Guess the grade on this 1896-S $20 Liberty

Foxer

Hi,

I am considering having this regraded by PCGS, it's currently in an NTC holder.

Just wanted to get some input from you guys before I do... i'll probably have to end up breaking it out of the slab before I send it in.






I'll post the so-called grade that NTC gave it in a day or two.. to keep things interesting.

Thanks,

gecko109

I like it as a solid 62....just too many small hits for 63 IMO.

DUIGUY

Nice!

If it was me, I would break her out and keep her free! Nottin like raw gold in hand!

DennisH

MS61

Placid

62 ntc 65

northcoin

It always amazes me on those Double Eagles how the Eagle on the Reverse can look so sharp while Lady Liberty on the Obverse can look like a much lower graded coin. Unfortunately there are probably just enough distractions on the face to make it difficult to get past a body bag from PCGS. If you are lucky you might get it into an MS 61 holder it it passes the "not cleaned" test.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

au58. Not an Unc.

PerryHall

AU58. Too scuffy for a MS grade.

DoubleEagle59

ms62

maibockaddict

As long as there are no hairlines that we cannot see in the pics, it should 62. Remember these are large soft coins that get marked up easily. The luster does look pretty strong which would keep it above a 61. Too baggy for a 63.

Here is a typical 62. And I have viewed enough PCGS/NGC 62's to say that there is no difference in grading standards between the services on these at the 62 grade level.

darktone

genuine holder- sorry.

commoncents05

<< <i>I like it as a solid 62....just too many small hits for 63 IMO. >>



Gecko doesn't like baggy gold...


-Paul

PerryHall

<< <i>genuine holder- sorry. >>



Why?

Longacre

Lightly cleaned generations ago. Commercial 53. Longacre 45. No sticker.

PerryHall

<< <i>Lightly cleaned generations ago. Commercial 53. Longacre 45. No sticker. >>



PerryHall wants to know where you see this cleaning?

Longacre

<< <i>

<< <i>Lightly cleaned generations ago. Commercial 53. Longacre 45. No sticker. >>



PerryHall wants to know where you see this cleaning? >>




Longacre thinks it looks too bright, even though most of the marks are bag marks rather than circulation wear. It just does not look right to me. However, there is only so much you can tell from a picture, though.

fc

<< <i>genuine holder- sorry. >>



that was my first reaction also. liberty on the obv just seems
to have a weird look to it.

2nd picture, hair by the ear, seems so odd, like metal was moved by
some type of cleaning.

mike92694

<< <i>genuine holder- sorry. >>



Who knows? For all practical purposes, it could be "Not Genuine"

doh

61, maybe 62

relicsncoins

<< <i>AU58. Too scuffy for a MS grade. >>



I agree.

telephoto1

OP coin...Not cleaned, but baggy and I see some rub in the fields. Note halo luster traces around the stars. 58.
And the other piece that's graded 62...no offense, but how many viewers out there would pay 62 money for a coin that baggy, in or out of a holder?

coolest

I say 58, significant scuffing and the rim seems to many scrapes.

But the grading services seem to be more relaxed about grading gold, unless of course it was a piece of gold I sent them.

zeebob

Why break it out before sending it in? Why not just send it in the NTC holder?

maibockaddict

<< <i>OP coin...Not cleaned, but baggy and I see some rub in the fields. Note halo luster traces around the stars. 58.
And the other piece that's graded 62...no offense, but how many viewers out there would pay 62 money for a coin that baggy, in or out of a holder? >>



That is what a 62 is. If you want better, the premium for a 63 is another $4-500. And they have lots of marks as well. Also remember that they are giant pics, and every mark looks huge. From what people on this board seem to think, the only acceptable $20 libs would be graded MS 64 or 65, which are even more expensive. I own 18 $20 Libs and have looked through hundreds trying to find ones I like over the past 10 years. It is the way they are graded. Luster is always broken on the cheek in varied degrees until you reach MS 65. Ms 63's can have some pretty nasty hits on it.

Here is a typical 63

tradedollarnut

Perhaps it is the pictures, but that coin looks unoriginal to me.

KlectorKid

I highly doubt it AU's, it has no more marks than the typical MS62. As for whether or not it BBs, I think the lighting could be making the coin look odd. I'd like a better pic if you could manage it, I'm no expert photographer so I understand if it isn't possible.

I've noticed that there is always a group of people that like to think the worst about other people's coins. I wouldn't take what people are saying as the absolute truth, but rather as things to look into.

maibockaddict

I suggest that if you have a trusted dealer who would allow you to examine his inventory as well as take an honest look at your coin you will have a better idea of what would happen if you were to submit it. In any event, the coin will always have an intrinsic value close to the spot gold price...

oreville

It looks like a high 61 or low 62 to me.

But we are limited to looking at pics.

streeter

rims no bueno

coinkat

clearly not original and 58 seems right.

JJM

62

Foxer

Thanks for the input so far!
There have been a few posts suggesting that it was cleaned.... but there is no indication on the NTC holder that it was...

I know that NTC typically overgrades coins,.. but wouldn't they have noticed a cleaning?

I have some more pictures with different lighting..

BloodMan

I am going to say AU58 on this one. The coin seems to have most of its mint luster, and the degree of bag marks is similar to that of a high-end 61 or low end 62 by current grading standards, but there are signs of circulation on this coin, in my opinion. The peripheral stars do not have full radial lines, which doesn’t appear to be from strike weakness. The “halo” effect around the stars that Telephoto1 mentioned is another sign of circulation in the fields. Also, it appears to have a slight haziness, especially on the reverse. However, I generally agree with maibockaddict that forum members are often tough on grading twenty dollar gold.

It is not uncommon for double eagles that were once in PGCS and NGC in AU58 holders to find there way to NTC MS62-63 holders. Also, just because a problem is not noted on the NTC holder doesn’t mean that if submitted to PCGS, it will not be placed in a genuine older. BTW, just because a coins was once in a PCGS holder doesn’t mean that if cracked-out and resubmitted, it will not be placed in a genuine older. It happened to me twice on my recent submission.

northcoin

I suppose there is a presumption or prejudice that if a coin like that is in a NTC holder it is because it could not make it into a NGC or PCGS one and cleaning is usually the reason. It does not take just hairline scratches either. Over dipping can also be the culprit. On the other hand some would opine that a high percentage of most pre 1900 coins have been cleaned in one way or another so there is some measure of luck involved in getting any old coin into a NGC or PCGS holder.

darktone

<< <i>I know that NTC typically overgrades coins,.. but wouldn't they have noticed a cleaning? >>



Don't confuse NTC with a real grading service- they are not. Your coin looks nice but the surfaces look un-natural. For sure it is not an MS coin. As a rule you should not be buying NTC coins unless you know how to spot cleaned or problem coins. The value will not change much from AU cleaned to AU. Please don't tell me you bought this as a MS65!

telephoto1

<< <i>That is what a 62 is. If you want better, the premium for a 63 is another $4-500. And they have lots of marks as well. Also remember that they are giant pics, and every mark looks huge. From what people on this board seem to think, the only acceptable $20 libs would be graded MS 64 or 65, which are even more expensive. I own 18 $20 Libs and have looked through hundreds trying to find ones I like over the past 10 years. It is the way they are graded. Luster is always broken on the cheek in varied degrees until you reach MS 65. Ms 63's can have some pretty nasty hits on it.

Here is a typical 63 >>



You seriously think that piece is worth $500 more than the other one? Wow. If that eyebrow, chin, cheek and neck, not to mention what looks to be traces of a fingerprint at the 2 bottom left stars, are indicative of a "typical 63"... then it appears I've been selling 4s and 5s at 3 money for the last quarter century. My customers should be ecstatic.

Nothing over 61 should have "nasty hits" in my opinion. A few bagmarks, sure, but not tractor marks.

fc

what exactly is going on with the rims ? were they filed to test it
back in the day?

northcoin

<< <i>genuine holder- sorry. >>



I had forgotten that PCGS does now offer the genuine holder option as an alternative to body bagging if you so check that as an alternative on your submission form. Let us know what happens if you end up submitting this one.

maibockaddict

<< <i>

<< <i>That is what a 62 is. If you want better, the premium for a 63 is another $4-500. And they have lots of marks as well. Also remember that they are giant pics, and every mark looks huge. From what people on this board seem to think, the only acceptable $20 libs would be graded MS 64 or 65, which are even more expensive. I own 18 $20 Libs and have looked through hundreds trying to find ones I like over the past 10 years. It is the way they are graded. Luster is always broken on the cheek in varied degrees until you reach MS 65. Ms 63's can have some pretty nasty hits on it.

Here is a typical 63 >>



You seriously think that piece is worth $500 more than the other one? Wow. If that eyebrow, chin, cheek and neck, not to mention what looks to be traces of a fingerprint at the 2 bottom left stars, are indicative of a "typical 63"... then it appears I've been selling 4s and 5s at 3 money for the last quarter century. My customers should be ecstatic.

Nothing over 61 should have "nasty hits" in my opinion. A few bagmarks, sure, but not tractor marks. >>



Lets see some pics of what you are talking about then. Looking through the pics at Heritage, from what you said, you would never buy any Lib they sell. I have never seen a 63 (at least by today's standards) without heavy hits, and broken luster on the cheek. If you are in fact a dealer, where is it that you find the inventory that fits your grading standards? I had this very discussion with my dealer about this very subject, for many of his Libs were absolutely horrid for the grade. The ones I have are at least acceptable to me, and generally better than the rest. So if you would post some pics for comparison, it would help, otherwise this is just here say.

Foxer

Thanks for all the input everyone!

The NTC grade on this coin is MS 63.

I originally paid about 2% over melt value for it a year ago so I figure even if it is cleaned or AU I still did O.K.... I was buying mainly for bullion content.

If anything the fact that it is holdered helps to determine if it's genuine or not...

Now should I leave it the way it is or submit it to PCGS?....

The coin will most likely loose all or most of the glory that the NTC holder gives it.... even if the MS 63 grade they gave it is not valid it probably would look a whole lot better than a "genuine" holder to a prospective buyer when it comes time to sell it sometime in the future....

Probably borderline AU/MS would be the best grade description I could give it when it comes time for that... certainly NOT MS 63.



After reading about NTC from you guys I will probably not be buying any holdered coins from them again.. (Unless the coin is selling for melt)

OchoReales

Just send the coin in raw and see what happens! Enough already with all the armchair quarterbacks giving their prognostications over a photo. NOTHING takes the place of a coin in hand and that obviously cannot be done. It looks UNC! You say that you paid 2% over melt , two years ago. Take the chance, crack it out and send it in!

Gary

telephoto1

What Gary said. We can't see the piece in hand; you can. Go for it. Send it in. Then the great mystery will be over.

Quick observation, and a question because I see it often...why is it when someone starts hearing things about their item they don't like, all of a sudden it doesn't really matter what it grades anyway, because they bought it dirt cheap?