Tips for storing or presenting details coins

[GROOVIE COINS 17]

Good day all

I am nearing completion of a 1935 set (short one coin) that I've been putting together since 2017. My goal was to put together the nicest set at an affordable price and with unc coins were out of my price range, many times I settled for good looking details coins.

A rim nick on the penny, a slight scratch or two on the florin, a small spot of verdigris on the farthing and ever so slight hairlines on the obverse of the shilling, but none of these stand out like a sore thumb. I made sure to avoid cleaned coins though.

 

For a while I've thought about getting an empty mint box from the 1950s for a nice looking presentation, but without a crown the box would look incomplete. I've also thought about putting in a british 1935 crown to fill the space, but I'm not overly fond of the idea.

The thought of having them graded through SANGS has also crossed my mind, but knowing that these are mostly details coins in my opinion and not to mention the high cost of grading king George V coins swayed me for alternative ideas. 

Other options are those hartburger white card flips, the A5 pastic sheets, or even the hartburger flips in the A5 sheets and in a file. I'm not so sure how appealing those would look, but I've had the A5 plastic sheets before and recall the coin detail weren't as clear through the thick layers of plastic. 

Another option would be the round plastic capsules, but this again leaves me with many capsules all over the place.

I also see the empty NGC style slabs being sold on BOB for R44 each and think they would make for a nice presentation at certainly less the cost of official grading. Though those would in turn need to be placed in container or flat wooden box which all adds to the costs of coins that really aren't all that valuable to begin with.

 

So until I decide, my coins are currently stored in little plastic money bags which makes for a very unappealing look.

Any thoughts or tips?

regards Robert

[jwither 17]

Not sure what is available in South Africa, but if you can find it, at least put the coins in 2" by 2" SafeFlips or cardboard holders.  That's what I use for my coins which aren't in an NGC or PCGS holder.  Currently, I have a small accumulation of 14 Bolivia and Peru pillar coins stored in this manner.

I don't mind owning "details" coins as long as the coins meets my appearance standards and I buy it at the "right" price.  In my Union collection, I currently have a combination of mistakes or where I guessed incorrectly that it would grade since I can only buy without seeing the coin first.  This includes two 1927 1/-, 1923 2/-, 1925 2/-, 1927 2/-, 1929 2/6 and 1936 2/6.  All are "AU details" except for the 1925 2/- which is "net graded" as an XF and the 1936 which is labeled "proof".   Financially, I'm "buried" in most of this lot and will keep it since what I would obtain by selling it wouldn't amount to "squat:"  Most of these coins have cleaned but there is really nothing with any of them. 

In my opinion, most Union silver coins better grade or otherwise (even in NGC or PCGS holders) have been cleaned in the past.  If this wasn't true, far more would be toned instead of "blast white".

[GROOVIE COINS 17]

1 hour ago, jwither said:

Not sure what is available in South Africa, but if you can find it, at least put the coins in 2" by 2" SafeFlips or cardboard holders.  That's what I use for my coins which aren't in an NGC or PCGS holder.  Currently, I have a small accumulation of 14 Bolivia and Peru pillar coins stored in this manner.

Financially, I'm "buried" in most of this lot and will keep it since what I would obtain by selling it wouldn't amount to "squat:"  Most of these coins have cleaned but there is really nothing with any of them. 

In my opinion, most Union silver coins better grade or otherwise (even in NGC or PCGS holders) have been cleaned in the past.  If this wasn't true, far more would be toned instead of "blast white".

It's a pity details coins are immediately disregarded without even inspection. People have a misconception that details coins are rubbish which is simply not true. 

Polished, wizzed, excessive hairlines, improperly cleaned should be the only details grades that discourage people. A scratch here and there, or a nick on the rim all adds to the history of the coin. Even surface hairlines could have come from a coin in a pocket and not necessarily cleaned. It would be better for grading firms to give a numeric grade with a side note rim nicked, or reverse scratch because the many details grade gives the coin an unfair rap. How many beautiful unc details coins go for less than AU or XFs just because of a details grade...

Edited May 16, 2019 by GROOVIE COINS

[jwither 17]

5 hours ago, GROOVIE COINS said:

It's a pity details coins are immediately disregarded without even inspection. People have a misconception that details coins are rubbish which is simply not true. 

Polished, wizzed, excessive hairlines, improperly cleaned should be the only details grades that discourage people. A scratch here and there, or a nick on the rim all adds to the history of the coin. Even surface hairlines could have come from a coin in a pocket and not necessarily cleaned. It would be better for grading firms to give a numeric grade with a side note rim nicked, or reverse scratch because the many details grade gives the coin an unfair rap. How many beautiful unc details coins go for less than AU or XFs just because of a details grade...

Many US collectors do not like "details" either, especially those who post on the NGC and PCGS forums.  I attribute it to a few reasons:

One: Financially, the coins are more difficult to sell.  Some collectors may not actually mind owning one but won't buy it anyway due to resale considerations. 

Myself, I am willing to buy coins that I cannot otherwise find but it depends upon the price.  As an example, there is a 1762 Peru one Real up for auction next week described as "EF" with a starting bid of $180.  I'd grade it as higher VF but it has multiple noticeable scratches in the fields above the pillar design.  It's the second best example I have ever seen of this date, after one sold by Bonhams (Huntington collection) which sold as part of group lot for about the starting bid of this one.  I'd estimate the grade as AU-53 and it had nice uniform darker toning.  It's a much better coin.  The point is, I'm not sure when (if ever) I can find a better example but buying it at $200+ now might mean selling it at a low fraction later.  I am leaning on not buying it because I just bought a coin for $1200 earlier this month and there are other coins I know I will attempt to buy or I want to leave room in my budget as contingency.

Two: Many collectors would rather buy what they consider a higher quality example with more wear; one in a lower grade.  This is especially true if the coin is common which applies to most US coins.

Myself, I have increased my selectivity in what I buy the last few year from the stand point of "originality" and "eye appeal".  Even from my pillar coins, I have sold several of the untoned Mexico.  I will buy a "white" coin if I can't find it otherwise from Bolivia, Peru or Guatemala even with minor problems but probably not otherwise if it looks different from what it "should".  I sold a few Spanish coins (i.e, 1721 MA 2R NGC MS-64) for this reason.

Three:  For Union specifically, I have commented on the poor eye appeal of lower to mid grade circulated coins numerous times.  I don't recall ever seeing a single example in fine or below that didn't look terrible.  I own a 1925 2/- PCGS VF-25 but it is one of the few decent ones I have seen in VF.  In EF, only slightly more.  Even in AU or MS up to MS-62, I'd describe a noticeable percentage as either average or mediocre.  The coins aren't old, but most have probably been cleaned or dipped in the past.  Remick's collection is the only one I have ever seen that prioritized "originality".  

For myself, I don't consider hardly any of these coins to be scarce enough where I would be likely to buy a "details" coin and then only at a cheap price.   An exception would be the 1931 NGC "AU Details" 6D (if it isn't the current MS-61) but only for noticeably less than the prior $1265 price.  I'll just collect something else because I am not from South Africa and don't have the same affinity for this coinage all of you do.

If I were you, I'd rather buy a better XF than an AU details if you can find one at a reasonable price.  Problem is, the prices I have seen on BoB are far above actual value and my prior experience with dealers in your country is that they use the fictional and exorbitantly inflated catalog prices.

[GROOVIE COINS 17]

11 hours ago, jwither said:

Many US collectors do not like "details" either, especially those who post on the NGC and PCGS forums.  I attribute it to a few reasons:

One: Financially, the coins are more difficult to sell.  Some collectors may not actually mind owning one but won't buy it anyway due to resale considerations. 

Myself, I am willing to buy coins that I cannot otherwise find but it depends upon the price.  As an example, there is a 1762 Peru one Real up for auction next week described as "EF" with a starting bid of $180.  I'd grade it as higher VF but it has multiple noticeable scratches in the fields above the pillar design.  It's the second best example I have ever seen of this date, after one sold by Bonhams (Huntington collection) which sold as part of group lot for about the starting bid of this one.  I'd estimate the grade as AU-53 and it had nice uniform darker toning.  It's a much better coin.  The point is, I'm not sure when (if ever) I can find a better example but buying it at $200+ now might mean selling it at a low fraction later.  I am leaning on not buying it because I just bought a coin for $1200 earlier this month and there are other coins I know I will attempt to buy or I want to leave room in my budget as contingency.

Two: Many collectors would rather buy what they consider a higher quality example with more wear; one in a lower grade.  This is especially true if the coin is common which applies to most US coins.

Myself, I have increased my selectivity in what I buy the last few year from the stand point of "originality" and "eye appeal".  Even from my pillar coins, I have sold several of the untoned Mexico.  I will buy a "white" coin if I can't find it otherwise from Bolivia, Peru or Guatemala even with minor problems but probably not otherwise if it looks different from what it "should".  I sold a few Spanish coins (i.e, 1721 MA 2R NGC MS-64) for this reason.

Three:  For Union specifically, I have commented on the poor eye appeal of lower to mid grade circulated coins numerous times.  I don't recall ever seeing a single example in fine or below that didn't look terrible.  I own a 1925 2/- PCGS VF-25 but it is one of the few decent ones I have seen in VF.  In EF, only slightly more.  Even in AU or MS up to MS-62, I'd describe a noticeable percentage as either average or mediocre.  The coins aren't old, but most have probably been cleaned or dipped in the past.  Remick's collection is the only one I have ever seen that prioritized "originality".  

For myself, I don't consider hardly any of these coins to be scarce enough where I would be likely to buy a "details" coin and then only at a cheap price.   An exception would be the 1931 NGC "AU Details" 6D (if it isn't the current MS-61) but only for noticeably less than the prior $1265 price.  I'll just collect something else because I am not from South Africa and don't have the same affinity for this coinage all of you do.

If I were you, I'd rather buy a better XF than an AU details if you can find one at a reasonable price.  Problem is, the prices I have seen on BoB are far above actual value and my prior experience with dealers in your country is that they use the fictional and exorbitantly inflated catalog prices.

Yes I'm aware the resale of details coins will take a knock, and for that reason I won't even bother grading them. This can be seen on sellers listings where they list their details graded coins at a specific price and drop the price regularly over a long period of time when it doesn't sell. Some of those coins are really horrible, and one has to think how it ever got about being graded in the first place. I can only assume it must have been uninformed people sending the coin off without doing any research, and the coin eventually found it's way to a dealer at a discounted price. 

With regards to buying AU and Unc coins, my budget has been constrained and I cannot compete with the hot bidders. But that being said it was only after a prolonged search and patience that I would compromise on what I was looking for and had no regrets.

One such compromise was a 1935 tickey that I got in XF (in my opinion) as the uncs were just outside of my price range. I'm very happy with this three pence as it has very little wear and nice toning. Another buy was a half crown which was VF condition but lots of details still visible in the devices. This 2 and half shilling is considered a low mintage, so I was never going to get it in anything above XF...

Strangely I expected the tickey and half crowns to be tough, but overlooked the six pence with a mintage of about 500K and this is looking to be the elusive one that completes my set. 

It all honesty the penny with nicked rim and shilling with hairlines were a oversight on my part, but they a beautiful coins none the less. The florin with its scratches was a deliberate buy on my part and the gamble paid off when the coin looked much better in person than on the photos.

Yes I agree Union coins don't hold up well in anything below VF, even in VF, and this is especially true for the 50% silver when the grey hits through top layers, but their designs do retain much more detail in VF to XF compared to british and canadian coinage as I highlighted in a previous post when comparing designers Kruger Grey vs Bertrum Mackennal I think his name was. They don't compare to US liberties from the 18th and 19th centuries in Fine and VF though, but then again those were much prettier designs. As you eluded to, these are modern coinage, and in plenty supply so there is no reason to have anything below VF in anycase except for key dates that can't be obtained.

With regards to my original dilemma of how to store the coins, upon searching for card holders, I have seen the sleeves which are specifically designed for them and I'm strongly inclined to go this route of a file with sleeves. It will be easier to add sets I complete in future to my existing collection.

regards Robert.

Edited May 17, 2019 by GROOVIE COINS

[jwither 17]

The "details" coins I listed are pretty decent coins with minor problems.  The 1936 2/6 proof was lightly wiped in the past but retains its full original brilliance.  I bought it off of eBay from UK dealer Lockdales of Ipswich over 10 years ago when it was much harder to find.  It was covered in residue and required conservation by NCS.  I tried to sell it recently but couldn't get an accurate picture.  I'll just keep it since I'm "buried" in it anyway.

One of the 1927 1/- came back from NGC as "stained".  I bought it really cheap from a US dealer unsure of whether the residue could be fully removed.  It has light environmental damage but is practically MS in my opinion and still has good eye appeal.

The others, all noted with "surface hairlines".  The 1929 2/6 I bought as an ungraded UNC at the Krause list of $350.  It required conservation but in my opinion, NGC "net graded it".  I am hopelessly "buried" in it.  The other 1927 1/- and the 2/-, lightly cleaned in the past but nothing wrong with either.  I bought both cheap as part of group lot from DNW.  The 1925 2/- has the wear of an AU except the crown band where it is somewhat more noticeable.  The 1923 2/- was just a bad decision.

The most interesting thing to me is that all the coins I described are much better than those owned by at least  95% of collectors who have these coins, yet those in South Africa don't want it anyway except practically for free.

On your other comments, I think the silver content might have something to do with it, especially the 50%.  Of the 1935, the 6D is the hardest to buy in my experience.  I used to own it in NGC MS-63 but sold it about 10 years ago.  I still have the 2/- in AU-58 and the 3D