CGS - A customer-facing business?

[RLC35 288]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

[1949threepence 3,367]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

[Peter 615]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

[Paulus 1,975]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

Is this a positive slab-related comment by our Peter??

[Sword 1,471]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

Is this a positive slab-related comment by our Peter??

I have no doubt that CGS graded it impartially and accurately. But grading an MS-64 coin as AU78 is to CGS's advantage... It gives an impression that they are much stricter than NGC and would therefore help CGS coins realise higher prices. I don't think AJW would be too pleased though.

[mike 5]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

I suspect you referring to the 1874 halfrown from the seller „goldguinea“, ex PCGS MS64, now CGS AU78, UIN 25124 (as I cannot see any YH Victoria halfcrown on AJW coins website or Ebay listing). IMO, based on my experience with CGS grading, this coin was marked down because of two spots in hair and some minor contact marks on the cheek and on the field in front of the bust (lustre cannot be assessed correctly prom the picture). I am fortunate to have this coin in CGS UNC 80 and for those interested I have attached a picture to show the quality needed to achieve basic UNC80 grade.

[Peter 615]

I would of bought it raw at market rates Unc & nice for a 50% discount.This is what I disapprove of.

If we head for the USA competitive grading where 1 Sheldon point can be worth £1000's .

Spink will be replaced by a price list rather than a guide.

Collectors can go whatever way they want.The choice is theirs.

If I couldn't handle my early copper/hammered I would give up collecting tomorrow.

[Peter 615]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

I suspect you referring to the 1874 halfrown from the seller „goldguinea“, ex PCGS MS64, now CGS AU78, UIN 25124 (as I cannot see any YH Victoria halfcrown on AJW coins website or Ebay listing). IMO, based on my experience with CGS grading, this coin was marked down because of two spots in hair and some minor contact marks on the cheek and on the field in front of the bust (lustre cannot be assessed correctly prom the picture). I am fortunate to have this coin in CGS UNC 80 and for those interested I have attached a picture to show the quality needed to achieve basic UNC80 grade.

Correct Mike I have been surfing,taking on reasoned arguments for and against.

Bill took the decision to slab over 2,000 coins.

With me my cabinet/trays/aluminium cases/flips in Albums/Lindner trays,2x2 coin boxes containing flips would not be a reality or affordable.It would have to be all or nothing.My few slabs are in a separate container with a coin ticket in the available space in the cabinet.Most of my slabs were bought via Colincooke who seem to ignore a premium for slabbed coins.eg PCGS MS65 bn 1891 1/4d £10 when other 1891 1/4d's especially BU were considerably more.The jury is out on the slabbed coins in my collection.

[RLC35 288]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

Michael, I have a lot of NGC graded coins (and some PCGS and ANAC's), and I think NGC does a good job on U.S. Coins. Coins of Great Britain are another matter, since the grading is not based on a UK system of grading...in fact I am not sure what they use as a grading guide for UK coins. On the other hand, I think CGS does a good job, as far as I have seen, on British coins. The real comparison of coin grading for CGS would be how do they grade U.S. Coins. Would they make the same mistakes on U.S. coins that NGC and others make on UK coins? I don't know, as I have never seen a U. S. Coin graded thus far, by CGS. That would be a good one to check out. What it all boils down to with the two grading systems is, we are not comparing apples to apples...instead apples to oranges!....

[VickySilver 830]

I have had rather remarkable problems with NGC on grading of matte proofs, both of the standard 1902 set and the "off year" specimens - they seem incapable of consistent grading. I do think they overall do a rather fine job and doubt you would find a late milled bit graded MS65 or higher that was not a pleasant specimen.

I definitely would like to see the AU78 1874 2/6. Post away your pictures of such as I like to compare PCGS with CGS and NGC.

[Bill Pugsley 0]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

Is this a positive slab-related comment by our Peter??

I have no doubt that CGS graded it impartially and accurately. But grading an MS-64 coin as AU78 is to CGS's advantage... It gives an impression that they are much stricter than NGC and would therefore help CGS coins realise higher prices. I don't think AJW would be too pleased though.

I have just returned a PCGS MS64 George V half crown to its owner which in its capsule looked BU. I sat down with it and simply used an ordinary lens to minutely examine the coin through the perspex case and using my experience (which is far from expert) made a note of the bag marks, scratches (on the coin - not the capsule), weak strike in areas, light rubbing on high points, flan flaw etc and concluded that CGS might grade as high as AU75 but possibly as low as EF65. Yet it was and is a lovely coin. The seller was great and had offered a full refund if I was not happy with it (I have a CGS EF70 of the coin already which I did tell the seller before I 'bought' his coin).

I am still intrigued by the 1935 Crown that was shown earlier in this post. Do let us know what CGS have to say about it should you contact them about it.

[Bill Pugsley 0]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

Michael, I have a lot of NGC graded coins (and some PCGS and ANAC's), and I think NGC does a good job on U.S. Coins. Coins of Great Britain are another matter, since the grading is not based on a UK system of grading...in fact I am not sure what they use as a grading guide for UK coins. On the other hand, I think CGS does a good job, as far as I have seen, on British coins. The real comparison of coin grading for CGS would be how do they grade U.S. Coins. Would they make the same mistakes on U.S. coins that NGC and others make on UK coins? I don't know, as I have never seen a U. S. Coin graded thus far, by CGS. That would be a good one to check out. What it all boils down to with the two grading systems is, we are not comparing apples to apples...instead apples to oranges!....

Hello Bob,

CGS actually recommend that Coins from North America (Canada & USA) be graded by US grading companies as the results are more acceptable to North American collectors. I have just checked the CGS site and it shows that there are five collectors who own 9 CGS Graded USA Coins. I had a quick look and found the following:

UIN 0016026

Coin Type 1DSE.USAM.2008.02

Origin United States

Description 1 Dollar Silver Eagle 2008

Variety W. Proof

Standard References CGS variety 02

Provenance

Grade UNC 98

Population Level 1 out of 1 Finest Known

I did ask CGS recently had they ever graded a coin at UNC100 and the answer was no - not even proof that had come straight out of a mint's capsule. Very critical grading but I feel consistent.

As an aside, I believe all other (than CGS) graders use the Sheldon Scale (developed in North America) which goes from 01 to 70 whereas CGS uses the decimal scale of 01 to 100.

[argentumandcoins 70]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

Michael, I have a lot of NGC graded coins (and some PCGS and ANAC's), and I think NGC does a good job on U.S. Coins. Coins of Great Britain are another matter, since the grading is not based on a UK system of grading...in fact I am not sure what they use as a grading guide for UK coins. On the other hand, I think CGS does a good job, as far as I have seen, on British coins. The real comparison of coin grading for CGS would be how do they grade U.S. Coins. Would they make the same mistakes on U.S. coins that NGC and others make on UK coins? I don't know, as I have never seen a U. S. Coin graded thus far, by CGS. That would be a good one to check out. What it all boils down to with the two grading systems is, we are not comparing apples to apples...instead apples to oranges!....

Hello Bob,

CGS actually recommend that Coins from North America (Canada & USA) be graded by US grading companies as the results are more acceptable to North American collectors. I have just checked the CGS site and it shows that there are five collectors who own 9 CGS Graded USA Coins. I had a quick look and found the following:

UIN 0016026

Coin Type 1DSE.USAM.2008.02

Origin United States

Description 1 Dollar Silver Eagle 2008

Variety W. Proof

Standard References CGS variety 02

Provenance

Grade UNC 98

Population Level 1 out of 1 Finest Known

I did ask CGS recently had they ever graded a coin at UNC100 and the answer was no - not even proof that had come straight out of a mint's capsule. Very critical grading but I feel consistent.

As an aside, I believe all other (than CGS) graders use the Sheldon Scale (developed in North America) which goes from 01 to 70 whereas CGS uses the decimal scale of 01 to 100.

Steve Lockett has already publicly stated that NO COIN will ever attain a 100 score because if a better example turned up how could you score it? Seems a bit double Dutch to me, it either scores 100 or it doesn't (ie it is flawless or it isn't)?

[Peter 615]

For those interested here is the 1874 halfcrown.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1874-Queen-Victoria-Half-Crown-CGS-AU-78-Valued-in-Spink-at-750-UNC-Condition-/290857415069?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item43b873f19d

I got the seller and USA TPG wrong but the grades correct.

[Nick 329]

For those interested here is the 1874 halfcrown.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1874-Queen-Victoria-Half-Crown-CGS-AU-78-Valued-in-Spink-at-750-UNC-Condition-/290857415069?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item43b873f19d

I got the seller and USA TPG wrong but the grades correct.

It's a perfectly decent coin, but £700 is way too strong - it would probably make about half of that at auction.

[VickySilver 830]

Bill, will try to contact (poor pun again!) CGS re: the 1935 crown.

I think the 1874 2/6 in CGS 78 is a rather nice bit grade wise but not IMO price wise. Not in hand but the rather minimal marks look to be "bagging" marks and less than average. If you look at Morgan dollars, you will see that at least from the pictures, the grade of 64 by PCGS is fairly consistent - thought lustre and strike is rather different between the two series.

The "spotting" on this coin is of course not a wear issue and likely could be removed by the aspiring doctor (LOL). These are not technical wear in a coin 139 years of age. The coin has been likely dipped with possibly some loss of lustre. I can not fathom the price of 700 though. So in summary, run with the grade if the price is in line with it on a coin like this - since it is not, run the other way.

[azda 979]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

Is this a positive slab-related comment by our Peter??

I have no doubt that CGS graded it impartially and accurately. But grading an MS-64 coin as AU78 is to CGS's advantage... It gives an impression that they are much stricter than NGC and would therefore help CGS coins realise higher prices. I don't think AJW would be too pleased though.

I have just returned a PCGS MS64 George V half crown to its owner which in its capsule looked BU. I sat down with it and simply used an ordinary lens to minutely examine the coin through the perspex case and using my experience (which is far from expert) made a note of the bag marks, scratches (on the coin - not the capsule), weak strike in areas, light rubbing on high points, flan flaw etc and concluded that CGS might grade as high as AU75 but possibly as low as EF65. Yet it was and is a lovely coin. The seller was great and had offered a full refund if I was not happy with it (I have a CGS EF70 of the coin already which I did tell the seller before I 'bought' his coin).

I am still intrigued by the 1935 Crown that was shown earlier in this post. Do let us know what CGS have to say about it should you contact them about it.

If that were an auction house you'd be lucky to return it as a slabbed coin is authenticity of grade and coin.

[1949threepence 3,367]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

Michael, I have a lot of NGC graded coins (and some PCGS and ANAC's), and I think NGC does a good job on U.S. Coins. Coins of Great Britain are another matter, since the grading is not based on a UK system of grading...in fact I am not sure what they use as a grading guide for UK coins. On the other hand, I think CGS does a good job, as far as I have seen, on British coins. The real comparison of coin grading for CGS would be how do they grade U.S. Coins. Would they make the same mistakes on U.S. coins that NGC and others make on UK coins? I don't know, as I have never seen a U. S. Coin graded thus far, by CGS. That would be a good one to check out. What it all boils down to with the two grading systems is, we are not comparing apples to apples...instead apples to oranges!....

Hello Bob,

CGS actually recommend that Coins from North America (Canada & USA) be graded by US grading companies as the results are more acceptable to North American collectors. I have just checked the CGS site and it shows that there are five collectors who own 9 CGS Graded USA Coins. I had a quick look and found the following:

UIN 0016026

Coin Type 1DSE.USAM.2008.02

Origin United States

Description 1 Dollar Silver Eagle 2008

Variety W. Proof

Standard References CGS variety 02

Provenance

Grade UNC 98

Population Level 1 out of 1 Finest Known

I did ask CGS recently had they ever graded a coin at UNC100 and the answer was no - not even proof that had come straight out of a mint's capsule. Very critical grading but I feel consistent.

As an aside, I believe all other (than CGS) graders use the Sheldon Scale (developed in North America) which goes from 01 to 70 whereas CGS uses the decimal scale of 01 to 100.

Steve Lockett has already publicly stated that NO COIN will ever attain a 100 score because if a better example turned up how could you score it? Seems a bit double Dutch to me, it either scores 100 or it doesn't (ie it is flawless or it isn't)?

As 100 represents perfection, and it is impossible to improve on perfection, surely he (Steve Lockett) is implying that a sub perfection coin might be mistakenly graded at 100.

[Bill Pugsley 0]

I was looking at a bun halfcrown NGC MS64 tonight.The seller AJW coins got it reslabbed.

It was then slabbed by CGS AU78.

One to Bill

My opinion was a nice straight UNC.

Is this a positive slab-related comment by our Peter??

I have no doubt that CGS graded it impartially and accurately. But grading an MS-64 coin as AU78 is to CGS's advantage... It gives an impression that they are much stricter than NGC and would therefore help CGS coins realise higher prices. I don't think AJW would be too pleased though.

I have just returned a PCGS MS64 George V half crown to its owner which in its capsule looked BU. I sat down with it and simply used an ordinary lens to minutely examine the coin through the perspex case and using my experience (which is far from expert) made a note of the bag marks, scratches (on the coin - not the capsule), weak strike in areas, light rubbing on high points, flan flaw etc and concluded that CGS might grade as high as AU75 but possibly as low as EF65. Yet it was and is a lovely coin. The seller was great and had offered a full refund if I was not happy with it (I have a CGS EF70 of the coin already which I did tell the seller before I 'bought' his coin).

I am still intrigued by the 1935 Crown that was shown earlier in this post. Do let us know what CGS have to say about it should you contact them about it.

If that were an auction house you'd be lucky to return it as a slabbed coin is authenticity of grade and coin.

That is why Major Grading houses offer their guarantees (or so I understand). Have you seen the fake slabs that are now coming from China? So far I think they have copied NGC and PCGS - I was shown one about six months ago. The coin in it had been cast but a quick inspection would allow it to pass - after all it was slabbed and graded. The immediate give away was the fact the slab was not identical to ones issued by NGC or PCGS.

[azda 979]

Herein lies the problem Bill, know what you're buying and do your Research first before jumping in with both feet. Coinery spotted a fake Lizzie I groat i think it was in an NGC or PCGS slab late last year from a French seller

This is why this is one of the best British Coin forums on the internet, if not the best, its like what CGS are to british coin grading

Edited March 6, 2013 by azda

[argentumandcoins 70]

What I do know is they are now on the CGS site with pictures so anyone registered to the site can compare them against their own coins.

The above note from Bill Pugsley is very true. The addition of the individual variety listing of coins on the CGS site is a real plus. It is one of the reasons I signed on to the site. The only negative I see is that each individual coin variety is listed as 1961-1, 1961-2, etc, and you have to go through all the 1961's to see the one you are looking for. It would be better to add a designation...(1961, far-1) etc to signify the coin being shown. Still, I really like that part of the site. I currently only have a few CGS slabbed coins, but am looking at adding some of my scarce pennies to CGS, for slabbing.

Bob, as an American, how do you compare the relative qualities of NGC and CGS ? Do you have experience of both ?

Michael, I have a lot of NGC graded coins (and some PCGS and ANAC's), and I think NGC does a good job on U.S. Coins. Coins of Great Britain are another matter, since the grading is not based on a UK system of grading...in fact I am not sure what they use as a grading guide for UK coins. On the other hand, I think CGS does a good job, as far as I have seen, on British coins. The real comparison of coin grading for CGS would be how do they grade U.S. Coins. Would they make the same mistakes on U.S. coins that NGC and others make on UK coins? I don't know, as I have never seen a U. S. Coin graded thus far, by CGS. That would be a good one to check out. What it all boils down to with the two grading systems is, we are not comparing apples to apples...instead apples to oranges!....

Hello Bob,

CGS actually recommend that Coins from North America (Canada & USA) be graded by US grading companies as the results are more acceptable to North American collectors. I have just checked the CGS site and it shows that there are five collectors who own 9 CGS Graded USA Coins. I had a quick look and found the following:

UIN 0016026

Coin Type 1DSE.USAM.2008.02

Origin United States

Description 1 Dollar Silver Eagle 2008

Variety W. Proof

Standard References CGS variety 02

Provenance

Grade UNC 98

Population Level 1 out of 1 Finest Known

I did ask CGS recently had they ever graded a coin at UNC100 and the answer was no - not even proof that had come straight out of a mint's capsule. Very critical grading but I feel consistent.

As an aside, I believe all other (than CGS) graders use the Sheldon Scale (developed in North America) which goes from 01 to 70 whereas CGS uses the decimal scale of 01 to 100.

Steve Lockett has already publicly stated that NO COIN will ever attain a 100 score because if a better example turned up how could you score it? Seems a bit double Dutch to me, it either scores 100 or it doesn't (ie it is flawless or it isn't)?

As 100 represents perfection, and it is impossible to improve on perfection, surely he (Steve Lockett) is implying that a sub perfection coin might be mistakenly graded at 100.

That is certainly one way of viewing it. I think the major problem is the human factor. If it were 2 machines examining the coins against a benchmark set, that would guarantee uniformity in grading. 2 humans always leaves a margin of error and you could almost argue you have doubled the margin rather than halved it!

I can see why slabs would appeal to some people and I will not bash them for their tastes but I always tell my customers to buy what they like and treat it as a hobby that may give them a financial yield long term. It infuriates me to read the splurge on Guineas ebay listings about "my investment coins" and that only mirrors the dross that CGS/LC were churning out last year and the year before about "investment collections".

Investors lead to bubbles and bubbles ALWAYS burst! People should be in the hobby for pleasure (Bill certainly falls into this bracket) rather than gain, strange comment coming from a dealer I know!

[azda 979]

I asked this question quite a while back also, without reply, but who graded the Benchmark coins that CGS use to check against submitted coins and what are those coins grades.?

[Peter 615]

Bill, will try to contact (poor pun again!) CGS re: the 1935 crown.

I think the 1874 2/6 in CGS 78 is a rather nice bit grade wise but not IMO price wise. Not in hand but the rather minimal marks look to be "bagging" marks and less than average. If you look at Morgan dollars, you will see that at least from the pictures, the grade of 64 by PCGS is fairly consistent - thought lustre and strike is rather different between the two series.

The "spotting" on this coin is of course not a wear issue and likely could be removed by the aspiring doctor (LOL). These are not technical wear in a coin 139 years of age. The coin has been likely dipped with possibly some loss of lustre. I can not fathom the price of 700 though. So in summary, run with the grade if the price is in line with it on a coin like this - since it is not, run the other way.

A cotton bud with a drop of acetone would sort out the marks.Pity it is entombed.

[Peter 615]

I asked this question quite a while back also, without reply, but who graded the Benchmark coins that CGS use to check against submitted coins and what are those coins grades.?

Chatting to a well known dealer at the Midland Fair he was taking the pee out of finest known claims for UK coins when only a fraction are slabbed.The benchmark coins would be interesting to find out about and where they were sourced.

[mike 5]

I asked this question quite a while back also, without reply, but who graded the Benchmark coins that CGS use to check against submitted coins and what are those coins grades.?

Chatting to a well known dealer at the Midland Fair he was taking the pee out of finest known claims for UK coins when only a fraction are slabbed.The benchmark coins would be interesting to find out about and where they were sourced.

Obviously this means Finest known from coins slabbed by CGS and not from all coins which exist... I find it really diffiuclt to believe that somebody does not understand such a simple thing. For those interested - quote from Londoncoins website:

"Many collectors believe quite rightly that the higher the grade of their acquisitions the better, so what could be more appealing than Finest Known (also known as best extant) examples.

It is not uncommon to see coins described on dealer's lists as "the best we have seen", or "surely the finest known", and although these items will certainly be nice coins a real Finest Known designation must be a comparative measurement rather than a matter of opinion.

We believe the numeric third party grading systems supply the necessary comparative measurement by attaching a numeric grade. So where we have a coin type such as a 1903 6d where over 50 different examples of this date and denomination have been graded by CGS, the highest known grade so far is their UNC 85 of which there are 9 examples. If in future a 1903 6d was graded as UNC 88 or better this one therefore by statistical empirical fact would be the Finest Known and anyone else contending that they owned a superior example would need to prove it by submitting it for grading before they could ask a premium price for the piece."