Incorrect Grade? 1 1

[EagleRJO]

I am always evaluating the grade of coins, even if it's in a TPG coin coffin.  The attached 1893 (P) Morgan was graded XF40 by one of the big boys, but it looks over-graded.  There seems to be too much wear of the hair and cotton leaves on the obverse and the eagle's feathers (right facing wing, neck and legs) as well as the wreath on the reverse for that grade.

And the coin doesn't have an exceptional appearance either, with a duller gray color, to offset any of that.  It looks like VF+ to me.  Am I just being a little overly critical?

[Sandon]

   It does resemble a VF30-35 more than it does an XF 40 per PCGS Photograde and the ANA Grading Guide, but I've seen worse graded XF 40.  The problem is less overgrading than having too many grades that are too hard to tell apart. The coin has relatively mark free surfaces, which may have influenced the graders' decision, and the color is quite normal for a circulated silver coin. 

[RWB]

The photo shows a very nice Very Fine coin.

When TPGs began expanding "AU" to cover EF coins (pushing EF upward into AU), they had to make more room at the lower end. That pushed VF upward into the EF grade. Hence, this might have happened to your 1893 dollar. It is worth VF money, not EF.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/12/2023 at 4:36 PM, Sandon said:

   It does resemble a VF30-35 more than it does an XF 40 per PCGS Photograde and the ANA Grading Guide, but I've seen worse graded XF 40.  The problem is less overgrading than having too many grades that are too hard to tell apart. The coin has relatively mark free surfaces, which may have influenced the graders' decision, and the color is quite normal for a circulated silver coin. 

I've always said that the grading standards would have benefitted from a NUMERICAL quantity and quality (or lack thereof) of scuff marks, dings, scrateches, bag marks, etc.... that were the maximum allowed.

If you know that an MS-67 cannot have more than 3 bag marks or dings in the fields, it's easy to quantify the grade.  Or maybe a ding is equal to 2 bagmarks or 1 bagmark is 2 dings.  Whatever....the point is to have an approximate total number of detracting marks/items that gives you a gauge.  You'll still have debates...but probably not gross errors like in the Franklin Gradeflation Thread.

I still think that AI is going to be able to grade coins down the line. 

[rrantique]

On 6/12/2023 at 2:55 PM, EagleRJO said:

I am always evaluating the grade of coins, even if it's in a TPG coin coffin.  The attached 1893 (P) Morgan was graded XF40 by one of the big boys, but it looks over-graded.  There seems to be too much wear of the hair and cotton leaves on the obverse and the eagle's feathers (right facing wing, neck and legs) as well as the wreath on the reverse for that grade.

And the coin doesn't have an exceptional appearance either, with a duller gray color, to offset any of that.  It looks like VF+ to me.  Am I just being a little overly critical?

[EagleRJO]

On 6/12/2023 at 4:36 PM, Sandon said:

The coin has relatively mark free surfaces, which may have influenced the graders' decision, and the color is quite normal for a circulated silver coin. 

Maybe with limited bag marks and a brighter silver color it might present well, but that's really for ms coins and it's nothing special with the "normal" duller grey color.

On 6/12/2023 at 5:20 PM, RWB said:

It is worth VF money, not EF.

Unfortunately, people just look at paper labels so I would bet the family ranch it goes for XF money.

On 6/12/2023 at 6:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I've always said that the grading standards would have benefitted from a NUMERICAL quantity and quality (or lack thereof) of scuff marks, dings, scrateches, bag marks, etc.... that were the maximum allowed.

I think that would be overly cumbersome and almost impossible to quantify given the voluminous combinations of those things just for a single grade.  I think the standards are fine if they are followed, which is not always the case on either side of a particular grade.

On 6/12/2023 at 6:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

You'll still have debates...but probably not gross errors like in the Franklin Gradeflation Thread.

I don't think there were gross errors on the Franklin grades in that thread, just a lack of awareness of how much sometimes very unique rainbow like toned coins had become extremely popular with a positive effect on grades (appearance) and especially values, with bidding wars over individual coins.

Edited June 13, 2023 by EagleRJO

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/13/2023 at 8:35 AM, EagleRJO said:

I don't think there were gross errors on the Franklin grades in that thread, just a lack of awareness of how much sometimes very unique rainbow like toned coins had become extremely popular with a positive effect on grades (appearance) and especially values, with bidding wars over individual coins.

I'll double-check but I do not recall toning being an issue that went from detraction to a net-positive there.  The re-submittances as I recall were fairly quick after the original owner sold.  But again, I'll re-read the thread maybe tonight.

[EagleRJO]

On 6/14/2023 at 1:59 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I'll double-check but I do not recall toning being an issue that went from detraction to a net-positive there.  The re-submittances as I recall were fairly quick after the original owner sold.  But again, I'll re-read the thread maybe tonight.

I was recently reading through that thread ATS, which we also discussed further here not too long ago, and some time had elapsed between the initial submission and the grade and price bumps.  The biggest thing were the price jumps, which for similar rainbow color toned coins ended with some really crazy bidding wars as each one can be fairly unique.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/14/2023 at 1:59 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I'll double-check but I do not recall toning being an issue that went from detraction to a net-positive there.  The re-submittances as I recall were fairly quick after the original owner sold.  But again, I'll re-read the thread maybe tonight.

Eagle, I re-read the key sections of the thread.  Unfortunately I still can't post PDFs at this site, hopefully they'll allow it soon (request is in). Also, when I saved the CU Threads, the dates of the posts are not there for whatever reason (I think cut-and-paste via Word saves as-is but not direct PDF-saving).  So I can't tell WHEN the posts are for the most part though I recall it was sometime in the 2014-16 time frame.

Anyway...it does NOT appear that toning is why the coins appreciated via higher grades.  The OP was a savvy collector AND grader who was aware of toning benefitting Franklins as early as the late-1990's.  Here's his comments on his final coin that he griped about; seems to me he has a good case:

"...This last example is the most extreme, not only for the HUGE price jump, but also because the coin is now overgraded by a HUGE margin.

Before I show you the pix, a little background on the coin: This coin was purchased in the late 1990's from Segoja. It was an MS64FBL PCGS. If IRC, I paid the extreme (for an MS64) sum of $500 for it because toned 1949-D Franks are downright rare.  James was adamant that the coin would eventually wind up in an MS65FBL holder, but I was just as sure it was maxed out at MS64FBL  You see, this coin, like so many 1949-Ds is covered with a myriad of marks, dings, and every manner of abrasion. If you examine this coin in hand with 5x or 7x magnification you will see it is really, really banged up! (PIC)

But, we all know that attractive toning and eye appeal play a large part in numerical grade and sure enough it did upgrade to MS65FBL for me (PIC). 

But by some incredible bit of luck, somebody got a huge gift from the PCGS graders; here it is as an MS66+ from CoinFacts (PIC):

All apologies to the owner of this coin in it's present iteration, but it is unarguably a $10,000 piece of plastic.

It is one of the most overgraded coins I have ever seen and I guarantee that 99% of you, if you have even the most rudimentary grading skill, were given the opportunity to examine this coin in-hand under good lighting, would agree. 

Be careful out there. Things are not always what they seem."

Edited June 16, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[EagleRJO]

On 6/14/2023 at 10:47 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

... it did upgrade to MS65FBL for me ... But by some incredible bit of luck, somebody got a huge gift from the PCGS graders; here it is as an MS66+ from CoinFacts

There are always going to be instances of over-graded individual coins, and that may be one of them, but that situation wasn't the case for almost all of the toned coins being discussed in that thread.  Keep in mind that while toned coins had already become popular around that 2015 time frame, the prices and grade jumps had just started going through the roof.  Also not considered was that collectors were beginning to hoard the rainbow toned coins they could get their hands on.

The rainbow toned coins in particular being discussed were just starting to go crazy as the supply dried up, with collectors holding on to them with death grips.  An example from around the time of that thread was a rainbow toned MS-68 1880-S Morgan, valued at $5,000 from a recent sale, then sold at auction not long after for $23,000 through Sacks Bowers with no grade change.

And a similar rainbow toned MS-67 Morgan then received a MS-68 grade reportedly to consider the increased valuation [or appeal to collectors] following current market grading, which indirectly factors in the value of a coin in the grade.  That is one of the criticisms, which has some merit imo, of current market grading.  If there are other examples of this elusive "gradeflation" with other than rainbow toned coins with prices going crazy I'm all ears.

Edited June 17, 2023 by EagleRJO

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/15/2023 at 4:31 PM, EagleRJO said:

There are always going to be instances of over-graded individual coins, and that may be one of them, but that situation wasn't the case for almost all of the toned coins being discussed in that thread.  Keep in mind that while toned coins had already become popular around that 2015 time frame, the prices and grade jumps had just started going through the roof.  Also not considered was that collectors were beginning to hoard the rainbow toned coins they could get their hands on.

I don't have a problem with "market grading" if it means that 2 coins of the same quality get the same grade, even if from a technical POV they both might be overgraded.

I DO have a problem determing the value of a coin FIRST...and then assigning a grade to match the value.  That's backwards.

On 6/15/2023 at 4:31 PM, EagleRJO said:

The rainbow toned coins in particular being discussed were just starting to go crazy as the supply dried up, with collectors holding on to them with death grips.  An example from around the time of that thread was a rainbow toned MS-68 1880-S Morgan, valued at $5,000 from a recent sale, then sold at auction not long after for $23,000 through Sacks Bowers with no grade change. And a similar rainbow toned MS-67 Morgan then received a MS-68 grade reportedly to consider the increased valuation following current market grading, which factors in the value of a coin in the grade.  That is one of the criticisms, which has some merit imo, of current market grading.  If there are other examples of this elusive "gradeflation" with other than rainbow toned coins with prices going crazy I'm all ears.

Again...I have no problem with the price of all coins going up.  But you seem to say that as this self-enforced "hoarding" took place...the values increased....and instead of the price chart on older-graded coins going UP....they gave the hoarded coins higher grades to match the "stale" older prices.

IOTW....MS-65 is $1,000....MS-66 is $3,000.....MS-67 is $5,000......MS-68 is $10,000.  Someone has a special toned coin, they pay $7,000 it shouldn't be graded MS-67 or MS-67+ if in fact the coins is an MS-66 and someone is paying a 100%-plus premium for the toning.  If this is how they used market grading, it's definitely wrong.  An outside factor -- toning -- shouldn't take an otherwise MS-66 or MS-65 or even MS-63 coin and transform it into a MS-67 or even MS-68 just because the PRICE jumped because of something new (toning).

This is like Saint prices doubling if you can count 5 toes on Lady Liberty or see extra detail in the Capitol building.

I always thought market grading was closer to gradeflation but from what you say even exogenous factors (like toning or maybe even extra-luster) can increase the value of a coin which then leads to the grade following instead of the other way around.

Edited June 16, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[J P M]

Toned coins can hide a multitude of sins. Therefore there is a greater chance the coin could get a higher grade than it had before the camouflage. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/16/2023 at 7:00 AM, J P M said:

Toned coins can hide a multitude of sins. Therefore there is a greater chance the coin could get a higher grade than it had before the camouflage. 

Yes, excellent point JPM....I just read about that....toning COVERS bagmarks and detractions that otherwise could stand out.

Not only do you get the benefit of toning, you hide blemishes, scratches, etc.  You wonder how many are engaging in AT not for the toning but to cover up marks.

[EagleRJO]

The coins GF and I are discussing were already toned, but I don't know if that toning continued to possibly hide some issues.  I think it has more to do with the rainbow toned coins becoming more appealing visually to collectors, which then resulted in some grade increases and huge price jumps,  It likely was not necessarily just a direct valuation increase which then affected grade, but probably more of a recognition of increased valuation being an indicator of what collectors were starting to find more desirable having an effect on the "eye appeal" portion of the grade.

Bottom line is I don't think that a particular type of toning having a profound affect on the desirability and eye appeal for a specific coin is really an indicator that there has been an industry wide systemic grade inflation, which may have had an impact on this 1893 (P) Morgan apparently being over graded at XF40.  I think it's more an indication of assembly line TPG grading, where maybe only seconds are spent looking at a coin, occasionally cranking out an improper grade.

[EagleRJO]

On 6/12/2023 at 5:20 PM, RWB said:

It is worth VF money, not EF.

On 6/13/2023 at 8:35 AM, EagleRJO said:

Unfortunately, people just look at paper labels so I would bet the family ranch it goes for XF money.

Well, from the results of this Great Collections auction it looks like I get to keep the family ranch.  Not only did someone bid XF money ($300 NGC guide price) , but this 1893 (P) Morgan graded XF-40 by NGC sold for $523 all in, while the NGC guide price for an AU-55 grade is $445.

Wow, some wacky bidding on this one.  So much for my $250 max hammer bid on this one, for an all in cost of $275 or the NGC VF grade value.

  

 https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-explorer/united-states/dollars/morgan-dollars-1878-1921/17220/1893-1-ms/?des=ms

Edited June 27, 2023 by EagleRJO

[Coinbuf]

@EagleRJO it was a long shot to win this with a VF bid, you won't win many (if any) using Roger's bid points in this market and those that you might win will be the dogs, nice coins almost always beat the guide prices.   As too your original question, the coin may be overgraded if you are using out of date (antiquated) references like the ANA or Rogers opinion, but under todays market grading it looks to be a perfect XF, and the bidders agreed.

Edited June 27, 2023 by Coinbuf

[VKurtB]

On 6/27/2023 at 3:19 PM, Coinbuf said:

@EagleRJO it was a long shot to win this with a VF bid, you won't win many (if any) using Roger's bid points in this market and those that you might win will be the dogs, nice coins almost always beat the guide prices.   As too your original question, the coin may be overgraded if you are using out of date (antiquated) references like the ANA or Rogers opinion, but under todays market grading it looks to be a perfect XF, and the bidders agreed.

Careful, @Coinbuf, I got a warning from the Mods for picking on Roger's grading opinions. I still think his opinions stink, but I'll probably get more warning points now.

[EagleRJO]

On 6/27/2023 at 4:19 PM, Coinbuf said:

@EagleRJO it was a long shot to win this with a VF bid, you won't win many (if any) using Roger's bid points in this market ...

I know Roger is tough on grading, and I am usually like one grade above him when evaluating a coin.  But on this one I happen to agree with him on the VF grade.

Just too much wear on the eagle.  So while the obverse may have been a solid XF to XF+, imo the VF+ reverse really controled.  You are correct that the bidders agreed with XF, but it doesn't mean the winning bidder knew what he was doing and considered anything other than the label, or was seeing it the way I did.  

I wasn't really expecting to get the coin at VF pricing as that was pretty much a lowball bid, but that was all I was willing to pay for that one.  Ya win some and ya lose some, then move on to the next coin.  I just thought this coin was worthy of a discussion considering the anticipated disagreements on the grade.  

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/27/2023 at 4:33 PM, VKurtB said:

Careful, @Coinbuf, I got a warning from the Mods for picking on Roger's grading opinions. I still think his opinions stink, but I'll probably get more warning points now.

As long as criticism is based on FACTS and not PERSONAL, it should pass muster.

Let's have heated debate here where we differ, but keep it civil. 

Disagree with the positions, not the person. 

[VKurtB]

On 6/27/2023 at 11:08 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

As long as criticism is based on FACTS and not PERSONAL, it should pass muster.

Let's have heated debate here where we differ, but keep it civil. 

Disagree with the positions, not the person. 

When that rule is applied unevenly, and it has been, I get annoyed. I shall CONTINUE to get annoyed.

[EagleRJO]

On 6/28/2023 at 9:51 AM, VKurtB said:

When that rule is applied unevenly, and it has been, I get annoyed. I shall CONTINUE to get annoyed.

RWB is just stuck with Technical Grading, and for worn circulated coins using current Market Grading really doesn't make that much of a difference.  It's more with MS coins were that can be a big difference, particularly with rainbow toned coins where the "eye appeal" part is getting big grade bumps for a desirable appearance.

For this coin I think the "eye appeal" part is really neutral.

[powermad5000]

If I were looking at that coin as raw, with no label and no holder, I would have gone VF on it and I would have bid VF on it. I think there is a little too much wear on the eagles wing feathers as well as the leaves and cotton bolls on the obverse. I also think the hair above the brow on the obverse would need a little more detail to make XF. The color to me I feel is consistent with a Morgan of wear. 

But that is just me. And I have been wrong on grades before. 

Also, on the part of discussion on the toning, I recently submitted a 1902 O MS 64 Morgan I got for a great price to NCS for conservation because of the black toning on it. It almost looks like the coin was laying next to an object being spray painted black and some of the overspray hit part of the coin. The spotty toning did not cover the entire surface. I was charged the $5 NCS rejection fee and the slab returned in a bag stating that conservation was not a good idea for this particular coin as it could possibly not improve the surface or look of the coin but could also compromise the MS 64 grade as well. So, I learned from that toning can hide imperfections and affect the grade sometimes positively.

[JKK]

On 6/12/2023 at 12:55 PM, EagleRJO said:

I am always evaluating the grade of coins, even if it's in a TPG coin coffin.  The attached 1893 (P) Morgan was graded XF40 by one of the big boys, but it looks over-graded.  There seems to be too much wear of the hair and cotton leaves on the obverse and the eagle's feathers (right facing wing, neck and legs) as well as the wreath on the reverse for that grade.

And the coin doesn't have an exceptional appearance either, with a duller gray color, to offset any of that.  It looks like VF+ to me.  Am I just being a little overly critical?

 

EF-40 is what I'd expect the accumulated masses here to grade it, on the grounds that they do not actually consult an ANA grading standards book. I find this forum's grading positively pariedoliac, which is why I rarely say anything or offer grading help--no one's listening to the blockhead/killjoy who actually looked it up in the book. I wouldn't be surprised if some eager beavers proclaimed it AU. (Nauseated, but not surprised.)

VF-20 is what I'd grade your piece, solidly and with great confidence. I think 30 would be a stretch. Not that I expect this to influence anyone--any more than I expect persons_of_impaired_testicular_sensation to stop giving helpful hints to counterfeiters, another source of my disenchantment--but just because something solidly meets a given grade criterion and is maybe slightly nicer does not f-bombing mean that it automatically merits the next increment upward. A good G-4 is a G-4, for example, unless it really truly is a G-6.

[EagleRJO]

On 6/29/2023 at 4:39 PM, JKK said:

... consult an ANA grading standards book ... no one's listening to the blockhead/killjoy who actually looked it up in the book

Well that makes at least 2 of us who actually looked it up.  The ANA standard for an XF-40 Morgan states for the Reverse (which I think controls) that "Tops of legs, wing tips and feathers on head show wear".  The legs have more wear than just at the "top", and the right facing wing has considerably more wear than just the "wing tips".

I also looked up the grading notes in the latest edition of the Red Book, and for an EF-40 it states "Eagle's feathers all plain but with slight wear on breast and wing tips".  Again there is more than just "slight wear on ... wing tips".

I think someone really overpaid for a VF grade 1893 (P) Morgan.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 6/28/2023 at 9:51 AM, VKurtB said:

When that rule is applied unevenly, and it has been, I get annoyed. I shall CONTINUE to get annoyed.

"Pins and needles...needles and pins....it's a happy man that grins !!" 
 

[VKurtB]

On 6/29/2023 at 4:41 PM, EagleRJO said:

The ANA standard for an XF-40 Morgan states for the Reverse (which I think controls)

This parenthetical phrase at the end of this quote troubles me greatly. While I agree that the reverse frequently SHOULD control, it almost never does. Obverses are where the rubber meets the road, ALMOST without exception. It's not a 50/50 thing. More like 90/10 or 95/5 with the obverse.

Edited June 30, 2023 by VKurtB

[EagleRJO]

On 6/30/2023 at 10:54 AM, VKurtB said:

This parenthetical phrase at the end of this quote troubles me greatly. While I agree that the reverse frequently SHOULD control, it almost never does. Obverses are where the rubber meets the road, ALMOST without exception. It's not a 50/50 thing. More like 90/10 or 95/5 with the obverse.

When it comes to the appearance portion of the grade for mint state coins, where that is a larger part of the overall grade, more often than not the obverse controls.  The obverse is also sometimes referred to as the "money side" since it has a larger effect on value, which again factors more into mint state coins with current "market grading".

But for a circulated coin like this, where it's really almost all about wear, I don't think those high percentages of the obverse controlling is really the case, at least not in my experience.  For this coin with a neutral overall appearance there is more wear on the reverse, so that side controls the grade.

[JKK]

I have this weird notion that the whole coin must conform to the grade specifics; if it misses even one, I look to the next lower grade. I realize that this seems almost quaint around these parts, but any other stance or outlook simply cheapens the value and meaning of the grade. I am not sure where anyone--including TPGs--got the idea that it was okay to blow that off in any situation, but most people seem to feel so. That's fine. They don't have to bother following the actual standards, and I in turn don't have to respect their grading opinions. I'm certainly not planning to adapt mine to the pariedolian consensus.