I sometimes wonder if we should not press the CPMS to establish three UNC grades. Simplistically: UNC 60 - 'commercial' unc, usualy handling, what you typically call UNC; UNC-63 a 'choice' note that has minimal handling, decent centering; the UNC-65, that "Gem" note that is utterly flawless in grade, centering and without counting creases or handling ( would eliminate 99.9% of 1935 and early 1954 issues). Then there would need to be a qualifier as to whether it is pressed or original - a serious and significant issue. Admittedly, the more complex the system the more scams and misrepresentation but we are getteing that anyway. As Charlton only uses one grade it means that better and lesser notes will sell for more or less and thus raise questions of the accuracy of Charlton.
Don
Fist off, is "old" synonymous with "senile"? Now that I've greeted you with the respect you deserve I, as you know agree with you in respect to a 3 level Unc category. Not a 977 level Unc category, just a 3 level.
I think realistically that that could be a doable option to press Charlton on, provided a consensus could be reached in regards to defining the standards. A man of your stature would of course have enormous influence in this.
I would propose the following due to the realities of the market.
Commercial Unc or Unc 60 could be in fact pressed.
Lets face it, 90% of the 37 issues and earlier are pressed. There is of course an enormous difference betweeen pressed and
processed. Not to mention the fact that a lot of people weren't and still aren't aware that the 54 series, particularly the DF issues are supposed to be wavey. Charlton would do well to expand the information on notes.
Definitions could be stated. As in "If the note still smells like money but is flat as a pancake, it's a Commercial Unc. If, on the other hand the smell makes your eyes water and it curls into a perfect "U" when held under a halogen lamp-No, that's not an Unc at all"
I'd be inclined to call the next level Original Unc. Nice, unsullied and perhaps an actual light counting crease. I'm pro light counting creases.
The last level would of course be the Gem. In this category Charlton could be very exacting. Essentially the note would have to be perfect in as much as paper money can be. I would even go so far as to suggest on particularly rare notes in this category Charlton does the old "PWA" if need be to avoid the pricing issue altogether.
Would this stop the rampant over-grading? Probably not but it might slow it down. If one was to couple the above with tighter spreads in the lower grades, particularly AU to Unc as
real Uncs are, for the most part ,simply not available in many of the series' it may slow down the tendency to over-grade by dealers and collectors alike plus make the collector more inclined to approach buying notes in a more serious fashion. As in actually looking at both sides of the note. That's usually the investor/collector that does that but in the end when they find out they've been screwed, the industry as a whole takes a hit. I could really care less about the "speculators". If they're gullible enough to believe the garbage posted on ebay and many other places by many they deserve what they get but we do lose a lot of genuine people to over-grading. They simply take their losses and move on. That is bad for everyone, both dealers and collectors alike-a line which is diminishing rapidly as the global market and the hobby continues to expand.
I think Charlton could do a lot in the above areas without a major expenditure. A broader explanation in the grades would do wonders on it's own.
As an aside I think it's better to be 10% low rather than 10% high or in your case-35% high.
In the end, the truly rare notes are going to sell at the price both parties agree on. 20% over cat or double cat, it makes no difference.
