Grading older coins

[melmcbee]

Are coins that are more rare or 100-150 years old just given the high grades or high price just because they still exist? Here is an example of a coin that is just ugly to me ( an extreme novice but wanting to learn). The starting bid is $1200.00. I cant even make out what it is. So as a general question, How do you grade older coins? By rarity?, Does the date not even have to be visualized and if so then how can you claim it is a 1837 versus 1838 ( just an example), If the obverse is completely worn down how do you tell what it is? On a second note, During earlier strikes is there a reason the reverse on some coins seems to be stronger than the obverse?

How would you grade this ugly or highly valuable

 

Thanks for any info.

[kryptonitecomics]

Well the coin pictured maybe be ugly, but it still a rare overdate coin. The overdate refers to a particular variety of the coin, so a normal 1807 may be worth X amount of dollars, but the overdate may be worth several multiple of X.

 

The Value of any coin depends on several main factors.......Date and Mintmark combinations, grade, mintage and of course the whole economic law of Supply and Demand.

 

If you have a coin from a popular series say a Morgan silver dollar with a mintage of 300,000....it might be an expensive coin in uncirculated condition. If you had say a coin from a less popular series like a 3 Cent nickel with the same mintage......it probably wouldn't command the same price.

 

Rarity is a big driver in price, but usually the rarity of a coin is based on the original Mintage. Not 100% of the time as the 1877 Indian Head cent will illustrate, but it usually a pretty safe bet that if you see a low mintage coin from the 19th century.....the number of surviving examples is going to next to none.

 

So yes, the fact that some coins exist makes then rare and valuable in any condition.........if you were to find an AG3 1804 Silver Dollar you could probably still sell it and buy a house

 

The grading of coins is a separate mater as coins should generally be graded the same no mater what age they are. Their are variance though due to changes in minting process so if I were to see a Bust Large Cent with file marks, it could still be a high grade coins as that was a common process for reducing the weight of a planchet. Now if I saw file marks on a Jefferson Nickel...the coin would be worth face value.

 

In most cases the date does have to be visible or the grading companies won't even slab the coin. The exceptions to that rule are 1 year only coin designs.......say in the case of a 1793 Chain cent, the design is unique to that one year and coin so even if the date was missing, but some of the reverse detail was present, the coin could be holdered as a 1793 Chain Cent.

 

As for the strike characteristics of older coins............I don't know that the reverses are more commonly fully struck that the reverses? The way coins were minted, the die and presses etc were a lot different in the 18th Century as were the coin planchets themselves so a lot of variables are at play here.

 

The design on a coin can have a great deal to do with how the coin wears. If a coin has a high relief Obverse, but the Reverse is flatter or the rim is a little higher than that surface then the Obverse will wear out quicker than the reverse.

[Hoot]

Like KC indicated, rarity must be coupled with demand in order for a coin to ba valuable. For example, some darkside material is exceedingly rare, but since there is not nearly the demand as there is for US coins, the proces are not outrageous.

 

As for the cent depicted, one of the reasons for a lack of detail on the obverse is that it's heavily corroded. This is common with old coppers, and in that state, NGC or PCGS will not grade them. The coin is "net" graded on the basis of the detail, and there is "good" detail left in the coin. One of the problems with the auction is that the pictures are of poor quality, even to the point that there's all kinds of debris on the coin's surface. This may be due to a dirty scaner or it could be that the coin is being poorly stored. Either way, it's a lousy presentation.

 

BTW, NCS or ANACS would encapsulate such a piece with a details grade. ANACS would also give it a net grade.

 

Many people who collect old coppers, however, prefer them raw.

 

Hoot

[HaydenTubbs]

It appears that grading is the hot topic today.

[Morgannut]

I would think looking at these corroded old ugly copper pieces day after day must lead to a high rate emotional fatigue or even depression among NGC/PCGS specialist graders. Since your bio Ms Mcbee says you're a computer genius, maybe you can chear these poor souls up by linking a picture of the newly NGC graded 1793 wornout old "Strawberry" Wreath Cent to be auctioned by ANR I think in Baltimore (www.anrcoins.com). Unless its an Ebay website, I'll borrow on the mortgage and start it off at $100,000 sight unseen for this tired old F12 NGC coin.

[Hoot]

...this tired old F12 NGC coin.

 

Perfect grade range! I love old cents in that grade range, and even lower! My 1798 AG03 (PCGS) cent is one of my favorite coins! So is my 1794 G details (NCS)! Scruptious!

 

Hoot

[melmcbee]

Morgannut, I apologize if my quote was misunderstood. I love older coins but as a novice my question was meant to say how do you grade them as opposed to the newer ones that you can see the date, the picture, etc. I didnt mean that the coin was ugly and should have used another term. I wanted to know if rarity versus all the things that are mentioned that makes a coin a collector item. Please keep in mind I am a novice and if I say the wrong thing it is out of stupidity not cruelty.

As far as my bio goes, if it says I am a computer genius then let me change that too! I am no genius, I have enjoyed "cleaning computers" up for years but I am no programmer nor did I think that I ever specified myself as a genius of anything.

[TomB]

Melanie, you should obtain a copy of the ANA Grading Guide for United States Coins to go along with the Red Book and other books you are buying. The grading guide will tell you fairly well what details should be present for a coin to achieve a certain grade, they also include obverse and reverse images. While the guide is usually quite good for circulated coinage, it is not very valuable for mint state or proof coinage.

[DaveG]

melmcbee:

 

In addition to a book on grading (Photograde is also another standard book for grading circulated coins), I would highly recommend (if you're planning on spending more than a few hundred dollars on coins) that you get a copy of "Coin Collector's Survival Manual" by Scott Travers.

 

It's the book I wish I had read first when I got back into coin collecting. It tells you how to go about being a coin collector: how to buy, how to sell, all about the grading services, the numismatic publications, price guides, etc.

[TomB]

It's the book I wish I had read first when I got back into coin collecting.

 

Don't feel badly, Dave, it's not your fault that Gutenberg hadn't invented that dang printing press yet!

[melmcbee]

Don't feel badly, Dave, it's not your fault that Gutenberg hadn't invented that dang printing press yet!

 

 

Thank-you Dave and TomB, I will add those to my book list. And thanks for the laugh, I really needed that.

[Morgannut]

Melanee. Ah, but genius from MY perspective! I just bought my first computer two weeks ago and from my perspective being able to import an Ebay photo has the attributes of genius. No, you"re correct; an adjective applied to apparent divinity would be more appropriate! This @#$%^ contraption is very confusing. My answer was old copper is very, very, very hard to grade and often value is from the way the coin "looks", not just the amount of wear or porosity. The NGC graded famous "strawberry leaf" F-12 1793 (just rediscovered) , best of four known, illustates (if I could transfer image) how different grading early US copper is from grading more recent coins on luster, strike, marks,wear and surface preservation.

[Morgannut]

Melenee--- I forgot to say that your questions seemed very sophisticated not stupid. For example, 20th century copper cents are graded brown, to red/brown (better), to red (best). This usually applys to ( I think?) uncirculated cents because circulated cents by definition are mostly brown. Anyway the joke was the NGC graders called this beautiful very worn (F-12) 1793 cent (that has beautiful old chocolate brown original surfaces) BROWN on the label! Although seemingly obvious, In this case it was the highest compliment they could certify. (Red would mean it was harshly cleaned). Anyway, when it was pictured on the PCGS board, some were in a tif that it had to be brown and didn't get it. So the answer is that 18th century cents can seem backwards from 20th century cents on color. To a newcomer the cents are so backwards that on some Poor 1793 examples the date was determined from the unique reverse because its worn off the front.

[DaveG]

Tom:

 

It's true - I can well remember the members of my first coin club (back before we had Internet boards, you understand) complaining loudly about all the dang moderns completely ruining collecting because the "new" Roman coins were so much uglier than the "beautiful" Greek coins

[TomB]

 

I'm going to try to make it to Parsippany in October, but likely won't have a table. We should try to meet up early in the show.

[melmcbee]

Morgannut, I found a thread that I believe Architect described how to post images.

How to post images

 

I usually prefer to post the url instead, because it is easier or quicker. Good luck.