What grade would you say this was?

[declanwmagee]

You probably get a more realistic valuation declan - between the overhype of Spink and the dismal undervaluation of Market Values. On the other hand, using Spink would pay dividends if having to make an insurance claim

Insurance! That'd be funny wouldn't it.

"and how do you secure your collection, Mr Magee?"

"erm...in my bus..."

[Rob]

You probably get a more realistic valuation declan - between the overhype of Spink and the dismal undervaluation of Market Values. On the other hand, using Spink would pay dividends if having to make an insurance claim

Insurance! That'd be funny wouldn't it.

"and how do you secure your collection, Mr Magee?"

"erm...in my bus..."

Yeh, but have you ever tried getting onto a bus? Difficult, isn't it.

[argentumandcoins]

You too? I have some calculations based on "in-between" grades that took me forever to code! That's using scripting in FileMaker - what are you using?

I use a big old bloated Excel workbook, ridiculously overcomplicated and held together with bits of string, rubber bands, and VBA. Keeping it pruned is a constant task, hence the loss of various bits of functionality over the years. One of which was the treatment of grades below Fine. On the grading scale I came up with when I started (years before CGS!), half of the numeric grades were below fine, because most of the coins I had at the time were. By condensing all that into one grade, Fair, that particular prune had the effect of reducing the number crunching by half, and eliminated such nonsense as "what would I pay for a 1967 halfpenny in VG+?". Which was being automatically calculated, along with 1500 other coins in 10 different low grades!

Inbetween grades above Fine took me a while to get right, because I found that each coin has an individual gradient. Big silver, for instance, is nearly linear, as bullion value holds the lower grades artificially high, but bronze tends to follow a classic exponential curve. The solution I came up with involves taking an average of 4 price sources, calculating the gradient of the average, and plotting a trend line between the known points.

As well as all that, I had to come up with a method for dealing with the more esoteric varieties that my 4 price sources don't list. Davies and Freeman both include pricing (albeit out of date) for their varieties, so I use those to factor up the prices given for the common types.

Example: 1929 Halfcrown. None of the 4 price guides I use recognise the 2 Davies varieties, so I have to assume the prices they give are for the commoner D.1704, listed as worth £11 in Mint State by Davies (1982). He gives £14 for D.1705, so I can safely multiply recent book prices by (14/11) for D.1705.

Make sense?

Sort of! Here are my visible notes as seen on one of my database layouts, giving an idea of what's going on in the background (what's going on i.t.b. is the actual calculation as coded by me!):

Make sense?

Peck have you by any chance worked at the Treasury???? Total gobbldeygook but it gives you a figure at the end!

[declanwmagee]

Peck have you by any chance worked at the Treasury???? Total gobbldeygook but it gives you a figure at the end!

We all do it! Keep playing with the formula till it gives you the result you wanted in the first place....

[Peckris]

Peck have you by any chance worked at the Treasury???? Total gobbldeygook but it gives you a figure at the end!

We all do it! Keep playing with the formula till it gives you the result you wanted in the first place....

Quite right! And then write notes to yourself explaining it. What does it matter if no-one else understands them???

[argentumandcoins]

There's a surefire way to value a coin;

Put it on ebay, call it VERY RARE, grade it as B UNC or FDC or both and watch the suckers jack the price up for you. Whatever it sells for you half, multiply by 3, divide by 0.666, find the cube root of and you should be left with a number that gives the true value plus or minus £1000.

Easy!

[Boomstick]

Hmm, I hope that wasn't how you arrived at the price of the coins I recently bought from you John!

[argentumandcoins]

Hmm, I hope that wasn't how you arrived at the price of the coins I recently bought from you John!

No, no, not at all.

That's the way to value coins.

The way to price them is think of a number and quadruple it...as the meerkat would say, simples!

[azda]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

[Coinery]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

Do you mind if I have a dig at this one? I'll get in first so I can reflect on any other grading suggestions to follow. I'd personally go with fine/good fine, probably pulling the whole thing back to a fine overall, in view of the obverse scratch, and the reverse 'stain'.

So I'm going for 'fine'.

I'll watch out the other opinions with the greatest of interest.

[Rob]

Fine reverse, the obverse nearly fine. Difficult to live with unless it's a hole that has to be filled.

[azda]

Fine reverse, the obverse nearly fine. Difficult to live with unless it's a hole that has to be filled.

I suppose some people have to live with coins like this due to its rarity in higher grades VF and above.

[Accumulator]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

Do you mind if I have a dig at this one? I'll get in first so I can reflect on any other grading suggestions to follow. I'd personally go with fine/good fine, probably pulling the whole thing back to a fine overall, in view of the obverse scratch, and the reverse 'stain'.

So I'm going for 'fine'.

I'll watch out the other opinions with the greatest of interest.

Ouch! That's a modern scratch? The reverse is certainly GF but the obverse is such a poor strike I'd say F money for the coin.

[Peter]

I will go under F for value.That scratch is recent (and appears to go through Vicki's face)

The stain also detracts.Even without defects it would push to get F.

[Peckris]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

I'd give the reverse a clear Fine, the obverse not yet there (too much wear to the hair, and a few letters going). So, NF/F is my verdict.

[Colin G.]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

I'd give the reverse a clear Fine, the obverse not yet there (too much wear to the hair, and a few letters going). So, NF/F is my verdict.

I would generally agree with the above comments, but scans can also make the copper series look a bit "flatter" from a detail perspective. I bet a photo would put a marginally better slant on it

[Red Riley]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

Do you mind if I have a dig at this one? I'll get in first so I can reflect on any other grading suggestions to follow. I'd personally go with fine/good fine, probably pulling the whole thing back to a fine overall, in view of the obverse scratch, and the reverse 'stain'.

So I'm going for 'fine'.

I'll watch out the other opinions with the greatest of interest.

Put yourself in the position of a collector buying blind. Would you prefer 'Fine' or 'F/GF. Scratch on obverse, stain on reverse'? In my opinion, you mention damage rather than attempt to grade it. I would have to say I have given the obverse the benefit of the doubt as the picture leaves something to be desired and that (recent?) scratch would be the killer for me. As Rob has said, this is one where a bit of blue baize would be a better contribution to the collection.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Red Riley

[Coinery]

And as the topic states, what grade would you say this one was? GF?

Do you mind if I have a dig at this one? I'll get in first so I can reflect on any other grading suggestions to follow. I'd personally go with fine/good fine, probably pulling the whole thing back to a fine overall, in view of the obverse scratch, and the reverse 'stain'.

So I'm going for 'fine'.

I'll watch out the other opinions with the greatest of interest.

Put yourself in the position of a collector buying blind. Would you prefer 'Fine' or 'F/GF. Scratch on obverse, stain on reverse'? In my opinion, you mention damage rather than attempt to grade it. I would have to say I have given the obverse the benefit of the doubt as the picture leaves something to be desired and that (recent?) scratch would be the killer for me. As Rob has said, this is one where a bit of blue baize would be a better contribution to the collection.

You're absolutely right...grade irrespective of damage, recording faults separately and accordingly! I have read much however that talks about grades being determined by a coin's faults; in hammered for example, by percentage of original edge, thereby using the extent of its clipping to arrive at a grade - not saying that this is good or bad either way.

I think when I arrived at 'fine' I was thinking in terms of ££££$$$$$€€€€€, rather than descriptive aspects. Maybe not the best approach. Lesson learned, and point taken.

[Red Riley]

You're absolutely right...grade irrespective of damage, recording faults separately and accordingly! I have read much however that talks about grades being determined by a coin's faults; in hammered for example, by percentage of original edge, thereby using the extent of its clipping to arrive at a grade - not saying that this is good or bad either way.

I think when I arrived at 'fine' I was thinking in terms of ££££$$$$$€€€€€, rather than descriptive aspects. Maybe not the best approach. Lesson learned, and point taken.

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across all preachy but that's just the way I do it. In hard cash terms I would expect to get that for around 'fair' money and then hope I didn't need to sell it in a hurry.

As regards grading hammered - that's a black art to me!

[Coinery]

You're absolutely right...grade irrespective of damage, recording faults separately and accordingly! I have read much however that talks about grades being determined by a coin's faults; in hammered for example, by percentage of original edge, thereby using the extent of its clipping to arrive at a grade - not saying that this is good or bad either way.

I think when I arrived at 'fine' I was thinking in terms of ££££$$$$$€€€€€, rather than descriptive aspects. Maybe not the best approach. Lesson learned, and point taken.

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across all preachy but that's just the way I do it. In hard cash terms I would expect to get that for around 'fair' money and then hope I didn't need to sell it in a hurry.

As regards grading hammered - that's a black art to me!

Hey, not preachy at all! I absolutely 100% agree with your point, it's the most logical and clearest approach to grading, especially if you are grading to sell!

[Nick]

How about a grade for this one? It has great lustre on the reverse and around the legend on the obverse. As often seems to happen the obverse field is showing signs of light cleaning.

[Nick]

And the reverse...

[azda]

Gonna dip My toe in and say GEF some wear to the 3 lions and harp area, nice coin though

[Rob]

I'd say a bit short of EF.

[RLC35]

I'm going to weigh in at EF!