What's PCGS looking for here...or what am I missing?...caution those w/dial-up

FinallyHere · February 9, 2005 11:49PM

This is without a doubt one of the nicest Merc dimes we've seen and certainly one of finest for the date. Wonderful luster, rich frost, a truly superb strike, pretty original and light pastel toning and great overall eye-appeal. So.....what's PCGS seeing that they will NOT grade this a 66FB? I don't expect you to grade from images so this is more or less a venting thread!!

Thanks for allowing me to vent!

saintguru · February 9, 2005 11:51PM

I see some tarnish...it should be really shiny and new. I hope that helps.

kieferscoins · February 10, 2005 12:10AM

What is the yellow stuff beneath her neck?

Looks like a 65FB to me.

Cameron Kiefer

FinallyHere · February 10, 2005 12:17AM

Cameron...uh...that would be toning.....

saintguru · February 10, 2005 12:21AM

toning, tarnish...aren't they the same? How much for the tarnished ms65 dime?

kieferscoins · February 10, 2005 12:22AM

Ok. It just looked thicker then the rest of the toning on the coin.

Cameron Kiefer

LindeDad · February 10, 2005 3:40AM

Think it got to PCGS on the wrong day of the week. Yes I agree it could be 66FB but from all the problems I'm hearing about PCGS is getting back to there higher standards. So coins like this that have a mark on the top of the devices don't get the top grade. Just my opion but that is what you paid PCGS for. At least mine doen't cast anything and remember we can all have one.

Datentype · February 10, 2005 4:16AM

submissions are at record levels because you need to crack everything out a few times to get the proper grade.

marcmoish · February 10, 2005 10:38AM

Hey Mike,

darn nice dime - from the picture it looks FB period. If I saw the dime as shown WITHOUT knowing it was from you I'd say it's 65FB, and a damn nice example. I can see it as 66FB too, in your hands! Great skin and luster. I will admit I am confused to say the least to see PCGS did NOT grade it FB. I would say instead of cracking it out (waste of $

take it to LB and get an opinion from DH himself. You're not the type to get stung like that

regardless it will end up in a FB holder.

Looks like a twin to my 20-D .

Marc

marcmoish · February 10, 2005 10:45AM

never mind I thought you meant they did NOT designate it FB

misunderstood the post - I see you have a hold on it too

great coin will find a new home

oreville · February 10, 2005 11:23AM

Wonderfully struck coin! Love that detail in Liberty's hair and the lettering and date along the edge.

Certainly an ultra high end MS-65FB is obvious to anyone even if not in a 66FB slab.

RAD · February 10, 2005 12:19PM

Great strike, nice luster underneath original and light toning....?tiny mark or two on bridge of nose and possibly above eyebrow, with ? very light ding affecting center of bands, BUT a very nice 65FB and worth a try for a 66!!!!! Overall, a very pretty coin!

Android · February 10, 2005 1:02PM

That coin is without a doubt MS66FB in my opinion, unless there are some underlying hairlines in the toning I can't see in the picture. I'd even say it's a high end MS66. I think PCGS got this one wrong.

RegistryCoin · February 10, 2005 2:37PM

Wow...
Kudos to the Mike, and kudos to the forum.
...recognition of the expertise within.

roadrunner · February 10, 2005 7:18PM

I'd say that PCGS leans towards white/brilliant coins and the obv of this coin, though magnificent, doesn't hit their "whitometer" scale.
The band is beautifully split too. Most full band coins don't have a band anything like this and are imo, NOT deserving of a FB rating.

Would concur that eventually this will get into a 66 holder and even up to a MS67 holder at NGC. Old timers like us really appreciate nice luster under beautiful orig toned surfaces. But there is a new breed out there today who want vibrant luster that is not filtered one iota through toning. Hence a double-dipped blazer with 10% of the luster acid-stripped, gets the same rating as a coin like this that has never been touched.

Great coin.

roadrunner

FinallyHere · February 10, 2005 7:32PM

Thanks to all that shared their thoughts!!

Marc....yeah it's a full band....if PCGS missed hat aspect we'd all be in serious trouble.....

Android and Orville....thanks for the positive feedback!!

And Roadrunner......I think your most unfortunate and sadly accurate statement kind of sums it up. What a shame eh? Marc....be SO glad you have some of the wonderful coins you have!!

A great weekend to all!! I'm outa here for a day off with my wife and NO kiddies!!!

Fairlaneman · February 10, 2005 9:41PM

A couple of thoughts on the coin. PCGS has this thing with slide marks on a Merc. If any are present the coin will not go above 65 no matter what and in most cases above 64. Mike does this coin have any at all ? The other thought is luster. If the light tone takes the snap out of the coin they will 65 the coin no matter how nice it is. From what I see here luster does not seem to be the problem. Outside of those two items certainly there is no reason why the coin should not 66 even in a perceived Market Grade versus a Technical Grade which older collectors like to see on a Totally Original piece like this one.

Darn Nice Coin.

Ken

marcmoish · February 10, 2005 10:20PM

A great weekend to all!! I'm outa here for a day off with my wife and NO kiddies!!!

a dealer finally starts a thread and then ups and go's with his wife and no kids in tow - sounds so unusually super

When you get back do post again will ya Mike - maybe some of the wannabe's can get some tips from a staright A guy

Marc

edited for typos

BrinkersMercs · February 10, 2005 11:35PM

I know the feeling on having nice coins come back with low grades. I've got a 23-s with similar issues. It has a bluish purple tone over 75% of the obverse and aout 40% of the reverse. There are no marks that stick out to the naked eye, and yet it comes back as a 63fb. Can you tell me whats wrong with it in their eyes? IMO your coin deserves to be given a shot at 66. I've seen better 66's, but i've also seen worse. I know my coin would never come back that high, but also wouldn't expect it to. I would consider mine to be a high end 64, low end 65. I would be satisfied with a 64FB, but also wouldn't be doubtful for a 65FB designation.

mercurydimeguy · February 11, 2005 12:39AM

This might sound odd -- or I might just be stating the obvious that no one has brought up yet -- but you're talking about a 20-D and a 23-S...you're not talking about a or 41-D or 44-D, right? These 20's are tough coins...and the graders will seldom make an upside judgement call on the tough/key coins. Like Larry (PQ) says, it's a crap shoot. You'l need to take a few pokes at it. What happens is after their their first glance, they're predisposed (they say it looks like a 5 at first glance, and even after the 10 senconds they spend looking at it, it's hard for them to go 6...or they say it's a 6 at first glance, and they usually won't go down), and this typically happens across the grade spectrum. Without a loop your coin might look like a 5, so they take it out thinking they're going to grade/look at a 5, and it would have to be UNDENIABLY nicer for them to change their mind. Try a few pokes, and keep your fingers crossed.

How about my 20-D, which they put in a 64FB holder:

I compared this coin to about 14 66FB's I have and it looks the same, yet after a resubmital they still put it in to a 64-FB holder. I might need to crack it out and send in raw -- not in a PCGS holder so they're not predisposed to the grade on the submission paper.

Anyway, you have a nice looking coin -- looks a great deal like my 24-S, which I've submitted 3 times for regrading and keeps coming back 64FB. David Hall even wrote me a note last time saying that he LOVES the hammered out/full of luster reverse of the 24-S, and that the obverse is clean with no nicks/abrasions, but "I don't think the pattern of the toning on the obverse adds to the aesthetic value of the coin...and generally speaking the toning on the obverse is unattractive". What kind of reasoning is that!!!!! What if the guy/guys are color blind!

Anyway, to conclude my psychotic rant/rave

-- when it comes to the key dates, these coins need to walk on water and raise the dead...or you really need to get lucky

I have a 21-D and 23-S in grading right now myself (from that raw collection I picked up) -- I'll let you know whether PCGS thinks they walk on water/raise the dead, whether I got lucky or whether I got skunked.

jacktheknife · February 11, 2005 3:58AM

Mike,

I'm not a merc dime guy so I can't comment much on the grading issue. I just wanted to hijack this thread and say that the images are AWESOME!

Jack

Bear · February 11, 2005 4:19AM

Mike, stop worrying about the dime and post

a few new coins on the old website.

oreville · February 13, 2005 9:56AM

Mike/FinallyHere:

You said:

<<<<<<<<great weekend to all!! I'm outa here for a day off with my wife and NO kiddies!!!>>>>>

Hmmm, those who forget their history are going to repeat it!!!!!

rkfish · February 13, 2005 10:48AM

Mike takes some of the best pictures in the business !! and by the way................BEAUTIFUL MERC !!

roadrunner · February 13, 2005 11:16AM

I like Mike's 20D far better than the 2nd piece shown in the thread.
A few key tics in the wrong places and you have a 64. But more importantly, the bands on the 2 coins, and the strike in general, is night and day. I would personally not consider the 64 coin a true FSB. If you lose sight of the center spilt at any angle, you're missing something. The scan shows this very clearly. Maybe another reason why they didn't assign a 65FB grade. I'm not a Merc expert however.

roadrunner

mercurydimeguy · February 13, 2005 12:09PM

I've come to the conclusion that it's not what we think the grade should be, it's trying to get to know how PCGS graders grade coins and what they're looking for in any specific grade. Personal experience tells me that if they don't like the toning, they'll take the grade down 1 point -- no matter how clean/nice the coin surfaces are. If they like the toning, they'll grade it a point higher, and be more leanient.

I agree with Larry (PQ Dollars) from another thread -- it's a crapshoot most of the time, but after a while you do learn how they grade...leading to less surprises. Although I recently had a batch of coins sent in, and thought one of them was a 63FB (or should I say I wouldn't expect PCGS to holder it in anything other than a 63FB...maybe a 64FB holder) and it came back a 65FB and one was a lock 65FB, and it came back a 66FB. Both coins sent in raw with really nice color. However, in the same batch was also a coin I thought was a lock 64FB, and it came back a 63FB. I don't know, the PCGS holder'd 63FB had more detail, better strike, less contact marks and more luster than the one they stuck in a 65FB holder, but perhaps they didn't like the toning on it and so no 64FB -- it went in to a 63FB holder.

I guess that's why they offer the re-grading service

FinallyHere · February 13, 2005 10:53PM

Mike, stop worrying about the dime and post more coins to the old website

Abe...I toldya.....I was with my wife without kids......I don't take my laptop with me for those kinds of extracurricular activities!! And besides....I highly doubt my wife would let me bring the camera.....

Hmmm, those who forget their history are going to repeat it!!!!!

Oreville.....I know...I know......don't worry though.....all is well....all is well.

I've come to the conclusion that it's not what we think the grade should be, it's trying to get to know how PCGS graders grade coins and what they're looking for in any specific grade.

Mercurydimeguy - This is really the issue and I'm glad you said it. However, that's NOT what grading is supposed to really be about now is it? A sound observation and more or less true.....for good or bad.

Jacktheknife - Thank you for your nice comments.

Fairlaneman (ken) - NO....there are NO wipes or hairlines but you are correct in your statements about how they treat them.

lloydmincy · February 14, 2005 1:38AM

I should be working harder today, but boy, I tell ya'!:

Mercury dimes to me seems to be THEE most difficult series that I know of to grade. I have looked at hundreds of 1916-d's from 63 to 65. And most times, I don't see a difference! It scares me. My own instinct is getting good with Mercs though. When I first looked at Mikes 20-D, I thought 64FB because of the reverse, which IMO, had the branch and bands look worn and dented in some spots, (yeah sounds picky but I;m trying to figure out grading these), and the ONE on the reverse looks smashed down. But the obverse looks beautiful to me, and so I would have said 65FB. I have seen many 1916-d and 1942/41 mercs, and I USUALLY can tell immediately if it is a 66 or higher. The luster jumps out at you, with no issues, like whoever owned it, never moved it.

Michael, your 20-D seems a 64FB for sure, but it looks like it has a bit of wear - especially the reverse. But I see the luster. But I think M. Whitlows is better.

Brinkersmercs: Yours shows a lot of wear to me.

I have to start posting pictures, but I have something strange in my collection that I may never image, until I know what I want to do. I have the two (out fo two, unless there is more now) of a top pop 66FB key date mercury with NGC (I know, not PCGS), but one is incredible, and the other one???? I look at regularily, and have NO IDEA HOW IT MADE IT TO 66FB. I bought it a while ago, but when I look at that coin, I think - either a dealer paid NGC bucks or I have no idea how to grade these things!!! Probably the latter.

Mike, resubmit a year from now.

lloydmincy · February 14, 2005 1:48AM

Look at Heritage LB mercs, lot 6335 (1916-D NGC 65FB), and lot 6353 (1920 66FB). Those two jump out at me. I bet the 16-d sells for more than one would guess. Nicest 65 from pics I have seen in a while.

mercurydimeguy · February 14, 2005 2:16AM

Well, one thing that I've also realized that it's nearlly impossible to accurately grade a high-grade/rare/key coin from a picture. But just to make one more observation, PCGS treats toned and untoned coins differently (and are REALLY critical of coins that are in between....brinker...look at your coin and you'll see what I mean...I have a few "tweeners" that are also not looked upon favorably by PCGS

From a picture it would be difficult to grade the below, as their color/luster/strike is really dynamite but the toning subdues the strike/relief in a picture/photo. So, in hand they grade well but in photos -- well, one would have a hard time buying them at (or even one below) their "photo" PCGS slabbed grade. BTW -- I made all of these at PCGS by buying them raw...and by making a number of either all toned or all white coins at PCGS I've made the above observation -- PCGS will speank you for the "tween" toned coins

Grade -- MS66FB

Grade -- MS65FB

So, Mike, perhaps your coin is that "tweener" I'm referring to and that's why they aren't putting it in to a 66FB holder?

EDITED: -->> Oh, and I've rarely seen the light golden/yellowish Merc make it in to anything better than a 65FB holder

mercurydimeguy · February 14, 2005 4:37AM

Hey, brink (and all) -- here's a lovely PCGS MS63 Old Green Holder PCGS coin

Link to Teletrade's Monday auction

Your's in comparions looks like a MS69 -- I only show this to demonstrate much of what we've discussed here...that grading is purely subjective and we can only learn by how PCGS has graded in the past to figure out what they'll do going forward.

Clearly, this is either the worst picture I've ever seen or this coin is XF -- at best -- and to Marc's point (in other threads) look at the holder and then look at the coin...they should be close and if not, and it is an undergader, snatch it up and hold for a while/resubmit later...or in the case of this 17-D, run away!!

Fairlaneman · February 14, 2005 5:15AM

Mike the dime on Teletrade looks Okay to me. It has two things bad going for it. One is the terrible picture and the other is that the dime is a Type of 16 obverse which on the 17's seems to be weak quite often. Later in 1917 part of this problem, strike in the wing area, was taken care of and then in 1918 we got what you see on all Mercs after 1918 thru the end of the series.

Ken

mercurydimeguy · February 14, 2005 5:26AM

Ken, very insightful -- so how do they determine is it a type 1 or type 2, and how they should grade it? I currently must have a type 1 in my set (64FB) because the strike is weak...although the coin does have some OK luster...however, I just sent one in that's REALLY hammered out hoping to get a 65FB out (much better than my current one). So if the one I just sent in is a type 2, are you saying that they'll say "oh, type 2" and also put it in a 64FB holder or do the type 2 coins become the 65FB's and 66FB's?

Curious -- shed some light on me as this is interesting

Fairlaneman · February 14, 2005 6:27AM

Mike changes to the Wing area and the front hair area were made in both 1917 and 1918 to bring out better striking qualities. It seems like the type of 16 obverse worked just fine in 1916 but many of the coins that have this obverse in 1917 are weak. Anyway the strike quality improved but the mint was still not satisfied so another change was made in 1918 at the very first of the striking period. All 1918 coins have a Type of 1918 obverse compared to the 1917 which has both a Type of 1916 and a Type of 1917.

Here are the three types with the 1916 on the left 1917 in the middle and what most collectors see the type of 1918 on the right.

Ken

mercurydimeguy · February 14, 2005 6:36AM

Very cool, Ken...so how do they grade them?

Fairlaneman · February 14, 2005 7:06AM

<< <i>Very cool, Ken...so how do they grade them? >>

To be real honest I have no idea. A 1916 or 1917 has never been sent in by myself. It would not surprise me if most graders know anything about this. Most die hard Merc collectors know about these changes but a average collector that just wants a example of the coin probably does not know about the changes either. I know for sure one guy at NGC does though. He wrote the book.

Ken

grip · February 15, 2005 9:19AM

I think the bands may have held it back from MS66,the line going across looks jagged/pushed up??..Just a guess.
Al

monsterman · February 16, 2005 1:43AM

mike

i suggest you send it in on the $500 no bs line....they arent going to give you the grade on the regular $100 line

also....you need to send it when the mail guy isnt grading where they have a ceiling on the computer of 64 programed in to it

also...dont forget the market can only absorb 1 million a day in coins...after which all graders are sent home and the mail guy takes over....seeing as how 60 plus million have been absorbed at fun...i suggest you wait unitl march to send it in on the $500 line

monsterman

ps.....you didnt think they would give you all that money for a $100 bucks in fees did you....this is wallstreet now!!!

monsterman

mercurydimeguy · February 16, 2005 7:09AM

monsterman -- you're funny

But unfortunately (for us)....there is a bit of ironic truth in your comment.

sinin1 · February 16, 2005 8:03PM

you must need more luster and eye appeal to grade any higher

graders spend what, 15 seconds on a coin?

compare this coin with some of your other graded coins at arms length

FinallyHere · February 16, 2005 11:12PM

Sinin1 - Thanks for your comments but, I can assure you that at arms length, knees length, across the room and in your face, this coin is exceptional and there is plenty of luster on this coin to grade MS66 (the bands are not even an issue). Again, it's very tough to grade from images and if you refer to my original post, I even stated it was more of a "ranting" thread" and that I did not expect anyone to grade from the images.

MM - You are a wise man....a wise guy sometimes too....but a wise man as well. Incidentally MM...remember...I play WITHOUT a helmet!! How about you??.......

Ken - Great insight and illustration as to the Mint's progression from Type of 16 through 18.

oreville · February 17, 2005 2:32AM

Finallyhere: For the answer to that question you need to obtain MM's rule #54.

lloydmincy · February 21, 2005 2:32AM

I told you that 1916-d NGC MS65FB was a beauty!!!! Price is aready a record for a 65FB 1916-D, still plenty of time left. Lot #6335 Long Beach, Heritage. (I dont know how to link).

What's PCGS looking for here...or what am I missing?...caution those w/dial-up

Comments