign different grades to coins that have more circulation marks a lower grade. So yes, if a coin has a single high point area of abrasion/wear and still has mint luster in the fields that coin may well be considered a technical AU58. If there are more points of wear then the coin would be down graded according to and depending on the number of areas that show abrasions/wear. ie. AU55, AU53, AU50.

 

Carl

[James_OldeTowne]

I have added images to the opening post. Please do not click if they will offend you as SPAM.

 

I would like to add more commentary, but will patiently wait for any further reactions after folks have a chance to review the images. I can safely say, however, that the coin has full flowing mint luster with no breaks through the fields.

 

Fantastic discussion so far!

[BLive1972]

This is a very interesting topic. I don't buy many coins in AU condition, so there are some good lessons and some great examples posted here so far.

 

For the coin James posted. First off, beautiful coin. I appreciate the super large image because I can see the surface really well. To me, and keep in mind that my eye is still untrained in this field, but what I see are contact marks from circulation, but toned over which helps them blend in a bit. The coin still has a good luster which also helps distract from them. I dont think that it would grade MS.

 

My opinion on the SLQ. I'm not sure, but on the reverse it looks like there are scattered contact marks in the fields.

 

The MS66 seated dollar. I don't see as wear, but the contact marks are a tad distracting to me and if it were to be sent back, I think it would drop a grade.

 

These are just an opinion of a new collector

 

[Coindude]

James... first off.... WOW!!! What a gorgeous original coin. Looking at the HUGE images, I have to say... I believe it's an AU coin, but I'm surprised they weren't more lenient on a scarce coin, I figured to see that in a 61 holder.

[coinman1794]

 

First, you misunderstood what I said: The answer I gave had absolutely nothing to do with uncirculated coins, it was about close to MS vs. extremely close to MS. I was saying that I think the coins that people call AU63 should instead be called AU58+, and that there is a long president for doing this with raw coins. By definition, there is a number between 58 and 60, and raw coins are often described as AU59+.

 

Second; the ambiguity in this case comes with the "one or more" line. What is the exact quantity defined by "one or more?" That line is laughably absurd, and I am not alone, or original, in my thinking.

 

 

 

"First, about close to extremely close to MS by definition is an AU coin, you are describing the definition of a circulated coin not an uncirculated coin. I did not misunderstand.

 

Second, "one or more" refers to the amount of rub/friction marks..There are several generally accepted AU grades, AU50, AU53, AU55 and AU58. It is well within the scope of any grading parameters to assign different grades to coins that have more circulation marks a lower grade. So yes, if a coin has a single high point area of abrasion/wear and still has mint luster in the fields that coin may well be considered a technical AU58. If there are more points of wear then the coin would be down graded according to and depending on the number of areas that show abrasions/wear. ie. AU55, AU53, AU50."

 

Carl

 

Carl,

 

I think you misunderstood me because you equated UNC with CIRC, as if I had made that connection, when the two scales are inherently separate, and I was actually trying to dispel the concept of AU63 coins. Specifically you said:

 

I agree that grading is done on a continuum. I believe that is the very idea underpinning the Sheldon scale. Exactly what is ambiguous about the barest trace of wear? Either there is wear or not. It is not a difficult concept. Call it cabinet friction or whatever, if there is wear on the high points of the design it is an AU coin. Either yes or no.

 

It doesn't matter how many years people have been using the term AU59+. An AU coin is an AU coin. How about AU55+, AU56+, AU58-, MS63- or as you note AU63, what exactly does that mean? Would you buy a coin that was graded AU58+ and pay any more than the same coin graded AU58?

 

As an aside, if we have "+" grades why don't we have "-" grades? Is AU58+ equal to MS60 - ?

 

Further, my comments are not directed toward you, but toward the ANA printed standards, which I will continue to say are ambiguous. You quoted their definition of an AU58 as having "one or more" points of wear. That was not a general description of the entire AU range as you are saying above, that was the description of "AU58." To describe it as "one or more" leaves the door wide open. The definition makes it easy to skew the 4 AU grades, in my opinion. You wrote:

 

ANA Grading Terminology. AU58. "The barest trace of wear may be seen on one or more of the high points of the design. No major detracting contact marks will be present and the coin will have attractive eye appeal and nearly full mint luster, often with the appearance of a higher grade."

 

Second, "one or more" refers to the amount of rub/friction marks..There are several generally accepted AU grades, AU50, AU53, AU55 and AU58. It is well within the scope of any grading parameters to assign different grades to coins that have more circulation marks a lower grade. So yes, if a coin has a single high point area of abrasion/wear and still has mint luster in the fields that coin may well be considered a technical AU58. If there are more points of wear then the coin would be down graded according to and depending on the number of areas that show abrasions/wear. ie. AU55, AU53, AU50."

[coinman1794]

Yep, we got a customer's coin back today in AU-58 "plus". For the record, I thought "lock 61". It's a $12,000 coin.

 

So, I'm just throwing it out there:

 

What do you think of the "AU-58+" grade?

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

3/27/2013 Edited to add:

SPAM POTENTIAL ALERT The images for the obverse linked here and the reverse linked here are for a coin that will be offered for sale. Please DO NOT CLICK if this will offend you as SPAM. The images are ENORMOUS (8 Mb each) so please be patient.

 

I see what looks like a miniscule amount of circulation rub. You are right that this heavily toned, slider "look" will often make MS61, but on a rarity like this, I guess they took advantage of all their tools and used the + instead. I applaud.

[Tradedollarnut]

I think you need to work on making the images a little larger.

[michael]

1916 stander that JAMES POSTED LOOKS UNC ------- FROM THE PHOTOS

 

ms 60-61

 

but if the top grading service asked me which would i rather have??

 

ms 61 or au58+ holder

 

i'd rather have the au58+ holder

 

as it adds mystique as a possible upgrade let the next "genius" buyer figure it out and this does add value to many buyers

 

hence is actually worth MORE in the au58+ holder

as most all pre-1917 silver coins i see in ms 61 holders are sliders with problems/usually with eye appeal and/or dead lustre

 

besides being i am not maxing out the coin to the end user retail buyer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Walkerfan]

I agree that I DON't like this coin at the MS level after seeing the images----I see a lot of possible rub. I (to a lesser extent) do not like that carbon spot on the obverse, either. Even if this piece was a MS coin---I would PASS on it, as it is not eye appealing to me. JMHO.

[$ilverHawk]

 

First, you misunderstood what I said: The answer I gave had absolutely nothing to do with uncirculated coins, it was about close to MS vs. extremely close to MS. I was saying that I think the coins that people call AU63 should instead be called AU58+, and that there is a long president for doing this with raw coins. By definition, there is a number between 58 and 60, and raw coins are often described as AU59+.

 

Second; the ambiguity in this case comes with the "one or more" line. What is the exact quantity defined by "one or more?" That line is laughably absurd, and I am not alone, or original, in my thinking.

 

 

 

"First, about close to extremely close to MS by definition is an AU coin, you are describing the definition of a circulated coin not an uncirculated coin. I did not misunderstand.

 

Second, "one or more" refers to the amount of rub/friction marks..There are several generally accepted AU grades, AU50, AU53, AU55 and AU58. It is well within the scope of any grading parameters to assign different grades to coins that have more circulation marks a lower grade. So yes, if a coin has a single high point area of abrasion/wear and still has mint luster in the fields that coin may well be considered a technical AU58. If there are more points of wear then the coin would be down graded according to and depending on the number of areas that show abrasions/wear. ie. AU55, AU53, AU50."

 

Carl

 

Carl,

 

I think you misunderstood me because you equated UNC with CIRC, as if I had made that connection, when the two scales are inherently separate, and I was actually trying to dispel the concept of AU63 coins. Specifically you said:

 

I agree that grading is done on a continuum. I believe that is the very idea underpinning the Sheldon scale. Exactly what is ambiguous about the barest trace of wear? Either there is wear or not. It is not a difficult concept. Call it cabinet friction or whatever, if there is wear on the high points of the design it is an AU coin. Either yes or no.

 

It doesn't matter how many years people have been using the term AU59+. An AU coin is an AU coin. How about AU55+, AU56+, AU58-, MS63- or as you note AU63, what exactly does that mean? Would you buy a coin that was graded AU58+ and pay any more than the same coin graded AU58?

 

As an aside, if we have "+" grades why don't we have "-" grades? Is AU58+ equal to MS60 - ?

 

Further, my comments are not directed toward you, but toward the ANA printed standards, which I will continue to say are ambiguous. You quoted their definition of an AU58 as having "one or more" points of wear. That was not a general description of the entire AU range as you are saying above, that was the description of "AU58." To describe it as "one or more" leaves the door wide open. The definition makes it easy to skew the 4 AU grades, in my opinion. You wrote:

 

ANA Grading Terminology. AU58. "The barest trace of wear may be seen on one or more of the high points of the design. No major detracting contact marks will be present and the coin will have attractive eye appeal and nearly full mint luster, often with the appearance of a higher grade."

 

Second, "one or more" refers to the amount of rub/friction marks..There are several generally accepted AU grades, AU50, AU53, AU55 and AU58. It is well within the scope of any grading parameters to assign different grades to coins that have more circulation marks a lower grade. So yes, if a coin has a single high point area of abrasion/wear and still has mint luster in the fields that coin may well be considered a technical AU58. If there are more points of wear then the coin would be down graded according to and depending on the number of areas that show abrasions/wear. ie. AU55, AU53, AU50."

 

I understand your points and am aware that you are commenting on ANA Standards. For myself, I understand the word picture that the ANA description is describing. And yes, the "one or more " statement may seem ambiguous until you examine many AU58 graded coins and note that there are examples with rub/wear detectable on a single high point of the design elements and other examples of AU58 coins where there are several areas of rub/wear on the high points of design elements.

 

I was wrong to refer to the "one or more " statement as a reference to the range of AU grades.

 

Carl

[WoodenJefferson]

After looking at the images, as a buyer, I'm glad the service deemed it AU-58 and did not put this into the Mint State range. I feel as though the coin has seen some slight rub (due to maybe circulation, collector abuse, or any other factor that can come into play) and through out it's life, has toned over the rub, but not as deep as in the contrast in un-touched areas, meaning the tone is lighter on the high spots.

 

It may not be the right call, but for the buyer it is.

[Catbert]

Send that AU-58+ into CAC, get a Gold Bean and you'll have a $15,000 coin!

 

During a recent Q&A call with John at CAC, I asked if gold stickers were ever applied to AU58 coins and, if so, how should they be interpreted given the "problem" grades of 60,61,62? He replied that they do not assign gold stickers to AU58 coins.

[James_OldeTowne]

Send that AU-58+ into CAC, get a Gold Bean and you'll have a $15,000 coin!

 

During a recent Q&A call with John at CAC, I asked if gold stickers were ever applied to AU58 coins and, if so, how should they be interpreted given the "problem" grades of 60,61,62? He replied that they do not assign gold stickers to AU58 coins.

Either that is incorrect or the CAC policy has changed, as here is a list that includes some AU-58 coins with CAC "gold" stickers just at Heritage, and who knows how many more are out there.

 

The weird thing is, if the CAC gold sticker means the coin is a bump up in grade (or even two or there) from what is assigned by the TPG, that brings an AU-58 "up" to MS-60 or MS-61, which generally means an "ugly unc".

 

Or... does it take an AU-58 to an AU-58 "plus" ?

[jom]

The weird thing is, if the CAC gold sticker means the coin is a bump up in grade (or even two or there) from what is assigned by the TPG, that brings an AU-58 "up" to MS-60 or MS-61, which generally means an "ugly unc".

 

I cannot validate that JA made that statement about gold stickers on AU58 coins. However, a gold sticker is simply a statement from CAC saying that coin is undergraded. So if they do gold sticker an AU58 I presume it means they think (their OPINION only) the coin is MS. They do NOT state what grade that might be at the MS level. JA did say on a recent conference call that gold stickered coins are "no brainer" upgrades.

 

jom

[Catbert]

Send that AU-58+ into CAC, get a Gold Bean and you'll have a $15,000 coin!

 

During a recent Q&A call with John at CAC, I asked if gold stickers were ever applied to AU58 coins and, if so, how should they be interpreted given the "problem" grades of 60,61,62? He replied that they do not assign gold stickers to AU58 coins.

Either that is incorrect or the CAC policy has changed, as here is a list that includes some AU-58 coins with CAC "gold" stickers just at Heritage, and who knows how many more are out there.

 

The weird thing is, if the CAC gold sticker means the coin is a bump up in grade (or even two or there) from what is assigned by the TPG, that brings an AU-58 "up" to MS-60 or MS-61, which generally means an "ugly unc".

 

Or... does it take an AU-58 to an AU-58 "plus" ?

 

That was precisely the reason behind my question. While I do not recall his full explanation, my recollection (this call was held about 45 days ago) was that he stated they do not grant gold stickers to 58s. Perhaps their position has changed, as you indicate, or my memory of that discussion is very poor.

 

I believe board member Michael was on that call so maybe he can chime in.

[FishyOne]

That is a beautiful coin! I am not a SLQ guy and there does appear to be very slight rubs. I expect coins like this to be in MS62 holders though. Years of Market Grading will do that to you.

 

Is AU58+ fair? Yes, it is but I'm still a bit surprised not to see MS61 or 62 on the holder.

[yonico]

When I read NGC's explanation of "+" and "*" grades, it seemed like they were saying MS70/PF70 coins won't ever get a star or a plus, since they are at the top grade uncirculated, and there is no "next" grade they are closer to.

Only makes sense that an AU58 coin, being the top circulated grade with no higher grade existing for a circulated coin, should NOT be able to get a plus or a star.

Giving the coin an AU58 grade already means the coin is as close as it gets to being uncirculated, yet not quite there. I don't understand a grade of AU58+

[coinman1794]

When I read NGC's explanation of "+" and "*" grades, it seemed like they were saying MS70/PF70 coins won't ever get a star or a plus, since they are at the top grade uncirculated, and there is no "next" grade they are closer to.

Only makes sense that an AU58 coin, being the top circulated grade with no higher grade existing for a circulated coin, should NOT be able to get a plus or a star.

Giving the coin an AU58 grade already means the coin is as close as it gets to being uncirculated, yet not quite there. I don't understand a grade of AU58+

 

Not exactly. MS70 is perfection, it is a specific point on the scale and there is not a range of quality within it. AU58 is a grade with many possibilities; it makes perfect sense to call a coin AU58+ if it has just 1 touch of high-point rub, instead of several points of rub, like most other AU58s.

[michael]

in the scheme of things and with regards to pcgs and the everyman set

 

in todays market and collector demands

 

perfection ............................ tomorrow i dont know

 

againwith the pcgs registry EVERYMAN set 58+ is perfection and a HUGELY RABIDLY IN DEMAND COIN

 

WITH THAT 58+ BLANKET AROUND THE COIN

 

AND YES SOME COINS MUCHO MORE THAN OTHERS AND OTHER COINS NOT SO MUCH

 

in and of itself au58+ is just another grade in the continum except in the above context

 

overall weather a coin is poor 1 or ms 68 it is all about eye appeal but we are playing the coin game and for most this matters little; unfortunately

[yonico]

When I read NGC's explanation of "+" and "*" grades, it seemed like they were saying MS70/PF70 coins won't ever get a star or a plus, since they are at the top grade uncirculated, and there is no "next" grade they are closer to.

Only makes sense that an AU58 coin, being the top circulated grade with no higher grade existing for a circulated coin, should NOT be able to get a plus or a star.

Giving the coin an AU58 grade already means the coin is as close as it gets to being uncirculated, yet not quite there. I don't understand a grade of AU58+

 

Not exactly. MS70 is perfection, it is a specific point on the scale and there is not a range of quality within it. AU58 is a grade with many possibilities; it makes perfect sense to call a coin AU58+ if it has just 1 touch of high-point rub, instead of several points of rub, like most other AU58s.

 

The AU grade has FOUR different numerical grades on the scale.. Why is that not enough to describe a coin's grade?

If it has just 1 touch of high point rub, call it 58. If it has several, you have 55, 53, and 50 to choose from.....

[coinman1794]

When I read NGC's explanation of "+" and "*" grades, it seemed like they were saying MS70/PF70 coins won't ever get a star or a plus, since they are at the top grade uncirculated, and there is no "next" grade they are closer to.

Only makes sense that an AU58 coin, being the top circulated grade with no higher grade existing for a circulated coin, should NOT be able to get a plus or a star.

Giving the coin an AU58 grade already means the coin is as close as it gets to being uncirculated, yet not quite there. I don't understand a grade of AU58+

 

Not exactly. MS70 is perfection, it is a specific point on the scale and there is not a range of quality within it. AU58 is a grade with many possibilities; it makes perfect sense to call a coin AU58+ if it has just 1 touch of high-point rub, instead of several points of rub, like most other AU58s.

 

The AU grade has FOUR different numerical grades on the scale.. Why is that not enough to describe a coin's grade?

If it has just 1 touch of high point rub, call it 58. If it has several, you have 55, 53, and 50 to choose from.....

 

Because..."it makes perfect sense to call a coin AU58+ if it has just 1 touch of high-point rub, instead of several points of rub, like most other AU58s."

 

The grading scale has placed four rungs on the latter, but there are gaps between the rungs, and some AU58s are simply nicer than others. The scale is man's imperfect attempt at assigning order to the chaos of the wear process, which is a continuum and not a 4-tier process.

 

There are slider coins that could go either way. Personally, I think the AU58+ is a great alternative to calling an AU coin MS62, which has been the disturbing trend of recent years.