Thoughts on this coin I just got back on toning, grade, etc. I think it should be a MS68 FB
Silvermonster
Posts: 15 ✭
Thoughts would be appreciated as I get my coins graded and up in my registry. Starting with my 1916 MS 67 FB
Tagged:
6
Comments
That's a pretty coin. In my experience, PCGS values booming luster very much at the MS68 grade level for twentieth century silver coins. Your coin has great color, but the luster might not be booming enough for them. Please note that this is written with only the one set of TV images available to judge the coin.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Nice looking coin.
Kennedys are my quest...
My personal opinion with no facts to base this on, is the graders aren’t going to grade a “new” coin higher than those already established. It changes the status quo. People that spent a lot of money for a coin don’t want to wake up one day and find that there is a new king of the coin…..just my opinion!
True - plus the grader is looking at the actual coin - not the TV picture
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
That may or may not be true, but in the case of an MS67FB 1916 Merc, we aren't talking about a new pop-top if the coin were to grade MS68FB. In this case, there are already 179 MS67FB coins, 40 MS67+FB coins, 16 MS68FB coins and 1 MS68+FB coin.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I agree with TomB that luster is critical and often the determinative factor at that grade level. With that said, my experience is that many coins that ultimately do make it into 68 or higher holders often require more than one submission to get there. YMMV.
Thank you for the feedback. I thought the coin should have at least + rated. The color is completely natural and has developed over the years that I have had the coin. This coin has been in my raw collection nor for over 40 years.
@Silvermonster
Welcome to the forum. That is a nice dime
Martin
adding other picture. The Obverse and Reverse larger picture.
Thank you for the larger images. I would quite happily own that coin. Again, my guess is that the luster is muted too much for PCGS for the MS68FB grade. As far as MS67FB vs MS67+FB, I would suggest not to sweat it as the folks who appreciate toning will bid that up when and if you ever decide to part with it.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
@TomB I agree I'd be happy with that coin also.
@Silvermonster Unless you are ready to sell that coin or dying for a regerstry upgrade. That coin speeks for itself.
It is too bad there is not a "D" hidden in that dark toning near the bottom rim.
Great Dime
Martin
I wish there was a "D" there too. If you squint enough you can almost see one.
this ranked as a 68 plus and mine is a MS67. I am starting to believe all of this is more subjective than you one would think coming from PCGS
Of course it's subjective! It's a manual process performed by humans, albeit humans who have generally exceptional skills, education and experience in the field, but each grade really is best thought of as a single data point in time. As for the coin you are comparing it to, it would be far more fair to compare the PCGS TrueView images instead of the "inventory style" image you provided. They are below-
Your coin appears to have near-terminal toning around much of both the obverse and reverse rim. This helps to mute the overall luster and is considered neutral or negative for eye appeal. That would definitely hurt your chances of a higher grade and this is especially true since PCGS has historically valued luster far more than some other attributes at the MS68 grade level.
The comparison coin appears to have booming luster with colorful toning dancing about the surfaces. The two coins are quite different.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Can you post a photo of the coin in its holder.
If You are unsatisfied with the grade...You certainly have the option to submit it for regrade
My understanding of the grading process is:
1) each coin is prepared for grading by removal from packaging/casing and submitted before a grader as a raw coin - with no knowledge of the condition or any previously assigned grade of the coin as it was received or the type of submission
2) the 1st grader assigns a grade to the raw coin and it is submitted to the next available grader
3) the 2nd grader repeats the same process and the coin is submitted to a 3rd (next available) grader
Steps 1-2-3 are repeated until 3 consecutive graders give the coin the same grade - with little chance for them to be the exact same (3) graders due to the process outlined above
4) The QA process then allows for a Master Grader to confirm and agree to the assigned grade
5) If QA agrees...the coin is slabbed/labeled and sent back to You
So in essence...You do not rely on a single grade opinion...and no Grader can "have it out for You" as they don't know the previous details
It's not a "once and done" process - it is graded again and again until 3 consecutive Graders give it the same grade - and no Grader knows which number he/she is or where the coin is at in the entire process
Each coin must pass the standard for a total of (4) PCGS Graders to agree on the exact same grade
The process would seem to legitimize itself by these standards and steps - as each Grader is bound to abide by the exact standards for each grade as defined by PCGS
The "internal grading record" of each coin would also allow PCGS to determine the technical aspects that define the degree of experience of each Grader within PCGS - it can take years and sometimes decades to become a Master Grader
Looking at the entire process...it can take an extended amount of time before any coin gets 3 consecutive same grades - and a full agreement of a Master Grader - which may in some cases explain the delays we currently see for turnaround times
At the end of the day...Your opinion of the assigned grade is just Your opinion
My 1957-2022 Proof Set Collection Has Been Sold
To me the fact that the toning is all natural and the luster is still strong is tell tale to me as to the quality of my coin. The surfaces are flawless. I also believe that my coin is slightly more well struck than the MS68 +.
I would say that my coin is early die state, where the 68 is more mid die or even heading towards later die state. The FB is weaker on the right also but that may be there picture angle that causes that on the 68.
My coin is natural and i can trace its history from my grandfather (I am 65) and how it has developed over the years and any one that knows toning knows of the colors that develop decades later. In ten years there will be even more colors developing where you would call it "near terminal", which to me is over the top as a statement.
I guess this is why the blast white dipped coins are appreciated over natural toning. A coin this old will always be toned if correctly maintained, unless kept in a vacuum tight environment which does not even exist in the slab.
What I meant by subjective by PCGS is their grading of toned versus none toned coins.
It appears you are deeply wed to this coin and have a strong emotional attachment to it. I get that and can understand it quite well. I don't know your coinage background, but I have been around for a long time myself and would likely be considered one of the original toning geeks.
In my opinion, both coins are attractive, though they obviously don't have the same look. The "near terminal" comment is quite accurate (based simply on the PCGS TrueView images) in that when toning gets to a certain point it can (though it does not need to) mute the luster to the point that the colors are quite dark and might appear burnt. The PCGS images suggest this along portions of the rims for your coin. I'm not slamming the coin, but instead merely going by the only evidence of its appearance that I have at-hand.
In my experience, newer collectors tend to gravitate toward blast white while collectors who have been around for a long time tend to appreciate toning to a greater extent. Before anyone gets bent out of shape, let me stress very strongly that this is merely my many decades long experience as a collector and dealer on the national show circuit and that not every newer collector favors blast white just as not every seasoned veteran prefers toning (look no further than our own esteemed ricko for evidence to the latter statement).
Also in my experience, PCGS favors nicely toned coins and the subjective eye appeal that PCGS graders see in these coins bumps their grades, on average, when compared to untoned pieces. Here is one of my pieces that I think you will like-
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
My avatar coin was submitted raw and came back as a 67; on regrade this year, about five years later, a 68. One factor to consider is that your toning could progress, and even in a good way.
The toning has been progressing in a good way for the last 20 years. The toning at 10 oclock just developed over the last couple of years. This coin went out with two of my other coins one upgraded and this one did not.
The coin has been in my collection for literally over 50 years when it was passed down to me by my grandfather. So I guess I wed to the coin.
Sounds super cool @Silvermonster ! Thanks for showing this and talking about the toning. I have some Mercs that I swear have changed over 15 years and I've really gotta get some old photos together and post on that. I guess I'm the first in the family to collect them, but if it wasn't for finding a 1944-D in lucite in my grandmother's attic, I might be collecting something entirely different.
Also -- these attractive toning changes go some distance to explaining the phenom of "gradeflation." Anyone agree?
Agree with all the luster comments. Nice surfaces, color is decent, luster is 66.
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
MS68 PCGS Mercuries are reserved for those that exhibit blazing luster- regardless of color. Yours appear slightly muted although the color is fantastic (mostly). MS67 is accurate based on the photos.
peacockcoins