A 1794 Half Cent - Sometimes a Bear to Grade - And for Some a Bear to Like Because of Strike Issues — Welcome to the CAC Educational Forum

A 1794 Half Cent - Sometimes a Bear to Grade - And for Some a Bear to Like Because of Strike Issues

Here is nice example of a 1794 half cent, Cohen variety #1a. These coins are really hard to find nice. NGC graded this one MS-61, Brown. One of the chief catalogers at Stacks-Bowers came over to me at an EAC convention, where I displayed this piece, and commented that he agreed with the grade.

Some people might not like this coin because the date is weak. It's actually a little weaker than shown in this photo. It all has to do with the way the dies were aligned in the press when the coin was made.

The question is, would CAC approve of this piece because of weakness in the date? It's hard to say.

Comments

  • Wouldn't logic dictate that the method to receive an answer to the question is to submit for evaluation?

  • edited December 2021

    I don't need to submit it because I don't have any intention of selling it any time soon. In addition, it would seen that the NGC-CAC combination does not to get much respect. The "gold standard" is the PCGS-CAC combination.

  • Makes sense.

    At some point, if you decide to sell, would you submit for evaluation, or..... life ends and we pass on our generational "wealth".... would you leave instructions for heirs to have CAC evaluate prior to a sale, or leave instructions not to sell?

    Or, do you think an NGC combo would not make a difference either way?

  • edited December 2021
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • edited December 2021

    This is a discussion that I would have the auction house, perhaps Heritage. I have coins in my collection that would never CAC because they are over graded. Sometimes a collector buys such things because the item is rare, seldom available and matches the other coins in the set. I’ll post pictures of one of those items one day.

    This is one of the problems with CAC. If a great coin is over graded, or the CAC graders don’t like the looks of it, it won’t get a sticker. That can make it much harder to find a really tough item. Often this material crops up in auctions. I have been run up and beat up so many times in auctions that I have great respect for “the bird in your hand.”

    As for NGC-CAC, my perception is, it doesn’t add much. NGC is #1 in the foreign, ancient coins and probably tokens, but #2 for U.S. coins. I am proud of the NGC coins I have, but I know what the market perception is.

  • edited December 2021

    "The "gold standard" for EAC copper is EAC grading, which allows for a net grade. And the patterns and intensities of red color are overvalued compared to TPG standards."

    I agree with you about the net grading part. Copper is a reactive metal, and to demand every piece has to be "perfect" to be worthy of a good collection, especially die variety collection, sets an impossible standard.

    As for grading an prices, "EAC grading" is not going to save you any money. It does not matter if the TPG calls "MS-61" and it's really an EAC AU-55, chances are the bid will end up in the same place.

    As for the grading service part, none of the big auction houses are going to sell these coins raw. They will all be graded, and it appears that PCGS has the inside track.

    Here's an example. This is the 1794, S-21 large cent that came from the Dan Holmes Collection. Bill Noyes, who is the most brutal coin grader on the planet, calls this an EF-45 and ranks it tied for #7 in the census. PCGS graded it MS-62, Brown. I have had a lot of problems taking a good photo of this piece, so I'm posting an angle shot to show the detail. Sorry I am still learning how to post pictures here, so the reverse shows up first.


    The EF-45 grade is only meaningful for EAC extremists when it comes to pricing. The Grey Sheet says an EF-40 is worth $4,000; an AU-50 is worth $9,000. None of those numbers are going to happen in the real world, unless some dealer, with no ethics, is dealing with the collector's widow.

  • edited December 2021
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Hi Bill- I don't see any problem with the date ( as struck). Thanks for posting!

    John

  • edited December 2021

    @rick_sear

    The enthusiasm level for TPG services seems less pronounced amongst EAC members than among devotees of other collecting domains.🤔


    Yes, but it grown considerably higher from what it used to be. I can remember photos in "Penny-wise" with a cent or half cent beside a smashed slab with the slogan "Free at last. Free at last. Thank heaven I'm free at last!"

    And yes I got your point about CAC approved NGC coins. The trouble is a large number of collectors, who are addicted to PCGS, will still say "it's still an NGC coin. I can't wait to cross it." This is one reason why NGC graded coins appear to have more "mistakes." The properly graded NGC coins get crossed; the ones that miss the mark stay where they are.

    Here's an example. I went to a Winter ANA show that was held in Orlando. I thought it would be like a regional show with some decent items to view. It was the pits. This was only coin I could find, and I bought it out of frustration, an 1838-P $5 gold in NGC AU-58 CAC. It's a bit short of the mark, but it filled the hole. At least it has original surfaces.


    I went to this show looking for an 1839-C quarter eagle. There were plenty of them there, all NGC graded. The trouble was, every one of them looked like a brass button that had been shined with with Brasso. It was like the hardware store had had sale on the stuff and every dealer in town had bought a tin of it to use on their coins before they sent them in for grading.

    Where these problem coin horrors, discounted? Of course not. They were priced as if the AU or MS grade on the holder was right on the money. Not that I would have bought any of them. Imagine paying $20 grand for something that looked like it came off of an ROTC uniform.

  • Not seeing the coin in hand, I'm at a disadvantage. Still, I consider the black discoloration on the reverse to be a much more likely reason to prevent the coin from "passing". In fact, i would not have even thought about the weakness of the strike as being a potentially fatal flaw, although I can imagine it becoming an issue if the coin is otherwise right on the border of beaning or not.

  • edited December 2021

    Most people in the Early American Coppers Club are not concerned about CAC opinions. A large number of them don’t care about TPG opinions. The major collections are usually certified for marketing purposes, but you would be amazed at the number of coins that are cracked out after the purchases are made. This includes some CAC approved pieces.

    The goal for the top collectors is to assemble a set of the varieties, and sometimes even die states. The guys who can afford it go for the finest know examples, which is rather informally determined among the specialists. There is another numismatic world beyond CAC.

  • I just joined. Color me very grateful to be allowed to post on this forum with some of my former posters - you Bill and Rick. I don't know what John wrote in this thread to be banned after a brief time here. Do we get one warning if we cross the line?

    My question for you Bill is this: What do you personally grade the 1794 cent. IMHO, EF is rather old school (1950's-60's) and MS-62 is how commercial grading has evolved today. I should hope that just about any person with good eyesight on the planet would look at a grading guide and think the coin was About Uncirculated. Do you think the CAC staff would "bean" the coin in a PCGS MS-62 slab because many early coins in this condition are considered to be MS.
  • As an oldtime early copper ( I love chocolate!) fancier, Bill’s 1794 cent grades AU-58 ( formerly known
    as AU-55 ) w great color, cartwheel lustre & “ cabinet friction” on the highest curls & cheek. These days the slab firms are grading it as MS-62 and even higher if it was a Chain or Wreath cent - apparently a more liberal standard.
  • My question for you Bill is this: What do you personally grade the 1794 cent. IMHO, EF is rather old school (1950's-60's) and MS-62 is how commercial grading has evolved today. I should hope that just about any person with good eyesight on the planet would look at a grading guide and think the coin was About Uncirculated. Do you think the CAC staff would "bean" the coin in a PCGS MS-62 slab because many early coins in this condition are considered to be MS.

    My grade is AU-58. I paid a high price for that coin because I bought from the dealer who purchased it from the Dan Homes Sale. I don't care, really, because I find the 1794, Head of '94 Cents, very attractive. It's hard to believe that something that nice was "just a cent."

    As for what CAC would think of it, that's not my concern. The real market for it will be with EAC specialists who might be attracted to the fact that it rates #7 in the pecking order.

    The 1795 cents were in lower relief and not as nice, BUT the dies lasted longer and that was important for the cost problems the first mint faced. This one is also graded MS-62. I have had a hard time photographing this piece to it's best advantage. This one really is a low level Mint State piece.



Sign In or Register to comment.