MS65?

cherrypickincoin

Okay, we all know that toning can have a positive outcome for the grade of a coin, whether it be the star designation by NGC or a minor bump from a PQ MS63 to MS64 due to pleasant toning. What about downgrades because of negative eye appeal? Anyone feel this coin warrants a 65?

New Rochelle

Placid

LoL I guess someone at ngc did.

Darker original crusty toning.
Sounds like a pizza and looks like one.

Louis

Russ

Damn, was that a sunken ship recovery? How did they even grade it through the barnacles?

Russ, NCNE

ClausUrch

The only thing that coin warrents is a good dip to bring it to life!

joejeweler

Almost looks like it may have turned funky in the holder after a previous dip that wasn't rinsed off properly! (if there IS such a thing since i don't like the proceedure on principle).

291fifth

This is the kind of coin that destroys a grading service's reputation.

lordmarcovan

I saw an early commem in a PCGS green label holder that looked like that, once, with the addition of a big, black thumbprint in the middle.

MS65? Sure, in technical grade, maybe. If you could see the thing to grade it.

Here's proof that technical grade and eye appeal are two very separate considerations.

Slabbing be damned, that thing would have me running for the Jeweluster so fast, I'd scare myself!

(edited to add: it might look a little better in person. A little.)

airplanenut

I've seen coins pictured like that which look great when you hold it...

fivecents

Now that is an original coin. I wonder if it is lusterous underneath that thick crust?

Paul

darktone

This could be in an old slab and graded when technical grading was used more or it could be one of those coins that you have to see in person to be able to see the underlying luster that is pretty much assured to be there in a grade of 65. Also I would like to point out that I have bought a couple of these coins in the past year that people started threads on about how bad they look and how overgraded they are because I just had to find out for myself- both coins were superb for the grade I found when viewed in person. mike

Conder101

I've seen coins like that get dipped. They don't get any better. The light areas get bright and lusterous, and the dark area come out light and dead with no luster. It's ugly but should probably be left alone. It's probably a technical 65 that isn't worth anything close to sheet, but which will probably bring close to it from number collectors.

dorkkarl

not no, but he11 no.

technically perhaps, but are'nt these supposed to be mkt-graded?

that coin is beyond help.

K S

dorkkarl

<< <i>This is the kind of coin that destroys a grading service's reputation. >>

i doubt it. they have easily 10's of thousands of coins that ugly in their holders, & their reputation is going strong

K S

LAWMAN

That thing is UG--LEEEEE!!!!!!!!! I don't care what NGC graded it. That's a coin only its mother could love.

Clankeye

<< <i>Darker original crusty toning. >>



I love that description.

I will say this, Northeast is a good dealer, and they honestly present their material. I actually would like to see that coin in person. I think it would be interesting.

Clankeye

cherrypickincoin

I just want to clarify that my intent for this thread is not at all to bash Northeast. I agree, they are very reputable dealers. My question is with NGC. I don't know how that coin could look any better in person but if it does, I sure hope it warrants that 65. The one thing we can't see from this picture, of course, is the surfaces underneath the toning but this is one case where I would downgrade simply because of negative eye appeal. I'd go no higher than 63 judging from the photograph, even if it is a technical 65. I certainly wouldn't argue with a 62 either.