Just an experiment 0

[jimbo27]

A couple months ago I bought an 1889 o Morgan silver dollar AU58. It looked really nice in the photos but when I received it, it looked even better. I also noticed it was a top 100 VAM. I decided to crack it out and resubmit it with the variety and to see if it would get higher grade. Here is the coin as I bought it

[jimbo27]

The grading results were posted today, I was very happy, more than doubled the value of the coin

[RWB]

The coin, judging only from abrasion visible in the photos, was correctly graded the first time. Only the label changed (for grade) and now someone in the future will be deceived by the TPGs' inconsistency. My comment is in no way directed toward the poster - he did nothing untoward. Just my minority opinion on "grading."

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/13/2022 at 9:11 PM, RWB said:

The coin, judging only from abrasion visible in the photos, was correctly graded the first time. Only the label changed (for grade) and now someone in the future will be deceived by the TPGs' inconsistency. My comment is in no way directed toward the poster - he did nothing untoward. Just my minority opinion on "grading."

It takes extraordinary courage to speak out as you have.  Don't get me wrong, I cannot say what was wrong though it was a clear violation of one of my precepts that you are not to engage in de-capsulation, regardless of  motive, as it runs afoul of one of my unwritten laws concerning willfully committing a sacrilege.  But who's to say?  This is what happens when graders are unwilling to straddle the 58/60 demilitarized zone and, palms open, suggest yea (an elevation) or nay (a de-escalation) whether deserved or not.

My take is the member is pleased as he took a risk, placed his coin on the line, and prevailed.  Who can argue with success?

As most members know by now, an opinion written by a Federal judge is engraved in granite and speaks for itself.  There are no invitations to discuss what went into its decision-making on any talk shows.  Reconsideration are less formal--can go either way--as long as a fee is paid.  I do not know if jimbo27 conferred first with his 26 other brothers and sisters, but what the heck?  It's almost Christmas and everybody loves a happy ending!  Nice going, jimbo27!

[Sandon]

   I've never approved of the numerical grading system because the use of numbers implies that the process involved is an objective or scientific one, which coin grading can't be. I also disapprove of the large number of grades, which increase the subjectivity of grading.  The more grades there are, the more opportunities there are for reasonable minds to disagree with them!  In this case professional graders at a single grading service--maybe the same graders--viewed a coin twice within the same year based on the labels and determined it to be Choice About Uncirculated on the first occasion and a scruffy Uncirculated piece on the other.  I always use my own experience and judgment in evaluating a coin and have no qualms about disagreeing with the grade given on that little paper tag.  

  I recall that in the late 1980s or early 1990s, the staff of Coin World sent groups of coins to each of ANACS, NGC and PCGS, recorded the grades given, then cracked the coins out and resubmitted them, sometimes to a different service and sometimes to a service that they had been graded by before.  Some coins varied in grade by as much as three or four grading numbers even at the same service, and several were given numerical grades on some occasions and returned ungraded as "problem coins" on others. (NGC and PCGS didn't give "details" grades at that time.)   I hoped that this revelation would explode the myth of third-party grading, but it has continued and expanded to this day.  Most collectors just want someone else to do the work for them.  

   I do like the "oval O" varieties found on a small minority of 1888-O and 1889-O Morgan dollars, which most likely resulted from the New Orleans mint's use of leftover dies from 1884, the last year the oval mint mark had regularly been used. It's also possible that the old oval punch was used on a few dies prepared in 1888-89. As I recall, they're usually well-worn and a great find in AU or Uncirculated.

[RWB]

On 12/13/2022 at 11:30 PM, Sandon said:

Choice About Uncirculated

There's also the commercial meaning of "Choice About Uncirculated." The seller/grader definition goes something like, "It's all About my making money, so my Choice is to grade the coin Uncirculated."

Every TPG does this same thing and the example Sandon mentioned of Coin World's market test remains valid, but possibly with increased emphasis. Some of the basic problem can be attributed to failure to experiment with and/or adopt new technology. But most of it sits squarely on abrogation of standards and inconsistency.

I'm pleased that the jimbo got a significant "upgrade" on the label. He will benefit from that typographical boost.

[numisport]

Because this is a better date it may have been given a market grade bump which I am strongly against. Look real close to see if there is any smoothing of the high spots that would make it a slider. Now you may be the only one that knows.

[RWB]

On 12/14/2022 at 11:32 AM, numisport said:

given a market grade

This is just another name for a lie.

[VKurtB]

On 12/14/2022 at 3:07 PM, RWB said:

This is just another name for a lie.

Here’s what the grade 61 means: taking all aspects into consideration, the coin is worth “MS 61 money”, nothing more and nothing less. It’s no conspiracy, just a valuation opinion. 
 

Note: VERY LITTLE time passed between the 58 and the 61 grading. Same label version.

Like irony? If either NGC panel had encountered this coin in NGC’s very own grading contest, they would have scored a big fat goose egg on this coin, based on the grade of the other. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

I came across a grade earlier today, in an NGC advertisement, which has to rank right up there with all the greats.

A coin, a number of them actually, carrying the same unnumbered descriptive label pertaining to the recovery of coins from the wreck of the S.S. REPUBLIC.

The coins are all labeled:  "UNC - Shipwreck Effect."

It is assumed if you were to inquire further you would expose yourself for the buffoon you clearly are and unworthy of being in the company of greatness when you see it.  Great marketing ploy!

[rrantique]

Humm, maybe i should try for the "unc-parking lot effect"

[numisport]

On 12/14/2022 at 11:43 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

I came across a grade earlier today, in an NGC advertisement, which has to rank right up there with all the greats.

A coin, a number of them actually, carrying the same unnumbered descriptive label pertaining to the recovery of coins from the wreck of the S.S. REPUBLIC.

The coins are all labeled:  "UNC - Shipwreck Effect."

It is assumed if you were to inquire further you would expose yourself for the buffoon you clearly are and unworthy of being in the company of greatness when you see it.  Great marketing ploy!

So an Unc coin can be 'circulated' to the sea floor for a while, then recovered and rebranded Unc. Okay got it. 

[numisport]

On 12/13/2022 at 9:11 PM, RWB said:

The coin, judging only from abrasion visible in the photos, was correctly graded the first time. Only the label changed (for grade) and now someone in the future will be deceived by the TPGs' inconsistency. My comment is in no way directed toward the poster - he did nothing untoward. Just my minority opinion on "grading."

No Sir you are not in the minority