1841 East India Company 2 Anna KM# 460.2

[PeaceBD]

Thanks Harry. I have not got a chance to look at it closely but I think its the W.W. Common Calcutta mint coin KM# 460.2. It is amazing to see so many of these survive in nice grades considering that these would have been some of the most used coins for daily transactions.

[Harry]

Thanks Harry. I have not got a chance to look at it closely but I think its the W.W. Common Calcutta mint coin KM# 460.2. It is amazing to see so many of these survive in nice grades considering that these would have been some of the most used coins for daily transactions.

Yes its does amaze me to see how many of these coins have survived in such good condition. After all they are more than 150 years old! I have noticed that the continuous legend 2 Anna is more difficult to get in this condition.

[The Oracle]

I was offered this beauty for real cheap and with the luster it was showing in the picture it was hard to pass her up. I was not disappointed when I saw it in hand. What do you guys think? Any opinion on the grade.



Thanks
BD

it should be AU but no TPG will call it that today.  we will all get market acceptable 62 at least maybe even a 63 on a good day

[PeaceBD]

it should be AU but no TPG will call it that today.  we will all get market acceptable 62 at least maybe even a 63 on a good day

This one still sits in the flip. We will find out one day. Considering the dark regions in the hair and above the brow in thge strictest sense yes ther is surface contact visible.Thanks.

[The Oracle]

This one still sits in the flip. We will find out one day. Considering the dark regions in the hair and above the brow in thge strictest sense yes ther is surface contact visible.Thanks.

thats all i am saying surface contact. 

[brokencompass]

it should be AU but no TPG will call it that today.  we will all get market acceptable 62 at least maybe even a 63 on a good day

I think your concept of grading is much different from a TPG scale because they are two completely different scales. It's like comparing two units of measurement as different as Centimeters and Inches. The Sheldon scale being a scale of 70 levels and considering that 68, 69, 70 grades are hardly ever given to Indian coins, I feel the above coin can be graded MS 62-63(I agree with your TPG Grade). I personally feel that a coin with so much luster cannot possibly be "about" Uncirculated and yet have the qualities it has. It just has a few rubs and bagmarks which are quite alright for a mint state coin IMHO. 

[The Oracle]

I think your concept of grading is much different from a TPG scale because they are two completely different scales. It's like comparing two units of measurement as different as Centimeters and Inches. The Sheldon scale being a scale of 70 levels and considering that 68, 69, 70 grades are hardly ever given to Indian coins, I feel the above coin can be graded MS 62-63(I agree with your TPG Grade). I personally feel that a coin with so much luster cannot possibly be "about" Uncirculated and yet have the qualities it has. It just has a few rubs and bagmarks which are quite alright for a mint state coin IMHO.

any break in luster makes a coin au.  this is the known and accepted definition.  neither of ANA, pcgs nor ngc will argue against it.  even the coin owner agrees it cannot be called ms

[PeaceBD]

any break in luster makes a coin au.  this is the known and accepted definition.  neither of ANA, pcgs nor ngc will argue against it.  even the coin owner agrees it cannot be called ms

TO, I would like to share a interesting fact I learned at the ANA grading course a few weeks back. The dark areas like the ones displayed on the queens brow and hair are not considered 'rub' but rather darkening of the surface due to contact with other surfaces. For it to be considered 'rub' the area which was in contact has to display minute hairlines which are the reason for break in luster. That is not the case with this coin.

[The Oracle]

TO, I would like to share a interesting fact I learned at the ANA grading course a few weeks back. The dark areas like the ones displayed on the queens brow and hair are not considered 'rub' but rather darkening of the surface due to contact with other surfaces. For it to be considered 'rub' the area which was in contact has to display minute hairlines which are the reason for break in luster. That is not the case with this coin.

wow.  Thank you for bringing this up though.  Just shows how far things have fallen and why CAC exists (unfortunately not for indian coins).  Simply unbelievable that they have managed to sneak "cabinet friction"  in.  If anyone else had told me this I would not have believed it.  Who was teaching the course?   

Soon all coins will be unc some less unc and some more unc.  i used to think the poor indian TPG's dont have a sense of what they are doing.  At least they dont loosen their definition every few years to please sponsors.  Even the old time dealers dare not say cabinet friction is unc to people in the know.  As early as this september a reputed dealer was red faced when i asked him why he was trying to pass a similar coin as unc.   His answer cabinet friction.  So i asked him are you trying to say cabinet friction is unc and he turned red and said sorry. 

i guess the new crop wont have to say it they will just point to the ANA definition.  For the first time i feel like i should invest in CAC or maybe even closer home.   Very interesting

[PeaceBD]

wow.  Thank you for bringing this up though.  Just shows how far things have fallen and why CAC exists (unfortunately not for indian coins).  Simply unbelievable that they have managed to sneak "cabinet friction"  in.  If anyone else had told me this I would not have believed it.  Who was teaching the course?   

Soon all coins will be unc some less unc and some more unc.  i used to think the poor indian TPG's dont have a sense of what they are doing.  At least they dont loosen their definition every few years to please sponsors.  Even the old time dealers dare not say cabinet friction is unc to people in the know.  As early as this september a reputed dealer was red faced when i asked him why he was trying to pass a similar coin as unc.   His answer cabinet friction.  So i asked him are you trying to say cabinet friction is unc and he turned red and said sorry. 

i guess the new crop wont have to say it they will just point to the ANA definition.  For the first time i feel like i should invest in CAC or maybe even closer home.   Very interesting

The instructors were Rod Gillis and Mike Ellis. Both did an excellent job. I think what they mentioned was the difference between "cabinet friction" and " surface contact". A coin which is lying on one side in a collector's cabinet/envelop etc or wrapped in a roll has it high points touching the surface /other coin which can cause slight discoloration on the high points. This is not considered "cabinet friction". Now if that same coin displays minute hairlines in the discolored areas which clearly indicate the surface of the coin "rubbed" against the surface of the cabinet or another coin in the roll then it can be termed as AU due to cabinet friction.
I saw a lot of examples of sliders(mostly morgans and walkers) in MS 62-63 holders which should have been AU. But then that the nature of this whole deal. One needs to know what he is doing and one can never know it all.  I have seen my share of such coins sold as Uncircs.
As for CAC it has its own place. I don't think the Indian collectors will be ready for anything like that anytime soon. Nor do I think we have some one like John Albanese for Indian milled coins.

[The Oracle]

The instructors were Rod Gillis and Mike Ellis. Both did an excellent job. I think what they mentioned was the difference between "cabinet friction" and " surface contact". A coin which is lying on one side in a collector's cabinet/envelop etc or wrapped in a roll has it high points touching the surface /other coin which can cause slight discoloration on the high points. This is not considered "cabinet friction". Now if that same coin displays minute hairlines in the discolored areas which clearly indicate the surface of the coin "rubbed" against the surface of the cabinet or another coin in the roll then it can be termed as AU due to cabinet friction.
I saw a lot of examples of sliders(mostly morgans and walkers) in MS 62-63 holders which should have been AU. But then that the nature of this whole deal. One needs to know what he is doing and one can never know it all.  I have seen my share of such coins sold as Uncircs.
As for CAC it has its own place. I don't think the Indian collectors will be ready for anything like that anytime soon. Nor do I think we have some one like John Albanese for Indian milled coins.

i am only retired  .   sliders another beautiful term.  I will have a word with both Rod and Mike soon.  Honestly there are a lot of people who are very knowledgable about indian milled coins both in grading and in attribution but they work only for their collections.  if u take a class with them again just ask them this.  if a coin has a single luster break can it be called unc.  you might get prodded for more info but just say thats the entire question.  Then let us know what they say.