Slabbed values

[Accumulator 52]

Spink (2010) values this 1931 Penny in UNC at £45. With 11 hours to go it has 9 bids and has reached £103. Does slabbing really make that much difference or have I missed something?

[scott 129]

sadly it does, i dunno why

[Gary 7]

I smell a rat! There are only 3 unique bidders and the last one has upped their bid three times ie outbidding themselves. Not in itself unusual, I have done it too. Put a bid in and then decided to increase it so bid again but never three times. The price does seem excessively high, this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre as is the case for this coin. I would expect a few £'s more due to the slabbing and expert grading but £103, hmmm! What will it eventually fetch, I predict £103 or is someone confusing this with a sovereign? An investor with no knowledge of coins!

[Peckris 579]

Ludicrous. If this is a genuine phenomenon then it's worth having any coin slabbed we're intending to sell, just to boost its price. Pffft. I just hope the bubble (forgive the pun) bursts, and soon.

[Peter 615]

The Yanks will pay a huge premium for a MS66 against MS64 although both are uncirculated...its the need to have the best which drives the price up.Love it or hate it if punters are prepared to pay...let them.

It knocks Spink prices ...so if you have a really brilliant BU that you want to sell it maybe worth slabbing (as long as it is a fairly valuable coin)

[azda 973]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Anyway back to the post, i believe that ms66 is 1 point short of perfect by USA grading standards, so hence the push in price me thinks.

[RLC35 288]

Azda,

You are pretty close to ms (perfect) standard. It is ms70.

[1949threepence 3,366]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Anyway back to the post, i believe that ms66 is 1 point short of perfect by USA grading standards, so hence the push in price me thinks.

I don't think that is the case though, Dave. As you say there are very few bunheads which would be in what we regard as a pure BU state, and those which are, command a hefty premium over their merely (technically) uncirculated cousins.

Have a look at this as an example of as near to BU as you will get with a bunhead. Look at what he's asking for what is one of the more common dates ~ and he will probably get it, or as near as dammit. It's no doubt enjoyed an almost hermetically sealed existence since minting.

I think there are UNC bunheads in which all the original underlying lustre is essentially still present, in that there has been no wear to the coin, and when it came out of circulation, probably still presented with pretty much 100% lustre. But time and the atmospheric exposure of well over a century, has removed the surface lustre such that the coin, whilst otherwise perfect, appears brown or black.

Edited February 22, 2011 by 1949threepence

[1949threepence 3,366]

Azda,

You are pretty close to ms (perfect) standard. It is ms70.

The MS definitions can be found here

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as true UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Very, very few. Oh for sure we have seen several hundred advertised as Unc, but I would be very surprised if the top quality stuff ever makes it to the internet. I would guess that the true Unc Buns are syphoned off and go to rich collectors who are prepared to pay top dollar.

Same as in any other collectible market.

As for Spink's definition, well, that's pretty unequivocal isn't it ?

Don't understand why a 1931 would go that high, 1932 maybe....

[azda 973]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Anyway back to the post, i believe that ms66 is 1 point short of perfect by USA grading standards, so hence the push in price me thinks.

I don't think that is the case though, Dave. As you say there are very few bunheads which would be in what we regard as a pure BU state, and those which are, command a hefty premium over their merely (technically) uncirculated cousins.

Have a look at this as an example of as near to BU as you will get with a bunhead. Look at what he's asking for what is one of the more common dates ~ and he will probably get it, or as near as dammit. It's no doubt enjoyed an almost hermetically sealed existence since minting.

I think there are UNC bunheads in which all the original underlying lustre is essentially still present, in that there has been no wear to the coin, and when it came out of circulation, probably still presented with pretty much 100% lustre. But time and the atmospheric exposure of well over a century, has removed the surface lustre such that the coin, whilst otherwise perfect, appears brown or black.

I would call that BU Mike and not UNC, if we were to go by spink, where a coin with 100% lustre is only UNC, what is their definition of BU, what would they class that coin as.? I have also been watching that

Jesus H, it finished at 180 quid

Edited February 22, 2011 by azda

[Gary 7]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Anyway back to the post, i believe that ms66 is 1 point short of perfect by USA grading standards, so hence the push in price me thinks.

We all know that full lustre commands a higher price so I think a price for BU and a price for UNC as Chris does in his CCGB. I only have the 2009 edition which puts the 1931 penny at £25 in UNC and £35 in BU.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Gary

[Gary 7]

Jesus H, it finished at 180 quid

Well knock me down with a feather!!!

[azda 973]

this years spink quotes £55 for UNC and spink also quote that UNC means with full lustre

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

Anyway back to the post, i believe that ms66 is 1 point short of perfect by USA grading standards, so hence the push in price me thinks.

We all know that full lustre commands a higher price so I think a price for BU and a price for UNC as Chris does in his CCGB. I only have the 2009 edition which puts the 1931 penny at £25 in UNC and £35 in BU.

Spink 2011 has 55 quid in UNC, the winning bidder has 118 Feedback score

[argentumandcoins 70]

Gentlemen, I have said it before on more than one occasion.... Spink certainly do not apply the BU status to coins they sell either in auctions, from their site or from the circular. I have had UNC coins from them that were toned and A UNC at best, Freeman 1 Penny that was actually a Freeman 6, a 267 halfpenny that was actually a 266 and a star stops 1845 Crown that was a cinquefoil.

Setting a company or individual up to Deity level only leads to becoming an agnostic!

As for the selling price

[Red Riley 2]

I have also noticed this quote in Spink, but surely if a coin is UNC whether full lustre or not it merits UNC price. If a coin is toned, does that mean Spink says its EF? Not getting that part at all. Also how many bunheads have we seen in what spink would then regard as ture UNC which would mean with full lustre. Sorry but i must laugh at that quote

The whole point is though Dave, that no coin, particularly in the higher grades, is ever an exact grade. If the UNC (100% lustre) figure is quoted as £100 and EF as £50, the theory is that everything EF to UNC will fit somewhere between the two and let's face it there is plenty of leeway. Sometimes an EF with lustre will fetch more than an AU without; that's just the way the cookie crumbles and shows that you should never give an undue amount of credence to Spink's or any other price guide without a pinch, or even a handful of Siberia's finest.

[azda 973]

Yes Derek, but surely everything UNC with Full lustre would surely Be BU then if it has FULL lustre?

I Hope you understand what i mean.

[Red Riley 2]

Yes Derek, but surely everything UNC with Full lustre would surely Be BU then if it has FULL lustre?

I Hope you understand what i mean.

I think the problem is that Spink's don't acknowledge the BU grade.

[azda 973]

Well the won't acknowledge it if they've already Stated that UNC is with Full lustre. So who exactly started the BU grade?

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, a difficult proposition with what Spink is stating as an equivalent to MS70 (or what it used to be?) as the unobtainable perfect.

There is a bit of a problem with this full lustre business IMO, and that is that a coin can have fantastic lustre and yet be bagmarked not only in the case of mint bagging and other post strike contacts but even the planchets themselves do not enter the striking chamber unmarked and some of these issues carry through even unbroken lustre...

PCGS makes some commentary as to market grading versus technical grading and perhaps we try to encompass this into our possibly more qualitative ananlyses with regards to this.

[Red Riley 2]

Well the won't acknowledge it if they've already Stated that UNC is with Full lustre. So who exactly started the BU grade?

Well it's always been around from my recollection but I do have a hunch that it is pre-dated by both Spink's and Seaby's who with that special kind of snobbery reserved by august English institutions refuse to accept that the world didn't stop the day they were established.

[Colin G. 147]

I really can't believe that people can still get so frustrated by the grading terms UNC/BU. No one person/company sets the standard, they are based on historical terminology, and the introduction of grading houses has mixed that issue even further with the introduction of numerical scales. I can understand that people may want a clear set of technical rules to try and make the system simpler, but it never will happen, there are just too many factors to consider, and whose opinion is going to ever be so perfect that every collector/dealer buys into it. There are only a limited number of us on here, and even we can't agree on things 9 times out of 10

At the end of the day we all have price guides, but they are just that "price guides". Nothing says that you shouldn't pay more or less for a particular coin, and the range of coins covered by the Spink catalogue inevitably will lead to several inaccuracies. Collecting patterns and markets change, and the guide is only as accurate as the data it is based upon.

Spinks state that their prices are based on UNC with full lustre. The next grade down is EF, so all other coins that are from EF up to BU fall into this range somewhere. Then it is a case of you determining the price you are willing to pay by using a combination of the guide, your own knowledge and experience and your desire for that particular piece.

You will always get anomolies on Ebay, which is no different to auction houses and I would guess that this is one of those anomolies, but theoretically two people were willing to pay that price for that piece at that time, so market forces have determined it to be correct. Whether the slabbing played a major influence we will never know.

There are examples in Spink where I would gladly pay double their list price for an example, and others which are way overpriced in my opinion, but that is where I think experience becomes invaluable.

As an example the recent 1825 farthings I acquired gave me a real opportunity to study a decent number of UNC examples of the same coin side by side. A large portion of them could easily be described as UNC with full lustre, but there were a range of different aspects that affected each coin (strike quality, lustre quality, planchet quality, die quality, tiny carbon stains, contact marks) that would all affect value. If I selected the best one out of the bunch in my opinion it should easily double the value that many of the others would realise, and if I am honest I would have paid a premium for that example because it was near perfect, it does not mean that the other coins were not BU, but can go some way to explain why certain coins command that premium (but it does not explain why people will pay that premium based on a photo, unless they have genuine faith in the subtle differences between the MS grades given by the grading houses)

[Red Riley 2]

Yes, a difficult proposition with what Spink is stating as an equivalent to MS70 (or what it used to be?) as the unobtainable perfect.

There is a bit of a problem with this full lustre business IMO, and that is that a coin can have fantastic lustre and yet be bagmarked not only in the case of mint bagging and other post strike contacts but even the planchets themselves do not enter the striking chamber unmarked and some of these issues carry through even unbroken lustre...

PCGS makes some commentary as to market grading versus technical grading and perhaps we try to encompass this into our possibly more qualitative ananlyses with regards to this.

Personally I think if it's one of those things we can over-analyse. I suppose that Spinks' Unc for currency pieces is what, MS66? But by the same token does their FDC equal MS70? If it does then I would guess that many of the prices they list are below market value. Perhaps the guide is produced as much on gut feel as on hard market evidence, which is in itself a very erratic yardstick. As I said, don't take it too seriously...

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

I've just rushed down to the Forum cellar, and the box labelled "The BU/UNC/lustre argument" has got 3 loose nails in it's lid and is shaking.

It can't be about to escape again can it

[azda 973]

I think the frustration lies between the UNC price and BU price, if both coins were the same and 1 described UNC and the other BU then thats where you might See the difference, so iny opinion, clarification is needed