Grade categories - [G] VG F VF XF [AU] UNC [Risolto]

Now that prices will be added, and given that the catalogue display has been modified, would it be possible to add two grades?

G VG F VF XF AU UNC

Without at least those two extra grades, the value of one's collection can be greatly distorted. A coin in G or AU is about half the value of a coin in VG or UNC respectively.

Take for example collectors of US large cents, a G one is often the best you can do in the early dates, such as the Draped Bust 1796-1807.

For the hell of it,

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic67396.html

I started the same thread a few hours earlier!
loruca

Oh! I looked in the list of topics in case someone had come up with the same idea, but did not recognize it from the title. Anyway I gave you a +1 vote, so that should count as well in the total.

Hello,

I pretty agree that we need to add the grades G and AU to match with the most common grading standards.
So the new scale would be: G VG F VF XF AU UNC

I plan no migration of user collections, meaning that each user may change the grades in the their collection if needed. It also means that some users won't migrate, raising potentially approximations in the coins of the swap list of some users.

Does anyone see an issue with the addition of these new grades?

Cita: "Xavier"​Hello,
​
​I pretty agree that we need to add the grades G and AU to match with the most common grading standards.
​So the new scale would be: G VG F VF XF AU UNC
​
​I plan no migration of user collections, meaning that each user may change the grades in the their collection if needed. It also means that some users won't migrate, raising potentially approximations in the coins of the swap list of some users.
​
​Does anyone see an issue with the addition of these new grades?

YAY!!!!​

Completely in support!

Cita: "Xavier"​
​Does anyone see an issue with the addition of these new grades?

​None whatsoever, I'd welcome the improvement. I don't care much for the AU grade, it's mostly populated by EF coins but that's the world we live in so I've come to accept it. I reckon the "G" box will serve as a catch all for all the Poor, Fair, AG & Good grades. It would be splitting hairs to include a separate box for each of these "junk" grades. It would be nice to depopulate the VG category of such coins though.

Any chance of merging the grades into the swap engine while you've got the virtual toolbox out?

On the one hand, I liked the simplicity of Numista's old interface, where you had just a few boxes that you could click on and enter the number of coins you had. On the other hand, it's quite limiting and forces a large range of grades into a single selection (and the new interface, with its pop-ups and radio buttons made it harder to use). This is especially problematic on the high end of the scale, with MS60+ coins, where values change the most and a difference of just a couple grade points might represent a change in value greater than between G and XF. What I would really like to see is a UI setting that lets you control the grading model you use for your collection (or even an individual coin, as I might only want to list the exact grade for graded coins). If the grading model is set to simplified, you would have just the G VG F VF XF AU UNC, basically equivalent to 10 grade-point ranges. If it's set to the Sheldon scale, you would have a dropdown/slider with the full 70-point range.

Cita: "Houseofham"​On the one hand, I liked the simplicity of Numista's old interface, where you had just a few boxes that you could click on and enter the number of coins you had. On the other hand, it's quite limiting and forces a large range of grades into a single selection (and the new interface, with its pop-ups and radio buttons made it harder to use). This is especially problematic on the high end of the scale, with MS60+ coins, where values change the most and a difference of just a couple grade points might represent a change in value greater than between G and XF. What I would really like to see is a UI setting that lets you control the grading model you use for your collection. If the grading model is set to simplified, you would have just the G VG F VF XF AU UNC, basically equivalent to 10 grade-point ranges. If it's set to the Sheldon scale, you would have a dropdown/slider with the full 70-point range.
​

I see difficulties regarding merging that with the user-inserted values we're working towards...​

Cita: "loruca"​

Cita: "Houseofham"​On the one hand, I liked the simplicity of Numista's old interface, where you had just a few boxes that you could click on and enter the number of coins you had. On the other hand, it's quite limiting and forces a large range of grades into a single selection (and the new interface, with its pop-ups and radio buttons made it harder to use). This is especially problematic on the high end of the scale, with MS60+ coins, where values change the most and a difference of just a couple grade points might represent a change in value greater than between G and XF. What I would really like to see is a UI setting that lets you control the grading model you use for your collection. If the grading model is set to simplified, you would have just the G VG F VF XF AU UNC, basically equivalent to 10 grade-point ranges. If it's set to the Sheldon scale, you would have a dropdown/slider with the full 70-point range.
​​

​I see difficulties regarding merging that with the user-inserted values we're working towards...​

It's not that complicated. One way to convert prices between the two models would be like this:

Let's say I use the Sheldon scale and you use the simplified model. I would report an MS-65 price. That grade falls within the MS-60 to -70 range, so when you look at that coin, that price would be used for calculating the UNC price.

Likewise, if you reported a price for UNC, I would see columns for all grades and the price you reported would be used for calculating the value for the MS-60 column.

Cita: "pnightingale"​
​​I don't care much for the AU grade, it's mostly populated by EF coins but that's the world we live in so I've come to accept it.

​Yes, it's very true that too many coins listed as AU are actually XF. I wouldn't mind if it weren't for the fact that coin dealers do it as well.

However, almost all of my Canadian nickel and plated steel coins were taken from circulation, and well over 50% of them should grade AU rather than XF or UNC.

Note that Xavier has created the same post on the French side. I should have done so myself, but the French TB, TTB, TTTB, TTTTB () etc. is unfamiliar to me.

Cita: "Camerinvs"​

Cita: "pnightingale"​
​​​I don't care much for the AU grade, it's mostly populated by EF coins but that's the world we live in so I've come to accept it.

​​Yes, it's very true that too many coins listed as AU are actually XF. I wouldn't mind if it weren't for the fact that coin dealers do it as well.
​
​However, almost all of my Canadian nickel and plated steel coins were taken from circulation, and well over 50% of them should grade AU rather than XF or UNC.
​
​Note that Xavier has created the same post on the French side. I should have done so myself, but the French TB, TTB, TTTB, TTTTB () etc. is unfamiliar to me.

​Aye, that's how I use the AU grade too - coins which appear superficially to be uncirculated but just too many bag marks, chatter etc. to be considered "as issued" or for coins never intended to circulate which have been improperly stored or mishandled. It's most certainly not defined as "an EF coin I'd like an UNC price for!"

I'm not familiar with the French very / very, very / very, very, very, linguistic dance either but now that you mention it I realise that during the course of many trades with our French cousins, the majority of them use the familiar English terms to describe their coins and almost as many price them in $US. Whether courtesy or convenience, it's appreciated.

I can see the merits of allowing users to choose their grading system and converting it. It can certainly be done, the two commonly used grades for uncirculated coins, UNC and BU or UNC(gem) each have an exact counterpart in the Sheldon scale. It would be a good fit for the lower grades but it's going to require a change in thinking for those using the traditional UNC tag otherwise all their coins will be downgraded to MS60.

For me personally, I want no part of the Sheldon Scale, not even by the loose association of conversion. It's the bastard child of American cultural Imperialism - the Burger Kings of coin grading if you will. Let's speak plainly here friends, the MS60-70 grades are all about coin snobbery - my UNC is more UNC than yours - and not about describing a coin's condition in a plainly understandable manner. Oh, I guess it serves the US market adequately which is overwhelmingly centered around modern coins. Given sufficient beer or recreational chemicals I might even be persuaded that there really is a difference between MS66 and MS67. But it would be a huge mistake for European collectors to allow their more venerable collections to be jammed into this meaningless tool of the coin grading industry.

There, I feel much better having got all that off my chest. I reckon I'll go have a cold beer with my neighbors and throw the empties at passing Yuppie joggers. (cans, not bottles - we're not animals)

Cita: "pnightingale"​​For me personally, I want no part of the Sheldon Scale, not even by the loose association of conversion. It's the bastard child of American cultural Imperialism - the Burger Kings of coin grading if you will. Let's speak plainly here friends, the MS60-70 grades are all about coin snobbery - my UNC is more UNC than yours - and not about describing a coin's condition in a plainly understandable manner. Oh, I guess it serves the US market adequately which is overwhelmingly centered around modern coins. Given sufficient beer or recreational chemicals I might even be persuaded that there really is a difference between MS66 and MS67. But it would be a huge mistake for European collectors to allow their more venerable collections to be jammed into this meaningless tool of the coin grading industry.

+1 ... ... "the Burger King of coin grading"

I couldn't have said it better. I see those poor souls on cointalk who send their supposedly MS 68 or 69 or 70 coins for grading (and pay dearly for the service) and being all upset when the coin returns with a 0.5 mm² stain they had not noticed when they sent their coin in, now apparently ready to sue the PCGS employee who allowed himself (or herself) to breathe while grading their once pristine piece of metal. Talk about killing the fun out of the hobby!

Perhaps because it's European, I find Numista much more interesting. Unlike cointalk, there seem to be very few people here who are investors more than collectors. I hope the Numista team will always keep that in mind anytime they make changes to the site.

Cointalk has far too many drama queens for my tastes. I finally gave up when I post I made referencing Elvis Presley was deleted along with a warning. It was explained to me by the low brow moderator that it was forbidden to mention dead people. A humble request for clarity on how a coin forum could function without referencing the deceased simply triggered more threats of dire consequences.

I lol'd. Then I lol'd some more and unsubscribed.

It's likely the queen will die in the not-too-distant future (say, within the next 20-30 years ). Let's wait and see how they handle that!

"I just purchased this coin of [POST EDITED BY ADMIN: the queen who ruled before Charles IV]."

Cita: "Camerinvs"​It's likely the queen will die in the not-too-distant future (say, within the next 20-30 years ). Let's wait and see how they handle that!
​
​"I just purchased this coin of [POST EDITED BY ADMIN: the queen who ruled before Charles IV]."

​Minor correction, she would be "the queen who ruled before Charles III" (last Charles was a II).

Cita: "CassTaylor"​​​Minor correction, she would be "the queen who ruled before Charles III" (last Charles was a II).

​Very true! I think I confused the Charles with the Williams, the fourth of whom is likely to reign within a few decades at most.

I remember a story that Charles might take the name "George" as monarch since the first two Charles had not been very fortunate. If this is what he believes, it's pretty lame. It assumes that the name itself is cursed. Pardon me, but I think we're out of the Middle Ages (well... these days I'm not so sure...).

On top of it, that would mean that he believes his mother and father gave him a cursed name!

I read somewhere that Canada may well switch to a coat of arms observe when the succession takes place. If so, it would unfortunately break with a long, historical tradition... and I organize my collection by monarchs, not denominations, unlike most Canadian collectors.

Cita: "Camerinvs"​

Cita: "CassTaylor"​​​Minor correction, she would be "the queen who ruled before Charles III" (last Charles was a II).

​​Very true! I think I confused the Charles with the Williams, the fourth of whom is likely to reign within a few decades at most.
​
​I remember a story that Charles might take the name "George" as monarch since the first two Charles had not been very fortunate. If this is what he believes, it's pretty lame. It assumes that the name itself is cursed. Pardon me, but I think we're out of the Middle Ages (well... these days I'm not so sure...).
​
​On top of it, that would mean that he believes his mother and father gave him a cursed name!
​
​I read somewhere that Canada may well switch to a coat of arms observe when the succession takes place. If so, it would unfortunately break with a long, historical tradition... and I organize my collection by monarchs, not denominations, unlike most Canadian collectors.

​I hate to correct you again, but William IV has already reigned too (1830-37).

I arrange my UK and British colonial coins by monarch too, so I have the order of kings and queens almost drilled into my head. And yeah, I read the same story about "George VII"- to be honest Charles I was pretty "unlucky", sure but Charles II, not really, speaking from a historian's perspective. Either way, don't underestimate human beings' illogical leaning towards superstition......

When I think I received a William IV shilling just two days ago ...

I used to know all the reigning dates from Henry VII and do remember most, though I used to wonder what to do with Lady Jane Grey, i.e. whether she should be considered a legitimate queen, even if only for nine days. The consensus, if I'm not mistaken, is that she doesn't really count (Law of Succession,etc.). Sad.

As for "human beings' illogical leaning towards superstition", I am confronted with that on a daily basis, especially online. More and more people, it seems, reject scientific evidence. Postmodernism is alive and well.

Cita: "Camerinvs"​When I think I received a William IV shilling just two days ago ...
​
​I used to know all the reigning dates from Henry VII and do remember most, though I used to wonder what to do with Lady Jane Grey, i.e. whether she should be considered a legitimate queen, even if only for nine days. The consensus, if I'm not mistaken, is that she doesn't really count (Law of Succession,etc.). Sad.
​
​As for "human beings' illogical leaning towards superstition", I am confronted with that on a daily basis, especially online. More and more people, it seems, reject scientific evidence. Postmodernism is alive and well.

​Fun Fact; if you count the disputed reigns of English and British monarchs, then England had a "King Louis I" for a year in 1216/17, when France's King Louis VIII claimed the English throne for a year or so.

Medieval history is not my forte compared to early modern and modern eras, but I know for a fact that the English got them back when they claimed the title of "King of France" (even including three fleur-de-lys on the English/British Coat of Arms) from 1340 to 1800... over 450 years!

I had a prof, British by birth, who said he would not go to France until the French returned Calais to the Brits.

It's not uncommon for royals to take a different ruling name. George VI's first name was Albert and he was commonly known as Bertie before he took the throne. Edward VII's first name was Albert too. Edward VIII's first name was Edward but he was commonly known as David which was one of his middle names.

Cita: "Camerinvs"​I had a prof, British by birth, who said he would not go to France until the French returned Calais to the Brits.

​
That kind of quirkiness is what makes me proud to have British relatives. At least I hope it was quirkiness!

@neil You're absolutely right; in fact George VI chose his regnal name rather than using "Albert" out of respect for his great grandfather, Prince Albert (Victoria's husband).

Cita: "CassTaylor"​

Cita: "Camerinvs"​I had a prof, British by birth, who said he would not go to France until the French returned Calais to the Brits.

​​
​That kind of quirkiness is what makes me proud to have British relatives. At least I hope it was quirkiness!
​
​@neil You're absolutely right; in fact George VI chose his regnal name rather than using "Albert" out of respect for his great grandfather, Prince Albert (Victoria's husband).

​He was a lot of things, including quirky. He resigned under expectations of being formally disciplined for sexual harassment. My phrasing is odd because I don't know all the details.

Since we're already way off topic, I'll point out that the 1936-1937 coinage is interesting because of the events surrounding the two successions. In terms of the coinage, the 1936 coinage should fall under George V, even if almost all of it was actually released under his successor, since with few exceptions (e.g. some African colonies) the policy was to start the new coinage with a new obverse only at the start of the first full year of reign of the new King/Queen. In Canada, though, 1937 started with a special issue of the 1936 1¢ and 25¢ with a small dot under the year. This coinage is normally placed under George V, but it actually belongs to George VI. It is a 1937 issue, dated 1936, struck under the authority of George VI, but in the name of George V.

It's implemented
You may now use the new grades G and AU.

Great; thanks !

Very surprised, nice addition, thank you, Xavier!

Cita: "ZacUK"​ Great; thanks !
​
​

​Now I have to re-assign all my worst coins to G....
#firstworldproblems

Sure it was a long story & discussions which leaded to a nice surprise for me with discovering of G and AU today suddenly so a lot of thanks to those who pushed that, life became easier :)

Great! It may take some time for Numistists to update their collection, but within a year or two, I'm sure everybody will wonder why we didn't have these two extra grades earlier.

Thanks to Xavier and the team for the update. Now I'll have a couple hundred coins to move from XF to AU.

Just to know that AU (and seems - G) grades do not appear in the swapbox as other grades do. Possibly it has a sense to correct that somehow...

nice! i have totally missed this!
now i really hope i can search my coins by grade, so find all those i need to change..