Grading and pricing.

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

There are a few dealers out there who I get along with very well. I base my offer on the notes' grade as I see it and usually end up with a nice note for a reasonable price.  I have, over the last  6 years of searching fresh bricks, come to the conclusion that perfection really doesn't exist and and have lowered my expectations somewhat to suit my experience. I allow a bit more on inserts because they are handled at least one more time than regular notes before they are bricked. Enough said about that.

Here is the nuts and bolts of my unpleasant experience yesturday:

I slipped a note out of a holder at a dealer's table at the Oshawa show to check its grade. I made an offer based on AU condition because the note had an obvious 3/4 inch bend in the top margin and a 1" crease near the bottom centre. The guy seemed miffed that I had the nerve to call it  AU and said " it was UNC till you took it out of its holder " he said. He grabbed his up his copy of Charlton, had a look, and said the note is worth 45.00 but I"ll take 40.00. I just shook my head and walked away.  

Charlton bases its prices on Charton's grading system, not on some obscure, self serving, personal opinion. If dealers are using Charlton as the pricing bible then they should also adhere to Charlton as the grading bible. Too bad collectors have to look at a 20 - 30 notes graded UNC to finally see one. I hate to handle notes but I have to know what I'm buying.

Needless to say I left the show early and just a bit put off.

Gary

I understand the problem, overgraded notes.
I am not at all pleased with customers sliding notes out of the protective holder to grade them, but I understand that it is necessary to ascertain the grade.

I watched Don Olmstead at the recent TNS show grading several notes that he purchased, and I sat with him for a few minutes to see how he did it. It mattered not at all what the previous owner said they were, and many of those marked Uncs were re-packaged and graded AU. I looked carefully at several of the notes and agreed with Don's grading on all except for one. A 1937 $10 that I would have called Unc, he called it AU.

I also look at the corners of all notes with a 10 power glass looking for actual wear. If I see some rounding or fibers showing, the note is not uncirculated, it is less.

Some notes are sold by price with no actual grade written on the holder. This is a hard thing for a consumer to buy unless he knows how to grade properly and checks his price list.

Rick

Notes can be tricky to grade. Especially with a busy bourse and tricky ambient lighting. The most respected sellers that Ive dealt with take more of the conservative road with grading but may charge more for the condition rare, high grade UNCs. I think in most regards this is fair as I feel Im buying certainty, quality, and saving valuable time and possibly money buying an inferior or misgraded note.
I also tend to walk away from sellers who arent open for discussion with a difference of opinoin with grading. Everyone makes mistakes so its never improbable.
Tough call however, as I would imagine it could be abit unnerving for some sellers to allow someone they just met to handle an UNC note. As a rule of thumb I would always ask first.
Perhaps you caught the dealer on a bad day.

Gary,

Sorry to hear about your B&M/show experience, which is similar to several of my own at shows as a buyer, which I mentioned in another thread recently.

What should have happened is he should have apologized to you and agreed to sell the note at an agreed upon less than UNC price and then gone even beyond that to help reverse the lack of confidence you may have had in his sales approach.

This assumes of course he is interested in building a business based on relationships and not jumping from one transaction to the other which is not the recipe for business success.

Troy.

What I generally do at shows or in stores for that matter is look at what the dealer's inventory as a whole looks like in respect to grades and prices before I even bother focusing on any notes at that table or store. Obviously if the notes all appear over graded to me that ends the story. If however I disagree with the grade on one or two particular notes I may mention it. More times than not I simply pass on the note. On occasion I may buy one I agree with the grade and price on to see if I can establish a longer term relationship with the person if they have inventory I may be interested in. A lot of times people act like they are doing you a great personal favour ( not saying that was the case in your tale) by buying a note or coin and that can be very irritating.  I've experienced sellers acting the same way.
If you have no previous relationship with the other person it is easy for both parties to get irritated.  Life is too short for that crap. *shrug*

Over grading seems to be a common problem,and yet is so subjective.

My experience was similar to sudzee recently.At a show I attended with several other collectors,we found every dealer of Paper Money had over graded most popular scarce notes.
We seperated,went through the displays,re-grouped,and found that out of 5 individuals,none of us purchased even one note.

One story related to me at this show-A dealer had a run of 4 Consecutive 1937 $2.00's in Unc.Each note had severe counting creases,at least 2 on each note.The response when my friend pointed this out to a very well established dealer? That's what makes them original.
Need less to say,he walked away.

Perhaps this is the time for accurate, third party grading. Grading by a minimum of 3 people, none of whom sell notes, and are widely known in paper money collecting circles.

The usual problems are notes that are borderline Unc (which means AU).

Rick

Agree, boarderline UNCs are a tough call. As close to an AU price usually does the trick in persuading me if the wear is a counting flick or less. Otherwise, its not an UNC. Usually Im thinking in terms of resale one day.

As far as im concerned UNC is UNC and better d@mn well be UNC if anyone wants my money.

Nothing wrong with expecting a note described as Uncirculated being that. Both parties in the transaction need to agree on both the price and the grade.

Far too many notes called Unc. that are not quite there.

Drives 'em nuts when you view the corners with a 10 power glass looking for signs of wear. Pressed notes are another problem, but this does not change any actual wear.

Rick

Agree, with the above. UNC notes should be straightforward enough - but arent nec. Especially when going back to the 1937 and older notes where handling of the sheets and counting flicks were common and yet an UNC note in its most sincere form. I had an interesting conversation with Don about this recently. One thing I like about his grading is his notation of Original UNC, whereby it can be generally accepted and noted that on certain vintages the original counting flick or light crease is a preference rather than the glassy flat surface of a pressed note. Likewise, with the waviness of the 54 series. I think a helpful addition to Charlton would be the addtion of these descriptions to the grading portion of the cat. Therefore making greater awareness of originality in unc vs - pressed or what I dislike - commercial unc...

Would you not agree that there is a difference between a counting crease and the ripples of the 1954 series? One of them is a result of handling or mishandling, yet the other is the result of moisture in the paper drying out during or shortly after the printing process.

I would not consider a note with a crease of any kind, including a counting crease, to be UNC. It is AU. Call it Original AU if you must, but it is not UNC or even Original UNC. The rippling is considered "as-made", and thus UNC, or if you use it, Original UNC.

I agree, having talked to Don many times about notes and coins when he used to sell them to me.

There is no definition of original Unc, or commercial Unc, while pressed Unc, if done well enough, is not traceable or detectable.

Wavy edges on 1954 are common place, counting marks can be brutal on earlier notes, while the notes coming out of bank machines can have a series of marks from the mechanism. The whole problem is notes with actual wear or heavy contract marks being called Unc. when they are not. This type of information would make sense if in the book, as to what to look for on certain issues.

Rick

The new journey notes often have a little pucker near the edge where the security strip is.   I suspect these strips dull the cutting knife causing some drag during cutting.  I know that a number of people are downgrading the note because of this... but it is "as issued".  

I look for the waiviness in the 54 Series - Devils in particular to indicate originality. WRT to 1937 notes and older, the texture of the paper and as Rick mentioned above - so signs of wear on the corners, edges, discoloration, etc... of the note to signify it was never in circulation.
My conversation with Don and ideas shared with other collectors is that the technology and handling process - by hand - for the older notes made them rarely susceptable to counting flicks and perhaps a light crease. Further, unless the note had been obtained from the centre of the brick and had been pressed from the corresponding pressure would have unlikely escaped some sort of light counting flick.
Having said that, my ideal standars for UNC are without any counting flick at all - and I would definately deine a crease as being more substantial than a flick and in my eyes give a note an EF - AU grade. However, I think where there is a gray area is the original note with a counting flick that from examination one would conclude has seen no wear and circulation. In general I would grade such a note AU-UNC original, and note the counting flick. And with a corresponding price between AU-UNC.
I have - for better or worse - bought notes through major auctions where the note was described as UNC and upong examination had such counting flicks - but felt the note in its sincerest form was uncirculated.
Likewise, the notes that I can truly say were GEM UNC and purchase for GEM unc prices commanded premium dollars - but were certainly GEMs and some of the most pristine and beautiful notes I have both seen and owned.
I guess, what I am also trying to express is that value should also be taken account and noted wrt to originality. And likewise, disclosure, identification of pressed notes, and cooresponding prices.
Hope this hasnt taken the intention of this post in the wrong direction.
BTW, I was sorry to hear about the experience with the dealer. It can certainly take the zing out of what should be a fun time hunting for treasure...