Home U.S. Coin Forum

1916-D Mercury dime GTG or...

TrampTramp Posts: 652 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited February 27, 2023 9:40PM in U.S. Coin Forum

About a year ago I took a huge gamble on this coin uncertified in an auction. Yeah, not the wisest thing to do, but everything appeared to be good. The auction's T&C seemed to cover if the coin turned out to be counterfeit or altered.

So, I finally decided, more like got up the nerve, to sent this Merc to PCGS. I was anxious for the results and I just got the coin back with the loaded TV. I'll post the PCGS results and the cert later tonight.

Update:

PCGS says it's Genuine, AU Details, Cleaned.

USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

Comments

  • DCWDCW Posts: 6,970 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm going AU55. Nice!

    Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
    "Coin collecting for outcasts..."

  • cameonut2011cameonut2011 Posts: 10,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    53

  • dhikewhitneydhikewhitney Posts: 361 ✭✭✭

    AU55

  • 124Spider124Spider Posts: 844 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 27, 2023 6:10PM

    Reverse is better than the obverse (probably had full bands when new); I'd go with AU55.

    That's a heckuva coin!

  • mr1931Smr1931S Posts: 5,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 27, 2023 6:22PM

    Gorgeous piece! AU...55.

    Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein

  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 4,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very nice, AU for sure. Guessing 55.

  • MarkKelleyMarkKelley Posts: 1,754 ✭✭✭✭✭

    53 to my eyes.

  • OAKSTAROAKSTAR Posts: 5,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )

  • TrampTramp Posts: 652 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Drum roll,,,,,,,

    PCGS says it's Genuine, AU Details, Cleaned.

    Now, I was hoping for it to be a genuine 16-D so I'll take that, but I wasn't thinking or expecting cleaned. Straight grade would have been nice. I guess beggers can't be choosy.

    USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
    My current Registry sets:
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
    ✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

  • OAKSTAROAKSTAR Posts: 5,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )

  • 124Spider124Spider Posts: 844 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Another spectacular example of how silly it is to consign a very special coin to purgatory, because someone, sometime gave it a gentle cleaning.

    Not one of us spotted it; none of us felt that the coin was substandard, but there it is. Many ugly (especially "extremely toned") coins get straight-graded, while many very nice coins get the body bag.

    Yes, when pointed out, I can see that it may have been gently cleaned. But it's still a very attractive coin. Now, because of the binary world in which we play (in which practically any straight-graded coin, no matter how ugly, is worth more than any "cleaned" coin of the same "detail," no matter how attractive), that beautiful coin will spend eternity in purgatory.

  • skier07skier07 Posts: 3,679 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If it was my coin I would resubmit it or submit it elsewhere multiple times.

  • OverdateOverdate Posts: 6,931 ✭✭✭✭✭

    From recent auction listings, it appears that "details" graded 1916-D Mercs are bringing about 80 to 85 percent of the price of their straight graded counterparts.

    My Adolph A. Weinman signature :)

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,007 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2023 3:16AM

    @124Spider said:
    Another spectacular example of how silly it is to consign a very special coin to purgatory, because someone, sometime gave it a gentle cleaning.

    Not one of us spotted it; none of us felt that the coin was substandard, but there it is. Many ugly (especially "extremely toned") coins get straight-graded, while many very nice coins get the body bag.

    Yes, when pointed out, I can see that it may have been gently cleaned. But it's still a very attractive coin. Now, because of the binary world in which we play (in which practically any straight-graded coin, no matter how ugly, is worth more than any "cleaned" coin of the same "detail," no matter how attractive), that beautiful coin will spend eternity in purgatory.
    >

    Cleaning (or the extent of it) is often undetectable in images. And based on the post below, it doesn’t sound as if the coin will spend any time in “purgatory”.

    @Overdate said:
    From recent auction listings, it appears that "details" graded 1916-D Mercs are bringing about 80 to 85 percent of the price of their straight graded counterparts.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • 124Spider124Spider Posts: 844 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @124Spider said:
    Another spectacular example of how silly it is to consign a very special coin to purgatory, because someone, sometime gave it a gentle cleaning.

    Not one of us spotted it; none of us felt that the coin was substandard, but there it is. Many ugly (especially "extremely toned") coins get straight-graded, while many very nice coins get the body bag.

    Yes, when pointed out, I can see that it may have been gently cleaned. But it's still a very attractive coin. Now, because of the binary world in which we play (in which practically any straight-graded coin, no matter how ugly, is worth more than any "cleaned" coin of the same "detail," no matter how attractive), that beautiful coin will spend eternity in purgatory.
    >

    Cleaning (or the extent of it) is often undetectable in images. And based on the post below, it doesn’t sound as if the coin will spend any time in “purgatory”.

    @Overdate said:
    From recent auction listings, it appears that "details" graded 1916-D Mercs are bringing about 80 to 85 percent of the price of their straight graded counterparts.

    I hear you, and I do know your level of expertise.

    But I have a question and an observation:

    The question is simply that it's not possible to compare, without photos, a PCGS- or NGC- coin that has been given a "details" grade, with a "straight-graded counterpart," since they only give a broad opinion on the details grade. So, for instance, this coin looks to many of us as if it is considerably better than AU50, but it received an "AU" details grade. It may be that this coin would fetch 80-85% of what a straight-graded AU50 would get, but I don't believe it would do as well compared to a problem-free AU55.

    And the observation is that, on this forum, an oft-repeated bit of advice is not to buy coins with problems. One can safely infer from that that the demand for a coin with problems will be significantly lower than the demand for a problem-free coin that looks pretty much the same. I can believe that a coin like this one would do ok in the market, since it's attractive and an unusually-high grade for the coin. But I cannot believe that a common coin (consider, e.g., many uncirculated Morgan dollars) would see such little diminution in value by being sent to purgatory.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Looks like a 53 to me.... and the cleaning is not 'obvious' in the pictures IMO... I think a resubmittal may change that decision. ICBW and in hand it may be more obvious. Cheers, RickO

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,007 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @124Spider said:

    @MFeld said:

    @124Spider said:
    Another spectacular example of how silly it is to consign a very special coin to purgatory, because someone, sometime gave it a gentle cleaning.

    Not one of us spotted it; none of us felt that the coin was substandard, but there it is. Many ugly (especially "extremely toned") coins get straight-graded, while many very nice coins get the body bag.

    Yes, when pointed out, I can see that it may have been gently cleaned. But it's still a very attractive coin. Now, because of the binary world in which we play (in which practically any straight-graded coin, no matter how ugly, is worth more than any "cleaned" coin of the same "detail," no matter how attractive), that beautiful coin will spend eternity in purgatory.
    >

    Cleaning (or the extent of it) is often undetectable in images. And based on the post below, it doesn’t sound as if the coin will spend any time in “purgatory”.

    @Overdate said:
    From recent auction listings, it appears that "details" graded 1916-D Mercs are bringing about 80 to 85 percent of the price of their straight graded counterparts.

    I hear you, and I do know your level of expertise.

    But I have a question and an observation:

    The question is simply that it's not possible to compare, without photos, a PCGS- or NGC- coin that has been given a "details" grade, with a "straight-graded counterpart," since they only give a broad opinion on the details grade. So, for instance, this coin looks to many of us as if it is considerably better than AU50, but it received an "AU" details grade. It may be that this coin would fetch 80-85% of what a straight-graded AU50 would get, but I don't believe it would do as well compared to a problem-free AU55.

    And the observation is that, on this forum, an oft-repeated bit of advice is not to buy coins with problems. One can safely infer from that that the demand for a coin with problems will be significantly lower than the demand for a problem-free coin that looks pretty much the same. I can believe that a coin like this one would do ok in the market, since it's attractive and an unusually-high grade for the coin. But I cannot believe that a common coin (consider, e.g., many uncirculated Morgan dollars) would see such little diminution in value by being sent to purgatory.

    Based on the details-grade assessment from PCGS, chances are that the 1916-D dime probably wouldn't do well compared to a straight grade AS55 example. However, as nice as it looks in the images, if the details-grade was justified and the cleaning is more obvious in-hand, why should it do as well?

    Ultimately, buyers decide the values of both straight-grade and details-grade coins. If a details-grade coin looks great, it can bring a very strong price. At the same time, if a straight-grade coin looks terrible, it can bring a very weak price.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • TrampTramp Posts: 652 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2023 9:04AM

    In my non-expert humble opinion, the dime looks just as nice in hand as the TV shows:

    Auctions for details grade:. Check out this 1916-D 10C on PCGS CoinFacts!
    https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/detail/4906

    I just might try a reconsideration in the future. Can't hurt.

    USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
    My current Registry sets:
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
    ✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 4,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tramp said:
    In my non-expert humble opinion, the dime looks just as nice in hand as the TV shows:

    I just might try a reconsideration in the future. Can't hurt.

    I might start with cracking it out with a trip in to NGC or ANACS and see if it straight grades. If so, then send back to PCGS under crossover and see if it holders.

  • TrampTramp Posts: 652 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2023 10:46AM

    @Batman23
    I'm only shooting success rate of 20% with crossovers and 0% with reconsiderations. Neither are very hopeful. The one coin that did crossover was a shoe-in and most likely a NGC under grade that PCGS had no problem crossing it over, IMO. It probably could go PR64.

    Reconsideration at 0% success rate isn't looking hopeful but couldn't hurt trying.

    Also, the market would be strongest for a Genuine, AU details PCSG than a NGC or ANACS with same, IMO.

    USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
    My current Registry sets:
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
    ✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice 16-D.
    If it were mine, I would crack and dip to work this baby into a problem free holder.

  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 4,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tramp said:
    Also, the market would be strongest for a Genuine, AU details PCSG than a NGC or ANACS with same, IMO.

    I think if you started with sending it in for reconsideration you would maintain your 0% success rate and money wasted. But if you crack it out and send it to NGC or ANACS and it straight grades you are money ahead. I agree that PCGS is the best holder and I would prefer it in PCGS holder. But for me if it would straight grade at NGC I would be happy. If it then crossed to PCGS at any (straight) grade I would be very happy. If it came back as cleaned in NGC I would probably crack it out, resubmit raw to PCGS and hope for the best.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,007 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LeeBone said:
    Nice 16-D.
    If it were mine, I would crack and dip to work this baby into a problem free holder.

    If the coin were dipped, the cleaning would be more conspicuous and you'd probably greatly reduce the chance of a straight grade.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • BuffaloIronTailBuffaloIronTail Posts: 7,406 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2023 6:48PM

    The cleaning seems evident on Libertys neck.

    I didn't notice it till others called it out. No matter. It's a real nice, genuine, high grade specimen of a tough coin to snatch in that grade.

    Pete

    "I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
  • pursuitoflibertypursuitofliberty Posts: 6,589 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm late, but I suspected AU Details based on the look as soon as I opened.

    That said, that is a super nice looking AU Details coin, and would probably garner all of EF40+ money. Based on my understanding of current pricing, that would be about 75% of AU53 money, which is right about where this one looks to be otherwise.

    My 2c based on images


    “We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”

    Todd - BHNC #242
  • TrampTramp Posts: 652 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2023 7:43PM

    Thanks to everyone that responded positively to a cleaned coin! You all are awesome!

    @pursuitofliberty. Thanks! Fortunately, I spent VF25 money so I'm pretty satisfied with a nice looking coin.

    USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
    My current Registry sets:
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
    ✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file