I think Wayneme has a point, I also agree with those that say the image is probably worse than the coin. Looks like something funky going on with the color in the image, if the coin really looks like that, then I'd be a bit purturbed with it.
I agree wholeheartedly with you, Russ. MS-64 Walkers (even some 63's) can be a great combination of looks and affordable price.
As to the gold coin, I'd want to see it in person before passing judgement one way or the other, and be able to roll it in a good light. I see what Mike means by the apparent surface disturbances, but also I really don't see that many out-and-out gouges, or even too many minor marks that really "break" the surfaces.
I've learned not to entirely trust images of gold pieces too much, as I like to look at a local dealer's inventory of gold online, then view some of the same pieces in person at the shop. Some of the scans are just about how the pieces look - some make 'em look better than they are - and some make 'em look worse.
True this might just be a bad picture but it sure has alot of luster breaks for an NGC ms64 and the cheek looks pretty rough also. Here's a picture of one I am hoping for a 63 on and I like mine much better than the pictured NGC 64. I agree when viewed in person it might be a very nice coin- at least I hope it is. mike
I think the 1893 is overgraded at MS64...the surfaces are nice but the cheek has issues that are not consistent with an MS64 grade. I'm not sure whether your 93 is better but it is still an attractive coin worthy of an MS62 or even 63 on a good day. Please keep in mind that I am just offering an opinion based on the pictures and not the coins themselves.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
So far as the first $10 gold piece goes, I'd have to see it "in the flesh" to decide. Too many little marks show up on the scan to allow me to give it an unconditional thumbs up.
When it comes to common date Walkers, a smart collector can own some VERY NICE coins in MS-63 and 64 holders. It won't get you up on the Registry, but you can have some coins that are equal to or better than some of the stuff in MS-65 holders, if you are observant and flexible and don't care about the Registry.
The reason? A lot of these coins are bulk graded, and I don't think the services take the time to really grade these coins consistently.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I think your assessment is correct and that the coin looks overgraded at 64.
Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon occurence from B&M in my opinion.
I'm not a fan of B&M overall. I think their historical position as the company offering the best quality for the $ has become a harder sell with the advent of the slab. While they used to claim their XF was better than the other dealers XF, they now seem to offer average looking or overgraded slabbed pieces for PQ $.
Comments
Tom
Joe.
I'm never going to be at the top of the rankings, but I'll have pretty coins for a lot less money than they'd cost for one more point.
Russ, NCNE
As to the gold coin, I'd want to see it in person before passing judgement one way or the other, and be able to roll it in a good light. I see what Mike means by the apparent surface disturbances, but also I really don't see that many out-and-out gouges, or even too many minor marks that really "break" the surfaces.
I've learned not to entirely trust images of gold pieces too much, as I like to look at a local dealer's inventory of gold online, then view some of the same pieces in person at the shop. Some of the scans are just about how the pieces look - some make 'em look better than they are - and some make 'em look worse.
I think the 1893 is overgraded at MS64...the surfaces are nice but the cheek has issues that are not consistent with an MS64 grade. I'm not sure whether your 93 is better but it is still an attractive coin worthy of an MS62 or even 63 on a good day. Please keep in mind that I am just offering an opinion based on the pictures and not the coins themselves.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
When it comes to common date Walkers, a smart collector can own some VERY NICE coins in MS-63 and 64 holders. It won't get you up on the Registry, but you can have some coins that are equal to or better than some of the stuff in MS-65 holders, if you are observant and flexible and don't care about the Registry.
The reason? A lot of these coins are bulk graded, and I don't think the services take the time to really grade these coins consistently.
I think the resolution makes it look more blochy than it would be in person.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
No good deed will go unpunished.
Free Money Search
I think your assessment is correct and that the coin looks overgraded at 64.
Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon occurence from B&M in my opinion.
I'm not a fan of B&M overall. I think their historical position as the company offering the best quality for the $ has become a harder sell with the advent of the slab. While they used to claim their XF was better than the other dealers XF, they now seem to offer average looking or overgraded slabbed pieces for PQ $.
I also like your coin better in your second post.