Coin Grading System for Bank Notes???

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

In your previous post picking apart a prior post line-by-line, please be aware that most of it is a quotation of an eBay auction listing. That block of text is not the original words of the post's author.

As a way of more clearly formatting your replies, please use the quote command. If you do the following:

Code: [Select]

[quote]I like peaches[/quote]
That's great! I like peaches too!It will look like this:

I like peaches

That's great! I like peaches too!

Please try to use this code when quoting chunks of someone else's post. Also, to keep replies short, only quote relevant parts of the original text instead of the whole post.

Thanks!

Don Olmstead is a well known expert in paper money, a professional dealer, a member of CAND and a contributor to trends and paper money books.
Profit is not a dirty word, neither is being a dealer.

As paper is only a small part of numismatics, but an important part, slamming anyone who has contributed as much to numismatics is not called for.

Grading notes is subjective, sometimes things need to be improved. Perhaps the Sheldon method of using numbers for grading notes is something that is going to happen, sooner or later. Some call it an improvement, other don't like change.

The addition of various words to describe notes has been going on for years. Gem, choice, original, bright, perfect, perfectly centered etc. I sat with Don for a bit at the CAND show, and graded a whole pile of notes that he had graded, and agreed with all of them. As no one is perfect, if two or more people agree that a note is choice Uncirculated (thus Unc. 63), then we have more agreement on grading notes than we do on many coins.

Notes are just bits of paper, subject to the slightest mark. Not really any harder than grading hockey cards, except they are of better paper.  

Trends in CCN sellects only a certain group of notes for value. Not enough room to put them all in along with mint products, coins, and tokens. The prices shown are more current than similar notes in the catalogues, which is many pages longer.

Notes being slabbed have some problems, as many people like to slide them out of the holder to look at them closely. Can't do that in a slab.

We need some propers definitions and descriptions of the numbering systems for note grading to make it viable. It may never be the cats meow, but surely some people will use it.

Rick

An open message to all present and future participants to this thread:

Please keep your comments at a professional level and respect the rules of this forum. If you cannot maintain a professional level of participation in this discussion, there will be consequences. We have been down this road before in various discussion threads. Let's not have a repeat performance. Further disrespect for others will not be tolerated.

Thank you.

In your previous post picking apart a prior post line-by-line, please be aware that most of it is a quotation of an eBay auction listing. That block of text is not the original words of the post's author.

As a way of more clearly formatting your replies, please use the quote command. If you do the following:

Code: [Select]

[quote]I like peaches[/quote]
That's great! I like peaches too!It will look like this:

I like peaches

That's great! I like peaches too!

Please try to use this code when quoting chunks of someone else's post. Also, to keep replies short, only quote relevant parts of the original text instead of the whole post.

Thanks!

Yea, I couldn't tell where he finished and the auction started. Either way if you put someone elses words on your post and support the message I will respond to it.

Thanks for the tip on the quote thing.

  I am fairly new to collecting paper money(4 years). I stopped collecting coins because I felt there were too many variations of Unc for me to be accurate in my grading. At present, I use three different terms for an uncirculated note. Unc - meaning the note is uncirculated but may have as printed waves in the paper as a lot of 54 series notes and some Journey notes do - like BEK for instance.  Choice Unc -  would be a nice flat note but may have uneven margins. And of course Gem Unc which is a perfect note.
  Is this not good enough, or am I wrong?

Scott

Don Olmstead is a well known expert in paper money, a professional dealer, a member of CAND and a contributor to trends and paper money books.
Profit is not a dirty word, neither is being a dealer.

As paper is only a small part of numismatics, but an important part, slamming anyone who has contributed as much to numismatics is not called for.

I didn't mention Don Olmstead let alone slam him. Read more carefully before accusing me thanks

 I am fairly new to collecting paper money(4 years). I stopped collecting coins because I felt there were too many variations of Unc for me to be accurate in my grading. At present, I use three different terms for an uncirculated note. Unc - meaning the note is uncirculated but may have as printed waves in the paper as a lot of 54 series notes and some Journey notes do - like BEK for instance.  Choice Unc -  would be a nice flat note but may have uneven margins. And of course Gem Unc which is a perfect note.
  Is this not good enough, or am I wrong?

Scott

UNC is UNC according to Charlton and any distractions should be mentioned not sub catagorized.

Just a clarification... UNC is UNC according to the Canadian Paper Money Society. The Charlton guide simply republishes the CPMS grading standards and uses those in its pricing. It is not UNC according to Charlton, it is UNC according to the CPMS. Merely a minor technicality, but an important one.

We should not forget that the CPMS should probably be an important player in any sort of changes to what is used in Canada for grading Canadian paper money.

  I forgot to mention that my use of the terms Unc, Choice Unc, and Gem Unc in my collection is for my benefit only. I find it easier for lableling purposes. I completely aggree. Unc is Unc!

glassmancanada thanks for the official welcome to the forum.

I take great offense to your  personal attacks of a post that was copied from a SELLER on ebay.
This was just providing other points of view.
I noticed you said squatt about Don Olmsteads 2 thumbs up to this way of grading.
Yet you choose to attack me over and over in your response.
Very ignorant and intolerant.Your tone smacks of a closed mind,I'm neither a dealer or a profiteer,just trying to collect the best quality I can.I choose this way after a number of sleezy dealers sold me rip-offs of the grades they had stated.
I'm surprised the moderators do not censure you for personal attacks.
If the forum is this intolerant I will leave it promptly.Disgusting!

When you put another persons words on my thread and adopt them as your own I will respond to them equally.
I have never bought a note from Don and probably never will so it doesnt matter what he thinks. In fact I think you are missing my whole point and if you examine your own words you will find that you are agreeing with me and don't even know it. I truely feel for you and your dealings with "sleezy dealers" but you made the mistake.....here comes the whole point loud and clear...... you let the dealer tell you the grade when you should be telling the dealer the grade. If then you don't agree you go elsewhere. This is a choice. You are the authority of what you buy. With 3rd party grading there is no choice, what you get is what you get. If you are having a hard time feeling confident of your grading ability or you are confused just think what a mess you will be in when UNC is busted up into divisions then AU then EF oh my lord save us.

Don Olmstead is a well known expert in paper money, a professional dealer, a member of CAND and a contributor to trends and paper money books.
Profit is not a dirty word, neither is being a dealer.

As paper is only a small part of numismatics, but an important part, slamming anyone who has contributed as much to numismatics is not called for.

Grading notes is subjective, sometimes things need to be improved. Perhaps the Sheldon method of using numbers for grading notes is something that is going to happen, sooner or later. Some call it an improvement, other don't like change.

The addition of various words to describe notes has been going on for years. Gem, choice, original, bright, perfect, perfectly centered etc. I sat with Don for a bit at the CAND show, and graded a whole pile of notes that he had graded, and agreed with all of them. As no one is perfect, if two or more people agree that a note is choice Uncirculated (thus Unc. 63), then we have more agreement on grading notes than we do on many coins.

Notes are just bits of paper, subject to the slightest mark. Not really any harder than grading hockey cards, except they are of better paper.  

Trends in CCN sellects only a certain group of notes for value. Not enough room to put them all in along with mint products, coins, and tokens. The prices shown are more current than similar notes in the catalogues, which is many pages longer.

Notes being slabbed have some problems, as many people like to slide them out of the holder to look at them closely. Can't do that in a slab.

We need some propers definitions and descriptions of the numbering systems for note grading to make it viable. It may never be the cats meow, but surely some people will use it.

Rick

I started this thread for collectors. Perhaps the dealers should start their own.

Clearly, you gentlemen cannot keep this discussion at a professional level.

THREAD CLOSED.

This is truly a shame, since I was looking forward to possibly achieving something productive for once when a thread of this nature gets posted.

Like it or not, it does seem that inevitably, the numeric coin grading system will continue its spread into the realm of banknote grading.

I too am an adherent to the "old school" of grading as defined by the CPMS.  At present I buy most of my notes from eBay, and when I see items being graded and sold according to the numeric coin system, I do one of three things:

1. I don't even think of bidding on the item (my most commonly-used option).
2. I carefully examine the scans of the item (or request larger scans from the seller) and do my own conversion from the numeric system to the CPMS system before bidding (e.g. UNC63 = AU, AU58 = VF/EF).
3. I ask the seller to redefine the grade of the item in CPMS terms.  This option lends itself to overgrading by the seller, but overgrading will happen no matter what grading system is used.

When buying on eBay, I guess the only thing that might help to some extent is if we had some standard way of "converting" a numeric grade into a CPMS grade.  The problem is, who is going to come up with this conversion system and will note traders adhere to it?  For the most part, I simply avoid numeric graders like the plague unless I see a note that I really want - then I ask more questions to try to limit the chances that I will get a note I'm unhappy with.

As has been pointed out before, the only sure-fire way to not get stuck with an overgraded note is to see it "in person", learn how to grade for yourself (based on whatever grading method that makes you happy), and make an offer to the seller based on your opinion of the grade.  The seller will either accept or reject your offer, and you can then either up the ante or keep looking...it's that simple!

If the day comes when the numeric system overtakes the CPMF system (perish the thought!), then I guess us old-schoolers will have no choice but to make all of our purchases face-to-face so that we can see what we're buying.

I thought I locked this thread. Oh well. Now it is.