MS67 Details - Graffiti. The market won’t value it as n MS67, but I guarantee it would rightfully be valued higher than if it was graded UNC Details. There would still be interpretation as to what that value is, but it would still be helpful for both parties to know that numerical grade.
In theory, this might work with heavy rim damage, scratches, or graffiti, but what about a harsh over dip? A coin that might have been a 67 and is free of chatter or contact marks, but has been stripped of all its luster. Do you still grade it 67-details harshly cleaned? Or would you net grade it to a 65-details? I think Marks point is that it just opens the door more complications and unnecessary nit picking for coins that are regarded by many as nothing more than another problem coin, it’s easier just to give a ballpark grade and let the buyer of the coin place a value on it.
Assigning a ballpark grade (without a number) isn’t just easier, it’s also more realistic and practical.
I've only been studying numismatics and grading for 6 months or so but I always thought they should apply a number grade if it goes into a slab at all. For instance an ms63 grade coin with graffiti should say ms63 details - graffiti. When I pay for grading I'm asking for what the grade is. If it has a problem note it so but having to guess the actual grade because all they will say is Unc details is frustrating and feels like I'm not getting the service I paid and asked for - a grade. Not an approximate grade that covers up to 10 grade levels.
Obviously (or not?) if the detail issue is so bad that they can't give an honest numerical grade, there would have to be a stipulation for that situation.
Unc covers a heck of a lot - as does au. Is it Unc 63 details, or 68 details? If it's a minor details issue there can be a huge value gap between detailed 63 and 68. They basically leave it up to the seller and buyer to guess the grade even after they paid for a grade. To whit, on the positive side I guess at least you can say it's confirmed Unc VS au VS xf etc. Still feels like not getting what was paid for though.
It would then be up to the buyer how much the detail hurts the value.
There's a liability issue from a grading company viewpoint. To take an extreme example. 1884-S Morgan Dollar that has a deep scratch in the field behind the head but the rest of the coins is nice enough to grade MS66 or even MS67. All TPGs agree that this coin should not straight grade but should go Unc Details Scratch. If this coin were to be graded Details Grade MS 65 Scratch by a TPG. At some point this coin would fall into the hands of an unscrupulous telemarketing firm who specializes in bilking elderly customers out of their life savings. PCGS Price Guide is $295,000. This telemarketer might easily convince a novice elderly wealthy person that is in the beginning stages of dementia this is a fantastic opportunity to invest in their grandchildren's future for the low cost of only $150,000 if they act fast. There's only one available so it will sell quickly! However, the actual coin market might only value this coin at $25,000-30,000. Now when this grandchild inherits the coin. They then get the news that their grandparents were defrauded by this unscrupulous telemarketing firm. They would probably consult with a lawyer to see if there is any actions to take to recover the funds. They will likely try to recover from whoever has any responsibility relating the certification and selling of this coin. They would look to go after the telemarketing firm, the coin dealer that supplied the coin to that firm and the grading company that certified the coin to set up this transaction. I don't believe that any TPG wants to have the liability over a details coin that may lead to large financial risks or really bad publicity. So if that were to happen at a TPG I am sure the grade range would be capped. Most probably in the MS60-62 range to reduce the financial liability.
Appreciate you sharing that perspective for us. In my head, I thought that liability would be a factor in some way but I didn’t have a way to articulate it, the example you provided makes a lot of sense.
Details slabbing is possibly the best of a number of bad options for a coin that is authenticated by a grading company but doesn't really "fit" into a numerical grade. High value coins like the 1870-S $3 that PCGS recently graded SP50 and at least some of the 1804 dollars probably belong in details holders, which makes the whole concept a bit messy.
Has CACG stated how they plan to deal with detail grades? I am guessing John A has said something about it somewhere but I don't recall it.
I absolutely hate the current market grading system, it sucks plain and simple. Coins should be graded on the technical merits and let the market decide the price, that should not be the job of the TPG's. And I very much disagree with the OP, damaged coins should not be graded at all, the old bodybag was the best way to handle those damaged or ungradable coins.
I could get behind a numerical grade with a definitive defect ON THE LABEL.
"Seated Liberty Half Dollar NGC UNC Details Harshly Cleaned" is wordy and I don't see what would be overlooked with "MS 60, Harshly Cleaned."
But do you think it would make sense to have something like “MS67 details, Harshly Cleaned”, as some respondents would apparently prefer?
In the old days, and sometimes the new days, I would buy every single RED holdered PCI coin that said PVC. Man I own some nice coins that re-graded just fine after the acetone baptism!
I understand your point of view, but the CAC concept is polar opposite. CAC was founded so that "C" quality coins, either over-graded or problem coins, wouldn't drag down premium quality coins of the same grade. If an XF details problem coin with graffiti is net graded as F15, the sale of that coin could skew the perceived value of a choice coin of the same grade. I think a rare coin that is authenticated as genuine in a details grade holder, still maintains its value.
Doug
I think your post contains a small omission. A "C" quality coin can ALSO BE correctly graded for its grade but at the lower end of its "correct" grade.
I can understand how chatter or dings on a MS coin effect the grade: how many, how deep or long, where located, etc to understand the grade. But graffiti, burning a coin with over-dipping or harsh cleaning, do you subtract 2 points, 5, 10? I like the current UNC Details & the Issue. I'll decide if its acceptable to me and if the price is right. But to ignore the issue on grade & still call it an MS 67 is wrong IMHO.
I can understand how chatter or dings on a MS coin effect the grade: how many, how deep or long, where located, etc to understand the grade. But graffiti, burning a coin with over-dipping or harsh cleaning, do you subtract 2 points, 5, 10? I like the current UNC Details & the Issue. I'll decide if its acceptable to me and if the price is right. But to ignore the issue on grade & still call it an MS 67 is wrong IMHO.
I can understand how chatter or dings on a MS coin effect the grade: how many, how deep or long, where located, etc to understand the grade. But graffiti, burning a coin with over-dipping or harsh cleaning, do you subtract 2 points, 5, 10? I like the current UNC Details & the Issue. I'll decide if its acceptable to me and if the price is right. But to ignore the issue on grade & still call it an MS 67 is wrong IMHO.
IMHO, subtracting points (net grading) is stupid.
Agree. Grade it as it is, no matter the scarcity of the coin. If all the astute collectors of all early 'x' series (fill in the blank) were cleaned, why should they have a problem buying details slabbed coins. Net grading does more harm then good.
Comments
Assigning a ballpark grade (without a number) isn’t just easier, it’s also more realistic and practical.
"Seated Liberty Half Dollar NGC UNC Details Harshly Cleaned" is wordy and I don't see what would be overlooked with "MS 60, Harshly Cleaned."
To take an extreme example.
1884-S Morgan Dollar that has a deep scratch in the field behind the head but the rest of the coins is nice enough to grade MS66 or even MS67. All TPGs agree that this coin should not straight grade but should go Unc Details Scratch.
If this coin were to be graded Details Grade MS 65 Scratch by a TPG. At some point this coin would fall into the hands of an unscrupulous telemarketing firm who specializes in bilking elderly customers out of their life savings.
PCGS Price Guide is $295,000.
This telemarketer might easily convince a novice elderly wealthy person that is in the beginning stages of dementia this is a fantastic opportunity to invest in their grandchildren's future for the low cost of only $150,000 if they act fast. There's only one available so it will sell quickly!
However, the actual coin market might only value this coin at $25,000-30,000.
Now when this grandchild inherits the coin. They then get the news that their grandparents were defrauded by this unscrupulous telemarketing firm. They would probably consult with a lawyer to see if there is any actions to take to recover the funds. They will likely try to recover from whoever has any responsibility relating the certification and selling of this coin. They would look to go after the telemarketing firm, the coin dealer that supplied the coin to that firm and the grading company that certified the coin to set up this transaction.
I don't believe that any TPG wants to have the liability over a details coin that may lead to large financial risks or really bad publicity. So if that were to happen at a TPG I am sure the grade range would be capped. Most probably in the MS60-62 range to reduce the financial liability.
John Butler
Appreciate you sharing that perspective for us. In my head, I thought that liability would be a factor in some way but I didn’t have a way to articulate it, the example you provided makes a lot of sense.
Has CACG stated how they plan to deal with detail grades? I am guessing John A has said something about it somewhere but I don't recall it.