Star grades... Rare ? Common ? Over awarded ? Not given enough ?

[Raisethis2]

I just got this one back from NGC along with a twin with a touch less color. This one was MS 65 Star FT. I'm keeping it for a while.

 

[/img] [/img]

[jpcienkus]

I don't collect Roosie's, but that is a beauty.

[coinman1794]

Are * grades too common ? Are they not granted enough ? Are they just a silly gimmick ? What are your thoughts on NGC's * grades ?

 

I can really only talk about Peace * grades since I have been tracking them for the past several years. Out of more than 680,000 Peace $ graded only 203 have been given a *

 

In the past 2-3 years only 10 have been given a * and none have been handed out in the past 8 months.

 

I have no idea if a * rate of .0003 is normal for most series but it seems a bit low to me.

 

Do you pay more for * ? Does it even matter to you ? Does a * increase value ?

 

My curious mind wants to know....

 

In the Peace dollar series, there are comparatively few nice toners than many other series, and especially compared to Morgans. Likewise, there are extremely few Peace dollars that qualify for the Star due to semi-PL qualities. Therefore, an analysis of the Star based only on Peace dollar numbers is not a good representation of the Star in general.

 

That said, I do think the Star is a useful designation, but probably not used as consistently as I would like. There are a lot of no-star coins that seem to be as nicer or nicer than the coins given Stars.

[michael]

I might be interested in a coin if I find it particularly attractive, but NOT because it has a star on the label.

 

MIGHT A STAR on the label help the saleability/profitability/demand

 

it sure can't hurt and an added bonus the star designation to ngc registry players is worth more points in the ngc registry and is a great selling point when looking at populations and since EGO is a huge part of the coin game it plays to many buyers egos which in and of itself translates into $$

 

 

but make no mistake about it

 

if i have for example a high end fantastically toned morgan dollar ms 65

it has more demand and value in a new pcgs holder ms65

than a new ngc 65 * star holder

 

and this is not a negative to ngc it is just the reality/perception of the current marketplace

 

tomorrow, next month,next year things could be different

 

 

 

 

[TonerGuy]

Well its nice to see others that like and appreciate the * designation... I was starting to think I was the only one.. .

 

I too would like to see it awarded more often then it is and also more consistently. I have made numerous * over the years in regards to my submissions but often I am left scratching my head when one coin gets a * and another that I think is a lock doesnt.

 

I wish NGC would provide some type of sit down with a grader at one of the shows to go over what they look for when it comes to * - obviously its eye appeal but what exactly does that mean...

[MarkFeld]

Well its nice to see others that like and appreciate the * designation... I was starting to think I was the only one.. .

 

I too would like to see it awarded more often then it is and also more consistently. I have made numerous * over the years in regards to my submissions but often I am left scratching my head when one coin gets a * and another that I think is a lock doesnt.

 

I wish NGC would provide some type of sit down with a grader at one of the shows to go over what they look for when it comes to * - obviously its eye appeal but what exactly does that mean...

 

Are you really thinking or hoping that someone can define "eye appeal' or "exceptional eye appeal" in an objective fashion which could be applied in a practical way? Surely you know better.

[TonerGuy]

I think it can be. Beauty can be scientifically defined. In humans it is often done with measurements. Symmetry is one defining element of beauty. Hip to breast ratio on women is another standard in the beauty realm. They've even done studies with new born infants that illustrate that babies spend more time looking at faces of attractive people more than the faces of unattractive people. You can always say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but that has more to do with personal taste than beauty.

 

I am not attracted to Cindy Crawford but I wouldnt say she isnt beautiful.

 

So can it be applied to coins. Why not ? I think that there are coins that are almost universally regarded as having superior eye appeal. I dont think that is an issue.

 

I think the border line coins are where the question gets hazy.

 

But the problem with NGC's * is that coins that have universal eye appeal do not always get the * and there are some coins that are not that appealing that do.

[AHFreak]

I disagree tonerguy. It's not universal, it's subjective. I think eye appeal, just like beauty is absolutely based solely on the visual interpretation of the one who's eyes are looking at said object. What one thinks is attractive may be very very unattractive to the next. Subjective. Opinion based, whether we are talking coins or super models. The list is endless.

[brg5658]

But the problem with NGC's * is that coins that have universal eye appeal do not always get the * and there are some coins that are not that appealing that do.

 

There is no such thing as "universal eye appeal". There are lots of collectors who don't care for any form of colorful toning on their coins.

 

My experiences with the star designation have been that I usually see why they assigned it, but I don't always agree with that decision. Most of the time, yes. Always, no.

 

What I do like about NGC's star designation is that the "eye appeal" factor theoretically isn't just used to bump the technical grade 1-2 (or more) points on said coins. I know that eye appeal is a factor in assigning technical/numeric grades at both NGC and PCGS, but the most egregiously numerically overgraded coins I have seen are almost always in PCGS plastic. It's not uncommon at all for a coin to get 2 full points technical grade bump for "purdy" colors at PCGS.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[AHFreak]

Speaking of coins with purdy color getting bumped 2 points ATS, I have personally witnessed this 10 times or more with coins that I personally found with toning, sold raw on ebay, and then come across same exact coin in PCGS holder at a later date as many as 3 to 4 full points higher than technical grade really is. Now granted, im talking mainly about 1964 business strike Kennedeys, but still. I actually came across one on Ebay just the other day, it was a coin I found in a junk silver box and paid melt for. We are talking about a MS63 AT THE VERY BEST. .. well I sold the coin raw, and now that very same coin is residing in a PCGS holder with a grade of MS66+... a freakin 66plus! I literally couldn't believe that when I saw it, but like I said, I've seen it countless times. It is mindboggling.

 

Makes no sense to me.

 

[Coinbuf]

I think it can be. Beauty can be scientifically defined. In humans it is often done with measurements. Symmetry is one defining element of beauty. Hip to breast ratio on women is another standard in the beauty realm. They've even done studies with new born infants that illustrate that babies spend more time looking at faces of attractive people more than the faces of unattractive people. You can always say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but that has more to do with personal taste than beauty.

 

I am not attracted to Cindy Crawford but I wouldnt say she isnt beautiful.

 

So can it be applied to coins. Why not ? I think that there are coins that are almost universally regarded as having superior eye appeal. I dont think that is an issue.

 

I think the border line coins are where the question gets hazy.

 

But the problem with NGC's * is that coins that have universal eye appeal do not always get the * and there are some coins that are not that appealing that do.

 

Your stretching way past the breaking point with this, I see people post coins all the time that many here or ATS love that are quite ugly to me. Your theory might work when used in a small group of people that like toning, but it falls apart as the audience sample size grows. I do not beleive that there is any such thing as eye appeal that can be universally aggreed on, eye appeal is a personal judgement.

[TonerGuy]

I dont agree. But I dont expect anyone to actually agree with me. But I can post coin after coin that the vast majority of the members on this board would oooohhh and aaaaahhh about. And Im just not talking toning. Coins that visually have a universal appeal.

 

Grading is subjective and is a moving target (market grading) and not everyone is going to agree on the grade of a particular coin but yet we accept it. Everyone's eyes are different when it comes to grading as well.

 

NGC is already using the * in the manner I described...

 

"NGC assigns a to coins with exceptional eye appeal for their assigned grade.

 

Eye appeal is the most subjective attribute of a coin, but there are norms and standards shared by numismatists."

 

Obviously the norms and standards they refer to must be qualitative. I would like the * designation to be more quantitative.

 

As for the PCGS color bump, yes I hate it as well. Its what really made me appreciate the NGC * designation.

[Six Mile Rick]

I kept a couple star graded NGC's for my sets as well. Not for the toned stars but for the proof stars and "W" & PL business strike stars. I have sent in groups of toned dimes and quarters and missed a few stars that I thought were worthy. Shortly after I learned that the thick dark toning at the rim on a nice toned piece will lose the star designation. Of course monster dimes with or without the star designation still bring home a good sale.

 

Soon to send in another "toned" group of dimes and FT's.

[Coinbuf]

I dont agree. But I dont expect anyone to actually agree with me. But I can post coin after coin that the vast majority of the members on this board would oooohhh and aaaaahhh about. And Im just not talking toning. Coins that visually have a universal appeal.

 

Grading is subjective and is a moving target (market grading) and not everyone is going to agree on the grade of a particular coin but yet we accept it. Everyone's eyes are different when it comes to grading as well.

 

NGC is already using the * in the manner I described...

 

"NGC assigns a to coins with exceptional eye appeal for their assigned grade.

 

Eye appeal is the most subjective attribute of a coin, but there are norms and standards shared by numismatists."

 

Obviously the norms and standards they refer to must be qualitative. I would like the * designation to be more quantitative.

 

As for the PCGS color bump, yes I hate it as well. Its what really made me appreciate the NGC * designation.

 

Your post disproves your theory, you dont expect everyone to agree with you but you expect everyone to agree on what eye appeal is and looks like.. seriously. I'm left wondering what your definition of universal is, I'm going by what the dictionary definition is as follows:

 

1. : including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception.

 

Getting a majority of people to agree on eye appeal is possible, to get universal agreement (100% agreement of all collectors) will never be possible.

[World Colonial]

Like the "+" designation, I consider * a clever marketing gimmick used by the TPG to separate people from their money. At the same time, if the coins I collected were eligible for it, I would get it on the label before I sold it if I could.

 

I also don't believe * signify anything of significance collecting wise. Its meaningful for those who collect registry points and need a third party opinion to tell them what they should already know, that the coin is attractive to them. I don't need anyone to tell me that and don't participate in the registry.

 

The * designation is also another way for collectors to invent another artificial and arbitrary form of "scarcity" and "rarity" for coins that are almost always common or extremely common. Anyone who collects coins that are actually hard to buy finds enough of a challenge just buying decent looking coins where * eligible coins don't even exist.

 

US collectors today favor "originality" and toning which apparently is a factor in the * designation. Collectors outside the US seem to a lot less. I prefer it as well but it should be evident from the proportion of cleaned coins that among most collectors or at least a significant number, its a recent preference. I don't see it changing for the foreseeable future but it could.

[brg5658]

Like the "+" designation, I consider * a clever marketing gimmick used by the TPG to separate people from their money. At the same time, if the coins I collected were eligible for it, I would get it on the label before I sold it if I could.

 

NGC has been designating all World coins they deem deserving with the star designation since February of 2014. I'm pretty sure that includes the coins you collect.

 

 

[MJ]

I like the star. Not a big fan of the +

 

For the board- what Is the lowest grade * coin out there or that you have seen?

 

mark

[Walkerfan]

I like the star. Not a big fan of the +

 

For the board- what Is the lowest grade * coin out there or that you have seen?

 

mark

 

I too like the star but don't put much stock in the plus, either.

 

MS 63 is lowest star I've seen.

[RWB]

The star has one more point than the plus (+) so it must be worth more...and a six-point star should be worth more than a five-pointed star. Also, a + is a kind of star, but an * is not a star.

 

To me, the coin is itself. No need for other symbols, diacritical marks or typographical symbols.

[brg5658]

I like the star. Not a big fan of the +

 

For the board- what Is the lowest grade * coin out there or that you have seen?

 

mark

 

I believe Jason (physicsfan) has an XF45 star graded Bust Half. I'll wait for his reply.

[physics-fan3.14]

I like the star. Not a big fan of the +

 

For the board- what Is the lowest grade * coin out there or that you have seen?

 

mark

 

I believe Jason (physicsfan) has an XF45 star graded Bust Half. I'll wait for his reply.

 

I actually have 2 EF Bust Halves with stars now, an 1821 EF-40*, and an 1835 EF-45*.

 

The 1821 is an example of a coin that's really nice, but I'm not sure why it got the star and others didn't. I have 7 or 8 nicer CBH's that didn't get the star. Anyways, I've posted it below for your viewing pleasure.

 

As for the lowest graded star: I personally have held a couple of VF* halves, and I've seen pictures of an F* 1795 half. There may be lower examples in other series. NGC will apply the star to all grades, if they earn it, except for 70.

 

[World Colonial]

Like the "+" designation, I consider * a clever marketing gimmick used by the TPG to separate people from their money. At the same time, if the coins I collected were eligible for it, I would get it on the label before I sold it if I could.

 

NGC has been designating all World coins they deem deserving with the star designation since February of 2014. I'm pretty sure that includes the coins you collect.

 

 

I haven't seen any * on world coins but then, I don't look at most of them. I have a high proportion in better grades (choice AU or better) but only a low number that I think might be eligible for the *. I don't see that it would add much to their value and yes, most of the coins I collect don't exist in the quality that would be eligible for it either.

 

I never said it wasn't used on world coins and though it is, doesn't change my opinion that its a marketing gimmick and has little if anything to do with collecting. The primary reason that I see why NGC introduced it was to increase the number of resubmissions and reconsiderations.

[MJ]

Thanks Jason

 

I have a 1805 quarter in 15* . I was curious

 

mark

[Davids5104]

The star has one more point than the plus (+) so it must be worth more...and a six-point star should be worth more than a five-pointed star. Also, a + is a kind of star, but an * is not a star.

 

To me, the coin is itself. No need for other symbols, diacritical marks or typographical symbols.

 

be nice if those "points" translated into a coin that was 25% more expensive then people would not lose their paychecks buying star coins

[Nutmeg Coin]

By comparison I don't think plus grades are conferred below a certain level such as AU58; I think David Hall said they don't do it as it would be like lipstick on a pig.

 

And with currency PMG does not add the EPQ under grade VF25; though PCGS has added their PPQ to G6 notes. and above.