Good info....don't think I will be adding to the PCGS coffers by crossing coins over but at least I have an idea of what my chances might be like if I have a nice solid NGC FBL coin....that I want to cross.
I am still not sure why PCGS and NGC use different standards for FBL designation but I am sure that diffeence exists in just about everything the two companies do!
<< <i>I say unless the coin has FBL's like this it should not get the designation.
>>
There's no '53-S with BLs like that. The coin in the OP is about the best you can expect for this date. >>
I agree that FBLs need to look like the photo. If there aren't any legitimate FBLs for a certain date because of striking issues, then that's the way it is. (Or should be at any rate.)
Me at the Springfield coin show: 60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
Not sure if the TrueView gets deleted or edited with the new cert number after an upgrade. Whatever the case, it's certainly not going to be linked from a URL that's based on a now non-existent cert number.
<< <i>So the OP ultimately received an upgrade? >>
Yes. Bushmaster said in another thread that he got the FBL on this coin on the 4th or 5th try.
Looks like ole bushy dipped the coin somewhere along the line, as the Trueview is showing the telltale post dip gold hues when compared to the CoinFacts pic Fadetoblack dug up.
If you do a quote of the OP, you'll find that it referenced cert # 11505210, which no longer exists. This indicates that it did upgrade. It's not clear to me that it's impossible for the new cert number to begin with a '0' under those circumstances. Perhaps PCGS practices have changed over time?
EDIT: It might not have upgraded IF it was cracked and submitted raw, of course. I was presuming Bushmaster used the Regrade service.
Comments
I am still not sure why PCGS and NGC use different standards for FBL designation but I am sure that diffeence exists in just about everything the two companies do!
and now it seems PCGS has tightened it's standards and NGC has loosened theirs ...........
how long has it been for a 53-S half (or 45-P dime) to get one?
just to clarify what I remember - PCGS only cares about bottom set of lines and NGC needs both sets of lines?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Nice coins - I am glad they still are giving out some high valued designations
how long has it been for a 53-S half (or 45-P dime) to get one?
just to clarify what I remember - PCGS only cares about bottom set of lines and NGC needs both sets of lines? >>
From here: "This is the first FBL 53-S that PCGS has graded in the last 5-6 years."
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I say unless the coin has FBL's like this it should not get the designation.
There's no '53-S with BLs like that. The coin in the OP is about the best you can expect for this date.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
<< <i>
<< <i>I say unless the coin has FBL's like this it should not get the designation.
There's no '53-S with BLs like that. The coin in the OP is about the best you can expect for this date. >>
I agree that FBLs need to look like the photo. If there aren't any legitimate FBLs for a certain date because of striking issues, then that's the way it is. (Or should be at any rate.)
60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
As I recall the coin being discussed finally did get a FBL for the OP on a subsequent submission.
I also recall that the link in the opening post was for a Trueview , but now I can't see it.
What gives? Do Trueiews get "revoked" after the grade changes on a coin? Don't trueviews last forever? Do they expire??
Whatever the case, it's certainly not going to be linked from a URL that's based on a now
non-existent cert number.
<< <i>I see the coin in question is now in the #1 registry set with cert #06616201 >>
Voila:
Supersize me!
1953-S 50C PCGS FBL
Sorry, for the redundant posting of the coin above...and I did not notice the OP date.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
<< <i>
<< <i>I drudged up this old thread to refresh my memory of what an example(s) of a 53-S FBL looks like.
As I recall the coin being discussed finally did get a FBL for the OP on a subsequent submission.
I also recall that the link in the opening post was for a Trueview , but now I can't see it.
What gives? Do Trueiews get "revoked" after the grade changes on a coin? Don't trueviews last forever? Do they expire?? >>
That cert doesn't exist any more so I'm guessing it was issued a new number although I know that doesn't always happen. >>
The cert does exist as does the TrueView.
TrueView
Cert
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
<< <i>I see the coin in question is now in the #1 registry set with cert #06616201 >>
So the OP ultimately received an upgrade?
<< <i>
<< <i>I see the coin in question is now in the #1 registry set with cert #06616201 >>
Voila:
Supersize me! >>
Anyone know the die state of this coin? Bad picture?
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>So the OP ultimately received an upgrade? >>
Yes. Bushmaster said in another thread that he got the FBL on this coin on the 4th or 5th try.
Looks like ole bushy dipped the coin somewhere along the line, as the Trueview is showing the telltale post dip gold hues when compared to the CoinFacts pic Fadetoblack dug up.
This indicates that it did upgrade. It's not clear to me that it's impossible for the new cert number to
begin with a '0' under those circumstances. Perhaps PCGS practices have changed over time?
EDIT: It might not have upgraded IF it was cracked and submitted raw, of course. I was presuming
Bushmaster used the Regrade service.
i always loved seeing his avatar...being an old zappa fan myself
yup
him and his searches for the 53-s fbl franky
<< <i>I did a google search of 11505210, that's how I got the pic I posted up there. >>
Nice. I'll have to add that to my bag of tricks.