CPM Forum
General => Banknote Grading Standards and TPG => Topic started by: BCS on October 15, 2008, 11:06:11 am
-
An interesting dilemma came about the other day when Certifying a 2001 “missing circle” $10 bill. The note was in excellent shape, but, as is usual and expected with the variety, the note was considerably off centre. Any Gem UNC note, grading 65 or higher, must have reasonably good centering contributing to the overall eye appeal of the note.
My first instinct was to grade the note Choice UNC 64 and not in the Gem UNC grades solely because of the centering. But when you consider if from another perspective, the off centering of the note, in this case, is a desirable quality on the note and perhaps shouldn’t be considered a detriment.
I thought that before I made my final decision I would take an informal pole of the forum.
What do you think?
-
I think the big problem here is that once you make an exception, there always tends to be more exceptions made down the road.
You state on your website....
For a note to fall under the Gem UNC category it must have perfect paper quality and perfect centering. This is a strict rule for all Gem UNC grades.
as for a
"CHOICE UNC" - 62/63/64
The Choice UNC range is a balance of minor imperfections and desirable qualities.
I would say CH UNC 64 and possibly a comment or remark.
Only my opinion.
FRIEDSQUID
-
I would somewhat agree with friedsquid. Allowing exception may look like inconsistencies within the grading firm and may reflect poorly on the TPG service, and trust may be compromised.
The Charlton guide does note that there are “Missing Circle” varieties out in the market, and they are non-errors and within the BofC tolerances.
I would 1st ask what are your parameters right now to determine if a note is perfectly centered or not? If you are using the missing circle to determine the centering of the note, then I would suggest that this may be the wrong approach. If you have graded an older $10 BABNC journey or a newer $10 note with the same amount of boarder on the left-side & right-side, as an UNC 65(+), then have you not already set a precedence as to what is and what is not acceptable for the UNC 65(+) grade?
I would agree that there should be a notation on the note being of the “missing circle” variety, as this is recognized by Charlton.
Just a thought, have you seen any other missing circle notes graded by other TPG sources, and if so what have they done?
If may be that a perfect “missing circle” note may be just like a true error note, sometimes perfection is slight less then.
FYI, I think it is great that you are doing your research.
Only my Opinion
Cheers
-
So then, on the virtue of imperfect centering, and given an otherwise perfect note, is the maximum achievable grade for any Missing Circle note UNC 64?
-
Hopefully you let the forum members know what your final decision will be?
I think it will make some difference as to whether people submit certain notes or not to BSC or other TPG graders.
Once you make a decision, it should be consistent...if it changes.... I believe trust is lost to a point.
Will it get to the point where in your website grading criteria...you will start listing execptions to the norm???
-
Here are two FEE missing circle notes. Both have been independently viewed by people known to have tough grading standards. Both are remarked to be perfect notes in every regard. These notes are numbered 35 apart and are from the same bundle.
Of course, the centering is definitely imperfect, but this is what defines and enhances the notes' status as "Missing Circle" notes.
FEE 2001 Missing Circle FEE0021600, CCCS UNC 67
(http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/1931/bc63bfee0021600fnj7.th.jpg) (http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bc63bfee0021600fnj7.jpg) (http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/6568/bc63bfee0021600rgv3.th.jpg) (http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bc63bfee0021600rgv3.jpg)
FEE 2001 Missing Circle FEE0021635, BCS UNC 64
(http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/7331/bc63bfee0021635fll1.th.jpg) (http://img389.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bc63bfee0021635fll1.jpg) (http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/9929/bc63bfee0021635rrc6.th.jpg) (http://img389.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bc63bfee0021635rrc6.jpg)
(Both notes are in my custody for the purpose of scanning them for this post).
-
After talking to a bunch of people about it, I have decided that the standards should not change and that this particular missing circle variety, because it is significantly off centre, will only recieve a Choice UNC-64.
This does not necessarilly mean that all missing circle varieties can never reach Gem UNC. This has to be decided on a piece by piece basis. Important about this decision, however, is that no specific variety should be given special consideration with respect to grading.
I will be conducting a grading study over the next four months on the facinating quarks that make grading the Journey Series so unique and interesting. With all of the grading, the above decision will be respected. You can learn more about it on my website, www.banknotecertification.com
Thanks for your input