A quick GTG: 1924 PCGS St. Gauden's
braddick
Posts: 24,110 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'll post the answer in about an hour or so.
peacockcoins
2
braddick
Posts: 24,110 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
I'll go 64.
64
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
Yep 64.
63+
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
64 I don't care for all those copper spots.
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
I'll post the slab photos at around 4:30.
peacockcoins
64
I was surprised too.
peacockcoins
The lighting and toning do not help accentuate the high technical quality of this example. Tough to argue a position from these photos, although there are clear contact marks that I believe would prevent a superb gem.
First impression was 65.
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.
BHNC #AN-10
JRCS #1606
I was on the 64/65 fence. That coin probablly has amazing luster, but it looks just ugly in those photos.
If that coin were in an NGC 67+ holder I bet more than one reply would say it was over graded by 3 to 4 points.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
And, more importantly- would they be correct?
peacockcoins
I don’t think so. But if they said 2 to 3 points, instead, I might have a different answer.😉
I sure would like to see the coin in hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Blinding luster—literally
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
OMG..................
Somebody was blind.............
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
That was interesting.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Is this the $100,000 price guide coin that sold for $50,000 in Feld’s other thread?
Mechanical error, has to be.
Truer words have never been spoken here, fear the kool-aid.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I said 63 originally.
I also thought that the 1st set of pics showed wear/rub on the Left Knee but the 2nd set of pics shows a tone consistent with the rest of the leg and high-points. I can't tell how good the luster is but I could see the coin getting a 67 if you don't de-merit because of the copper spots.
If the rub/wear isn't there, it's a 65. If the fields are as good as they seem (and you don't take away for the spots), you have a 66. If blazing luster, 67.
I just couldn't tell from the 1st set of pics. It's why for a really high grade you need multiple pics from different angles OR it has to be in-hand.
If eye appeal is still a grading factor for mint state coins, that coin was grossly over graded and the owner should send it back to PCGS to take advantage of their grade guarantee. Is it possible the copper spots didn't appear until after the coin was already slabbed?
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
That would be a very sneaky way to sell/market coins that either turn in the holder or get doctored (gassed) while in the holder. Assume the coin was problem free while being slabbed originally. Resubmit for a reholder & trueview after it turns in the holder, and now the coin has the fresh trueview picture showing the questionable areas. The dealer can just point to the fact that pcgs graded it 67+ and if you have any doubts about the coin’s surface issues, just look at them in the trueview picture.
I’ve thought of this, but I have to think that PCGS has some sort of process to review during a reholder, at least on Rarity submissions, given the guarantee liability. Rarity reholder costs $300, although coins up to $100k value are only $25.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Dip it to dull the spots (ask PCGS conservation) and flip it!
I read that ugly copper spots can be removed from gold coins using one of those small butane torches. Has anyone else heard of this?
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
This coin is worth well below $100K in its present condition so it would be worth the $25 to have PCGS review this coin.
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
Yes, the spots can be removed. Clearly the owner of this coin can get it conserved and upgraded to 69 making this by far the finest known. Should be no problem upgrading 1.5-2.0 points for a coin with this many issues.
Curiously, does anyone think if this coin was sent to cacg it would details grade? I’d give it a 50/50 shot of a straight grade there.
No CAC.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
I was going to post MS62 after deciding I wouldn’t want to buy/own it as an MS63; then I saw the grade reveal
No, they wouldn’t details-grade the coin. Regardless of what people think of copper spots, they aren’t something that would result in a details-grade.
On some occasions copper spots that are removed have been known to reappear.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I let the herd sway my judgement to a 64, and then saw the answer before I posted. my initial thought was 64 due to lack of luster, no penalty for the spots, but then taking a closer look decided on 65 no CAC. No CAC due to the slight discoloration on the knee, although I have proved to myself that I dont know what I am talking about with CAC on gold coins!
Technically, I was at 65, shot 66 ... but I figured the spots and stains were a negative, holding it back at 64, shot 5, depending on the luster.
I would NOT have considered anything above 66 for any reason.
“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
I'm surprised at that grade, with just a picture its hard to tell but I suppose in hand it looks different. It must be dark toning on the high points and not hits or marks..
Agreed. However these do not look like copper spots but rather copper stains which is not as bad but still not an eye appeal positive.
I would have trouble thinking this coin is a 66 let alone a 67. Only based on photos which is not best way to determine grade.
This is what grade these days? I figure it is an MS-64.
Has not been submitted to CAC yet. Do not have reverse photo yet.
An ultra rare PCGS 1.1 white label rattler.
Duolicate post.
I had it down as a 66 as the surfaces very nice & what is shown looked to be possibly a less than accurate depiction of the coin. Also, copper spots are removed via various forms of electrolysis that will not harm the surface (actually have posted a few on this and on Cointalk with regards to gold coins of somewhat more recent vintage).
Well, just Love coins, period.
I was guessing 66 but I'm terrible at grading gold. Maybe blind luck.
With all the chatter, I think it should green bean at cac as a 63. The plastic (unfortunately) is worth more than the gold.
This was my guess.
I can't ever remember being this far off.
Also...I
copper spots 
My Saint Set
While there are no hits on the obverse or reverse devices that brings up the grade, the copper discoloration and other spots are just an eye sore to my eye taking it out of the 67 and 66 grades. Also, this just might be an example that I can't grade off photos and there is blazing luster. Either way, I wouldn't be purchasing this coin for my collection based on the photo.
I and the vast majority of collectors would agree with you. Unfortunately, there are a few collectors who are more interested in collecting the label than the coin.
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
Yes, I agree - I call them amateurs or rookies. They are playing in spaces that they shouldn't be in unless they work with a very trusted dealer. I guess this is true in everything in life.
If I could get decent odds, I would bet this gold stickers. Via pictures I think its a great looking coin and, in hand, I trust oreville's eye.
No guess is as good as any.
I’ll give you 50 to 1. $500 minimum bet.
This is more along the lines of how I envision a 67+ common date Saint looking....
Your hobby is supposed to be your therapy, not the reason you need it.
Just for clarity, we had a misunderstanding. I jumped on the 50:1 for Oreville's coin...but @skier07 thought I was referring to the 67+ in the OP. So no bet
Not a coin that I would want as a 67+.
I agree.
I have not yet seen this coin in-person. I fully admit I am no better in grading a photo of a coin than the average collector.
I only bought that coin because of the ultra rare slab. Upon a second look that 1924 Saint could be a borderline MS-63/64. It is only wishful thinking that I was cheering for a gold sticker.