AU-59: MYSTERY SOLVED! 1 1

[Henri Charriere]

It's taken me 17 years to solve this enduring mystery -- and an extra 90 days to summon the nerve to present my findings here to the numismatic community.

No one denies that PF-70 and MS-70 examples exist and are accepted by the industry, dealers, auction houses and collectors alike.  Is there any dispute as to the utility of the grade MS-69? No, none at all.

I can personally attest to the fact that a coin graded MS-67 has a FMV twice that of an MS-66.  So grades, particularly in the upper tiers, are both worthy and noteworthy.

But what of the AU-59?  It is a concept, the mere contemplation of which, subjects the heretic to the whims of the boogeyman.

Have you, dear reader, ever laid your eyes upon one?  What about that video wherein a gentleman formally unveils a bucket, double canvas bagged with 1964 90% silver half dollars?  So improperly was its contents mishandled with unsheathed human hands that it prompted one viewer to submit a comment addressing that astounding act of "public" desecration. Beyond that, however, something else of great significance occurred: every coin which had come into contact in the manner heretofore described, lost its alleged Mint State status (which prominent members have vociferously denied it had ever enjoyed to begin with right here on this Forum.)  Having dropped ten (10) notches, I submit to you that these formerly Mint State coins, FMV aside, are at most, nothing more than AU-59's. Anyone beg to differ?

[MarkFeld]

AU58+ is already used, but if you want to add AU59, go for it. And while you’re at it, how about AU51, 52, 54, 56 and 57?

[zadok]

On 9/5/2021 at 7:57 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

It's taken me 17 years to solve this enduring mystery -- and an extra 90 days to summon the nerve to present my findings here to the numismatic community.

No one denies that PF-70 and MS-70 examples exist and are accepted by the industry, dealers, auction houses and collectors alike.  Is there any dispute as to the utility of the grade MS-69? No, none at all.

I can personally attest to the fact that a coin graded MS-67 has a FMV twice that of an MS-66.  So grades, particularly in the upper tiers, are both worthy and noteworthy.

But what of the AU-59?  It is a concept, the mere contemplation of which, subjects the heretic to the whims of the boogeyman.

Have you, dear reader, ever laid your eyes upon one?  What about that video wherein a gentleman formally unveils a bucket, double canvas bagged with 1964 90% silver half dollars?  So improperly was its contents mishandled with unsheathed human hands that it prompted one viewer to submit a comment addressing that astounding act of "public" desecration. Beyond that, however, something else of great significance occurred: every coin which had come into contact in the manner heretofore described, lost its alleged Mint State status (which prominent members have vociferously denied it had ever enjoyed to begin with right here on this Forum.)  Having dropped ten (10) notches, I submit to you that these formerly Mint State coins, FMV aside, are at most, nothing more than AU-59's. Anyone beg to differ?

90 days wasnt quite long enuf, i think the recipe calls for another 90 to simmer n maybe ferment....

[Henri Charriere]

Attn: @MarkFeld Having had an opportunity to read an article that just caught my eye following your reply, "AU-58 Coins - A Stealth Numismatic Investment - Antique Sage," it became quickly evident I have no clear understanding of the matter at hand. When I read the argument for an AU-63 or AU-64, it all made perfect sense. Grading becomes increasingly more complex when factors other than wear are considered.  My focus on a single series of Mint State coins has apparently limited my exposure to the dizzying array of possibilities the grader is confronted with daily, and within time constraints. I appreciate your input!   🐓 

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/5/2021 at 8:19 PM, zadok said:

90 days wasnt quite long enuf, i think the recipe calls for another 90 to simmer n maybe ferment....

[RWB]

On 9/5/2021 at 11:31 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Grading becomes increasingly more complex when factors other than wear are considered. 

True, and it also becomes less meaningful as more opinion and personal bias are piled onto the mix. The "wear" and/or surface marks are all that are necessary for a "Grade." Everything else is a descriptor and belongs elsewhere. (I concede that if TPGs will adopt clear empirical standards for proof-like, and use only electronic means to determine this, then it would also qualify as an objective characteristic.)

Edited September 6, 2021 by RWB

[VKurtB]

On 9/5/2021 at 6:57 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

It's taken me 17 years to solve this enduring mystery -- and an extra 90 days to summon the nerve to present my findings here to the numismatic community.

No one denies that PF-70 and MS-70 examples exist and are accepted by the industry, dealers, auction houses and collectors alike.  Is there any dispute as to the utility of the grade MS-69? No, none at all.

I can personally attest to the fact that a coin graded MS-67 has a FMV twice that of an MS-66.  So grades, particularly in the upper tiers, are both worthy and noteworthy.

But what of the AU-59?  It is a concept, the mere contemplation of which, subjects the heretic to the whims of the boogeyman.

Have you, dear reader, ever laid your eyes upon one?  What about that video wherein a gentleman formally unveils a bucket, double canvas bagged with 1964 90% silver half dollars?  So improperly was its contents mishandled with unsheathed human hands that it prompted one viewer to submit a comment addressing that astounding act of "public" desecration. Beyond that, however, something else of great significance occurred: every coin which had come into contact in the manner heretofore described, lost its alleged Mint State status (which prominent members have vociferously denied it had ever enjoyed to begin with right here on this Forum.)  Having dropped ten (10) notches, I submit to you that these formerly Mint State coins, FMV aside, are at most, nothing more than AU-59's. Anyone beg to differ?

Your premise here is incorrect. If the only “wear” is original bag wear, as in those hoards found after all those years, the coins are by definition all “mint state”, or MS60, literally while being as “baggy” as they can get.

[VKurtB]

On 9/6/2021 at 8:21 AM, RWB said:

True, and it also becomes less meaningful as more opinion and personal bias are piled onto the mix. The "wear" and/or surface marks are all that are necessary for a "Grade." Everything else is a descriptor and belongs elsewhere. (I concede that if TPGs will adopt clear empirical standards for proof-like, and use only electronic means to determine this, then it would also qualify as an objective characteristic.)

This is a personal opinion of the poster, and not fact. In fact, it is a highly controversial opinion in this field, and not widely shared. 

[MarkFeld]

On 9/6/2021 at 8:21 AM, RWB said:

True, and it also becomes less meaningful as more opinion and personal bias are piled onto the mix. The "wear" and/or surface marks are all that are necessary for a "Grade." Everything else is a descriptor and belongs elsewhere. (I concede that if TPGs will adopt clear empirical standards for proof-like, and use only electronic means to determine this, then it would also qualify as an objective characteristic.)

So in your grading universe, (even leaving eye-appeal aside) strike and luster considerations aren’t necessary for a “Grade”? 

[RWB]

On 9/6/2021 at 2:05 PM, MarkFeld said:

So in your grading universe, (even leaving eye-appeal aside) strike and luster considerations aren’t necessary for a “Grade”? 

Correct. That does not exclude them from individual appeal or valuation, both of which are opinions. Auctions, sellers and buyers can then present their opinions without agreeing or disagreeing with the assigned "grade." The free market then assumes its proper capitalist role.

I do not feel that ANY TPG should ever be involved in "valuing" a coin or medal - that is strictly a market task.

[MarkFeld]

On 9/6/2021 at 1:11 PM, RWB said:

Correct. That does not exclude them from individual appeal or valuation, both of which are opinions. Auctions, sellers and buyers can then present their opinions without agreeing or disagreeing with the assigned "grade." The free market then assumes its proper capitalist role.

I do not feel that ANY TPG should ever be involved in "valuing" a coin or medal - that is strictly a market task.

While you feel that way, most buyers and sellers - both collectors and dealers - obviously want more “valuing” from TPG’s than you do.

And even your preferred grading system would still value coins to some extent (since, for example, an AU coin would tend to be valued more highly than a VF). So why not do away with grading, altogether?

Edited September 6, 2021 by MarkFeld

[Henri Charriere]

UNSOLICITED EDITORIAL

I pity the fool who would crack out one of those so-called "emergency issue" ASE's cleverly dubbed 2020-(S) [and not 2020-S].

What, if anything, distinguishes this coin from any other minus a unique mintmark?

This is a coin, if de-encapsulated, will forever require an explanation from its progeny as to the precise circumstances attendant to its conception.     

[RWB]

On 9/6/2021 at 2:17 PM, MarkFeld said:

While you feel that way, most buyers and sellers - both collectors and dealers - obviously want more “valuing” from TPG’s than you do.

And even your preferred grading system would still value coins to some extent (since, for example, an AU coin would tend to be valued more highly than a VF). So why not do away with grading, altogether?

All I advocate is separation of the grade of a coin from any assumption of value. I disagree that " most buyers and sellers - both collectors and dealers - obviously want more valuing from TPG’s than you do." No one asked them. The situation was simply imposed as a means of increasing revenue and falsely increasing "value" by padding grades with opinion fluff. No TPG should have any role in determining a coin's market value.

Doing away with "grading" won't happen. It is part of human thought processes to organize and characterize information. But what can be done is to assign clear standards for each "grade" and then do our best to assess only those factors that can be determined empirically. This leaves all (or most) of the personal opinion under the control of buyer/seller/owner. (This basic discussion appears during the 1850s as coin and medal auctions gained traction and the collector base expanded.)

[Woods020]

It’s not surprising to see differing views from Mark and Roger.
 

Roger, based on his posts, isn’t an active collector. He owns a small number of coins purchased for research. His pursuits I would call a historical scholar of the mint and its coinage. 

Mark on the other hand has spent a lifetime dealing directly with collectors and coins in multiple capacities. His days are spent hands on with coins. His pursuits are of a practical nature. 
 

It’s the classic case of classroom/theoretical vs real world/practical. I am actively a collector and purchase more coins than I should I guess so to me practicality rules the day. While I agree with Roger in that clear standards are a good thing and I would appreciate more consistency, I tend to side with Mark. To me and other collectors having the TPG opinion is valuable. I’m not saying to blindly take it, but I think we would sure miss it if it was gone. And that includes their opinion on the totality of the coin including strike, eye appeal, and surface preservation. A star grade from our hosts has meaning and the coins always bear it out. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Woods020

[zadok]

On 9/6/2021 at 9:54 PM, Woods020 said:

It’s not surprising to see differing views from Mark and Roger.
 

Roger, based on his posts, isn’t an active collector. He owns a small number of coins purchased for research. His pursuits I would call a historical scholar of the mint and its coinage. 

Mark on the other hand has spent a lifetime dealing directly with collectors and coins in multiple capacities. His days are spent hands on with coins. His pursuits are of a practical nature. 
 

It’s the classic case of classroom/theoretical vs real world/practical. I am actively a collector and purchase more coins than I should I guess so to me practicality rules the day. While I agree with Roger in that clear standards are a good thing and I would appreciate more consistency, I tend to side with Mark. To me and other collectors having the TPG opinion is valuable. I’m not saying to blindly take it, but I think we would sure miss it if it was gone. And that includes their opinion on the totality of the coin including strike, eye appeal, and surface preservation. A star grade from our hosts has meaning and the coins always bear it out. 

amen brother ben...

[VKurtB]

On 9/6/2021 at 6:08 PM, RWB said:

All I advocate is separation of the grade of a coin from any assumption of value. I disagree that " most buyers and sellers - both collectors and dealers - obviously want more valuing from TPG’s than you do." No one asked them. The situation was simply imposed as a means of increasing revenue and falsely increasing "value" by padding grades with opinion fluff. No TPG should have any role in determining a coin's market value.

Doing away with "grading" won't happen. It is part of human thought processes to organize and characterize information. But what can be done is to assign clear standards for each "grade" and then do our best to assess only those factors that can be determined empirically. This leaves all (or most) of the personal opinion under the control of buyer/seller/owner. (This basic discussion appears during the 1850s as coin and medal auctions gained traction and the collector base expanded.)

No, what you advocate is that everyone give up a perfectly wonderful grading system that works well, and adopt something that comports with your highly specious opinion. But then why not? That’s what you’re all about and always pretty much have been. 
 

In competitive exhibiting, we have the same thing going on. The paleo-exhibiting crowd is throwing a major hissy fit over reformed judging criteria that came into being about 5 years back. My attitude is “stay current or stay quiet”. The scores are all lower in exhibiting now, and it’s not unheard of for a winning exhibit to score in the high 70’s. The paleos want to see 90’s or they get bent out of shape. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

@Woods020 I am ashamed to say while I do not know the combatants as well as you do, everything you've said sits well with me. I suspect there are others out there with something to say but shrink at the thought of appearing to side with one against the other(s).  I appreciate the free-for-alls because it tends to reveal things about individuals they themselves may be unaware of.  I leave it to the Moderators to sort things out even if it affects me adversely.  You win some; you lose some. And the loose cannon puts pep in your step and jut in your strut.  What more can a simple coin-collecting chiffonier ask for?  Man, Iove this place!

[Woods020]

On 9/6/2021 at 9:20 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

@Woods020 I am ashamed to say while I do not know the combatants as well as you do, everything you've said sits well with me. I suspect there are others out there with something to say but shrink at the thought of appearing to side with one against the other(s).  I appreciate the free-for-alls because it tends to reveal things about individuals they themselves may be unaware of.  I leave it to the Moderators to sort things out even if it affects me adversely.  You win some; you lose some. And the loose cannon puts pep in your step and jut in your strut.  What more can a simple coin-collecting chiffonier ask for?  Man, Iove this place!

To be clear my comment isn’t a “dig” at anyone. It’s just depending on where you sit within the hobby your viewpoint is different. And to be expected to some degree. 

[VKurtB]

On 9/6/2021 at 9:24 PM, Woods020 said:

To be clear my comment isn’t a “dig” at anyone. It’s just depending on where you sit within the hobby your viewpoint is different. And to be expected to some degree. 

People who write histories tend to become captured by historical thinking. 

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/6/2021 at 10:14 PM, VKurtB said:

....what you advocate is that everyone give up a perfectly wonderful grading system that works well, ....

Let's see now, we've got to consider strike, preservation, luster (or lack thereof) color and attractiveness (or eye appeal) with no sermonizing. Just a quick appraisal and assignment of a number.

Fact: this "perfectly wonderful grading system works so well," but apparently not well enough for you to rely on the professional opinions of experienced graders preferring instead to traipse the world over to examine relics personally, in hand, with the aid of a loupe while I, the self-admitting, rank amateur, received an award "for outstanding achievement in building the Best French Set [for] 2020, assembled while sitting on an old wooden chair, bad leg crossed over the good one, with a cheap, knock-off phone in my left palm letting my right thumb do all the walking -- relying on the judgment and good will of others wholly dependent on systems I am not completely in accord with. And if memory serves, it was YOU who implored ME to get with the program and "adapt" to the times. So I ask, Who's zoomin' who? and do so politely.  🤔 

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/6/2021 at 10:26 PM, VKurtB said:

People who write histories tend to become captured by historical thinking. 

There are two sides to every story and histories tend to be written by the victors...

[VKurtB]

On 9/6/2021 at 10:07 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

There are two sides to every story and histories tend to be written by the victors...

Not THIS time.

[VKurtB]

On 9/6/2021 at 10:03 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Let's see now, we've got to consider strike, preservation, luster (or lack thereof) color and attractiveness (or eye appeal) with no sermonizing. Just a quick appraisal and assignment of a number.

Fact: this "perfectly wonderful grading system works so well," but apparently not well enough for you to rely on the professional opinions of experienced graders preferring instead to traipse the world over to examine relics personally, in hand, with the aid of a loupe while I, the self-admitting, rank amateur, received an award "for outstanding achievement in building the Best French Set [for] 2020, assembled while sitting on an old wooden chair, bad leg crossed over the good one, with a cheap, knock-off phone in my left palm letting my right thumb do all the walking -- relying on the judgment and good will of others wholly dependent on systems I am not completely in accord with. And if memory serves, it was YOU who implored ME to get with the program and "adapt" to the times. So I ask, Who's zoomin' who? and do so politely.  🤔 

All four criteria count in the grading system; preservation, strike, luster, and eye appeal. And they SHOULD. What most collectors can’t possibly know is what bias each panel of graders gives, perhaps even unwittingly, to the relative importance of the four. What I do know for certain is that Roger is “all preservation, all the time”, while I prefer banging luster and I’ll gladly accept a few more chatter marks in search of it. That should not be a surprise. I’ve written of my positive opinion of AU58 coins here. They typically give up a little on preservation in favor of really nice luster. I like that much better, and I really don’t care who doesn’t share my opinion. So yes, I have my “favorite” of the “four horsemen” of MS grading, and my least favorite, which happens to be Roger’s “one and only”. The difference is, I don’t even try to jam my preference down the throat of ANYONE else, while Roger does virtually nothing else, on any subject, at any and every time.

If I were grading coins according to current standards, I’d have a 7x glass with me or a 5x if I couldn’t get a 7. But for me to decide if I want a particular coin for MY collection, I need NO MAGNIFICATION at all. Just the right light and my own hand and eyes.

Edited September 7, 2021 by VKurtB

[Cat Bath]

On 9/6/2021 at 11:32 PM, VKurtB said:

If I were grading coins according to current standards, I’d have a 7x glass with me or a 5x if I couldn’t get a 7. But for me to decide if I want a particular coin for MY collection, I need NO MAGNIFICATION at all. Just the right light and my own hand and eyes.

Yep, you and JA are luster graders.

I'm a preservation grader so we don't have to worry about bidding against each other. 

The only thing I use luster for is to verify that a MS coin isn't cleaned.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Cat Bath

[GoldFinger1969]

On 9/7/2021 at 5:49 AM, Cat Bath said:

The only thing I use luster for is to verify that a MS coin isn't cleaned.

Clean coins by definition can't have luster, right ?

[zadok]

On 9/7/2021 at 9:41 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Clean coins by definition can't have luster, right ?

incorrect...

[zadok]

On 9/6/2021 at 11:07 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

There are two sides to every story and histories tend to be written by the victors...

not with all the counter culturalists n revisionists we have today...beware those insufficiently_thoughtful_persons will be tearing down all the rooster statues next....

[zadok]

On 9/6/2021 at 11:03 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Let's see now, we've got to consider strike, preservation, luster (or lack thereof) color and attractiveness (or eye appeal) with no sermonizing. Just a quick appraisal and assignment of a number.

Fact: this "perfectly wonderful grading system works so well," but apparently not well enough for you to rely on the professional opinions of experienced graders preferring instead to traipse the world over to examine relics personally, in hand, with the aid of a loupe while I, the self-admitting, rank amateur, received an award "for outstanding achievement in building the Best French Set [for] 2020, assembled while sitting on an old wooden chair, bad leg crossed over the good one, with a cheap, knock-off phone in my left palm letting my right thumb do all the walking -- relying on the judgment and good will of others wholly dependent on systems I am not completely in accord with. And if memory serves, it was YOU who implored ME to get with the program and "adapt" to the times. So I ask, Who's zoomin' who? and do so politely.  🤔 

ur overlooking the simple fact that registry sets just go by the grades on the label n not the actual coins, some or many of ur coins could actually be not as described n u wouldnt know until in hand, not all finest knowns r that n not all 67s r really 67s...thats one of the negatives of registry sets but its the best we have at the present n yes if one chooses to participate one has to go with the tpg label even if incorrect...cousin vinny chooses to not play the registry game n im sure his hand selected coins r superior to many coins in the respective registry sets...i have registry sets n also have dups with my sets that r far superior to the registry coins, just the facts of collecting n common sense says buy what u need n also buy what u know is better....

[Woods020]

On 9/7/2021 at 8:41 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Clean coins by definition can't have luster, right ?

Luster is caused by microscopic lines in the die/coin that reflect light. As the coins are struck with the die metal flow lines develop and produce these small lines. A clean coin can reflect more light across these lines. Ironically the first coins off new dies may have a proof like appearance but not luster per se. Luster develops to a certain point then the die gets overly worn and strikes start to diminish  

This is case in point why I think, to me atleast, the totality of the coin is important. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Woods020

[RWB]

On 9/6/2021 at 9:54 PM, Woods020 said:

To me and other collectors having the TPG opinion is valuable.

The opinion is fine, but it must be in the proper context and identified. The present non-system jumbles different characteristics together into an unintelligible mess. Unless the "grade" is separated from opinion, it is a useless waste of money and time. FYI - I have decades of coin collecting before concentrating on research, so I have collector perspective. I have no meaningful experience in touting coins or the kind of greedy exaggeration some espouse.