Is it possible for a 70 to be PQ?

braddick

Like all the grades before it, coins can be Premium Quality or not.
Like the MS65 GEM Morgan that has sparkling luster (and personality!) with raibow rim toning (but the marks of a five)- we call it "PQ".

Can a PR or MS 70 coin be PQ- or is simply being a 70 PQ enough?

Have you seen levels of 70 status?

solid

How could a coin be MS/PR70+ ???

I don't own any 70's, nor will I be buying any in the near future, but if
I ever do, or should I be lucky enough to make one, I'd like to see it
mounted straight up and down in the holder. Is it too much to ask
that they handle my "perfect" coin with just a little extra care?

Ken

wondercoin

Pat: Great question and the simple answer, of course, is YES!! The easiest way to be "PQ" is to have exceptional depth of cameo. If one considers the depth of cameo as, say, having 10 "shades", perhaps the lowest of shades "COULD" have an influence on the PR70 grade itself. Assume shades "6" or "7" are fine as PR70. Now, when a coin exhibits "shades" "8" or "9" or "10", those coins are "PQ".

Put another way, the grading companies could easily adopt what Rick Tomaska was stating for years (to paraphrase here) - that there are 7 degrees of cameo - no cam, cam-, cam, cam+, DCAM-, DCAM and DCAM+. I would be happy with either that or a scale of 1-10. I would use this scale to assist collectors in buying high end proof coins. I AM NOT ASKING THE GRADING COMPANIES TO ADOPT THE CAMEO DEPTH SCALE (at this time ) Wondercoin

DAM

Good question.

Regarding proofs, what WC said about CAM and DCAM has merit. As for MS, I think that would be more subjective. Personal tastes about toning would probably be the biggest issue. Some like it, some don't.

The simple answer would be yes, IMO.

braddick

I agree with the Cameo depths.
Regarding the MintState 70's with colorful toning. I don't recall seeing a coin labeled 70 that was not bright. Anyone?

keithdagen

Most of the gold commems graded MS-70 (at least the ones pre-1999 or so) have very deep reddish-orange toning in places, which in some cases enhances the eye appeal, and in others, kind of detracts.

I had a 1992 Olympic Gold (runner in front of flag) that had toning that seemed to highlight the devices and made the piece look like a medal instead of a flawless coin.

coinguy1

Absolutely not!

Correctly/properly used, "premium quality" should refer to the QUALITY of the coin.

Yes, eye- appeal (to which cameo contrast could certainly contribute), is a consideration in the grade, but it is only one factor, among several. If a coin rates MS or PF70, as in perfection, there is nothing better, quality-wise. Granted, one MS or PF 70 coin might be prettier or more eye-appealing than another, but the question addressed quality as in "PQ", not eye appeal. Eye-appeal and "quality" are, by no means, synonymous.

Other than the above, I'm quite wishy-washy on the subject.

egsantos

I agree with Mitch.
I have 22 PR70DCAM and one in special is much more 70 than all the others. It's absolutely perfect and for sure is a PQ.

Typetone

I agree with Mark. The 70 catagory is the one catagory with no range. The coin is either perfect or its not. If it's not, its not a 70. Even if mistaken graded 70, it is not a 70 which was the question of the thread. Sure, you might prefer the look of one to another, and I might prefer the opposite. But, the quality of one could not be superior to the quality of another. Also, the written standards for 70 specify magnificent eye appeal. Anything less is not a 70. Differences of opinion over appearance do not make for a PQ modifyer. Typically, dealers use the word PQ to refer to high end for the grade. There can do no quality differentiation on real 70s.

Greg

wondercoin

"Yes, eye- appeal (to which cameo contrast could certainly contribute), is a consideration in the grade, but it is only one factor, among several. If a coin rates MS or PF70, as in perfection, there is nothing better, quality-wise. Granted, one MS or PF 70 coin might be prettier or more eye-appealing than another, but the question addressed quality as in "PQ", not eye appeal. Eye-appeal and "quality" are, by no means, synonymous."

Mark: I think I "caught" you on this one. First, you acknowledge that cameo contrast contributes into the grade. Second, you acknowledge one PR70 might be more "eye appealing" than another. Now, my simple question:

Assume two coins grading PCGS-PR70DCAM that are perfect in every way, except that one coin has slightly stronger cameo contrast than the other coin. Now, you conceed the stronger cameo coin is more "eye appealing" - hence (to address Pat's question) PREMIUM QUALITY. It is as simple as that and, as is often the case, the "proof is in the pudding". I would gladly pay large premiums for sight-seen PR70 coins and would not buy them sight-unseen. I assume you feel the same way. If a Pr70, is a Pr70 is a Pr70, then why would Greg (Typetone) take years to pick the one he always wanted and point out all the problem PR70's?!! And, if Greg had (2) perfect Pr70's in his hands, but one coin was 5 shades deeper cameo than the other, are you telling me Greg wouldn't care which one he was given for his money? This question is not the same as "is there infinity" or "does the universe ever end" - go to Edson's house and see for yourself the meaning of "PQ" PR70 Wondercoin

fcloud

I am thinking along the lines of Coinguy1 and Typetone. If a coin is perfect there should not be a PQ. The fact that it is a 70 made it a PQ already. A low grade 70? How do you get a low grade 70, it should be a 69 PQ! I can see it coming they will break up the 69 grade to include steps. 69.3, 69.5. 69.8, then in a few years they will add the numbers in between, next we will start to see 69.6 PQ or *, and then maybe if the weather is right maybe we'll get 69.975 PQ or *, and after that when we need more designations maybe we'll get "69.9999999999 Special Heavy Industrial Tier". Then when we run out of numbers they may go to a 7000 point scale. Heck, why not a 10 million point scale!

We could start to spiral out of control.

As far as the cameo goes, it would be okay if they expaned.

Tony

IrishMike

Hey Mitch....In a letter to PCGS dealers, David Hall writes:

...I feel the concept of premium quality is nothing more than an illusion. I am 100% convinced that there is not a man alive today who can consistently and accurately grade coins with more precision than the eleven-point MS-60 to MS70 scale. I simply do not believe it is possible to differentiate with any degree of consistency between MS64 and "MS64PQ" coins. The public will simply not buy that concept long term. It will be seen as another scam-another way to manipulate grading standards--to buy for $250 and sell for $500.

Typetone

Mitch:

While it is true that I struggled for a year to buy a great 70DCAM Kennedy, the problem with the others is that they were not real 70s, in that they all had visable flaws under 5X. The thread question is whether a 70 can be PQ. I say no. If the question is whether a coin graded PCGS 70 or NGC 70 can be PQ, I guess I would say yes. But, what I would mean is that the PQs are the real 70s, and the rest should really be in 69 or lower holders.

BTW, I think I disagree on your deep cameo arguement as well. I believe the written standards require a 70 DCAM to be ultimate in contrast. Anything less would not be a 70. That includes any coins which would not make the Tomaska DCAM+ grade. Whatever other flaws I found with returned 70s, they all had ultimate contrast.

Greg

wondercoin

Guys: The books are meaningless on this subject and David Hall (with all due respect) is misguided in his conclusions as they pertain to modern day PR70 coins. Again, just ask Edson if PR70 has a PQ quality to it - he has 22 PR70's but one stands out as far as cameo depth. If Edson's coins were all perfect in all other respects, the super DCAM coin is a PQ PR70. Edson is not seeing things - he is seeing his PQ PR70.

Send me a box of (20) PR70 coins and I'll gladly pay a premium for not only the "perfect" coin, but also the monster DCAM+ coin I pick out of the box. Explain this one? Wondercoin

Typetone

Mitch:

I would say you picked out the true 70. The rest are 69s in 70 plastic.

Greg

wondercoin

"I would say you picked out the true 70. The rest are 69s in 70 plastic."

Greg: Honestly, is your comment more a reflection of the concept of "absolute" numbers (i.e. a mathmatical debate), vs. the realities of the PR70 marketplace (which I am discussing)?

Wondercoin

coinguy1

Mitch, you said :

Mark: I think I "caught" you on this one. First, you acknowledge that cameo contrast contributes into the grade. Second, you acknowledge one PR70 might be more "eye appealing" than another. Now, my simple question:

Assume two coins grading PCGS-PR70DCAM that are perfect in every way, except that one coin has slightly stronger cameo contrast than the other coin. Now, you conceed the stronger cameo coin is more "eye appealing" - hence (to address Pat's question) PREMIUM QUALITY"

You think wrong - you did not catch me.

I would certainly concede (in fact, I already did in my previous post, I believe) that one proof 70 might have
" slightly stronger cameo contrast than the other coin" and thus be more "eye-appealing." But, as I said previously, "eye-appeal" is not the same thing as "PREMIUM QUALITY." Again, one perfect (MS or PR70) coin might be preferable to another to someone, for one reason or another, but that does not make it a PQ coin.

If you want to say one MS/PR 70 coin can be PEA (premium eye-appeal) to another, fine. The questin, though, was about "premium quality" and as Greg rightly pointed out, perfection is an absolute.

flykite

You guys need coin therapy (or I need a rubber room!) If, on the
Sheldon scale, a 70 is perfect, than how can it be more perfect?

Depth of Cameo? I can see what a slab will look like in a few years;
as follows:


1956 Franklin; PCGS PR-70-PQ-D-8-TY-1-* (stolen from NGC)

You will have to write a book of translation!

wondercoin

"If you want to say one MS/PR 70 coin can be PEA (premium eye-appeal) to another, fine. The questin, though, was about "premium quality" and as Greg rightly pointed out, perfection is an absolute. "

Mark: Let's start with what we agree on: the word "premium" - in your "premium eye-appeal" comment and in Braddick's/my "premium quality" comment. So, we both agree one PR70 can be "premium" in some manner to the other - right?

Now, we simply have a disagreement on the word "quality" vs "eye appeal". We already agree that one PR70 can be premium to another in some fashion. You want to label your premium PR70 as "premium eye appeal". I am comfortable labeling my premium PR70 as "premium quality". First, before we go further, as a practical matter, do you see how your comment is truly a distinction without a difference? You love your coin better because it has "premium eye appeal" - I love my coin better because I call it "premium quality". You have conceeded that all PR70 coins do not look as good as each other from an "eye appeal" standpoint. You agreed on other threads that "eye appeal" is, in part, a function of grade - right? I took Logic class - think about the premises we have come up with and the conclusion is obvious

Wondercoin.

flykite

I took Philosophy class (to my great regret!) and studied the
body-soul dichotomy; is this technical vs. aesthetic again?

supercoin

Whatever other flaws I found with returned 70s, they all had ultimate contrast.

You haven't been looking hard enough. Unfortunately I've seen plenty of PCGS PR70 DCAM coins that did not have full deep cameo contrast.

coinguy1

Yes, Mitch - the conclusion is obvious. We disagree, however on what the conclusion is.

While "eye-appeal" and beauty can be subjective, quality, in terms of MS or PR70 (perfection), is not. It is absolute. Perfection is perfection, with no distinctions. One perfection can not be more perfect than another - surely you see the "logic" in that. If you don't, than I give up. I can only do so much to help you understand.

wondercoin

Mark: Just another one of those threads where we will have to agree to disagree

I enjoyed discussing it with you though.

Wondercoin

braddick

Before you two just leave this as agreeing to disagree, let me run one "experiment" by you:
Take ten PR70DCAM coins (for this to work they ALL must be true 70's).

Wouldn't you be able to line them up from favorite to not-so-much-so?
Even if you had to group two or three on top of each other as being the "same", you'de be able to come up with some type of order.

Ok, now take a look at those two top coins. There you go: PQ.

wondercoin

"Wouldn't you be able to line them up from favorite to not-so-much-so?
Even if you had to group two or three on top of each other as being the "same", you'de be able to come up with some type of order.

Ok, now take a look at those two top coins. There you go: PQ."

Pat: Of course I could line up the top two coins and pay a nice premium for the "PQ" coins as well.

OK: You want more debate: This distinction between "premium eye appeal" and "premium quality" is rediculous. We already agree that eye appeal is PART OF GRADE!!! That is the key reason why Mark has lost this argument - Mark conceeds EYE APPEAL is part of the grading component. Hence, "premium eye appeal" equates to PQ for the grade! There is no way out of that box I am afraid

I know you agree Pat.

Wondercoin.

braddick

I do.

coinguy1

Pat and Mitch,

I was all set to move on, but, you have persuaded me to keep this going.

Pat, you asked : "Take ten PR70DCAM coins (for this to work they ALL must be true 70's).

Wouldn't you be able to line them up from favorite to not-so-much-so?
Even if you had to group two or three on top of each other as being the "same", you'de be able to come up with some type of order.
Ok, now take a look at those two top coins. There you go: PQ."

I think you could line the coins up and place them in some type of favorite to least favorite order. But, in doing so, if they were each truly perfect PR 70's, your order would still be one of your own personal, subjective preference based upon eye-appeal, not QUALITY, hence, "PQ" doesn't enter the equation.

Pat, you and I apparently just have different interpretations of the term "PQ" - to me, it refers to quality, not eye-appeal, value, price, etc. And, in terms of quality, all 70's must, by definition, be equal.

Mitch, eye appeal is certainly part of the grading equation but not enough so to make one perfect coin more perfect than another. You're usually a logical guy - I can't believe that you would say one perfect is more perfect than another.

Premium eye appeal is not the same as premium quality, unless eye-appeal is the only component of a coin's grade and that is obviously not the case. You, for whatever reason, might prefer and be willing to pay more for one PR70 over another. The reason, however, cannot be an objective, qualitative one, as by definition, perfect PR70 quality is an absolute and "perfectly" objective term.

Ok, you may have the last word and henceforth, I will remain silent on this issue, whether you want me to or not.

wondercoin

Mark: The last word (but please comment if you can share your well-reasoned and learned opinions on the forum members). All "perfect" is not exactly "perfect", because "Perfect" is merely an artificial defintion created by the grading companies. Essentially no detectable marks with a 5x, yada, yada, yada. The "artificial" definition of "perfect" created by the grading companies (unfortunately) failed to include a depth of cameo component. Hence, perhaps the grading companies self created definition falls short when it comes to the important "eye appeal" component of cameo depth. This is why one "perfect" coin is not the same as the other. Simply put, the self created definition of "perfect" failed to include a depth of DCAM component in the definition. Does this make sense to you now having considered this point? Wondercoin

braddick

Mark, I would absolutely agree with you on every other grade EXCEPT MS70! There is no "room" for a 70 and once a coin reaches that pinnacle (I always wanted a reason to use that word) THEN defining "PQ" takes on a level of experience (and, taste?) that is a separate criteria then everything from 69 and below.

In this ONE instance- this ONE grade (of 70)- I think PQ DOES equate to Eye Appeal.