How Are US TPGs with English Coins?

[VickySilver]

Sorry, the CGS was 85 & should have been 65 probably.

[Rob]

I've noticed that rim nicks are not marked down by the US TPGs having seen and bought an MS64 in that state, as with the NGC slab above. However, in the former case that may have been a function of out of sight, out of mind because the plastic hid the edge defect and I didn't know until l got it out of the plastic. It was far more obtrusive than the nick seen above.

[PWA 1967]

Its not costing much wherever you send them if the coins worth a few quid £200 + and you think its nice.

Everyone has different opinions so just send them ,the results from your own opinion as against the other are whats important.

Personally its not just the grade but any faults .

£15/30 a coin if you want it slabbed is upto you 

[pokal02]

As has been said previously, it's important to look at the coin not the slab.  

I need a 1680 crown and typed it into the Heritage search site.  There is one in VF 30 coming up next month which isn't even a British Fine, particularly the obverse.  However, there are two recently sold 1680's in VF 25 which are both indisputably better - Fine to GF maybe. 

[azda]

I'm still perplexed how the Jon Blyth offering of a 1912H penny even made MS65 with the gouges on it, if they mark down for mint wipes then surely gouges should also apply. Sold for £313 if anyone is interested

Edited December 19, 2016 by azda

[VickySilver]

Hard one to explain - I think that by the ear might be a planchet "adjustment" if you follow it along its course. Those behind the ear on back of neck may also be some planchet issue. But I agree, even if they do a decent job in all, they sometimes seem to miss it either direction high or low (as you will recall with the Off Metal Strike pennies you put up for me).

[jaggy]

I have had a 'details' grade for less obtrusive scratches.

[Guest Jam]

3 hours ago, azda said:

I'm still perplexed how the Jon Blyth offering of a 1912H penny even made MS65 with the gouges on it, if they mark down for mint wipes then surely gouges should also apply. Sold for £313 if anyone is interested

The seller has done well for £313

[azda]

2 hours ago, Guest Jam said:

The seller has done well for £313

He usually does

[youliveyoulean]

the tpgs are a rigged market. you will never get consistency and so you just cannot compare lcgs and ngc or pcgs. sometimes one will be more accurate or in line with what you would expect than another. the cynic in me would observe the bigger players in the market almost certainly get more favourable outcomes with slabbing.

i've sent coins in for cross-overs between all of them (without disclosing it to the tpgs in question) and you get all sorts of weird and wonderful outcomes.

grading really should be quite straightforward when you have a population of say 20 of the same coin and you need to rank them in order based on  your own criteria!

[VickySilver]

Absolutely. I have seen cases where I had not an ax to grind and was shocked at how "good" the outcomes were! Buy this is not always the case, as I had at one time pointed out an example: Cheshire 1854 6d UNDERGRADED in my opinion at "63". Virtually all the marks were clash...

[craigy]

On 11/15/2016 at 2:52 AM, Paulus said:

I have a bunch of English coins I would like professionally graded, for various reasons, and I do not want to use CGS / LCGS

What are peoples' opinions on how US TPGs treat weak strikes vs wear, and mint wipes on 1902 matt proofs? Do they know what they are doing with these?

Here's an example, VS what would this get from a US tpg? @VickySilver

mint wipes on the 02's,  do you have any images, i have what i think is a lovely matte proof shilling with weird lines across it on the reverse, not scratches though, is that just the toning or this final wipe they gave them at the mint showing itself, love the half crown Btw, next on my list, i understand the 02 issue tends to be weakly or softly struck anyway, 

Edited July 11, 2017 by craigy

[VickySilver]

Rehash: half crown a Pf63, the shilling more a Pf62 IMO. The problem is that both major TPGs in USA appear to be a bit spread on these; how much to deduct for the wipe? I have seen them really ding a coin and others to not. It does not mean a coin is not attractive just because it is at the lower end of the scale however, and the buyer would be advised to look closely under good lighting. Those wipes did in most cases seem to affect more than just toning and have seen some very light abrasion with them under magnification.

[craigy]

4 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Rehash: half crown a Pf63, the shilling more a Pf62 IMO. The problem is that both major TPGs in USA appear to be a bit spread on these; how much to deduct for the wipe? I have seen them really ding a coin and others to not. It does not mean a coin is not attractive just because it is at the lower end of the scale however, and the buyer would be advised to look closely under good lighting. Those wipes did in most cases seem to affect more than just toning and have seen some very light abrasion with them under magnification.

are talking about my shilling there ? lol

[VickySilver]

Yes. The proof gold of this year is even more problematic....Not that it matters but I like the shilling, half crown, and crowns of this set if nicely preserved & yours pleasant enough. The lion on rev. a bit regal (if perplexed) & Eddie looks the wise old dignified man (not the partier/bon vivant).

[craigy]

4 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Yes. The proof gold of this year is even more problematic....Not that it matters but I like the shilling, half crown, and crowns of this set if nicely preserved & yours pleasant enough. The lion on rev. a bit regal (if perplexed) & Eddie looks the wise old dignified man (not the partier/bon vivant).

my favorite bust after George VI's, but then i like Anne's too lol  so does my shilling show the signs of the mint wiping, just scanning the net about the practice now, the shilling is nice in the hand, (gloved hand that is) with some hints of rainbow toning that just about shows in the picture 

Edited July 11, 2017 by craigy

[VickySilver]

Yes, classical wipe appearance on the shilling.

[craigy]

56 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Yes, classical wipe appearance on the shilling.

would be nice to see a truly matte finish unwiped 02 proof 

[Nonmortuus]

2 hours ago, craigy said:

would be nice to see a truly matte finish unwiped 02 proof 

I think @Paulushas some examples.

[Paulus]

Fairly / totally(?) wipe-free

[Paulus]

[Paulus]

Bit of a wipe on the shilling and sixpence though:

[VickySilver]

Although I am one of those somewhat on middle ground with regard to TPGs and their function in the market as well as personally in a collection, I find the grading of these mattes by the major TPGs nearly laughable as it seems depending on their mood of the day, or perhaps other factors (LOL), grading seems to be all over the map. To some extant, I have also seen this with the currency half crowns and especially the currency crowns of this date - well, also the gold...

[jaggy]

I have had quite a few of my British coins graded by NGC. For the most part, I have been comfortable with the grade assigned. In the cases where there has been a 'details' grade, I have almost always understood where that has come from. What the grading process has done for me is to make me much more 'picky' when buying coins. I now have a feel for what the graders are looking for and I apply that to my purchases. It has also made me much more skeptical of auction house/dealer/seller descriptions. 

The question I have is whether NGC applies a different standard to large customers (dealers, auction houses) than the one they apply to the individual collector?

[Rob]

50 minutes ago, jaggy said:

The question I have is whether NGC applies a different standard to large customers (dealers, auction houses) than the one they apply to the individual collector?

I have my suspicions