@Crypto said:
Late to the dance but I was torn between 55+ and 58. I see detail loss on wing and he belly so no 58+ to these eyes. Nice color as it doesn’t appear to be dipped seeking a higher grade which is too common on the 08s
I truly respect your opinion @Crypto, and I completely understand your reservation with the +, but I would challenge anyone to find a Saint in AU55 that looks remotely like this coin. Admittedly, ownership adds a point and it is my coin, but I'll die on this hill that anything under 58 would be a obvious undergrade.
@Crypto said:
Late to the dance but I was torn between 55+ and 58. I see detail loss on wing and he belly so no 58+ to these eyes. Nice color as it doesn’t appear to be dipped seeking a higher grade which is too common on the 08s
I truly respect your opinion @Crypto, and I completely understand your reservation with the +, but I would challenge anyone to find a Saint in AU55 that looks remotely like this coin. Admittedly, ownership adds a point and it is my coin, but I'll die on this hill that anything under 58 would be an obvious undergrade.
What’s the saying about ownership? Ah, yes, “ownership adds 3+ points.”😉
Never mind that I agree with you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I simply can't see any MS grade based off of your photos Dan. I can easily see it in the Heritage pics, but in yours it's just not there for me. There's obvious wear.
Can you post a video? I'm going to say that your photos are probably the most accurate, and if that's the case I'd probably stick with my grade, falling into the "silly" camp, lol.
On this one, there's no way I'd pay MS money for it. CAC 58 all the way.
@FlyingAl Based on DD’s photos, there’s a good argument for this coin just barely breaching 55 territory (making your 55+ grade a good one), but getting bumped to 58 because of the exceptional eye appeal condition of the surfaces.
I think 58 is right on the money for this coin and would be thrilled to own it in the current holder.
@FlyingAl said:
I simply can't see any MS grade based off of your photos Dan. I can easily see it in the Heritage pics, but in yours it's just not there for me. There's obvious wear.
Can you post a video? I'm going to say that your photos are probably the most accurate, and if that's the case I'd probably stick with my grade, falling into the "silly" camp, lol.
On this one, there's no way I'd pay MS money for it. CAC 58 all the way.
The coin looks more like the heritage photos than mine, I didn’t do flattering pics for it.
THIS date wouldn’t likely make it into an MS holder at PCGS, NGC maybe. If it were a 1927, they wouldn’t put nearly as much thought into it and taking the value into consideration it wouldn’t be an issue in a 62 holder.
Now, about “Ms money”-
Take a look at the greysheet for a non cac 62 vs CAC 58. Then perhaps take a look at some of the MS62 comps and compare the eye appeal and tell me which coin you would rather own.
I stand by my comments that AU55 would be a criminal undergrade, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Modern grading standards take eye appeal, luster, AND wear into consideration and the coin has the fields of a gem. Even by technical Standards it’s an easy 58. If anyone can find a comparable AU55, I’ll happily buy the coin and send you $100 as a finders fee. Here the last 55cac to sell on HA.
I absolutely agree Dan and there is a point where people just get absolutely too technical and completely throw out the window eye appeal.
It appears as a weak strike around the obverse peripherals so I could see splitting hairs and calling it a 65 or 6 but then I bumped it again for a 67 :-)
But again, if that’s a 55+/58 then the one you just showed us should be XF or worse.
After seeing the HA.com photos, which are far clearer photos, I can see how I screwed up, no way ms by an stretch of the imagination, still lovely toning with originality and nice strike, a great piece either way
Dan - to start, I have realized that your coin is absolutely a PQ 58. In my head, I was expecting the quality going into that grade would be much higher, and clearly I was wrong after looking at a few dozen examples. Even some CAC coins are true dogs.
With that said, here's a nicer NGC 55 with decent fields. Not sure how the luster shapes out but based on the slab shots I'd say it could be reasonably compared to the OP coin. Certainly quite a bit better than a few AU58 CACs, and I'd bet money the full size NGC pics over-exaggerate a lot of marks. This one is for sale. https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/6869885-001/55/
Granted, the price difference is 3x (62 vs 58), and if you are in the market for a generally nicer 1908-S, it makes sense to go for the 58. However, my point is that if you want an MS example, pay up for one that blows all doubt away.
.
.
I completely see the point you're making with this coin going 62 if it was a 1927, and I completely agree. However, I'd still rather want a strong MS62 for the 1927 even at a lower price point. The collector always has a choice to be able to cherry-pick PQ examples in any grade level, like you have done with this AU58.
This is where you lose your shirt if you miss that rub.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
This is where you lose your shirt if you miss that rub.
And based on those numbers and a couple of comp's, this coin, being what it is, as what I would consider a super premium 58, is probably really worth North of 16.k
My humble opinion, of course ... and not a series I play in
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Not responding to the follow up question- just the follow up commentary as to the grade and grading in general...
Just a few comments to keep the discussion within reason:
-We are looking at images of coins and grading coins based on those images;
-There is simply no substitute for an in hand review for rarities or condition rarities;
-Not all coins within a series are struck and created equal which adds to the subjective nature of grading. Can we please keep it to an apples to apples comparison? I would argue that the 1908-s has some characteristics whereby it would seem most appropriate to compare to other examples to document how coins measure up from the surviving population.
-Saints were stacked and there is rub at the highest points and the quality of the surfaces comes into play which is often difficult to measure, appreciate and comprehend from an image.
I looked again at the images and I just do not think the best and most accurate opinion for this coin can be offered from the images.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@coinkat said:
Not responding to the follow up question- just the follow up commentary as to the grade and grading in general...
Just a few comments to keep the discussion within reason:
-We are looking at images of coins and grading coins based on those images;
-There is simply no substitute for an in hand review for rarities or condition rarities;
-Not all coins within a series are struck and created equal which adds to the subjective nature of grading. Can we please keep it to an apples to apples comparison? I would argue that the 1908-s has some characteristics whereby it would seem most appropriate to compare to other examples to document how coins measure up from the surviving population.
-Saints were stacked and there is rub at the highest points and the quality of the surfaces comes into play which is often difficult to measure, appreciate and comprehend from an image.
I looked again at the images and I just do not think the best and most accurate opinion for this coin can be offered from the images.
All reasonable points that I agree with, but I will note that most of the grade discussion came after I had shown both sets of heritages images in addition to my own. With 3 sets of decent images, the only thing thats left to one’s imagination is the luster, to which I’ve now provided a video as well.
Based on the new sets of pictures in addition to the provided video, i think that’s sufficient for members to opine on the grade for a post-game discussion. Anyone who made a guess based off of just the first set of images is granted clemency, and I agree there is no substitute for an in hand evaluation.
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
This gets my vote for top five forum posts of the year.
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
This gets my vote for top five forum posts of the year.
This gets me vote for pucker post of the year. RGDS!
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
Not in your inventory but you want to keep it for a bit? Seems like a clear contradiction to me. Sorry play yer 2-bit mustard games elsewhere. THKS!
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
This gets my vote for top five forum posts of the year.
This gets me vote for pucker post of the year....Lieutenant please hurry to chime in. RGDS!
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
Not in your inventory but you want to keep it for a bit? Seems like a clear contradiction to me. Sorry play yer 2-bit mustard games elsewhere. THKS!
Cry about it 😭, call the wambulance if you want. I’m a collector foremost and a dealer second. My follow up question was not a sales pitch, it was an introspective question to collectors about how we value coins, and the ramifications of avoiding any coin without a cac sticker. This is a coin that could reasonably be found in an NGC 62 holder and many would avoid it, despite the fact that it would cost the same as an au58 cac. That was the meaning behind the question.
As an aside, my contributions to this forum are 1000x what yours ever were, and even if the coin was in my inventory I doubt many would have much of an issue with it. I’ve never seen you make any type of valuable contribution to ANY thread on this forum, only mindless dribble about precious metals and generally just being an obnoxious ass on every thread.
As told by Steve Feltner in my recent grading seminar -
“Any idiot can undergrade…” (I forget the second part of this trope but it’s not really necessary, the second word is key in my response to you)
careful where you go DD, enough put downs could land you in the forum slammer. and taking it to PM only works if you keep it civil there too. the modulators can read PMs and I know of 1 banned forumite lost over PMs
@MsMorrisine said:
careful where you go DD, enough put downs could land you in the forum slammer. and taking it to PM only works if you keep it civil there too. the modulators can read PMs and I know of 1 banned forumite lost over PMs
Thank you for the sound advice, I’ve had a couple drinks playing poker tonight and may be feeling a bit more obstinate than I normally am.
With that said, I don’t take back anything I’ve said. I have yet to see that poster make a positive contribution to any thread here, and In my opinion he’s nothing but a cancer to this forum. His only comments to me have involved him taking a crap on my coins. It would be rather poetic if I was banned or jailed over this discussion, but that would be more of a reflection of the forum than it is on me. Regardless, you guys will know where to find me 🤘.
Late to the party. I can see why it’s a 58. I certainly wouldn’t want it in an NGC 62 slab. I prefer it in a CAC 58+ slab, because that’s what it truly is. Not sure I’d pay for it that way, though.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@DeplorableDan said:
Ok, many of you nailed it so I see no reason to drag this one. Admittedly, I rushed the pictures and they weren't the best, but I thought they were good enough for grading purposes.
@pursuitofliberty said:
AU58, deserving of a plus (technical strength and eye appeal) and a bean (technical strength)
This is a 58/64 "superslider" IMO ... i.e. one of those coins where the wear regulates the technical grade, but the surface quality and luster is superlative, and makes it look Near Gem/Gem at first blush.
Bada bing
@ReadyFireAim said:
The 8-s is a trick coin.
It gets hammered in grading.
If it was a 29 I'd give it a 65.
If it was a 8-D motto ???? Never seen one with actual circ wear.
A "godless 8" will get away with anything and are often over-graded.
Sometimes the more you know, the less it will help you.
My guess is AU58 but I would grade it a MS65
Look at the long rays on the 1st motto reverse.
Gotta love it.
8- Motto coins take a minus 1 hit and I don't know why.
All Motto eight coins seem to get AU over the slightest bit of circulation and I don't know why that is either.
Check out mine on my linked set below.
It's a straight 65 but looks 66???, It's not alone in how 8D's are graded.
I will tell you this...
That is one nice looking 8-S and I'd be happy to own it
Bada boom.
This coin is what's referred to as a "super slider". In pictures, it faces up like a gem and has very little disturbances in the fields, contact marks are almost non existent. The high points of the coin have just a touch of flatness with minimal loss of detail, but the luster of the coin in hand is a bit dull and is not quite sufficient to put it in a 64 or 65 holder.
The 08-s saint is a key to the series and has the lowest mintage aside from the high relief issues. It is what they call a "protected date" and as @ReadyFireAim mentioned, it gets "hammered" in the grading room with extra scrutiny. PCGS graded this coin AU-58 but a more common date could have made it into a 62 or 63 holder, if they market graded it based on the fields and netted it because of the rub/dull luster. My technical grade for this coin is AU-58+ and I wouldn't be bothered by a grade of 62, as I believe it's worth low-end 62 money at a minimum.
here are the heritage photos of the coin below.
Now, as a follow up question- If you wanted this coin in your collection, would you pay more for this coin in a AU-58+ CAC holder, or an NGC 62 non-cac holder? Why?
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
This gets my vote for top five forum posts of the year.
This gets me vote for pucker post of the year....Lieutenant please hurry to chime in. RGDS!
Here I am, as requested. I can't say what I would like without probably being banned.
I will say that you have never contributed one thing to any post in this forum. Not a single positive post, ever.
At least in the US Coin forum, every single member hopes you go away and never comes back (unless they enjoy the schadenfreude of reading the equivalent of someone trying to escape an overturned port-a-potty).
You are a troll and a complete waste of time. I can't believe I ever wasted one second trying to convince, cajole, or shame you into being a halfway decent person. I'm done. Enjoy having to live with yourself.
@Walkerfan said:
Late to the party. I can see why it’s a 58. I certainly wouldn’t want it in an NGC 62 slab. I prefer it in a CAC 58+ slab, because that’s what it truly is. Not sure I’d pay for it that way, though.
It wasn't so much "what it's worth" vs is it worth more to YOU in a market grade (62) vs a technical grade (58).
At Summer Seminar, where I took grading lvl 2 with McCarthy and Feltner, one of my main takeaways was that expensive coins and key dates are graded to a different standard than common issues. When this coin arrived, I had started to think about whether or not I would have bought a saint that looks like this in an NGC 62 holder for the same money as an AU-58+, and honestly, speaking for myself, I might have not even noticed or considered the NGC 62 coin. It made me think deeply about my collecting style and the coins I target, and I was hoping to get others to ask themself the same question.
But how would a coin like this land in a 62 holder? If the grader thought it was uncirculated, I can't imagine them grading it anything lower than a 65.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@hummingbird_coins said:
But how would a coin like this land in a 62 holder? If the grader thought it was uncirculated, I can't imagine them grading it anything lower than a 65.
Net grading. They see the wear but feel that overall the coin presents as uncirculated. Therefore, it goes 62.
Dan, ignore the dingbats. There is no way that coin even with 'rushed' pictures looks remotely details. My gut instinct was 58. As for 62 VS 58, if I could see it in hand, I'd pay what it grades not just what the lebal says. Personally I'd rather the label be accurate as if it were to be out up for sale I'd want the buyer to be happy with it, and at 62 some would not be that happy.
Just some follow up commentary to the follow up commentary...
Lustre is critical but so is color and the look of the surface preservation at the high points. And this remains my issue with offering the most accurate grade opinion possible from an image. Please do not take that as a commentary on your images and the work undertaken to present the coin here. You did well framing the coin and issues at hand in your thread.
Our host graded this one AU58- Initially I thought that might have been harsh, but they saw the coin-I did not-so I am simply not going to second guess the grade outcome. And that outcome does not change the coin- it is quite attractive for the date. However, threads such as this might help shift the discussion back to "the look" of coins which is what is truly important in contrast to holders/stickers.
edited to add:
I would not want to see this thread vanish so let's keep the discussion on point.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I would want the best deal for me relative to CDN AU 58 CAC. The 62 around $18.6 k the 58 CAC $12 K MV. However the reality it’s a 58 (our hosts) so somebody trying sell me get 62 money (blowing in wind w me) wish them luck shopping it around bourse. You know when the ref measures for the 1st down? Agree with 58 grade - is that lite rub on the knee? The other thing I don’t think it really has the luster to be mint state / plus detail loss described above. It is a really nice coin to fill the slot. MS 70 perfect lol.
@MsMorrisine said:
careful where you go DD, enough put downs could land you in the forum slammer. and taking it to PM only works if you keep it civil there too. the modulators can read PMs and I know of 1 banned forumite lost over PMs
Thank you for the sound advice, I’ve had a couple drinks playing poker tonight and may be feeling a bit more obstinate than I normally am.
With that said, I don’t take back anything I’ve said. I have yet to see that poster make a positive contribution to any thread here, and In my opinion he’s nothing but a cancer to this forum. His only comments to me have involved him taking a crap on my coins. It would be rather poetic if I was banned or jailed over this discussion, but that would be more of a reflection of the forum than it is on me. Regardless, you guys will know where to find me 🤘.
And nothing you or anyone else posts will stop him from trolling.
It’s sad to me because he hasn’t always been this way.
I’ve given up trying to have reasonable conversations with him and for your own good, hope you will do the same.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ok well if I enlarge the pic more than 5x (what was the standard) I can see the wear on top of the devices and I can understand the grade given.
But at arms length the coin is a stunner and that’s how I view most of mine anyway.
So can I assume “Super Sliders” come in all series ie. Barbers or Walkers?
I would want the best deal for me relative to CDN AU 58 CAC. The 62 around $18.6 k the 58 CAC $12 K MV. However the reality it’s a 58 (our hosts) so somebody trying sell me get 62 money (blowing in wind w me) wish them luck shopping it around bourse. You know when the ref measures for the 1st down? Agree with 58 grade - is that lite rub on the knee? The other thing I don’t think it really has the luster to be mint state / plus detail loss described above. It is a really nice coin to fill the slot. MS 70 perfect lol.
This far into the thread, probably everything that's worth saying has been said, along with even more that wasn't worth saying. Great coin! Not graded 58+ because the rub was just a little too obvious? Very wide range of quality in this grade, especially now that CACG isn't handing out MS grades to coins that are technically AU willy nilly.
The video’s mint surfaces show that AU55 if out of the question. It looked like 80% intact mint surfaces with highpoint loss in the photos and the video makes it like like 98% intact metal flow and strike which puts it solidly in slider territory. I think i agree it suffers from losing the benefit of the doubt due to its keydate status. Sooooooo many 1908 no mottos in 62 holders that are technically worse. The original photos do it no favors so much that one must question if the video is a bit of a flooded glamor shot. This thread is really good example of nothing beats in hand inspection
Do you vets here believe that if we all were in a room and had the coin IN HAND....that we'd all be CLOSER in our grades ?
The number of experienced collectors here who are off simply on MS vs. AU is somewhat surprising.
And maybe if we had the coin in hand we'd be clearer and more definitive on the rub/wear issue. And that assumes that Rexford's "non-filled" wear-appearance argument isn't at the heart of the dispute.
@Crypto said:
The video’s mint surfaces show that AU55 if out of the question. It looked like 80% intact mint surfaces with highpoint loss in the photos and the video makes it like like 98% intact metal flow and strike which puts it solidly in slider territory. I think i agree it suffers from losing the benefit of the doubt due to its keydate status. Sooooooo many 1908 no mottos in 62 holders that are technically worse. The original photos do it no favors so much that one must question if the video is a bit of a flooded glamor shot. This thread is really good example of nothing beats in hand inspection
Personally, I love the satiny look that the first set of photos shows more of than the video does.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Comments
3 reasons:
PCGS over NGC
58+ over 62
CAC over no CAC
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
I truly respect your opinion @Crypto, and I completely understand your reservation with the +, but I would challenge anyone to find a Saint in AU55 that looks remotely like this coin. Admittedly, ownership adds a point and it is my coin, but I'll die on this hill that anything under 58 would be a obvious undergrade.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
What’s the saying about ownership? Ah, yes, “ownership adds 3+ points.”😉
Never mind that I agree with you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I simply can't see any MS grade based off of your photos Dan. I can easily see it in the Heritage pics, but in yours it's just not there for me. There's obvious wear.
Can you post a video? I'm going to say that your photos are probably the most accurate, and if that's the case I'd probably stick with my grade, falling into the "silly" camp, lol.
On this one, there's no way I'd pay MS money for it. CAC 58 all the way.
Coin Photographer.
@FlyingAl Based on DD’s photos, there’s a good argument for this coin just barely breaching 55 territory (making your 55+ grade a good one), but getting bumped to 58 because of the exceptional eye appeal condition of the surfaces.
I think 58 is right on the money for this coin and would be thrilled to own it in the current holder.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
The coin looks more like the heritage photos than mine, I didn’t do flattering pics for it.
THIS date wouldn’t likely make it into an MS holder at PCGS, NGC maybe. If it were a 1927, they wouldn’t put nearly as much thought into it and taking the value into consideration it wouldn’t be an issue in a 62 holder.
Now, about “Ms money”-
Take a look at the greysheet for a non cac 62 vs CAC 58. Then perhaps take a look at some of the MS62 comps and compare the eye appeal and tell me which coin you would rather own.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I stand by my comments that AU55 would be a criminal undergrade, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Modern grading standards take eye appeal, luster, AND wear into consideration and the coin has the fields of a gem. Even by technical Standards it’s an easy 58. If anyone can find a comparable AU55, I’ll happily buy the coin and send you $100 as a finders fee. Here the last 55cac to sell on HA.
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1908-s-20-au55-pcgs-cac-pcgs-9149-/a/1371-5150.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
And here’s the second to last:
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I absolutely agree Dan and there is a point where people just get absolutely too technical and completely throw out the window eye appeal.
It appears as a weak strike around the obverse peripherals so I could see splitting hairs and calling it a 65 or 6 but then I bumped it again for a 67 :-)
But again, if that’s a 55+/58 then the one you just showed us should be XF or worse.
After seeing the HA.com photos, which are far clearer photos, I can see how I screwed up, no way ms by an stretch of the imagination, still lovely toning with originality and nice strike, a great piece either way
Dan - to start, I have realized that your coin is absolutely a PQ 58. In my head, I was expecting the quality going into that grade would be much higher, and clearly I was wrong after looking at a few dozen examples. Even some CAC coins are true dogs.
With that said, here's a nicer NGC 55 with decent fields. Not sure how the luster shapes out but based on the slab shots I'd say it could be reasonably compared to the OP coin. Certainly quite a bit better than a few AU58 CACs, and I'd bet money the full size NGC pics over-exaggerate a lot of marks. This one is for sale.
https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/6869885-001/55/
As far as "full MS money", there are some truly lovely MS62 coins out that that sell for a price commensurate with the grade - I'd rather buy those than a cheaper liner 62. The AU58s are cheaper by far, but even in CAC they come pretty banged up. I'd rather take this 62:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1908-s-20-ms62-pcgs-only-22-000-pieces-were-struck-making-the-1908-s-a-challenging-issue-in-he-saint-gaudens-double-eagle-series-this/a/132417-27791.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
Over say this 58 CAC:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1908-s-20-au58-ngc-cac-pcgs-9149-/a/1279-3270.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
Or even these 62 CACs (same price range):
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1908-s-20-ms62-ngc-cac-pcgs-9149-/a/1342-3359.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1908-s-20-ms62-ngc-cac-pcgs-9149-/a/1342-3359.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
Granted, the price difference is 3x (62 vs 58), and if you are in the market for a generally nicer 1908-S, it makes sense to go for the 58. However, my point is that if you want an MS example, pay up for one that blows all doubt away.
.
.
I completely see the point you're making with this coin going 62 if it was a 1927, and I completely agree. However, I'd still rather want a strong MS62 for the 1927 even at a lower price point. The collector always has a choice to be able to cherry-pick PQ examples in any grade level, like you have done with this AU58.
Coin Photographer.
Here are the 58 & 55 from the CoinFacts app, for add’l reference points:
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
@FlyingAl - as requested
https://player.vimeo.com/video/964882025
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Thanks @DeplorableDan.
Looks like a lovely 58.
Coin Photographer.
For those (myself included) not familiar with the pricing on this coin (from PCGS price guide)...
1908-S
AU-55+ $9,500
MS-62 $21,000
MS-63 $35,000
MS-64 $50,000
This is where you lose your shirt if you miss that rub.
And based on those numbers and a couple of comp's, this coin, being what it is, as what I would consider a super premium 58, is probably really worth North of 16.k
My humble opinion, of course ... and not a series I play in
“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
Well, I’m late to the show but I too thought it was a 58.
Wish all my 58s looked like this one!👍
Not responding to the follow up question- just the follow up commentary as to the grade and grading in general...
Just a few comments to keep the discussion within reason:
-We are looking at images of coins and grading coins based on those images;
-There is simply no substitute for an in hand review for rarities or condition rarities;
-Not all coins within a series are struck and created equal which adds to the subjective nature of grading. Can we please keep it to an apples to apples comparison? I would argue that the 1908-s has some characteristics whereby it would seem most appropriate to compare to other examples to document how coins measure up from the surviving population.
-Saints were stacked and there is rub at the highest points and the quality of the surfaces comes into play which is often difficult to measure, appreciate and comprehend from an image.
I looked again at the images and I just do not think the best and most accurate opinion for this coin can be offered from the images.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
When I saw the OP pic in the first post I was straddling 64/65... and thought 58 was out of the question. Wow... beautiful coin...
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
Deserves a plus for having almost no contact marks like so many other AU coins do.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
All reasonable points that I agree with, but I will note that most of the grade discussion came after I had shown both sets of heritages images in addition to my own. With 3 sets of decent images, the only thing thats left to one’s imagination is the luster, to which I’ve now provided a video as well.
Based on the new sets of pictures in addition to the provided video, i think that’s sufficient for members to opine on the grade for a post-game discussion. Anyone who made a guess based off of just the first set of images is granted clemency, and I agree there is no substitute for an in hand evaluation.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Crazy that piece not only straight graded not to mention earned the sought after slab stickrz. CRZY WRLD! CNGRTS!!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
As to your follow up question you really should post your sales pitches in the BST threads but I'd personally be interested around $2K. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
Not a sales pitch, this coin isn’t my inventory. Maybe it will be down the line but I like the coin and want to keep it for a bit.
Tell us, oh wise one. In your infinite wisdom, what indicates to you that the coin deserves a details grade? Are you capable of pulling your head out of the dark, cavernous tunnel of which it resides long enough to make a cogent reply here?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
This gets my vote for top five forum posts of the year.
Coin Photographer.
This gets me vote for
pucker post of the year. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
Not in your inventory but you want to keep it for a bit? Seems like a clear contradiction to me. Sorry play yer 2-bit mustard games elsewhere. THKS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
Cry about it 😭, call the wambulance if you want. I’m a collector foremost and a dealer second. My follow up question was not a sales pitch, it was an introspective question to collectors about how we value coins, and the ramifications of avoiding any coin without a cac sticker. This is a coin that could reasonably be found in an NGC 62 holder and many would avoid it, despite the fact that it would cost the same as an au58 cac. That was the meaning behind the question.
As an aside, my contributions to this forum are 1000x what yours ever were, and even if the coin was in my inventory I doubt many would have much of an issue with it. I’ve never seen you make any type of valuable contribution to ANY thread on this forum, only mindless dribble about precious metals and generally just being an obnoxious ass on every thread.
As told by Steve Feltner in my recent grading seminar -
“Any idiot can undergrade…” (I forget the second part of this trope but it’s not really necessary, the second word is key in my response to you)
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
DeplorableDan, I for one, think your 2-bit mustard games are more valuable than 2 bits.
.
.
edited to fix "and" to "than"
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
careful where you go DD, enough put downs could land you in the forum slammer. and taking it to PM only works if you keep it civil there too. the modulators can read PMs and I know of 1 banned forumite lost over PMs
Thank you for the sound advice, I’ve had a couple drinks playing poker tonight and may be feeling a bit more obstinate than I normally am.
With that said, I don’t take back anything I’ve said. I have yet to see that poster make a positive contribution to any thread here, and In my opinion he’s nothing but a cancer to this forum. His only comments to me have involved him taking a crap on my coins. It would be rather poetic if I was banned or jailed over this discussion, but that would be more of a reflection of the forum than it is on me. Regardless, you guys will know where to find me 🤘.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Late to the party. I can see why it’s a 58. I certainly wouldn’t want it in an NGC 62 slab. I prefer it in a CAC 58+ slab, because that’s what it truly is. Not sure I’d pay for it that way, though.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Here I am, as requested. I can't say what I would like without probably being banned.
I will say that you have never contributed one thing to any post in this forum. Not a single positive post, ever.
At least in the US Coin forum, every single member hopes you go away and never comes back (unless they enjoy the schadenfreude of reading the equivalent of someone trying to escape an overturned port-a-potty).
You are a troll and a complete waste of time. I can't believe I ever wasted one second trying to convince, cajole, or shame you into being a halfway decent person. I'm done. Enjoy having to live with yourself.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
It wasn't so much "what it's worth" vs is it worth more to YOU in a market grade (62) vs a technical grade (58).
At Summer Seminar, where I took grading lvl 2 with McCarthy and Feltner, one of my main takeaways was that expensive coins and key dates are graded to a different standard than common issues. When this coin arrived, I had started to think about whether or not I would have bought a saint that looks like this in an NGC 62 holder for the same money as an AU-58+, and honestly, speaking for myself, I might have not even noticed or considered the NGC 62 coin. It made me think deeply about my collecting style and the coins I target, and I was hoping to get others to ask themself the same question.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
But how would a coin like this land in a 62 holder? If the grader thought it was uncirculated, I can't imagine them grading it anything lower than a 65.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Net grading. They see the wear but feel that overall the coin presents as uncirculated. Therefore, it goes 62.
This is also called market grading.
Coin Photographer.
Dan, ignore the dingbats. There is no way that coin even with 'rushed' pictures looks remotely details. My gut instinct was 58. As for 62 VS 58, if I could see it in hand, I'd pay what it grades not just what the lebal says. Personally I'd rather the label be accurate as if it were to be out up for sale I'd want the buyer to be happy with it, and at 62 some would not be that happy.
Great looking coin by any stretch!
https://www.the4thcoin.com
https://www.ebay.com/str/thefourthcoin
@DeplorableDan
Just some follow up commentary to the follow up commentary...
Lustre is critical but so is color and the look of the surface preservation at the high points. And this remains my issue with offering the most accurate grade opinion possible from an image. Please do not take that as a commentary on your images and the work undertaken to present the coin here. You did well framing the coin and issues at hand in your thread.
Our host graded this one AU58- Initially I thought that might have been harsh, but they saw the coin-I did not-so I am simply not going to second guess the grade outcome. And that outcome does not change the coin- it is quite attractive for the date. However, threads such as this might help shift the discussion back to "the look" of coins which is what is truly important in contrast to holders/stickers.
edited to add:
I would not want to see this thread vanish so let's keep the discussion on point.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Really nice 1908-S $20
I would want the best deal for me relative to CDN AU 58 CAC. The 62 around $18.6 k the 58 CAC $12 K MV. However the reality it’s a 58 (our hosts) so somebody trying sell me get 62 money (blowing in wind w me) wish them luck shopping it around bourse. You know when the ref measures for the 1st down? Agree with 58 grade - is that lite rub on the knee? The other thing I don’t think it really has the luster to be mint state / plus detail loss described above. It is a really nice coin to fill the slot. MS 70 perfect lol.
And nothing you or anyone else posts will stop him from trolling.
It’s sad to me because he hasn’t always been this way.
I’ve given up trying to have reasonable conversations with him and for your own good, hope you will do the same.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ok well if I enlarge the pic more than 5x (what was the standard) I can see the wear on top of the devices and I can understand the grade given.
But at arms length the coin is a stunner and that’s how I view most of mine anyway.
So can I assume “Super Sliders” come in all series ie. Barbers or Walkers?
Thanks Cougar, I agree with you
.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
This far into the thread, probably everything that's worth saying has been said, along with even more that wasn't worth saying. Great coin! Not graded 58+ because the rub was just a little too obvious? Very wide range of quality in this grade, especially now that CACG isn't handing out MS grades to coins that are technically AU willy nilly.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I am very late to the thread, but I saw a 58 right away, I think it’s properly graded and I think it’s a fantastic coin!
My YouTube Channel
The video’s mint surfaces show that AU55 if out of the question. It looked like 80% intact mint surfaces with highpoint loss in the photos and the video makes it like like 98% intact metal flow and strike which puts it solidly in slider territory. I think i agree it suffers from losing the benefit of the doubt due to its keydate status. Sooooooo many 1908 no mottos in 62 holders that are technically worse. The original photos do it no favors so much that one must question if the video is a bit of a flooded glamor shot. This thread is really good example of nothing beats in hand inspection
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Strongly agree...
($80,000 -vs- $47,500)
Check out this 1929 graded MS64
There is a lot of cash between AU & MS here
My Saint Set
Do you vets here believe that if we all were in a room and had the coin IN HAND....that we'd all be CLOSER in our grades ?
The number of experienced collectors here who are off simply on MS vs. AU is somewhat surprising.
And maybe if we had the coin in hand we'd be clearer and more definitive on the rub/wear issue. And that assumes that Rexford's "non-filled" wear-appearance argument isn't at the heart of the dispute.
Personally, I love the satiny look that the first set of photos shows more of than the video does.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled