CPM Forum
General => General Forum Comments => Topic started by: buxvet on April 12, 2007, 11:16:51 pm
-
" Charlton catalogue will be pricing Bank of Canada notes with three prices for Unc. in the next edition. Once this realization takes hold, premiums will increase for Gem notes. "
Saw this in an EBay auction. Is this coreect ???? ???
-
What is true is the the 20th edition Charlton will have UNC-60, UNC-63 and UNC-65 with pricing to reflect.
Now, What I have also learned is that what UNC was in the old book to expect that price to be the same as UNC-65. So do not expect the same note to GAIN value by moving up.
AU Notes could qualify as now being UNC-60 but UNC-60 Pricing with be the same as old AU Prices. So it SHOULD all wash out but as well all know this may not be true in all cases.
Only time will tell.
-
What is true is the the 20th edition Charlton will have UNC-60, UNC-63 and UNC-65 with pricing to reflect.
Now, What I have also learned is that what UNC was in the old book to expect that price to be the same as UNC-65. So do not expect the same note to GAIN value by moving up.
AU Notes could qualify as now being UNC-60 but UNC-60 Pricing with be the same as old AU Prices. So it SHOULD all wash out but as well all know this may not be true in all cases.
The above is just simple speculation.
-
This is very true...
I know the Charlton WILL have the 3 grades of UNC but what pricing will be reflected know one will be 100% sure about until the book is actually released and one can sit down and compare notes with the current edition.
I am sure EVERYONE is anxious to get a grasp on WHAT the grading will be and of course the OFFICIAL CPMS DEFINITIONS of these grades. ???
-
Assuming that I can grade notes properly based on the current Charlton standards, will I be able to properly grade the 3 levels of UNC? What is the difference between the levels?
Do the new 3 UNC grades mean that I will have to get my current UNC notes professionally graded in order to find out their actual value?
Brad
-
As far as I can tell, there is no definition of the higher graded numbers, in either the Charlton or CPMS. These have yet to be defined and become universal. Only the TPG note currently use these grades, and some have supplied information about them. Looks like it is happening anyway despite others not willing to use them or support them.
I have not seen the new Charlton although I know a couple of people who have sent information with this regard.
Rick
-
Eegads! If someone said it on eBay, it MUST be true!
BTW how's the course outline for that course on "recognizing sarcasm" coming along, BWJM?
:o
He was one of the no-shows for my Procrastinators Anonoymous class - 'nuff said! ;)
-
Do the new 3 UNC grades mean that I will have to get my current UNC notes professionally graded in order to find out their actual value?
Brad
The answer is no.
Once again, there will be detailed explainations of what each grade level entails. This will be in the new Cat as far as I know. We can read it, evaluate it, and assign grades to the best of our ability, just as we always have done/ try to do.
LATER ADDITION
I do not know the the 60, 63, and 65 NUMBERING is part of it. I guess we will see what is happening in the months ahead. - Huds- 7:45pm, April 13th.
-
The answer is no.
Once again, there will be detailed explainations of what each grade level entails. This will be in the new Cat as far as I know. We can read it, evaluate it, and assign grades to the best of our ability, just as we always have done/ try to do.
I agree. Nothing huge will change other then a few definitions. What this is doing is taking into account the varying levels of Uncirculated notes (Especially with the Journey Series we are seeing different quality levels of UNCIRCULATED notes). It is all in the hands of the CPMS to hopefully be VERY clear int he differences so there is not Grey area. Just Back and White.
A good example of this is in Coin Grading. If you look at any of the really good grading books they have a PERFECT description of what to look for for (Wear on a coin) for each grade level. I feel this should also be very true for paper money, it should cover in detail the different marks, ripples, cups, creases, folds, waves and flicks.
-
Where can I find proof of this?
Why don't you ask someone on the pricing panel? Try asking a 'friend?'
I have only collected a short time compared to many and even I know the answer to this!
True or not true lol
-
Proof will come when the book is published in the summer. Until then, it is all hearsay and rumour, and the wise will avoid making such bold statements, since the book hasn't even been printed yet.
Many of us here on the forums know more than we say, and that remains true (for the most part) because we elect not to say what we cannot prove.
-
Proof will come when the book is published in the summer. Until then, it is all hearsay and rumour, and the wise will avoid making such bold statements, since the book hasn't even been printed yet.
Many of us here on the forums know more than we say, and that remains true (for the most part) because we elect not to say what we cannot prove.
Proof positive that silence is golden!
I'll say it again,True or not true lol.No response required,I'll wait for da book!
-
" Charlton catalogue will be pricing Bank of Canada notes with three prices for Unc. (UNC-60, UNC-63 and UNC-65) in the next edition. Once this realization takes hold, premiums will increase for Gem notes. "
The rumoured UNC-60, UNC-63 & UNC-65 approach by Charlton would be a satisfactory solution to a difficult problem. Unfortunately though, assuming that UNC-65 is the maximum grade permitted on the Charlton scale (i.e., total absolute perfection), then that would create additional confusion since the American TPG companies go all the way up to UNC-70. At least with coins there is consistency on both sides of the US/Canada border since the Canadian TPG company ICCS goes all the way up to UNC-70 as do its American counterparts.
Notwithstanding my comments above, I do personally prefer the simpler approach with only 5 (rather than 10) points separating a "Gem Perfection UNC" from a "Basic UNC" because I'm not convinced that it's possible to grade on a consistent basis when there's a 10 point difference. Presumably a conversion scale would have to be developed between PMG and Charlton grading, e.g.
Charlton UNC-65 = PMG UNC-70 (Gem Perfection UNC)
Charlton UNC-63 = PMG UNC-65 (Choice UNC)
Charlton UNC-60 = PMG UNC-63 (Basic UNC)
Charlton AU = PMG-60 (??)
We already know from a fairly wide pool of hands-on visual evidence that PMG grades are about half a grade higher than the equivalent Charlton grades throughout the entire grading spectrum (VG to Gem UNC) and half a grade is roughly equivalent to 5 points on the numerical PMG scale.
Confusing or not, a perfect UNC note is a perfect UNC note and there should be no ambiguity whatsoever about that. The perennial problem, of course, is that when buying such a note at a show or online you can't really verify that it's 100% flawless UNC if it's permanently encapsulated in plastic. Personally speaking, I'd rather make up my own mind about that than to allow a TPG company to make the decision for me. This is not such a problem for the lower grades (VG-EF) because the defects associated with lower-grade notes are usually clearly visible through the encapsulating plastic.