Just was perusing their site, and noticed on the front page that they have a dozen or so PR70 DCAM Kennedy halves in stock. Just thought I would let you all know.
Now Russ, let's try to remember there are newbies out there that are interested in collecting and learning. We all know you are very good at parroting the comments of other Members about the PR-70 DCAM. The same old pete and repeat.
Anyway, the reality about VALUE of the PR-70 DCAM Kennedy is that it has skyrocketed over the past 3 years. The same dates in PR-69 DCAM, or less, have fallen very significantly. About 3 years ago I was able to buy PR-70 DCAM Kennedy coins on Ebay for $115 to $125, if I was careful not to get caught up in the bidding. At that same time I was able to sell the common date PR-69 DCAM Kennedy for $39 and some of the more difficult date coins for quite a bit more. Today, those common date PR-69 DCAM Kennedy coins are selling for $15-$20. The common date PR-70 DCAM Kennedy is selling for $665 to $700! Which coins have been the better coins to own over the past few years???? A pretty simple queston to answer!
For the newbies out there, the reason Russ makes the statement of, "The vast majority would not grade 70DCAM if submitted today." is that the graders have been instructed not to give out the PR-70 DCAM grade, except for a few commems. It is not that the standard has been changed for the grade. It is just that the grade has been removed from the options available. This is a very artificial situation that will change. For the past couple of years, anyone with any smarts that felt they had a PR-70 DCAM candidate coin, sent the coin to NGC where the grade is still alive and well. Better to go there, receive the PF-70 UCAM grade and sell the coin for $200 than to go to PCGS and have it come back PR-69 DCAM and sell it for $20!
Russ' statement is very disingenuous though. The reason I can say that is that I went to the DLRC website and tried to view the scans of the coins to see what it is was that would cause Russ to believe the coins were not worthy of the PR-70 DCAM grade, I found that scans had NOT been posted to most of the auctions! Be very careful about those that paint with a very broad brush.
Yesterday I physically replaced seven PR69DCAM Jeff proofs with their equivalent PR70DCAM compadres. In changing them out, I compared the sets of coins very carefully and in all except one case, the PR70DCAM was a (marginally) nicer coin. Maybe I had "bad" 69's or unusual 70's, but there was a difference.
I wanted to do this comparison for the next time this discussion came up (and boy was that quick!). I will note that the Kennedy 70DCAMs are more expensive than the Jeffs. DLRC recently sold a PR70DCAM Jeff for $425. I think the market price for the Jeffs in 70DCAM (if not a really rare date -- meaning less than 10) is more like $300-350.
"The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."
It is much easier for a Jefferson to be a true 70 (perfect), than it is for a Kennedy because there is far less surface area. I've viewed plenty of Kennedy halves with 70DCAM on the holder, and I have yet to see any that were truly deserving of the grade. I've seen some that were downright junk. The only 70 Kennedy I've seen that I thought was actually a 70 was a 1998 SMS coin.
I can understand that, Russ. I guess that's the advantage (?) of smaller coins. . . .
Edited to add: I would not say that all the 70's were perfect, either -- just generally nicer than the 69's.
"The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."
BNE - you're quite right smaller coins do tend to be better in proof (from my personal experience). One other thing that I think makes a difference seems to be the compound nickel-copper-zinc vs. sandwich.
Russ, I love Kennedys in general - and have truly been having the time of my life with Silver proof Kennedys in particular. I've not had the pleasure of seeing too many PR70 Kennedys, but I have several 69s that are just incredible and seem to be the same quality to me as the 70s I have seen. Perhaps I don't know the fine difference between the two.
I know that I don't compare to Russ, ClarkOfKent, Osiris, PhillyJoe and some of the other folks on the boards in knowledge or breadth of taste - but I do know that I love looking at them... and I'm learning fast (thanks to you folks).
Perhaps someone could post a great photo of a 70??? (In Silver ?)
With the price difference between a 69 and a 70 could someone at dhrc walk a few nice 69's over to pcgs and have them nudged up to a 70 ? Hope I don't offend anyone at those companies, but I don't know if it can happen.
Thanks for the answers, all. Isn't it DHeath's sig that says "They just don't make PR70s like they used to."?
Russ, thanks for the photo. Whew. I don't care what the 1994's grade was. It would do well in any collection. Beautiful. My 1998 looks almost that good (the frost isn't quite as thick.)
One thing I look for in proofs is cartwheels in the frost. I like that variety of cameo. If color can cause an upgrade to a coin, can't superb looks?
Through the years I have owned over 75 PCGS Kennedy 70DCAMS. Were they all 70s? No........ but most were nicer than "the average" 69. I've seen 70s with the patented PCGS fingerprint! Are there "true" 70s? Look at the standard PCGS uses - I mean under high enough magnification (<10x) every coin has flaws! The vast majority would not grade 70DCAM if submitted today. True because as DCAMFranklin points out PCGS doesn't hand 'em out these days! Though I'd be willing to bet that less than 10% of them would downgrade if sent back to PCGS today.
When you see enough 70DCAMs you can tell what the difference between a 69 and 70 is supposed to be - you may not be able to put it into words but you'll know it when you see it and you'll be able to cherrypick some 69s that if slabbed at a different time would be in a 70 holder.
For the majority of collectors a 69DCAM is a beautiful coin and a better value for the buck - I mean I have probably 200 69DCAM Kennedys and yeah Russ......... some are as nice as a 70DCAM except for that inferior quality plastic surrounding them. I started out buying 69s but when I bought my first 70 *ugh* I was in deep trouble!
ursabear - enjoy your Kennedys! Those silver ones do make a beautiful DCAM contrast!
And for everybodies information PCGS is still giving out some 70s. Check the pop report on the 1994 Silver Kennedy! Someone (who shall remain anonymous) just made a 70DCAM - the first Kennedy 70DCAM in over a year - and one of only two in about two years!
<< <i>What a nice selection they have, but very pricey....... >>
Luuuuuuuuuuuccccyyyyyyyy - C'mon Cool Kitty - 70s rule in Hepcat City!!! You could mount a couple in the headlights of your badass Chevy and blind all the Cool Cats out there
Yes, a 69DCAM is clearly a better value for the dollar in terms of just visually looking at the coin. but as DCAMFranklin points out, there is no question that the 70DCAMs have been a better "investment" over the last several years, having doubled or tripled in value while their counterparts in 69DCAM have probably gone down a little in price. So if you are buying a coin to enjoy visually (which is what almost everyone here insists is their primary motive), then a 69 is probably a better buy. If you're buying one for appreciation, we know what the last few years did, but it is clearly a crap shoot what the next few will bring. In large part it may fdepend on when (or if) PCGS relaxes their non-70 grading policy.
For what it's worth, here are a couple of PR70DCAMS. If you ignore the reflections, these are pretty nice coins. the scratches you see in the images are all on the slabs, not the coins. The exception being a very small splotch on the 97Silver that might or might not be dippable (and was the reason for a fairly substantial discount in price from a member of this board). I can say that I carefully compareed wach with the 69DCAM they replaced and the 70s were noticeably nicerf coins.
Thank you for sharing the pictures. The 1997 would feel very much at home with my other Kennedys
It is so very interesting - I think that pictures must still be a step behind the naked (or glasses-ed) eye, though. I bet they all blaze quite nicely!
I have to ask myself, though, why would I pay $350 for the 1983 in 70DCAM, when I bought this one for $20?
If one's concern is investment potential, than all those who are currently paying these prices are going to be screwed if PCGS ever gets off their no 70DCAM kick.
Russ and ClarkOfKent - Look at the difference in the busts between those two. Was there a redesign between the two dates? Was this done for the "hair redisign" of all the busts in the early nineties? I guess I hadn't pulled down two different decades and looked at them at the same time.
I think I love silver Kennedys even more after this thread and all those pictures.
Yes, I like the Eagle, too. I just don't know about the floating stick-balls, though
I like the newer design... a bit more detail on the face & neck. The hair is a bit overdone, though. All the detail in it detracts from the rest of the coin. In fact, now that the subject has been raised... that's all I can see is the darned hair!!!! Thanks alot!
This is, indeed, a dangerous place to hang out. It's almost as bad as going to a strip club with a pocket-ful of $5 bills. Uh... er.... that's what I've heard, anyway. I, uh... I gotta go now.
Comments
"Senorita HepKitty"
"I want a real cool Kitty from Hepcat City, to stay in step with me" - Bill Carter
Russ, NCNE
Anyway, the reality about VALUE of the PR-70 DCAM Kennedy is that it has skyrocketed over the past 3 years. The same dates in PR-69 DCAM, or less, have fallen very significantly. About 3 years ago I was able to buy PR-70 DCAM Kennedy coins on Ebay for $115 to $125, if I was careful not to get caught up in the bidding. At that same time I was able to sell the common date PR-69 DCAM Kennedy for $39 and some of the more difficult date coins for quite a bit more. Today, those common date PR-69 DCAM Kennedy coins are selling for $15-$20. The common date PR-70 DCAM Kennedy is selling for $665 to $700! Which coins have been the better coins to own over the past few years???? A pretty simple queston to answer!
For the newbies out there, the reason Russ makes the statement of, "The vast majority would not grade 70DCAM if submitted today." is that the graders have been instructed not to give out the PR-70 DCAM grade, except for a few commems. It is not that the standard has been changed for the grade. It is just that the grade has been removed from the options available. This is a very artificial situation that will change. For the past couple of years, anyone with any smarts that felt they had a PR-70 DCAM candidate coin, sent the coin to NGC where the grade is still alive and well. Better to go there, receive the PF-70 UCAM grade and sell the coin for $200 than to go to PCGS and have it come back PR-69 DCAM and sell it for $20!
Russ' statement is very disingenuous though. The reason I can say that is that I went to the DLRC website and tried to view the scans of the coins to see what it is was that would cause Russ to believe the coins were not worthy of the PR-70 DCAM grade, I found that scans had NOT been posted to most of the auctions! Be very careful about those that paint with a very broad brush.
I wanted to do this comparison for the next time this discussion came up (and boy was that quick!). I will note that the Kennedy 70DCAMs are more expensive than the Jeffs. DLRC recently sold a PR70DCAM Jeff for $425. I think the market price for the Jeffs in 70DCAM (if not a really rare date -- meaning less than 10) is more like $300-350.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
It is much easier for a Jefferson to be a true 70 (perfect), than it is for a Kennedy because there is far less surface area. I've viewed plenty of Kennedy halves with 70DCAM on the holder, and I have yet to see any that were truly deserving of the grade. I've seen some that were downright junk. The only 70 Kennedy I've seen that I thought was actually a 70 was a 1998 SMS coin.
Russ, NCNE
Edited to add: I would not say that all the 70's were perfect, either -- just generally nicer than the 69's.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
Russ, I love Kennedys in general - and have truly been having the time of my life with Silver proof Kennedys in particular. I've not had the pleasure of seeing too many PR70 Kennedys, but I have several 69s that are just incredible and seem to be the same quality to me as the 70s I have seen. Perhaps I don't know the fine difference between the two.
I know that I don't compare to Russ, ClarkOfKent, Osiris, PhillyJoe and some of the other folks on the boards in knowledge or breadth of taste - but I do know that I love looking at them... and I'm learning fast (thanks to you folks).
Perhaps someone could post a great photo of a 70??? (In Silver
Here's the 1994 silver:
It doesn't say "70" on the holder, but it is nicer than any of the 70's I've seen.
Russ, NCNE
PR-70 DCAM
my hotels
Russ, thanks for the photo. Whew. I don't care what the 1994's grade was. It would do well in any collection. Beautiful. My 1998 looks almost that good (the frost isn't quite as thick.)
One thing I look for in proofs is cartwheels in the frost. I like that variety of cameo. If color can cause an upgrade to a coin, can't superb looks?
Were they all 70s?
No........ but most were nicer than "the average" 69. I've seen 70s with the patented PCGS fingerprint!
Are there "true" 70s?
Look at the standard PCGS uses - I mean under high enough magnification (<10x) every coin has flaws!
The vast majority would not grade 70DCAM if submitted today. True because as DCAMFranklin points out PCGS doesn't hand 'em out these days! Though I'd be willing to bet that less than 10% of them would downgrade if sent back to PCGS today.
When you see enough 70DCAMs you can tell what the difference between a 69 and 70 is supposed to be - you may not be able to put it into words but you'll know it when you see it and you'll be able to cherrypick some 69s that if slabbed at a different time would be in a 70 holder.
For the majority of collectors a 69DCAM is a beautiful coin and a better value for the buck - I mean I have probably 200 69DCAM Kennedys and yeah Russ......... some are as nice as a 70DCAM except for that inferior quality plastic surrounding them.
ursabear - enjoy your Kennedys! Those silver ones do make a beautiful DCAM contrast!
And for everybodies information PCGS is still giving out some 70s. Check the pop report on the 1994 Silver Kennedy! Someone (who shall remain anonymous) just made a 70DCAM - the first Kennedy 70DCAM in over a year - and one of only two in about two years!
<< <i>What a nice selection they have, but very pricey....... >>
Luuuuuuuuuuuccccyyyyyyyy - C'mon Cool Kitty - 70s rule in Hepcat City!!!
You could mount a couple in the headlights of your badass Chevy and blind all the Cool Cats out there
For what it's worth, here are a couple of PR70DCAMS. If you ignore the reflections, these are pretty nice coins. the scratches you see in the images are all on the slabs, not the coins. The exception being a very small splotch on the 97Silver that might or might not be dippable (and was the reason for a fairly substantial discount in price from a member of this board). I can say that I carefully compareed wach with the 69DCAM they replaced and the 70s were noticeably nicerf coins.
Pete
It is so very interesting - I think that pictures must still be a step behind the naked (or glasses-ed) eye, though. I bet they all blaze quite nicely!
If one's concern is investment potential, than all those who are currently paying these prices are going to be screwed if PCGS ever gets off their no 70DCAM kick.
Russ, NCNE
Please remove me from your knowledgebase... I know nuthink, NUTHINK!!!
I'm an amateur, through and through.
Clark
p.s.
I like the silvers, too... but, my scanner hates 'em. Way too much reflection.
Edited to add: It's not a 70, but I just don't care.
Russ and ClarkOfKent - Look at the difference in the busts between those two. Was there a redesign between the two dates? Was this done for the "hair redisign" of all the busts in the early nineties? I guess I hadn't pulled down two different decades and looked at them at the same time.
I think I love silver Kennedys even more after this thread and all those pictures.
Yes, I like the Eagle, too. I just don't know about the floating stick-balls, though
The portrait was redesigned in 1991. Personally, I prefer the earlier design.
Russ, NCNE
Clark
I understand that problem. I started my Walker short set after spending too much time drooling over the pics posted by the Walker people here.
Russ, NCNE
This is, indeed, a dangerous place to hang out. It's almost as bad as going to a strip club with a pocket-ful of $5 bills. Uh... er.... that's what I've heard, anyway.
Clark