Your honest opinions sought on this coin

[MarkFeld]

So you send it back to PCGS under their grading guarantee with the notice that the coin is harshly cleaned and hairlined and should not have been graded problem free.

 

 

"Net grading" to "XF" seems to reduce its price to a VF or even less

In that case the coin has not been net graded low enough. it isn't a Net XF it is a Net VF.

 

That's a thought. Conder101

I might try that someday, but I haven't decided yet.

Now it's mine and I have plenty of time to decide what to do with this coin

 

Based on the images, I don't think there is any way that PCGS would say the coin is harshly enough cleaned for them to honor their guarantee. I think it would be a waste of money to send it to them.

[toyonakataro]

Might be a waste of time/money, but I'm interested in trying that option if I have a chance.

Until then, I would like to show the coin to local dealers and collectors. I'm very curious as to know how they(Japanese) think of this coin.

[TonerGuy]

Seems like a harsh cleaning for a straight grade of AU55.

[toyonakataro]

Seems like a harsh cleaning for a straight grade of AU55.

 

That's my opinion, but I worship Markfeld and he says it's not harsh.

Well, the seller will ship back the coin to me this week and I might upload new pics so that he migiht change his opinion.

 

[coinman_23885]

Based on the images, I don't think there is any way that PCGS would say the coin is harshly enough cleaned for them to honor their guarantee. I think it would be a waste of money to send it to them.

 

You're probably right, but I don't remember the PCGS published grading standards or guarantee making reference to market acceptable cleaning. I thought they supposedly would not grade problem coins as problem free, or am I mistaken? Anyway, given that PCGS charges a ridiculous fee to review a coin sent in under the guarantee, it does seem discouraging. It would only add insult to injury if he bought a problem coin in a problem free holder, and then was subsequently charged a $25 fee only to be told to go away.

[coinman_23885]

It looks like a lightly cleaned AU coin. I don't like the hairlines, but they don't appear to be bad enough to merit a details grade.

 

Where is the threshold for a details graded piece?

 

That's a fair question and one that I feel is impossible to answer with specifics.

 

I have posted numerous times that often, the determination whether to assign a straight vs. details grade is just as difficult and open to subjectivity and inconsistency as the decision regarding what numerical grade to assign.

 

One general rule of thumb I used when I was at NGC was:

 

If the cleaning (or other type of problem) was bad enough to merit a straight grade that was so low, it appeared silly, it was better to assign a details grade instead. I used the term "details grade" so that my post addressed current grading practices. However, when I was a grader, I don't think we were yet using details grades, but instead, were assigning "no-grades" to problem coins.

 

Thank you for responding. So would you say within a 2 interval net grade would be MA?

 

By that, do you for example, mean awarding an otherwise XF coin (which has been cleaned) a grade of Fine, instead? If so, I would prefer to details-grade such a coin, unless I thought VF was acceptable. That's because I think a grade of Fine would probably look silly.

 

However, as another example, I might be OK grading an otherwise gemmy unc. or Proof coin (which has been lightly cleaned) MS62 or PR62 instead of MS65 or PR65. Bottom line, I would feel a need to make decisions on a case by case basis.

 

By interval, I meant two grading levels down. So MS64 to MS62, AU50 to XF40, etc. And it appears that you answered the question in the next paragraph. I appreciate your response.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

Based on the images, I don't think there is any way that PCGS would say the coin is harshly enough cleaned for them to honor their guarantee. I think it would be a waste of money to send it to them.

 

You're probably right, but I don't remember the PCGS published grading standards or guarantee making reference to market acceptable cleaning. I thought they supposedly would not grade problem coins as problem free, or am I mistaken? Anyway, given that PCGS charges a ridiculous fee to review a coin sent in under the guarantee, it does seem discouraging. It would only add insult to injury if he bought a problem coin in a problem free holder, and then was subsequently charged a $25 fee only to be told to go away.

 

I am unaware of any published standards which articulate what is and is not acceptable cleaning.

 

The cleaning on the coin in question will be unacceptable to many people - and I don't like it either. However, I have seen more than enough other coins in problem-free PCGS and NGC holders which appeared to exhibit cleaning that was just as severe.

 

I don't think that the grading companies will pay out on their guarantees unless the coin is question is an extreme case. In other words, if a good % of knowledgeable numismatists could live with the assigned grade, I wouldn't expect it to be changed, upon a resubmission review.