Moderately okay submission of MODERN CRAP (with images and commentary)

Russ

I actually came pretty close on the grading for this one. My grades noted in bold next to the PCGS grade.

LINE # CERT # COIN DATE DENOMINATION VARIETY COUNTRY GRADE

1 21782940 1965 50C SMS USA MS66CA (MS66CAM)
2 21782941 1969-S 5C USA PR68DC (PR68DCAM)
3 21782942 1968-S 50C USA PR69DC (PR69DCAM)
4 21782943 1969-S 50C USA PR68DC (PR69DCAM)
5 21782944 1976-S 50C Silver USA MS67 (MS67)
6 21782945 1967 50C SMS USA MS66CA (MS66CAM)
7 21782946 1967 50C SMS USA MS66CA (MS66DCAM)

Date Received: 10/29/2004
Date Shipped: No Date Specified

First of all, yes, I submitted the nickel knowing it was a money loser at that grade. But, I'm trying to learn proof and SMS Jefferson grading and the best way for me to do that is to submit a few and see if I called them correctly.

The 1965 SMS Kennedy was cracked out of an ICG MS67CAM holder that I picked up for $30. It's the one I did a poll about a while back. Expected the MS66CAM, but it has a strong look about it, so hoped it might slide in to a 67CAM holder.

I expected PR69DCAM on both the 1968-S and 1969-S Kennedys. PCGS agreed on one, and the good thing is that it's the more valuable of the two.

The 1976-S Silver is very strong and PQ for MS67. Another I was hoping I might get lucky on.

PCGS is still being stupidly tight on the DCAM designation for SMS coins. The first 1967 is a barely cameo that I included trying to setup the second coin. I figured if it graded CAM, they would HAVE to notice the HUGE difference between it and the second coin and give the second the DCAM designation. No such luck, and it's the second try on that one.

Some of the coins:

Line #1:


Line #2:


Line #3:


Line #4:


Line #7:


This concludes today's MODERN CRAP report.

Russ, NCNE

Stuart

Russ: Those seem to be good results, and you also appear to be sharpening your grading skills as well as your expectation level for how PCGS will grade your coins.

seanq

What about that '69-S nickel made you think 68DCAM instead of 69DCAM? I wrote up a batch of coins last night to submit before the fee incerase, and looking at your coins and grades I'm thinking I may be wasting my money on a couple of them.


Sean Reynolds

Russ

<< <i>What about that '69-S nickel made you think 68DCAM instead of 69DCAM? >>



See the little tiny white dots in the fields? Planchet ticks. PCGS likes nearly perfect fields for PR69.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

Bump for the night crew.

Russ, NCNE

RGL

OK, so ,bottom line, do you think PCGS is beginning to emerge from where it's head has been on modern CAM/DCAMs? I had three SMS coins called brilliant by the graders, but David bumped them to CAMs when he looked at them, although I would argue I had a 67 SMS JFK that went 66 CAM that deserved DCAM (similar to your story). That submission also contained the DCAM PR-67 1955 Jeff I am still fuming about that PCGS/David called CAM when any decent Jeff proof collector would tell you in a heartbeat it was DCAM ... they beginning to come back to sanity, Russ?

Russ

<< <i>they beginning to come back to sanity, Russ? >>



Ask me that after my next couple submissions post. It's pretty hard to say with this submission since the proof Jeff and proof JFKs were glaring no brainer not even close call DCAMs, and the 1965 SMS was well over the minimum for cameo. I still think the second 1967 SMS should have DCAMed, though. I will say that the other 1967 SMS Kennedy was a pretty light cameo - not a lock, so there was some sanity there.

Russ, NCNE