| Contenu de l'article |
- From njraywms@optonline.net Thu Jun 19 18:34:46 2003
Return-Path: <njraywms@optonline.net>
X-Sender: njraywms@optonline.net
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 44233 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 01:34:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Jun 2003 01:34:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net) (167.206.5.46)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 01:34:46 -0000
Received: from asv8.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (asv8.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.47])
by mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003))
with ESMTP id <0HGR003XWB1XFL@mta11.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for
colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DIANEJ33YVI95P (ool-4354aed4.dyn.optonline.net [67.84.174.212])
by asv8.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h5K1YaKM004429 for
<colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:34:37 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:35:51 -0400
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Net Grading Nightmare
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Message-id: <00ba01c336cc$48f219c0$f2fea8c0@DIANEJ33YVI95P>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <bcto2c+45cd@eGroups.com>
From: Ray Williams <njraywms@optonline.net>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=78843690
X-Yahoo-Profile: njray2
John,
After a few years of lot viewings, we get to know the catalogers and
know what to visualize when they are free to describe a coin as they wish.
Something tells me that cataloging styles won't change in the near future.
Ray
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Lorenzo" <johnmenc@optonline.net>
To: <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:29 PM
Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Net Grading Nightmare
> I can say no more. As prices continue at these levels as I indicated
> net grading may come in. As you open the door or if one auction
> company STARTS - it just will snowball and REMAIN. Its the "lack of
> consistency" and the "degree of reduction" that worries me on the
> cataloging end.
>
>
> --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Neil Rothschild"
> <nrothschild@n...> wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > In theory, the consigner paid (net) G6 $$$ for the coin... and
> when you
> > sell the coin, you can expect to get G6 $$$ for it.
> >
> > Is it the net grade that is a problem or the reliance on CQR?
> There is a
> > big difference. Without a price guide, does the net grade really
> make that
> > much of a difference? If two people are happy to get a VF-20 with
> porosity
> > for F-15 money and need the coin, the consigner will get F-15
> money. If
> > only one guy wants the coin, the consigner doesn't make out so well.
> >
> > Where am I off on this?
> >
> > Neil
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Lorenzo [mailto:johnmenc@o...]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:09 PM
> > To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Net Grading Nightmare
> >
> >
> > The net grade becomes a problem because each "individual" will
> reduce
> > a coin a certain amount numerically with no constant set of factors
> > in place for this reduction other than the net grader's opinion.
> > Noyes hated porosity and I had seen VF-20 Large Cents coins reduced
> > to G-6 levels simply due to porosity. I know I BOUGHT a few. Which
> > was good for me and bad for the consigner. Anywhere else it was a F-
> > 15. Perhaps if he is reading this he can explain how he reduced a
> > coin (4) grade levels due to ONLY porosity. Was he removed and
> > replaced by Tom Reynolds to keep peace or was that here-say??? Who
> > would consign to EAC with net grading such as this ...
> > Neil you were saying ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Neil Rothschild"
> > <nrothschild@n...> wrote:
> > > David,
> > >
> > > I picked TR just to illustrate a point. (although should one want
> > to do
> > > something so stupid, he is in the ideal position to do it, as the
> C4
> > > cataloger). You are absolutely right; TR doesn't have the ego
> > required to
> > > do the job <s>. The grading czar is all powerful and all ego.
> You
> > need a
> > > special person for the job.
> > >
> > > I'm not really sure why you think net grading, in itself, is so
> > terrible.
> > > Catalogers put all kinds of opinions in their descriptions and
> > people apply
> > > those opinions as they see fit. I see claims of census,
> > populations, this
> > > coin better than that coin, etc. that I don't agree with. A net
> > grade is
> > > just one more opinion to nit pick.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Neil
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David L. Palmer [mailto:palmers4@e...]
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:26 PM
> > > To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Net Grading Nightmare
> > >
> > >
> > > Again I have to disagree to SOME extent. Tom Rinaldo is one type
> of
> > > person, the so-called grading( or ranking) czars in EAC are
> > > completely different kinds of people. Although all of us have an
> > > ego, with Tom it is usually fairly well buried. With the two main
> > > players in EAC's mess, their egos are readily apparent at ALL
> times,
> > > and therein lies the rub. Tom can be talked to, and possibly
> change
> > > his mind based on new or better information, Bill Noyes and Denis
> > > Loring are very different. Once they have said it, that's it, the
> > > authorities have spoken, and thus ends it. Net grading IS however
> a
> > > morass that we cannot afford to get into. Although for our own
> > > tastes and wallets, we all use it to some extent, methinks. David
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Neil Rothschild"
> > > <nrothschild@n...> wrote:
> > > > Just a side comment here...
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure if it's "net grading" that causes the problems with
> > > EAC. The
> > > > root of the problem is that some one or some ones are officially
> > or
> > > > unofficially declared "grading referees" and have established a
> > > published
> > > > census. In other words, it is the establishment of an "official
> > > census"
> > > > which leads to the undesirable politics.
> > > >
> > > > As an example, let's say we decide never to allow a cataloguer
> to
> > > print a
> > > > net grade. But, we make Tom Rinaldo the Census czar. Tom
> > > establishes the
> > > > list for each variety and he publishes each coin's position in
> the
> > > census
> > > > when he handles the coin. He doesn't net grade the coin; but he
> > > establishes
> > > > the census and we all collectively go along with this.
> > > >
> > > > I believe the end result is exactly the same as the situation in
> > > EAC.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Neil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > colonial-coins-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > colonial-coins-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> colonial-coins-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
|
|---|
