Beauty vs technical grade? Which means more to YOU?

[Lucky One]

Just a quick question to pose to all of you out there in numisland: what good is a collection of coins that have high technical grades but look like crapp? As an example, I added a MS61 Barber half to my type set even though the set is made up of primarily gem quality coins. Why? Because, even though the technical grade is low, the luster, strike and eye appeal are off the charts, or at least for a coin graded so low. I personally don't understand the need to have technical points and an unattractive collection. I also don't understand the debate about how many points a coin is worth in any particular series. Who cares? The points are just meaningless points, the coins are the focus. When you show them, the viewers don't say 'wow, look how many points that coin is worth!' do they? My bet is their first reaction to an amazing looking coin is 'wow what an namazing looking *coin*!'. On the other hand, if the coin is toned dark and ugly and they see the MS68 on the slab, they're still going to say 'wow, what an ugly *coin*!'. Sorry if I ruffled any ideological feathers out there, just musing on the more peculiar points of the hobby. thanks for reading, would love to hear other points of view!

 

[asdfgh]

There are several things at work here.

Never buy a bad coin no matter what the grade.

Buy the best coin you can afford at the highest grade.

Obviously there were more that one coin between ms68 and ms61.

Grade does matter when trying to resell at a later date.

If you like a particular coin at a lower grade, its your collection buy it.

however don't overpay if you expect to retain it value. just because you

like it and overpay to get it, don't expect that other people will in the future.

The toned coin thing is one of those areas. People are buying toned coins in

au58,ms60,ms61 and paying very large premiums over a non toned coin.

In the future the market might turn on toned coins especially during a recession.

It might take 10 years to recover in a down turn.

In closing if you like it that's all that matters.

[Lucky One]

So which means more to you? You weren't clear and kept going back to grade. I personally don't believe the highest grade you can afford makes a difference, and that a MS62 with outstanding eye appeal is worth more and a much easier sell against a rather average MS63 or MS64...

[Walkerfan]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

[World Colonial]

I prefer lower grade visually appealing coins over higher grade mediocre ones. While tastes have changed, a mediocre looking coin is more likely to be viewed that way later when you go to sell it.

 

I also don't subscribe to buying the "best" coin you can afford, whether measured by the grade or otherwise. This approach is certainly in fashion on this forum, the PCGS forum and certain dealers (who will remain nameless) but it's a poor one unless the premium is "reasonable".

 

There is one particular dealer who sells one of my series more than any other. They are well known and their coins are certainly superior. Problem is, their ask prices are frequently so high you are likely paying for years or up to a decade of potential appreciation. I don't believe this trade off is worth it unless you are going to treat it as a (quasi) consumption expense.

 

Most of the coins this dealer offers, I did not see at public auction. But to provide one example, Heritage sold the coin for $1997 in January 2015 and then it shows up on their site offered at $3995 a few months ago and has since been sold. I was one of the under bidders and recall bidding maybe $1500. The price level for the series has moved up since but nowhere near that much.

[dragon]

<<< Who cares? The points are just meaningless points, the coins are the focus. >>>

 

 

Yes, exactly. The visual appeal of a coin is all that really matters in the end IMO, not arbitrary 3rd party opinions. Modern corporate versions of coin 'grading' were imposed upon the hobby to further deepen the pockets of a group of already wealthy coin dealers for the benefit of sight unseen generic coin trading amongst dealers and to push rare coin investing to Wall St. via coin mutual funds, and has devolved over the years to now grading and encapsulating colorized coins, coins straight from the mint in sealed boxes, bullion, and various other items to further the corporate bottom line.

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

<<< Who cares? The points are just meaningless points, the coins are the focus. >>>

 

 

Yes, exactly. The visual appeal of a coin is all that really matters in the end IMO, not arbitrary 3rd party opinions. Modern corporate versions of coin 'grading' were imposed upon the hobby to further deepen the pockets of a group of already wealthy coin dealers for the benefit of sight unseen generic coin trading amongst dealers and to push rare coin investing to Wall St. via coin mutual funds, and has devolved over the years to now grading and encapsulating colorized coins, coins straight from the mint in sealed boxes, bullion, and various other items to further the corporate bottom line.

 

 

 

Visual appeal can be just as arbitrary.

[Afterword]

I look for coins I find attractive - in grades I find attractive - for prices I find attractive. No one requirement is more important than the others. All three requirements must be satisfied.

 

The first requirement is pure aesthetics (eye appeal). The second is mostly technical (originality/condition/authenticity). The third is financial (money).

 

Which of the three is more about the coin? Something that exists only in your mind and that others may or may not see, original to the mint characteristics and genuineness or how thick is my wallet?

 

[Matt_dac]

I look for coins I find attractive - in grades I find attractive - for prices I find attractive. No one requirement is more important than the others. All three requirements must be satisfied.

 

Yup....for me too.

[TwoKopeiki]

I prefer lower grade visually appealing coins over higher grade mediocre ones. While tastes have changed, a mediocre looking coin is more likely to be viewed that way later when you go to sell it.

 

 

I also don't subscribe to buying the "best" coin you can afford, whether measured by the grade or otherwise. This approach is certainly in fashion on this forum, the PCGS forum and certain dealers (who will remain nameless) but it's a poor one unless the premium is "reasonable".

 

 

I'm pretty sure I know the dealer you're referring to and I've bought a few coins from them over the years (sold to them, as well). While I agree that their premiums are often outrageous and every coin I bought I "felt the sting" on, their coins are often of superior quality. And in my series, superior quality is often very difficult to find. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from them again, but my numismatic budget is a fraction of what their other clients seem to spend.

[johnny9434]

ill go with what walkerfan said.

[Lucky One]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

 

well I think there is a difference of terms here then, because the technical grade is a number assigned based on all factors, but the the eye appeal is separate from the grade. In other words, a MS60 could have absolutely sock-blowing luster, color and eye appeal and still, technically, be just a basal state unc. I would much rather have a mind-blowing beauty of a MS60 than a dull and lifeless MS65, wouldn't you? Technical grade has nothing to do whatever with a 'worthwhile' coin imho, and many times in my life I have bought lower graded coins for more than the cost of the higher graded counterpart simply because it was too beautiful to pass up and that is what I like in my sets...

[Lucky One]

I prefer lower grade visually appealing coins over higher grade mediocre ones. While tastes have changed, a mediocre looking coin is more likely to be viewed that way later when you go to sell it...

 

absolutely, that is the point of this exercize. When I view a coin for the first time and I think it is ugly, that is the end of my thought process because to take it further would mean to have to admit to myself that it is a dead-end coin, or in other words, when the time comes to sell it, it will definitely be a loser. When I view a just average coin, I look at it's rarity- if it isn't rare, as in can't be readily found elsewhere and not likely to find a nicer one anytime soon, and if it isn't rare, I go directly to rejection again. The only few ugly coins I own have tiny numbers known to exist, usually under 50 known, that is when you take whatever comes along to fill the hole in the hope that one day you can replace it. ONLY in those circumstances have I ever been able to get my money back out of an ugly or average coin. But who really cares? I don't understand why someone collecting BU coins would want average, how can you be proud of just average when displaying your collection, right?

 

 

[Lucky One]

<<< Who cares? The points are just meaningless points, the coins are the focus. >>>

 

 

Yes, exactly. The visual appeal of a coin is all that really matters in the end IMO, not arbitrary 3rd party opinions. Modern corporate versions of coin 'grading' were imposed upon the hobby to further deepen the pockets of a group of already wealthy coin dealers for the benefit of sight unseen generic coin trading amongst dealers and to push rare coin investing to Wall St. via coin mutual funds, and has devolved over the years to now grading and encapsulating colorized coins, coins straight from the mint in sealed boxes, bullion, and various other items to further the corporate bottom line.

 

 

 

 

exactly back at you for the point about 3rd party opinions. Who cares about them too? Authentication is important, and if you want to sell thousands of common coins as a commodity, slabs are a necessity, but if you want to collect *rare* coins, you need to educate yourself because an uneducated buyer of slabs can get burnt just as badly as if he bought raw IF he doesn't know what he is looking at in the slab. They are always the first to complain when a delaer informs them the coin is mis-graded when it is really his/her own fault for not making sure it was graded properly.

 

Sounds dumb maybe, but you have to get to dumb before you see how dumb it is to buy them with no knowledge of the coins themselves- SLABS ARE NOT AN INSURANCE POLICY, and obviously neither is CAC- I have seen some unattractive or improperly graded coins CAC'd too.

 

Yes sir, the only thing I think slabbing is needed for is authentication- the grade opinions on slabs serve only slab sellers and the TPG's, and I'll add, without the registry at PCGS and NGC, half of their business would be gone overnight...

 

[Walkerfan]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

 

well I think there is a difference of terms here then, because the technical grade is a number assigned based on all factors, but the the eye appeal is separate from the grade. In other words, a MS60 could have absolutely sock-blowing luster, color and eye appeal and still, technically, be just a basal state unc. I would much rather have a mind-blowing beauty of a MS60 than a dull and lifeless MS65, wouldn't you? Technical grade has nothing to do whatever with a 'worthwhile' coin imho, and many times in my life I have bought lower graded coins for more than the cost of the higher graded counterpart simply because it was too beautiful to pass up and that is what I like in my sets...

 

Not true....this is where subjectivity and human error come into play. I have seen low 'technically' graded coins that should have been higher and technically 'lacking' coins that leave you wondering how they got into that numerically superior plastic.

 

Also, if you mean a coin that has blazing luster and knock-out color but is all marked up and struck very badly (softly), then you can have it, as I am not interested.

[brg5658]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

 

well I think there is a difference of terms here then, because the technical grade is a number assigned based on all factors, but the the eye appeal is separate from the grade. In other words, a MS60 could have absolutely sock-blowing luster, color and eye appeal and still, technically, be just a basal state unc. I would much rather have a mind-blowing beauty of a MS60 than a dull and lifeless MS65, wouldn't you? Technical grade has nothing to do whatever with a 'worthwhile' coin imho, and many times in my life I have bought lower graded coins for more than the cost of the higher graded counterpart simply because it was too beautiful to pass up and that is what I like in my sets...

 

I think you've just described a unicorn. I don't recall having EVER seen a "mind-blowing beauty of a MS60" coin graded by either of the two main TPGs. The grade MS60 is often reserved or applied to truly uncirculated coins that are fugly or are borderline problem coins. I can't think of a single MS60 graded coin that I have seen that I would want to own -- but, there may be a couple I just don't know of. By and large, when I see a coin graded MS60, it is a BIG red-flag.

 

Now, by contrast, I have seen a LOT of coins graded AU58 that I would much rather have in my collection than an MS62 or MS63 pedestrian ho-hum example of the same coin.

[Matt_dac]

 

SLABS ARE NOT AN INSURANCE POLICY, and obviously neither is CAC- I have seen some unattractive or improperly graded coins CAC'd too.

 

I disagree. Slabs are absolutely insurance for coin buyers and the market supports this as a premium for them. Obviously nothing is infallible. I've seen MS64+ gold coins I consider junk/melt and AU58's that were stunning, but save a few experts, I will trust the pros who look at thousands upon thousands of coins over any dealers and casual collectors.

[dragon]

<<< Slabs are absolutely insurance for coin buyers and the market supports this as a premium for them. >>>

 

 

IMO perhaps the only real aspect of rare coins that slabs "insure" is that they insure a minimum sight unseen value for the myriad (and I mean truckloads) of overgraded and otherwise undesirable coins that without the "insurance" of a slab would be unsaleable at a level even close to the slabbed price..... and the already massive sea of overgraded slabbed riffraff has been growing annually ever since the late 80's/early 90's when the crackout game first began in significant numbers.

[Raisethis2]

Beauty trumps technical grade with me. A few hairlines never killed anybody.

 

 

[numisport]

Rarely do you get more coin than you pay for. A coin is at auction for a reason. Dealers who specialize offer coins at a premium because they are usually at the top of their grade and may see these coins back someday. Let the truth be known.

[Afterword]

Collectors buy the coins they can afford or are willing to spend to acquire. A collector’s idea of what constitutes a beautiful coin is heavily influenced by this factor.

 

The standard by which they measure beauty is dictated by the wallet. Coins with wear or hairlines can be attractive, but would they not be that much more attractive without these flaws?

 

[RWB]

Coin collectors should be able to buy a wallet with a 10x magnifier built in, and a money clip that won't let go until you've answered 20 questions and waited 1 hour.

[Lucky One]

wow, just browsing by and noticed a lot of great opinions! I'll be sure to reply when I have time to sit down and think. Keep the opinions coming, I learn something from all of you

 

[KMAG100]

I like both....I tend to lean towards technical excellence in moderns and eye appeal in the classics....Really don't care for blast white silver coins that are 80+ years old anymore then some big toner that is 15 or less years old....both look odd to me.....

[Lucky One]

Collectors buy the coins they can afford or are willing to spend to acquire. A collector’s idea of what constitutes a beautiful coin is heavily influenced by this factor.

 

The standard by which they measure beauty is dictated by the wallet. Coins with wear or hairlines can be attractive, but would they not be that much more attractive without these flaws?

 

wow, I never thought about it this way before because I always believed that buying the nicest looking coins makes me feel the best about this hobby, but you hit on something that should have been obvious to me- human nature and desire dictate even in coin collecting. A lot of great perspectives here and this is one of the most profound imho, thanks for sharing.

[Lucky One]

Coin collectors should be able to buy a wallet with a 10x magnifier built in, and a money clip that won't let go until you've answered 20 questions and waited 1 hour.

 

no comment necessary, just wanted to see it posted again because I agree. I usually ask myself if I'll respect myself in the morning if I buy this coin today

[Lucky One]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

 

so you're saying both are important in the coins you add to your sets? I guess I can say the same, but that wasn't the scope of the question posed: "what good is a collection of coins that have high technical grades but look like crapp?"

 

The technical grade has nothing whatever to do with the condition, eye appeal or value.

 

Imagine a MS67 Morgan dollar with splotchy toning in shades of brown with dullish luster. The MS67 is a technical grade but the coin looks like crapp. I wouldn't buy that coin at ANY price because I'd not only be ashamed to show it, I'd also be ashamed to re-sell it. To each his own, just my view.

 

On the other hand, I have seen some very nice coins that would grade MS60 technically but had outstanding eye appeal. I would put one of these coins in my type set before I'd ever consider the lifeless Morgan suggested. In fact, I don't even care if the coin is misgraded in the slab, it is still the coin that I am adding to my set and I usually base purchaes on my own opinion no matter what the opinion on the slab.

[Lucky One]

I would buy a beautiful, technically solid 63 or 64 over an average or poorer quality 65 or 66 any day of the week.

 

I have stated this belief many times, in the past, and this is the approach that I took, when I built my set.

 

well I think there is a difference of terms here then, because the technical grade is a number assigned based on all factors, but the the eye appeal is separate from the grade. In other words, a MS60 could have absolutely sock-blowing luster, color and eye appeal and still, technically, be just a basal state unc. I would much rather have a mind-blowing beauty of a MS60 than a dull and lifeless MS65, wouldn't you? Technical grade has nothing to do whatever with a 'worthwhile' coin imho, and many times in my life I have bought lower graded coins for more than the cost of the higher graded counterpart simply because it was too beautiful to pass up and that is what I like in my sets...

 

I think you've just described a unicorn. I don't recall having EVER seen a "mind-blowing beauty of a MS60" coin graded by either of the two main TPGs. The grade MS60 is often reserved or applied to truly uncirculated coins that are fugly or are borderline problem coins. I can't think of a single MS60 graded coin that I have seen that I would want to own -- but, there may be a couple I just don't know of. By and large, when I see a coin graded MS60, it is a BIG red-flag.

 

Now, by contrast, I have seen a LOT of coins graded AU58 that I would much rather have in my collection than an MS62 or MS63 pedestrian ho-hum example of the same coin.

 

I have looked at millions of coins in my life, and my interest has always been full strikes and outstanding luster so most of those have been BU. If you ever sorted through bags of BU silver dollars, or any BU silver coins for that matter, you;'d understand what I mean- they aren't unicorns, they do exist and I have owned many technically graded MS60's that had absolutely outstanding eye appeal. Maybe the probelm today is that they don't come back to market often, or they end up over-graded today due to the 'market grading' the big boys have resorted to in the last few years.

 

As for the comment about the AU58 coins- definitely agree, there are a lot of slider gem AU's with great eye appeal that are worth more than their MS60, 61 or 62 counterparts. As for red flags- I am proficient at detecting flaws as well as alterations so I don't sweat the grade, but I was actually talking about coins in general, whether raw or not. An example of a technical MS60 picked from an original bag would have some abrasions in the focal areas that are well hidden by the outstanding rainbow toning and mint luster but otherwise perfectly original and beautiful...

[JLarronde]

Coin collectors should be able to buy a wallet with a 10x magnifier built in, and a money clip that won't let go until you've answered 20 questions and waited 1 hour.

Shut up and take my money!

(now you know WHY I need that special collector's wallet hehehe.)