Spread of coins between grades

[MickM 5]

Having bought Freemans book 'Bronze coinage of Great Britain', and considered his rarity index, and estimates for likely surviving numbers of each coin variety, is there a rule of thumb for what the split between the grades would be?

Looking at valuations for each grade doesn't appear to give a consistent pattern.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

[PWA 1967 1,836]

The short answer to that Mick is no.

Better to do your own research by looking at auction results and speaking to dealers for grades / valuations IMO.

Have you got one particular coin in mind or do you mean all of them ?.

 

Edited October 16, 2017 by PWA 1967

[declanwmagee 122]

A very interesting can of worms, Mick.  It introduces the idea of the condition rarity - coins that are common in low grade, but disproportionately scarce in high grades.  The best insight, over and above my own findings (which, after all this time, are not inconsiderable), I've found is the book "the Standard Catalogue of English Milled Coinage", written by Cope and Rayner, published 1975, in which they give relative rarity ratings for coins in a range of grades.

 

Rob Pearce sold me my copy, he may have some more, but it's an excellent reference...

 

 

[VickySilver 775]

Liking Vicky silver as you might guess, this is an issue that is much more difficult & seems to be not an absolute entity. That is, opinions vary from one person to another and also over time. The best IMO one might hope for is a general consensus about a particular date or dates and condition.

On reading that, I suppose not that helpful but it is a difficult one. Pricing volumes such as Spink give value that is only relative and on occasion a bit inaccurate but are at least an attempt to give an idea based on price which is naturally the intersection of the supply and demand curves.

[MickM 5]

Many thanks. I will certainly seek out a copy of Cope and Rayners book.

[1949threepence 3,366]

On 10/16/2017 at 1:33 PM, declanwmagee said:

A very interesting can of worms, Mick.  It introduces the idea of the condition rarity - coins that are common in low grade, but disproportionately scarce in high grades.  The best insight, over and above my own findings (which, after all this time, are not inconsiderable), I've found is the book "the Standard Catalogue of English Milled Coinage", written by Cope and Rayner, published 1975, in which they give relative rarity ratings for coins in a range of grades.

 

Rob Pearce sold me my copy, he may have some more, but it's an excellent reference...

 

 

Thanks for the heads up on that book, Declan. Sounds useful. I managed to locate a copy on Amazon and have ordered it.

As far as rarity and condition, if I'm understanding Mick correctly, I'd say that it's quite possible to get even a really rare coin  (>20 in existence) in high grade - see Richard's rare penny website. When I say "get", what I mean is that they are out there somewhere, but unlikely to be put up for sale anytime soon, and if they were, they'd be a hell of a price.

Whilst I don't think Freeman took grade into account in determining rarity - he just appears to have gone on likely numbers still extant, irrespective of grade - Gouby does touch on the relative rarity of some coins according to grade. For example, the 1864, 1869 &1875H all relatively easy to obtain in grades below VF, but extremely difficult to obtain in high grade, EF+.

Obviously the above concerns pennies. Not really much of a clue about relative grade rarity in other denominations.           

    

  

[1949threepence 3,366]

Cope and Rayner book arrived today - excellent. Really interesting. 

[Guest Tim]

On 19/10/2017 at 3:36 PM, 1949threepence said:

For example, the 1864, 1869 &1875H all relatively easy to obtain in grades below VF, but extremely difficult to obtain in high grade, EF+.

1869 is not as scarce a date as 1864 or 1875 H in UNC grade. I also feel that 1878 is probably scarcer in UNC grade than the 1869.

[PWA 1967 1,836]

50 minutes ago, Guest Tim said:

1869 is not as scarce a date as 1864 or 1875 H in UNC grade. I also feel that 1878 is probably scarcer in UNC grade than the 1869.

Hi Tim........Sorry but i cant agree that the 1878 is scarcer in UNC than 1869.

[Peter 615]

The 1869 1d is the holy grail for penny collectors.Anyone who has an UNC is unlikely to sell it.I bet there are quite a few stashed away.

I bow to Pete's expertise on the 1d series and the market availability of buns.

[PWA 1967 1,836]

Definately know expert Peter but i do look at them everyday 

[Peter 615]

Don't undersell yourself Pete.You've forgotten more than I know.

[1949threepence 3,366]

7 hours ago, Guest Tim said:

1869 is not as scarce a date as 1864 or 1875 H in UNC grade. I also feel that 1878 is probably scarcer in UNC grade than the 1869.

Re: emboldened sentence above. My point was that all three are extremely difficult to locate in top grade, but if you are going to rank all three, I'd say the most difficult is the 1864, and of the two types plain 4 and crosslet 4, contrary to popular belief, I'm going for the plain 4 as being the more difficult of the two to obtain in UNC with lustre. Next the 1869, and then the 1875H. 

With regard to your second sentence, I'd agree that the 1878 is most definitely a scarce date, but I obtained an UNC example in 2011 for just £138. I could not have bought an UNC1869 for that price. That should tell you all you need to know about the relative scarcity of the two dates. 

   

[1949threepence 3,366]

46 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Re: emboldened sentence above. My point was that all three are extremely difficult to locate in top grade, but if you are going to rank all three, I'd say the most difficult is the 1864, and of the two types plain 4 and crosslet 4, contrary to popular belief, I'm going for the plain 4 as being the more difficult of the two to obtain in UNC with lustre. Next the 1869, and then the 1875H. 

With regard to your second sentence, I'd agree that the 1878 is most definitely a scarce date, but I obtained an UNC example in 2011 for just £138. I could not have bought an UNC1869 for that price. That should tell you all you need to know about the relative scarcity of the two dates. 

   

Correction it was £137.00 and a/UNC, February 2011 - I posted it in the Coin Acquisition of the Week thread at that time. Link to post here  

Photo still intact, but not very good. Here's a better one I took just now, for interest. Also out of interest, I just turned to the Cope & Rayner book, which Declan recommended, and it states the following rarity values for the four coins in question

1864 plain EF R2, AS R4

1864 crosslet EF R4, AS R6

1869 EF R3, AS R3

1875H EF R3, AS R4

1878 EF R, AS R2

Where AS = "As Struck"

R = rare

R2 = very rare

R3 = very rare

R4 = extremely rare

R5 = extremely rare

R6 = fewer than 10 pieces known (to our knowledge)

The book was written in 1974 and published in 1975.

So in fact they didn't have the 1878 that far behind the 1869. But with a very clear emphasis on the rarity of the 1864, as makes sense.   

   

 

 

 

 

Edited October 25, 2017 by 1949threepence
added for increased relevance

[VickySilver 775]

Hmmm, most 1869 “mint state” pennies are rather unsatisfying for one reason or another. I still like the Gerald Jackson specimen.  1875 H seems not as popular now but think similar rarity. The ‘64s are both quite tough in top grade. I just never felt the same about 1878. 

[Guest Tim]

I would say that I have seen a few 1869 pennies in UNC grade, but I have never seen what I would class a true UNC 1864. With the 1878, it is a date that I have seen sparingly in UNC grade but I've seen 30 odd in AU grade. The other coins I have not seen in UNC condition are the 1874 G obverses, 1879 narrow date, 1908*, 1909*, 1911 neck, 1913 (the scarier type), 1915 broken tooth, 1926, 1934 and almost all the coins that Freeman lists as R15 and over. That out of the way an old sod like me has only come across 2 1872 pennies that were proper UNC with a fully formed clear shield

[secret santa 2,013]

36 minutes ago, Guest Tim said:

The other coins I have not seen in UNC condition are the 1874 G obverses

Tim, do you mean G reverses, or a different obverse ?

[Guest Tim]

Closer ribbons Freeman 8

[PWA 1967 1,836]

22 minutes ago, Guest Tim said:

Closer ribbons Freeman 8

Your loosing me Tim.

Is the 1913 a limited one specially struck by the Royal Mint for Tuesday ?.

[1949threepence 3,366]

2 hours ago, Guest Tim said:

I would say that I have seen a few 1869 pennies in UNC grade, but I have never seen what I would class a true UNC 1864. With the 1878, it is a date that I have seen sparingly in UNC grade but I've seen 30 odd in AU grade. The other coins I have not seen in UNC condition are the 1874 G obverses, 1879 narrow date, 1908*, 1909*, 1911 neck, 1913 (the scarier type), 1915 broken tooth, 1926, 1934 and almost all the coins that Freeman lists as R15 and over. That out of the way an old sod like me has only come across 2 1872 pennies that were proper UNC with a fully formed clear shield

 

 

With regard to 1874, do you mean Freeman's 69 and 76, reverse I? 

By the way, here's an UNC (or very near so) 1879 narrow date. Another one was sold at the Workman auction in 2010. But you're right, they are extremely rare in UNC, although not that difficult in grades up to VF.

 

[davidrj 194]

I was lucky with this one, bought as a standard 1915, the broken tooth is much less than the 1916 recessed ear variety. Be nice to find a recessed ear 1915 from an early strike without damage

[secret santa 2,013]

2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

With regard to 1874, do you mean Freeman's 69 and 76, reverse I? 

I think he means the F77 and 78 varieties with obverse 8. They are both rare in high grades.

[1949threepence 3,366]

5 hours ago, secret santa said:

I think he means the F77 and 78 varieties with obverse 8. They are both rare in high grades.

Hmmm, possibly.

Even if he meant Gouby obverse G, that is a special designation which applies exclusively to1861.

Maybe he can clarify - and hopefully sign up as a full member.

 

 

[secret santa 2,013]

3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Hmmm, possibly.

Well, he did say Freeman 8 closer ribbons above.

[1949threepence 3,366]

13 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Well, he did say Freeman 8 closer ribbons above.

He did indeed, Richard. I missed that bit.