"Every coin is MS65 RD or better"... means RD is always better?

A set of copper coins is described this way: "every coin is MS65 RD or better." Does that imply a RD coin is always better than a RB or BN example, even if a non-RD coin has a higher numerical grade? Would a MS68RB coin be considered automatically inferior to a MS65 RD, simply on the basis of color?
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
0
Comments
I've seen some very ugly red coins and some outstanding brown coins. Each coin should be graded and appreciated on its own merit.
Generally a 65RB is priced the same as a 64RD and so on.
I am not of the opinion that red is the be all and end-all. Their are many RB and even BN coins that have better eye-appeal that a RD coin of the same grade. Plus, RB or BN coins are almost as a rule less expensive than a RD coin in the same grade. Great value for the money in gem grade... red/brown or brown Lincoln's.
imho.
Collector of Early 20th Century U.S. Coinage.
ANA Member R-3147111
<< <i>I've always understood that "MS65 RD or better" could include MS66 BN, MS66 RB, MS66 RD, MS67 BN, MS67 RB, etc... >>
I don't interpret it that way. If someone told me all the coins in a collection were MS65 RD or better, I'd expect everything to be 65 RD, 66 RD, 67 RD etc.
<< <i>
<< <i>I've always understood that "MS65 RD or better" could include MS66 BN, MS66 RB, MS66 RD, MS67 BN, MS67 RB, etc... >>
I don't interpret it that way. If someone told me all the coins in a collection were MS65 RD or better, I'd expect everything to be 65 RD, 66 RD, 67 RD etc. >>
Interesting...
So a 65 RD is "better" than a 67 BN? The market may (or may not) reflect this...but I always thought a 67 was supposed to be better than a 65 regardless of the level of toning.
<< <i>
<< <i>I've always understood that "MS65 RD or better" could include MS66 BN, MS66 RB, MS66 RD, MS67 BN, MS67 RB, etc... >>
I don't interpret it that way. If someone told me all the coins in a collection were MS65 RD or better, I'd expect everything to be 65 RD, 66 RD, 67 RD etc. >>
I think that if they were to include the RD, RB and BN then it would say "MS65 or better". Because it says MS65 RD or Better it implies that all are RD and some better than 65 (in red). That is the way I interpret the statement.
<< <i>So a 65 RD is "better" than a 67 BN? >>
Obviously that is subjective, but if you ask me, I would say yes - a legitimate 65 RD is better than a 67 BN.
I think this is more true the older the coin in question, as RD is rarer and more special on an 18th century coin than on a 1938 Lincoln. >>
Which would you rather have, an MS65 BN, an MS65 RB or an MS65 RD?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Which would you rather have, an MS65 BN, an MS65 RB or an MS65 RD? >>
Obviously it depends on the coin...but I generally prefer RB copper.
Just ask Stewart Blay. He will not touch anything, never has if he could, unless it was RED!!!! So if someone says 65RD or better, I'm with ColonialCoinUnion, who is correct.
Do I get googly eyed for a red copper key? Duh.
Would I rather have a nice honest red 65 or a blazing 67rb? The 67RB all day long.
When the price is so much higher for a red coin, I would rather have a rb that has more eye appeal with a smaller price tag. I dont want to take away from the guys that soley collect red copper.
It all comes down to each his own. Plain and simple, collect what you like, like what you collect.
Also looking for VF-EF Seated halves.
Sell me your old auction catalogs...