Remember this 1906 Canadian 50c? GRADE IN Trueview image

ajaan

Well I sent it to PCGS Regular 15-day service. Today is day 15. Any additional opinions on what you think PCGS will grade it?

ASUtodd

It sure is pretty! I've pretty much given up on trying to grade items so I'll just leave it at "pretty"!

ormandh

AU-55 without knowing the background. I am not able to tell if that is rub on the highpoints or if it is just the way the surface looks with a little skin. If it is the toning then 61.

tacynnep

92??

coinkat

What did I say last time?

I like it and I think it is a quality coin

coinkat

I think worst case is AU55 and best case is MS62.

ajaan

I'll be happy with anything AU50 or better. I will NOT be happy with 92.

ColinCMR

It's definitely a nice one! I'm not sure of the grade, but be sure to share PCGS's opinion when it comes in

coinpictures

Love the obverse as AU55+, but the reverse screams EF45 to me. I'll net it to 50... it all depends how conservative PCGS is feeling that day. You could end up anywhere from 45 to 58 depending on how generous they're feeling.

Assuming there are no problems of course.

coinkat

Edward VII Canadian coinage seems to have a general theme... one side of the coin is usually struck better than the other. The obverse is terrific and the reverse is likely better in hand than in the image and is the weaker side of the two. Take a good look at the surfaces of the reverse of this coin and that tells the whole story in terms of wear. There are no disturbing hairlines or severe evidence or circulation other than the lack of sharp detail that one wishes for... I would be shocked with a grade less than 55.

ajaan

One month now and still no grade.

coinkat

good luck with the grade...

WWW

One month now and still no grade.
I wonder if it is due to the large numbers of US high relief gold bullion being submitted right now by the flippers.
BTW: Looks AU58 to me.

ajaan

I think they are getting bogged down with the UHR coins.

Doogy

<< <i>I think they are getting bogged down with the UHR coins. >>



but look at it this way. Maybe you'll get it mixed up, and they'll slab it a MS70 too! they are handing those grades out like candy on the UHRs

ajaan

Line # Item # Cert # PCGS No. CoinDate Denomination Variety Country Grade

2 1 14063934 32110 1906 50C CANADA AU53

7Jaguars

Well, don't be mad or glad...Kind of fair, I suppose. I think it better than an AU53 & more like a 58 but must confess to not liking to grade if not in hand. These sometimes have incomplete striking in the beard, 'burns, crown on the obv. and leaf prominences on the reverse that will get minimal contact and cause a grade "slap" downward that I do not think merited.

Also true of my beloved Teddy home silver of Great Britain.

BTW, and not to pirate this thread but if ANYBODY sees or hears of the set of Mack's designs for obverse of GB and obverse of Colonial medals (and these were affixed to and the original white/silver matted board inserted into a very neat double glass frame) then that is likely mine and went missing as my wife moved out last July - this sold along with the infamous Patina collection by Spink in summer of '01.

coinkat

53 is harsh for this coin... why? For the reasons I have already said.

But to add to that, the high points have little, if any wear- look at the ear which is the high point. Look at the crown band as well as the hair. The reverse rarely holds back a coin like this... and in this instance, where are the obnoxius hairlines on the reverse? In all seriousness, the reverse is alittle weak, but it is in the strike and not wear. This is quite unfortunate.

ajaan

WWW

Beautiful coin. Still looks like an AU58 to me, but then again I don't have much experience with grading this series.
What were your turn around times?

ajaan

My 15 day turnaround was actually 24 days. I submitted two submissions at the same time, one Regular (15-day), and one economy. They were both graded the same day.

7Jaguars

You know, as I think about it, this may be a coin that should be sent to NGC. I think the grade is just too harsh and too much is put on the numerical grade when it comes to evaluating the coin.

Well, there you have it as my recommendation...

SYRACUSIAN

Don's image suggests that there's more luster than the TrueView image allows to be seen. I love the original surfaces, and the consencus seems to say that it's a PQ AU53 at least.

Doogy

this is something that frustrates me with third party grading, is seemingly the inconsistant ability to discern wear from strike weakness. I personally think that this coin is an MS62 as it appears that the "wear" is indeed strike weakness. IF there is high point wear, PCGS allows cabinet friction type wear up to MS67 per their grading guide. being that the luster isn't strong (or so it appears), I would say that it would be right for an MS62, but probably no higher.

Funny how they can look at a coin like this one click here and discern the strike weakness based on the type and grade it accordingly, but they don't do it with other series like yours.

I'll be willing to bet that if you submit that coin to them 3 different times, you'll get three different grades.

coinkat

The true view images are very well done and while grading from an image represents its own challenges, I think that between the two separate sets of images makes the grade of AU53 even more difficult to comprehend.

Sorry... but someone had to say it.

docday2003

wow, I'm amazed at the difference in between the 2 images. If I didn't know better, I wouldn't have suspected they were the same coin. As an aside, I have a 1906 half which is graded pcgs ms 64 (and formerly icg ms 65). The toning is very similar to your coin. Based on the first set of images, I would have guessed your coin was AU based on the busy-looking fields. Based on the trueview images, though, I would have initially guessed mint-state. I'm not seeing typical wear on their images, especially on the obverse side... although I get the sense that there is a fair number of strikes on the king's face. On reflection, though, I wonder...is that wear on the leaf closest to the C in canada at about 9 oclock? As well the reverse fields look busier than a mintstate coin.
Anyhow, nice coin!

coinpictures

Still difficult to grade from pictures, but the Trueview pictures give a good additional perspective. I'll admit that I do not know the strike characteristics of this particular issue, but... The obverse looks PQ AU58 to me (just a hint of wear along the beard below the ear). The reverse looks AU50-53: unless it's all weak strike, while the crown is untouched, I see enough wear along the edges of the leaves, especially from 1:00-3:00pm to justify the assigned grade.

I don't think 53 is unreasonable. Now from an eye appeal standpoint, I can see it going for higher money, but a 53 technical grade seems consistent to me.

Doogy

<< <i>wow, I'm amazed at the difference in between the 2 images. If I didn't know better, I wouldn't have suspected they were the same coin. As an aside, I have a 1906 half which is graded pcgs ms 64 (and formerly icg ms 65). The toning is very similar to your coin. Based on the first set of images, I would have guessed your coin was AU based on the busy-looking fields. Based on the trueview images, though, I would have initially guessed mint-state. I'm not seeing typical wear on their images, especially on the obverse side... although I get the sense that there is a fair number of strikes on the king's face. On reflection, though, I wonder...is that wear on the leaf closest to the C in canada at about 9 oclock? As well the reverse fields look busier than a mintstate coin.
Anyhow, nice coin! >>




If by "busier" on on the reverse, you mean abrasions and bag marks, MS coins are allowed to have numerous marks and still be lower MS. Heck, most MS62 Morgan dollars look they were run over by the stagecoach carrying them, but are still uncirculated. IF this coin is worn enought to warrant the AU grade, I would think the busier reverse fields would keep it from AU58 maybe, but not any lower than 55.

i still think this is a low MS coin though.

docday2003

<<If by "busier" on on the reverse, you mean abrasions and bag marks, MS coins are allowed to have numerous marks and still be lower MS. Heck, most MS62 Morgan dollars look they were run over by the stagecoach carrying them, but are still uncirculated. IF this coin is worn enought to warrant the AU grade, I would think the busier reverse fields would keep it from AU58 maybe, but not any lower than 55.

i still think this is a low MS coin though. >>




actually, I'm not talking about bag marks. Instead, I'm talking about the light circulation marks that disturb the luster enough to indicate the coin has seen circulation. I'm now looking at the trueview images on a different computer screen, and to me there are definite signs of wear on the coin, most visible on the leaves at 2o'clock-5 o'clock and at 9o'clock-10 o'clock. The deceptive thing with this coin is the fact that the obverse wear is apparently well hidden by the gorgeous toning. JMHO!

docday2003

a perfect place to see the disturbance I'm talking about is adjacent to the 5 in 50¢...immediately around the 5, there is nice luster, whereas inbetween the 5 and the leaf at 10 o'clock, there is an absense of luster. That's what I mean by it looking busy. Unfortunately on my workplace monitor, the wear wasn't as evident, whereas on my hi definition monitor the circulation marks are clear.

WWW

Just in case any one cares to see it super-sized: Large TrueView Image

ASUtodd

I wish a TPG would come up with a computer program to grade coins accurately across the board. It wouldn't be hard to program the type of coin and to tell the program where to look for the wear. I know it would cost some money to do but in the long run they wouldn't have to pay the temperamental graders salaries...

MacCrimmon

53 - 55 - 58 ??? No matter. If you could fit together a complete date run of 50c with matching eye-appeal, you'd have a fantastic set.

Also, what most images will never reveal are the tell-tale hairlining (micro cross-hatching) on the high points. That speckled type toning is also a bear to "see" through when grading the surfaces.

OchoReales

I'm thinking AU 50-55 though I can't tell if there is enough luster for the 55!

OchoReales

Sorry, didn't see your grade post. In that case, I'll go with AU53! Did I win???


Gary

coinkat

Well, this one has a new owner and because we tend to grade from images, I though sharing my thoughts after a review would be appropriate. My last comments left a range of 55 on the low and possibly 62 on the high end which is quite a big spread. The coin looks more like Ajaan's image than True view... The coin is not MS. The lustre is muted and the strike is average for the series. The coin is attractive considering that there are no problematic hairlines. I think the correct grade is 55- no higher. I like it and it is a welcome addition to the collection

7Jaguars

And there you have it as there is no substitute for in hand viewing.

This soft strike business reminds me of the occasional buffalo nickel (and I am no great expert on the series) where occ. there is mark down for soft strike almost as thought it is wear. Another point is that if you see the occ. blank planchet for a denomination, these are no great shakes and have quite a few hairlines to them & so that with such a planchet AND a soft strike will see the high points with "micro cross hatching" and abrasions that actually can be PRE-strike as well.