Is a paperclip mark still UNC ?

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

Particularly interested in hearing the logic of those who say no but will accept a counting flick as an undamaged note. Thanks.

Just curious,
Doug

a counting flick or a paper clip mark would not I repeat would not be UNC

The logic behind those who say counting folds, ATM machine marks, paper clip, etc is that like coin between the moment they are made and the moment they really circulate, they are handled and can get small imperfection due to those fact. Now coin are handled too before circulating and get bag marks, friction marks, etc and still are consider UNC at different level between MS-60 and the Graal MS-70.

Why would paper money be so different.?

As long as damage is not from circulation, they should be assign different grades of UNC. If you think about it, it make sense. I understand the arguments of the purist and respect them. I also understand the argument express above and respect it.

The bottom line is the hobby and the industry or market will decide on the course of the future grading system. Status Quo or adjustment.

Louis C.C.C.S.

Good logic expressed by Louis in the previous post.

Paper money is just that, money made from paper. It is very easily marred by handling. Could a note with a paper clip mark be described as Uncirculated with a mark?. The signs of not being uncirculated would most certainly be wear, but I am not too sure that other minor blemishs and imperfections would cause it to be called so circulated.

One really cannot compare paper grades to coin grades, because as mentioned, metal disks are less subject to minor marks that affect the grade. That is why we have 70 grades of coins.

Rick

a counting flick or a paper clip mark would not I repeat would not be UNC

I'm betting you own maybe what?  5 notes?
Best get used to the fact that the woefully out-dated standard used to grade Canadian notes is fast disappearing. Why even those that haunt the ATM's in search of wonderful prefixes on brand spankin newly issued notes are realizing 95%, maybe more, have edge crimps from machine wrapping and or machine counting. As has been stated, it's paper and has a tendency to get a little banged up by mechanical counters , wrappers etc.

[warnyel]Getting a bit snippy aren't we? Maybe you didn't mean your comments to be inflamitory, but they are. This is a "yellow warning flag. - Admin[/warnyel]

What difference does it make how many notes a person owns?

I have about 3,000 notes, mostly common stuff for promotional purposes, but some exceedingly rare Bank of Hamilton notes. Those with paper clip marks, or other minor defects, unless rare, are spent.

Rick

Good points made by all.
Louis makes a strong argument again for the need of sub-grades. No counting flicks, paper clip marks, etc., great - you have an MS65 UNC.

CNA, ONA, CPMS, Charlton contributors, should organize a steering committee. Include both buyers & sellers. Individuals allowed to make written submissions. Powers that be should deal with this issue head on instead of muddling along.

I have only taken serious interest in this hobby a short while yet it is clear IMO standards should be set out ASAP.

My humble opinion.
doug

I think strict guidelines should be adhered to. But IMHO I would say a paperclip mark disqualifies a note as being unc. My logic is that a paperclipped note would by circumstance imply it has been handled for circulation and therefore no longer - uncirculated.

but is that not why UNC notes are set at a premium becuase they are rarer than the AU or at most describe the note as AU-UNC

and travsy I would bet you I have alot more notes and rarer ones then yourself

(Merging two consecutive posts --BWJM)

[warnyel]Ok, let's not go there. - Admin[/warnyel]

I didn't bring this up to start a discussion about who own more notes and who's better...

I think that it is time the industry, the collectors, the associations, the grading services and the cataloguers sit down together and come up with acceptable standards for the time. The ones widely accepted have been put in place for long time and may be due for revision to fit the time.

A new grading chart for paper might make pricing of AU to GEM UNC notes easier to do.

Louis C.C.C.S.

I agree, Louis. The standards for grading of paper money need to be revised, and give them grades instead of descriptors.  I cannot define a choice uncirculated, or a gem uncirculated, and have read few definitions of those words that make sense, with regard to using them universally in paper grading. I guess it is about time for another grading company to start up.

Rick

I agree, Louis. The standards for grading of paper money need to be revised, and give them grades instead of descriptors.  I cannot define a choice uncirculated, or a gem uncirculated, and have read few definitions of those words that make sense, with regard to using them universally in paper grading. I guess it is about time for another grading company to start up.

Rick

Pretty much everyone in Canada knows CCCS is thinking about or is about to start up a Canadian paper money grading service so your comments over the past few weeks alluding to a "new service" have the subtlety of a brick through a window.  Much like CCCS is "thinking" about going to a hard plastic holder  for coins ala PCGS isn't a secret. That is of course if the dealer who wasted 2 hours of my time at the last Edmonton show asking me about injection molding etc. decides to pony up the 50-100k it'll cost to make the deal fly (No offense meant in anyway to CCCS or its founders, it's a decent grading service and in more and more cases, a stabler service than ICCS. Unfortunately, destroying that myth is going to be very tough indeed)

Regardless, In the end I guess the success or failure of any 3rd party note grading service based in Canada will depend on how nice the service plays with the dealers which is idiotic. Hopefully it works in spite of that-the biz needs it.
That being said, all of the old school rounders disliked the CCGS service when it started up, you included. Granted the CCGS standards are ridiculously convoluted and the explanations are worse but when the service started there was nothing but bitching about it. No "paper money experts" including you ever offered postive input, support or constructive criticism. They just whined about what was wrong with the service.
Be interesting to know the why of that someday.

Note for the site admins: I know the above probably seems kinda acrimonious but seriously, how many times can you beat a dead horse? Never any positive input about the issue, just whining and not so subtle shots at the owner of the service. That seems somewhat counter-productive *shrug*
Oh yeah, I apologize to whoever it was I directed the 3 note comment at-they undoubtably have 1000's of bank notes, all incredibly rare pristine Unc's with nary a paper clip mark on any. My bad.

Travsy

Just to make things clear. CCCS is preparing to go with hard slab for coins in the near future. As for grading paper, we are not about. We are not closing that door, but injecting the money needed to do it when nobody agrees on grading would be ridiculous.

This is the only reason I have brought up the subject. Things don't change fast in numismatic unless you are important enough to force things on collectors. CCCS want to bring quality holders, serious gradingand product wanted by collectors. I hear the demand for paper grading but no sensus.

One last thing, CCCS grades coins the same for all and dealers don't get favorable grading to get their business. That is not the way to be serious,

Louis C.C.C.S.

Travsy

Just to make things clear. CCCS is preparing to go with hard slab for coins in the near future. As for grading paper, we are not about. We are not closing that door, but injecting the money needed to do it when nobody agrees on grading would be ridiculous.

This is the only reason I have brought up the subject. Things don't change fast in numismatic unless you are important enough to force things on collectors. CCCS want to bring quality holders, serious gradingand product wanted by collectors. I hear the demand for paper grading but no sensus.

One last thing, CCCS grades coins the same for all and dealers don't get favorable grading to get their business. That is not the way to be serious,

Louis C.C.C.S.

[size=12]Louis
To be clear, though I did type it previously I'll type it again; in no way do I think CCCS caters to or favours anybody in their grading of coins and if you thought I was stating  or inferring that, I apologize.  That aside, it is good to see someone finally get serious and move ahead with a hard plastic holder. It is long overdue and to be frank, the myth of ICCS is ripe to be broken although it will be difficult. As you mentioned, things don't change fast in the Canadian numismatic business.


Congratulations on your decision and courage to move ahead with it nonetheless. I hope that self-important fellow who I referenced chatting with at the Edmonton show listened to me and shared the information with you regarding the what and how of the holder. He must have although his lack of courtesy to me in respect to my time is a minor irritant but one must always consider the source. I guess I could bill you for it eh?    Believe me, that's a lot of coin certifications, lol.

In the event that he chose to ignore my advice and you people have opted to go with the holder offered by that one US service (which would be a mistake in my opinion)  I will,  if you wish, send you all of the pertinent information about the plastic that is best , the approximate cost of the mold itself and molding process, sonic welder information etc. that I provided him to try and persuade you otherwise-that "ready made" holder available is garbage, though I'm sure you have researched it thoroughly. The information is free, I have no interest in, nor do I expect to get any compensation for it.  A thing that fellow seemed unable to wrap his brain around when we spoke at the Edmonton show, lol.
Including this guy at the Edmonton Show, I think I've been asked 3, maybe 4 times to design a hard plastic holder for a 3rd party Canadian coin certification service . Hell, I think I still have 2 designs for hard plastic holders on AutoCad somewhere. Unfortunately all times it has been broached with me it has involved my time, my money and my brains so why would I? I can make my own mistakes just fine!  One thing of import, it would be unwise to have the mold and holders manufactured in China or Taiwan.

 
My statement about catering to dealers had more to do with a 3rd party service for paper money. It would seem that most dealers are all for a 3rd party service if the standards fit their needs. Of course this is not unexpected given that dealers are dealers afterall but I feel it will make it virtually impossible to ever arrive at a nationally accepted standard and the methodology behind it. I think Olmstead is coming out with his own standard and the little I know of it, it seems to make a degree of sense. I still feel there is too much import put on the Unc category but in the end, it really doesn't matter to me.  I looked at launching a 3rd party note certification service late last year and came to the conclusion that it wasn't economically viable. For me, it is more of an "aggravation to return" issue-the paper money area of Canadian numismatics simply isn't big enough to make it worthwhile, particularly when one adds in the inevitable snivelling that would accompany such a service. Besides the guy who owns CCGS is a friend of mine so doing a 3rd party service would be a scuzzy thing to do to him.

However if a person already involved on the certifiction business were to decide to go ahead and certify Canadian paper money I would advise them this:
Establish simple easy to understand standards. To me that would be 3 levels of Unc and in the circulated grades, two per grade. As in F/VF or F15 etc. Those are easy to understand and all that is required. As I told the guy at CCGS when I saw one of the notes he had certified as "F-17".  "What the hell is an F17? To me it's an American Jet Fighter". Jesus, there is simply no need for that type of complexity.

Lastly, I would largely ignore the dealers and their opinions and target the collectors through various advertisements and of course at shows and auctions. The only thing I'd use dealers for is to "slab" a few notes of theirs-hell I'd even do it for free so name recognition would get out to the collecting population. Given your unique situation, this could be viable.
Anyhow, good luck to you on the hard plastic holder and to CCCS.[/size]

Things don't change fast in numismatic unless you are important enough to force things on collectors. Louis C.C.C.S.

EXCUSE ME???  Force things on collectors?  Whose hobby is this anyway!