Will this gold dollar qualify as PL?
liefgold
Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭
This coin was slabbed before PCGS certified gold as PL. I think it should PL, but have never resubmitted. It would be quite valuable as no other 1869 G$1 has ever received a PL.
I know it is very difficult to tell from a pic.
Opinions?
liefgold
12
Comments
Tough to say without seeing mirrors or a reflection of something from the mirrored field.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
Doesn't look like it on the reverse
A video would make it easier for us to weigh in but the reverse doesn't look PL enough. NGC might give you PL though, they are looser.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Probably not. I see some frosty areas on both sides.
Beyond that, I have never understood what it takes to make the P-L designation. Silver dollars have rules about how far you need the surface to reflect an object. I don’t how that can work for a tiny coin like a gold dollar. Gold is not reflective like silver. If it were, a crazy billionaire would have had made a gold mirror by now.
I have a two very bright gold dollars from the 1880s. During that period there are coins between which it is hard to distinguish the Proofs from the Mint State pieces. Yet you see very few coins that are called “P-L.”
Why not send it to CACG with a question as to whether it's PL?
From that pic, I would guess maybe a 30% shot at PCGS and a somewhat better shot at NGC. In my experience NGC isn't quite as tight on assigning the PL designation on gold. Nice looking coin.
Your hobby is supposed to be your therapy, not the reason you need it.
Here are some gold dollars. None of these coins are labeled as Proof-Likes.
This is a Proof
From the photos I would also say the chances seem low of a PL designation.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Question, if the pl distinction was of utmost importance to you, and it was already in a pl holder and if holders are also extremely important to you then why did you crack it out of that rare pl holder?
Indeterminate based on those pics IMO.
Obverse yes, reverse no, so no PL. Only way to be sure is to resubmit for a designation review. Either way, it has something special going for it that the typical 1869 business strike won't, as the casual observer that looks beyond the label will see the atypical reflectivity.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Yes!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Should the grading services add a "Semi-PL" designation to the label for coins such as this one?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Business strike struck with recycled proof dies perhaps?
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Please don't give them any ideas.
http://ProofCollection.Net
I’m gonna say yes.
MY GOLD TYPE SET https://pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/complete-type-sets/gold-type-set-12-piece-circulation-strikes-1839-1933/publishedset/321940
I like it as it is. Hard to tell from the pictures but on small coins like the gold dollar, odds may be stacked against you.
Mark
Thanks everyone for the opinions. I really have no intention to sell it so I guess it is not vital to resubmit. It is very unique for this date, as virtually all do not have the PL look. I have shown it to a handfull of "experts" and received about half yesses.
To clarify, it was never in a PL holder. It was graded before PCGS did that on gold.
That would be a hard NO! for me. We have far too much subjectivity and personal bias in grades already.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Based on the reverse - no.
Proof-like-like
I have about 150 PL Jefferson nickel in various levels/depths of mirrors/reflectiveness. Most have added eye appeal due to the level of reflectivity/mirrors which is what make a coin most desirable. To make up some kind of cutoff as to what depth the mirrors need to be to receive a designation.....why shouldn't a lesser mirrored surface coin receive its due diligence as being a highly worthy/desirable/sought-after collector's coin? Having these so-called strike designations only kills the market for those coins that didn't qualify. And with the majority of collectors lacking the skills to see the difference will never learn and appreciate what they do have.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I've actually had someone us that term on me before.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Nope. Proofs were all struck with one reverse die, business strikes with another. Date position is quite different between the two.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
You must be shiny!
Or just somewhat shiny… 😝
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.
Shiny-like.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Hasn’t the term Semi-PL been used before?
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
I've seen that on some 2x2s at coin shows, in my experience it's mostly when the reverse is PL and the obverse isn't and vice versa.
Type collector, mainly into Seated. -formerly Ownerofawheatiehorde. Good BST transactions with: mirabela, OKCC, MICHAELDIXON, Gerard
That has not been my experience with NGC at all. I sent 15 PL coins IMHO to NGC and only 6 came back PL. The others will be cracked out and submited to our host. Not because I think they are looser. It's because I think they grade accurately and consistently. Just my opinion.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
I'm glad you have better experiences. As a collector of PL and DMPL Morgans, I have submitted several NGC examples to PCGS for crossover even at a point lower and rarely do they cross. Many times when I see NGC PL and/or DMPL coins on dealer's websites (Such as Northern Nevada Coins) I ask them if they think the mirrors are good enough to cross at a point lower and they usually dissuade me from buying the coin. This coin below recently failed to cross at MS62PL or better. So good luck, let us know how it coes.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Proof-like-like> @Morgan13 said:
Your experience doesn't prove or suggest anything about NGC being looser than PCGS. it just proves that you are looser than NGC.
Take the 6 NGC PL coins and send them to PCGS if you want to find out who is looser. I bet all 6 don't cross as PL.
Gold makes a great mirror, but more so in the infrared.
I'll bet the same happens when you take 6 arbitrary PL PCGS coins and try crossing them to NGC. The grading services don't want to cross low-end coins into their holders and want to come across as better than each other. I'll bet the stickering rate of coins that do cross is higher than those that don't (not the same as the rate of stickered coins that cross).
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I was suggesting breaking them out, not sending in to cross.