Grading a folder coin

[DrP]

How do you grade an uncirculated coin that has been in a folder and received some wear? I assume you grade according to the wear and grade it down to EF or VF depending on the amount of wear. I have a few really nice pennies that are uncirculated with lustre,which have wear on the highest points from being in a folder. I would say EF due to the wear and VF on others, but the wear is on the highest points only and the rest of the coin is uncirculated.   Would you grade them as EF/VF with lustre? I guess then they would be valued at lower VF or EF grades with a little exrtra for the lustre. Maybe a note added to the grade to say that the wear is from a folder. I am trying to value them, I will keep some and sell some on.

Do they loose their uncirculated status from being stored in a Whitman folder for years?    I am also guessing it is a little subjective according to the grader's criteria for grading and what scale is used, but there must be some rules that apply.   Again, for me, I would think it would go by the amount of wear on the coin. 

 

This is harder when the coin has wear to the high points that would put it in as low as a VF grade, but the rest of the coin is top end EF AUNC with high lustre and looks great  -  how to value/grade these?

 

. 

[DrP]

Or a coin that is better than EF,is UNC but has some visible wear on the very highest parts due to poor storage?   I think maybe some of the other grading scales could cover it I do not know. I have only ever really graded coins by the English method - VG/F/VF/EF/UNC/BU//MINT

 

Thanks. 

[DrP]

Maybe I am confusing the UNC grade with BU grade a bit. Is the coin still UNC with wear or a patina... if you look with a loop and there are no scratches but there is slight wear?

Now I'm thinking that if it has the wear then it drops the grade regardless of the rest of the coin. just a very good EF or VF.

Sorry for going on - thoughts or critic welcome.

Edited May 30, 2018 by DrP

[Peter]

UNC or EF isn't rocket science.I like A/unc because that gives a great coin A/unc most of the time.

[zookeeperz]

you will hear auctions often quote UNC with some cabinet friction. We had this discussion what constitutes wear and what doesn't. Some people say wear is wear and that's the long and tall of it. to me if a coin has been in circulation then yes that applies even if the wear is minute. But if a coin is UNC and never seen a pocket or a till draw and has been in a flip for years and has a tiny friction mark due to pressure from the flip to me it is still unc and should designated so with that statement of storage friction applied. Some say how can you tell friction from minute wear. Simple answer is if a coin has never been in circulation it will for the most part be unmarked or very few contact marks from production. Circulated coins could never escape much heavier marks even if only exposed for a short time. So unless the storage process suspends the coin from contact either side from any other material all coins will receive some degree of friction even in a tray.

[Peckris]

I very much doubt if a coin would degrade to VF through being stored in a folder. If handled significantly, then it could go down to EF+ but pictures would help us.

VF is a comparatively misunderstood grade that has actually changed over the years. Back in the 60s it was defined (I paraphrase) as "visible wear only to the highest points of the design", and it was strictly interpreted by the top dealers. However, there has to be a clear divide between EF and VF to account for difference in values. I would say that VF shows the complete design but can appear a bit 'blurry' due to the wear to - e.g. lions' faces, garter motto, monarch's hair, etc. If you want pictorial guidance, then invest in Derek's book on grading British coins as shown in the banner ad, top.

[pokal02]

Definitely agree that VF grade now is lower than 30 years ago - the big divide then was F to VF, now it's VF to EF (although EF has also come down a bit from what it used to be).   

[DrP]

13 hours ago, Peckris said:

I very much doubt if a coin would degrade to VF through being stored in a folder. If handled significantly, then it could go down to EF+ but pictures would help us.

I'll try to get some decent pics at some point. I'm talking about damage/wear caused by the ion being kept in a whitman folder.

13 hours ago, Peckris said:

VF is a comparatively misunderstood grade that has actually changed over the years. Back in the 60s it was defined (I paraphrase) as "visible wear only to the highest points of the design", 

That's how I often see EF defined now and what I would use for grading. I think everyone suffers a bit of unconscious bias when grading their own coins too. Even if you think you don't. :-)   

[mrbadexample]

I’d grade the coin according to the level of wear, regardless of how it happened. Whether it’s from poor storage or circulation is irrelevant to me.

[Sword]

2 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

I’d grade the coin according to the level of wear, regardless of how it happened. Whether it’s from poor storage or circulation is irrelevant to me.

Exactly. "Cabinet Friction" is merely a wishful thinking term. If a coin has wear, it is no longer unc in my view. 

[Peckris]

10 hours ago, DrP said:

"VF is a comparatively misunderstood grade that has actually changed over the years. Back in the 60s it was defined (I paraphrase) as "visible wear only to the highest points of the design"

That's how I often see EF defined now and what I would use for grading. I think everyone suffers a bit of unconscious bias when grading their own coins too. Even if you think you don't. :-)   

EF used to be defined as "very slight wear to the highest points only visible under magnification or close inspection" - the difference there being that VF was immediately visible while EF required some degree of peering. But one person's "slight wear" was another's "noticeable wear", so pictures - as in Derek's book - are everything.

[1949threepence]

I'd say that cabinet friction or, as in this case, "folder friction", on an otherwise uncirculated coin, would be negligible in terms of actual wear - given they're not actually circulating and continually getting wear from constant exposure/friction with other coins, frequent handling, being drawn across surfaces before pick up etc. That's true wear criteria.  

Pictures would obviously help, but in their absence, I'd say aUNC. 

 

[DrP]

OK - Lets see if these pics are clear enough for wear to be shown.

The 1917 coin here still has lustre - there is little to no wear on most of the coin  -  byt look at her arm - it is worn down as bad as you would find on a coin that is graded F/VF. ? The head side of the coin is pretty good - wasn't face up in the folder.    The 1920 doesn't have much wear, but has some dirt marks/dust from being in a whitman folder.

 

Edited June 1, 2018 by DrP

[DrP]

This last one  -  it's 1937 - I would have said EF - but look at the visible wear on the head. This was heads up in the folder. The rest of the coin is spotless and almost UNC apart from the toning and the wear on the head.

Maybe I am just not that good at grading - but I found these hard to grade because of the fact they have never been in circulation - but have wear from poor storage.  Thoughts welcome. Obviously a Whitman folder isn't the place to store high grade coins, esspecially if someone keeps opening and closing it. I think some lateral slippage of the pages during transport of the folder and due to lots of opening and closing the folder and taking coins in and out - I guess this just counts as circulation.

 

Thanks again.

Edited June 1, 2018 by DrP

[mrbadexample]

That 1917’s a really weak strike which may be misleading when it comes to grading.

[secret santa]

In my opinion, storage in a Whitman folder isn't going to leave any wear marks on a bronze coin.