Options
From an Anaconda MS64 in 2005 to a Heritage MS67* in 2007. Nice.
poorguy
Posts: 4,317 ✭
1835 H10c NGC MS64 Toned Capped Bust Half Dime
While I was viewing lots for the current Dallas Sig. Sale, I came across this lot that resembled a coin that we had sold back in 2005. When I got back to the office and checked our archives, I confirmed it was the same coin. Now when I originally sold it, I felt it definitely had a strong chance for a higher grade and sent it in a couple of times but had a client that knew about it and after the second upgrade attempt didn't fly, I just sold it to the client knowing it was much nicer than what it was graded at the time. So, to whomever got it into the MS67* holder, kudos. The coin is a killer and I'm happy to see someone proving my point that it's always better to buy PQ exceptional coins than to settle for "just an example".
Something to note, and appreciate, is the fact that the coin had not been doctored as it looked EXACTLY like it did when I originally sold it.
Anaconda Inventory Archives
Heritage Lot 351 Sale 452
While I was viewing lots for the current Dallas Sig. Sale, I came across this lot that resembled a coin that we had sold back in 2005. When I got back to the office and checked our archives, I confirmed it was the same coin. Now when I originally sold it, I felt it definitely had a strong chance for a higher grade and sent it in a couple of times but had a client that knew about it and after the second upgrade attempt didn't fly, I just sold it to the client knowing it was much nicer than what it was graded at the time. So, to whomever got it into the MS67* holder, kudos. The coin is a killer and I'm happy to see someone proving my point that it's always better to buy PQ exceptional coins than to settle for "just an example".
Something to note, and appreciate, is the fact that the coin had not been doctored as it looked EXACTLY like it did when I originally sold it.
Anaconda Inventory Archives
Heritage Lot 351 Sale 452
Brandon Kelley - ANA - 972.746.9193 - http://www.bestofyesterdaycollectibles.com
0
Comments
What is the price diff between 64 and 67*?
So, what exactly is the difference with this true life example vs. the argument (which I do not particularly agree with) that one can not tell the difference between a 69 and 70 so why pay for 70's? Is this NGC-MS67* also a coin to be very much avoided now using the same logic? Interesting stuff to say the least.
Wondercoin
<< <i>Wow, that's a beautiful coin!
What is the price diff between 64 and 67*? >>
maybe 10 grand
<< <i>Wow!!! Was it beyond under-graded before, or is it slightly over-graded now, or neither? I can't see how the same coin can be rendered a 64 and 67*. Isn't there an enormous difference in qualifications between a 64 and a 67? This just goes to show for me that there are some real treasures out there in 63-65 holders. >>
I believed it was well undergraded before. The coin glows like the sun with very prooflike surfaces and the color is second to none.
<< <i>Brandon- Is the big honkin spot in front of lady Liberty's bust on the slab or a break in the toning? >>
It is just pale white and not very opaque (sp?). It comes out like that in images for some reason but not distracing in-hand.
Edited to say: Boiler, I want your icon.
<< <i>Notice that the coin originally resided in an OLD holder from NGC - graded early 1990's. I have found some exceptional coins in those holders. >>
Ditto. There are treasures to be found in old NGC holders.
"...Something to note, and appreciate, is the fact that the coin had not been doctored as it looked EXACTLY like it did when I originally sold it."
....then what did change? The grading 'standard', right? So much for the value of plastic.
I'm trying to think of something clever to say here. How about "Buy the coin and not the plastic".
This is not an isolated case. I see it all the time. It's sick, that's what it is. It's the same stinkin' coin!!
Identical coin. Different slab. Hugely different price
As one who has prided himself by busting 1 point upgrades, I kneel in your presence
<< <i>So then, what is a grading 'standard', anyway. Are coins like fine wine, that improve with age? If the coin didn't change with time ....
"...Something to note, and appreciate, is the fact that the coin had not been doctored as it looked EXACTLY like it did when I originally sold it."
....then what did change? The grading 'standard', right? So much for the value of plastic.
I'm trying to think of something clever to say here. How about "Buy the coin and not the plastic".
This is not an isolated case. I see it all the time. It's sick, that's what it is. It's the same stinkin' coin!! >>
The standard might have not changed but certainly the opinion of those who graded it on seperate occasions were different. Just as is the case now, I see accurately graded, undergraded, and overgraded coins in early NGC era holders. I just happen to see more accurately graded and undergraded coins in old NGC holders about as frequently as I see accurately graded and undergraded recently graded PCGS coins right now. I just don't see a ton of Old NGC holder coins out there compared to the number of currently graded PCGS and NGC coins.
<< <i>Brandon - Nice coin you sold. But, it got me thinking...
So, what exactly is the difference with this true life example vs. the argument (which I do not particularly agree with) that one can not tell the difference between a 69 and 70 so why pay for 70's? Is this NGC-MS67* also a coin to be very much avoided now using the same logic? Interesting stuff to say the least.
Wondercoin >>
This is one reason I sold my complete set of Indian Half Eagles. I started to find coins 2-3 grades down at a fraction of the cost that were just as eye appealing. While it takes longer to find the pieces I am re-building at a lower grade.
<< <i>Didn't the 1870S half dime go through something like a half dozen grades to get where it is now? >>
the AU-64?
Yes, it did. When it was first discovered, in 1978, it was graded (properly, in my opinion) AU-55. It later was graded and holdered by a TPG at MS-63. It is now in an MS-64 holder! I have spent quite a bit of time "up close and personal" with that coin, studying the die marriage, and I can tell you, IT IS STILL AU-55! The coin did not change.
A 3 grade bump is an isolated case!
Toning and the star (*) market grading had something to do with it.
Those remnent spots on this coin that drained and didn't tone, leaving halos of white....
How does anyone explain them?
Russ, NCNE
This was simply done by letting it sit wrapped up in toilet tissue for a couple of months in a windowsill. I let it sit too long, because I was not home much this summer, but there was a time when this coin had very simmilar toning.
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
BigMoose - good to see you here again!
<< <i>Brandon, when are you gonna add your newest inventory to your website?...... >>
Santa Clara and then the Heritage Trade and Grade and NOW I'm sick and feel pretty crappy. I'll try to have all of the coins listed by Tuesday since we leave for Baltimore on Wednesday. I've got a ton of stuff to go up too.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
I could understand if you said ACG or SGS, but NGC ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>The coin was a no sale, so apparently the bidders weren't impressed with the MS67* grade.
Russ, NCNE >>
Clearly it is lacking a sticker. That was certainly a deal breaker.
How about both? Looks like it is exactly 65.6* to me.
Great look! I like it very much.
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>It is absolutely appalling that any coin could be graded MS64 on one occasion, and MS67 on another. Those are two very different grades. In the range of MS grades from 62 to 67, I can understand one point differentials from one submission to another. Rarely I have seen coins that moved two points, and I am usually fairly scathing when that happens. But three points in the mid-MS range ... inexcusable.
Sunnywood >>
<< <i>It is absolutely appalling that any coin could be graded MS64 on one occasion, and MS67 on another. Those are two very different grades. In the range of MS grades from 62 to 67, I can understand one point differentials from one submission to another. Rarely I have seen coins that moved two points, and I am usually fairly scathing when that happens. But three points in the mid-MS range ... inexcusable.
Sunnywood >>
I disagree - because of the time involved. It's well known that standards have changed dramatically since the late 1980/early 1990's. Eye appeal is so much more a factor now ... and the upper end of the grading spectrum utilized so much more often.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
whose standards? the ones in position to make money off changing
standards or the collectors?
<< <i>I had a rattler AU58 walking liberty half go to MS65 at PCGS upon resubmission. That's 7 grades ... but no biggie. Standards changed - they no longer use a high power loop to scrutinize for rub when the fields & devices are fully lustrous. >>
Bingo! I too have had 6 Peace dollars go from MS63 to 65, one go from 64 to 66 and a couple go from 62 to 64. Did i make a killing on these? No; in fact most of these were widgets or semi-key dates/mints. Of these, all were 1st gen. ANACS slabs with the ANA logo hologram on the back, and all were cracked out and went to PCGS through a local dealer. Gradeflation is a fact, not a theory, and all of the TPGs have converted their business model to it over the last 15 or so years.
the question is, what is the worst thing to collectors: a sliding grading scale over the years, or blatant overgrading the first time?
Although this is just a widget that was recently sold at auction, there are semi and key dates that have been overgraded too upon the first submission.
<< <i> It's well known that standards have changed dramatically since the late 1980/early 1990's.
whose standards? the ones in position to make money off changing
standards or the collectors? >>
Interesting point and food for thought
<< <i>Standards shouldn't change that much over a half a generation. They're called "standards", because they should remain standard... >>
unless you're a publicly traded company with shareholders to answer to. don't forget, there is big business in resubmissions based on a sliding standard over time.
<< <i>I had a rattler AU58 walking liberty half go to MS65 at PCGS upon resubmission. That's 7 grades ... but no biggie. Standards changed - they no longer use a high power loop to scrutinize for rub when the fields & devices are fully lustrous. >>
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."