"GRADE IN" on a piece of Southern $10 Gold???
dizzyfoxx
Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭
Guess the Grade and opinions always welcome....
...There's always time for coin collecting. 
0
Comments
'dude
I would grade this piece AU-58. I would not be surprised if it is in an MS-61 or 62 holder because that happens farily often. But I think the real grade is AU-58.
<< <i>I have no idea but just for fun I'm going to say MS60. >>
Look for the flats from friction via circulation InternetJunky.
On the Obverse some areas to look at is above the LI in in Liberty, hair curl over the ear, nose, and lower neck and dangling curl.
On the Reverse the top of the Eagles head, inner tops of both wings, crawl, etc.
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>
<< <i>I have no idea but just for fun I'm going to say MS60. >>
Look for the flats from friction via circulation InternetJunky.
On the Obverse some areas to look at is above the LI in in Liberty, hair curl over the ear, nose, and lower neck and dangling curl.
On the Reverse the top of the Eagles head, inner tops of both wings, crawl, etc. >>
Thanks. Yeah I'll admit not knowing anything about gold I just did the once over looking for scratches, I didn't even pay attention to the wear, which normally I do. Maybe I need another cup of coffee?
At this time I'll say 55
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
About a year ago I searched all the archives looking at N/M AU50 Eagles, and would be hard pressed buying 3-4 examples out of hundreds viewed if they became available again.
This is a very SWEET example!
Unless those slight streaks on the obverse are hairlines, with the spread I would definitely work this coin.
JMHO but if you ever want to sell this coin let me know!!!!!!!!
People can call me evil for the above post, but that coin is a 1980's graded example.
On a side note, unless this was a consigned coin if it was owned by heritage if it was upgradeable it would have been done by them already.
Dizzy, you posted that in the other thread (the "Moon Money" one)................................it's very true!
Sweet coin. Don't know how I missed seeing this thread.
Unless those slight streaks on the obverse are hairlines, with the spread I would definitely work this coin.
JMHO but if you ever want to sell this coin let me know!!!!!!!!
People can call me evil for the above post, but that coin is a 1980's graded example.
On a side note, unless this was a consigned coin if it was owned by heritage if it was upgradeable it would have been done by them already. >>
Theres afew points in this post that bother me...
First, why work this coin? Dipping is one thing, but to work, as yuou put it, seriously bothers me as a collector. I get why a dealer would do this, but when collectors do this, they to me are no longer collectors. They are profit driven investors.
The coins where it should be grade wise, maybe the next grade, but not MS. If it works its way into a MS holder, thats not a good thing, yea it is for the owner when its time to sell, but then its overgraded.
Also, Ive bought seriously undergraded coins from Heritage, buy it nows and auctions.
With the amount of coins coming in Heritage, I seriously doubt they send in all coins for a shot at upgrade. Ive bought 63's that I sold at 65-66 price levels.
With comments like the working of this coin to get it in a MS holder, I believe is one of the reasons we have services like Cac now...
Why work a nice lightly circulated coin?
Dizzy, I love the coin btw, the N.O. gold is a area of numismatics Im really starting to fall in love with.
Regardless of the grade, I love it!
Also, If you do ever sell, dont sell it to someone who will ruin its originality to up the grade, sell it to me where it will remain untouched for a very long time...
IMHO, I'd leave it in that holder with the CAC sticker. Last thing you want is for it to come back in a "PCGS Genuine" holder.
<< <i>The color is uneven, and I believe the coin has been cleaned and possibly recolored. It has been net-graded 50 and is probably "solid" for that grade. If you crack it out, I think there is high risk for a no-grade. >>
Looking at the coin in-hand and under a scrutinizing loop, there is absolutely no evidence of a cleaning but not to say it wasn't.... Also, the slightly uneven coloring (especially to the left open area of Liberty where it is slightly less vibrant) appears to be from minor handling/rubbing as the grade would illustrate. I don't think I've ever seen an XF or AU 19th century gold coin with perfectly even and unchanging coloring throughout both sides of its' surfaces.
That's a shame. I have.
<< <i> I don't think I've ever seen an XF or AU 19th century gold coin with perfectly even and unchanging coloring throughout both sides of its' surfaces.
That's a shame. I have. >>
Then my guess would be that it has been dipped to achieve absolute evenness. Like with any silver coin in XF or AU that is completely the exact same patina shade with absolutely no color shade discrepencies, I gladly stay away from them, just like I would a gold coin in XF or AU with the same characteristics.
<< <i>
<< <i> I don't think I've ever seen an XF or AU 19th century gold coin with perfectly even and unchanging coloring throughout both sides of its' surfaces.
That's a shame. I have. >>
Then my guess would be that it has been dipped to achieve absolute evenness. Like with any silver coin in XF or AU that is completely the exact same patina shade with absolutely no color shade discrepencies, I gladly stay away from them, just like I would a gold coin in XF or AU with the same characteristics. >>
Dipping a gold coin does not guarantee even coloration. Like it or not, the color of the coin in the OP is not original. It has been cleaned, and the only question I would have is has it been recolored poorly or unevenly cleaned.
Oh, I guess, by your criteria, this one has been dipped:
You better stay away from it.
Stay away from this one, too:
and this one...
etc.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> I don't think I've ever seen an XF or AU 19th century gold coin with perfectly even and unchanging coloring throughout both sides of its' surfaces.
That's a shame. I have. >>
Then my guess would be that it has been dipped to achieve absolute evenness. Like with any silver coin in XF or AU that is completely the exact same patina shade with absolutely no color shade discrepencies, I gladly stay away from them, just like I would a gold coin in XF or AU with the same characteristics. >>
Dipping a coin does not guarantee even coloration. Like it or not, the color of the coin in the OP is not original. It has been cleaned, and the only question I would have is has it been recolored poorly or unevenly cleaned.
Oh, I guess, by your criteria, this one has been dipped:
You better stay away from it.
With all due respect, anyone who can be so adimant about knowing a coin has been messed with based on a completely unrevealing image, is either being silly or was the under-bidder on the coin and now holds resentment. If it is the ladder, I truly do apologize.
Now as far as the 1861-D, aside from the extremely cool date/mintmark, that particular coin judging strictly by the image, has definitely been cleaned. There is no way that a gold coin could have seen so much handling, rubbing and contact and absolutely maintain an unmolested exacting patina. In the words of Dr. Spock... illogical.
<< <i>Now as far as the 1861-D, aside from the extremely cool date/mintmark, that particular coin judging strictly by the image, has definitely been cleaned. There is no way that a gold coin could have seen so much handling, rubbing and contact and absolutely maintain an unmolested exacting patina. In the words of Dr. Spock... illogical.
It's all a continuum. Some coins are more messed with than others. I have seen RYK's in person and can assure you that they are less messed with than usually seen.
Oh, next time you should say,
"Guess the Grade and favorable opinions always welcome..."
I'm an old, dirty gold addict now. Damn you (j/k, of course).
does look a bit too shiny for me and i consider that a sign of it being
dipped up to get that higher grade. i just do not like that look.
<< <i>Okay, Dizzy, you are right. I was the underbidder for the POS in the OP. I am so envious that I cannot stand it.
It's funny how coins are deemed as "POS" when they are in someone else's hands. There's no doubt in my mind that your three above half eagles, aside from being amazing dates/mintmarks, are completely void of personality and originality and can be certainly construed as POS examples. But who knows, if they were in my collection I just might feel differently, but I doubt it.
<< <i>can i play too? dizzy, it is a nice coin.. all old coins are nice... but it
does look a bit too shiny for me and i consider that a sign of it being
dipped up to get that higher grade. i just do not like that look. >>
Now there's some constructive criticism and not a judgement of absolutism.
This one?
No
This one?
No.
This one?
No.
How about this one currently for sale at CRO?
Nope, not there either.
Okay, let's go over to Doug Winter's current inventory.
This one?
No.
This one?
No.
This one?
No again.
Your turn. Find some circulated 19th century gold coins with splotchy light discoloration in the fields that have been hand picked by a professional. We'll leave my coins out of it.
Here's an irony: the image is completely unrevealing, but you were comfortable buying the coin from it, with no return privilege? My personal approach has always been that I can rarely confirm a coin is a good one from a photo, but I often can tell it's a bad one from a photo. Sure, a few opportunities may be missed, but it saves aggravation over time.
(oh, and it's adamant--think Adam Ant, the 80's pop star, as a memory aid
And I did start constructive, until you spouted off some nonsense.
Now, this last statement is not for you, Dizzy, it's for the others who might read this thread.
If you see uneven, splotchy or geographic light discoloration in the fields of a circulated 19th century gold coin, it's probably best to avoid. If you doubt this advice, ask a pro like Doug Winter or Dave Wnuck. If you accidentally got stuck with one of these in the past, offer it to Dizzy. He pays strong money for them.
myself
<< <i>Yeah, but how bout those Battle Creek Morgans? >>
Did they go from bags directly to NGC or from bags to tubes to NGC?
Another lesson for everyone but Dizzy:
If there is a lock upgrade in a Heritage Signature sale, you ain't gonna get it (at least not at a worthwhile price). There are folks who make a living doing this, and if you think you can sit home in your underwear, with your wife nagging you, your kids fighting in the other room, your dog barking because she needs to take a leak, Lynyrd Skynyrd music blasting, and your mother-in-law calling to find out what time she can come over for dinner on Sunday night, while you look at the inconsistent photo and try to decide if the coin is good/no good, you do not stand a chance.
Well, to be honest RYK,
I did this several years ago with a piece of early copper. A Lincoln to be correct. But... I wasnt jamming to Skynyrd. I was blasting Stevie Ray Vaughn... Tin Pan Alley.
<< <i>i am tending to like this new and improved ryk. reminds me a bit of
myself
I read the whole thread and somehow I thought you got RYK's password.
Backwards but I like it too. Kinda fun again.
Dizzy, all is good and its not a bad coin, attractive in it's own right but I agree with RYK and FC that from the photo's it is re-toned over time. Your comment on coins with wear having even toning meaning cleaned and re-toned seems a bit off as well. A coin that was worn over 150 years ago would naturally age over the whole surface with the copper toning etc...
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>With all due respect, anyone who can be so adimant [sic] about knowing a coin has been messed with based on a completely unrevealing image...
Here's an irony: the image is completely unrevealing, but you were comfortable buying the coin from it, with no return privilege? My personal approach has always been that I can rarely confirm a coin is a good one from a photo, but I often can tell it's a bad one from a photo. Sure, a few opportunities may be missed, but it saves aggravation over time.
(oh, and it's adamant--think Adam Ant, the 80's pop star, as a memory aid
And I did start constructive, until you spouted off some nonsense.
Now, this last statement is not for you, Dizzy, it's for the others who might read this thread.
If you see uneven, splotchy or geographic light discoloration in the fields of a circulated 19th century gold coin, it's probably best to avoid. If you doubt this advice, ask a pro like Doug Winter or Dave Wnuck. If you accidentally got stuck with one of these in the past, offer it to Dizzy. He pays strong money for them.
Good morning all. Congrats RYK, you have managed to go from one of the few that I held in a bit higher esteem to just another one of the reasons I don't take this forum all that seriously, well done. And once again, I think anyone here will be wise to heed the advice of both PCGS and CAC, as opposed to some dirty gold man.
You're alternative? Buy 19th century gold raw from anyone who claims to be experts and don't expect much more than a "tail light" guarantee.
<< <i>
<< <i>With all due respect, anyone who can be so adimant [sic] about knowing a coin has been messed with based on a completely unrevealing image...
Here's an irony: the image is completely unrevealing, but you were comfortable buying the coin from it, with no return privilege? My personal approach has always been that I can rarely confirm a coin is a good one from a photo, but I often can tell it's a bad one from a photo. Sure, a few opportunities may be missed, but it saves aggravation over time.
(oh, and it's adamant--think Adam Ant, the 80's pop star, as a memory aid
And I did start constructive, until you spouted off some nonsense.
Now, this last statement is not for you, Dizzy, it's for the others who might read this thread.
If you see uneven, splotchy or geographic light discoloration in the fields of a circulated 19th century gold coin, it's probably best to avoid. If you doubt this advice, ask a pro like Doug Winter or Dave Wnuck. If you accidentally got stuck with one of these in the past, offer it to Dizzy. He pays strong money for them.
Good morning all. Congrats RYK, you have managed to go from one of the few that I held in a bit higher esteem to just another one of the reasons I don't take this forum all that seriously, well done. And once again, I think anyone here will be wise to heed the advice of both PCGS and CAC, as opposed to some dirty gold man.
You're alternative? Buy 19th century gold raw from anyone who claims to be experts and don't expect much more than a "tail light" guarantee.
Actually, my alternative is to learn what original, circulated gold looks like, from those who have more experience than I do, and not rely on PCGS and others to make the call for me. There are plenty of horrible coins in PCGS holders, and, over time, some of these will have stickers on them. Everyone makes mistakes, but most people learn from them over time.
As for for you holding me in lower regard after this business, if one or two of the folks who read this thread learned something and avoids a future mistake, it is well worth me embarrassing myself. A couple people PM'ed me last night and thanked me for the discussion. You are obviously beyond reason and beyond help.
Edit: You may now have the last word here. I will not respond again to this issue.
In memory of the USAF Security Forces lost: A1C Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 9/28/05; SSgt Brian McElroy, 1/22/06; TSgt Jason Norton, 1/22/06; A1C Lee Chavis, 10/14/06; SSgt John Self, 5/14/07; A1C Jason Nathan, 6/23/07; SSgt Travis Griffin, 4/3/08; 1Lt Joseph Helton, 9/8/09; SrA Nicholas J. Alden, 3/3/2011. God Bless them and all those who have lost loved ones in this war. I will never forget their loss.
The point is that reasonable minds will differ, but buying from images is difficult at best. It would be interesting to see if the coin was cracked out and sent for regrading, what the outcome would be. If you decide to send it in for a regrade, it would be fun if you gave us the submission number before the grade so we could all watch and wait for the outcome.
That might make for some more interesting conversations here.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Thanks for giving me the last word and not having to be concerned about coming back to see how this petty debate is going to continue. First, any time a friendly adversary in a debate begins to rely on slamming his opponent for a spelling error, shows me that they have lost their edge and really have nothing further to contribute.
I have received messages from those that I actually do trust their opinions and who have actually seen the coin in-hand at the Heritage viewing and their conclusion was that it was as original as they come. In fact, three fellow forum members want to buy the coin if I decide to sell. I guess they like to collect cleaned, messed with, recolored, reshaped, revamped, POS coins.
I'm beginning to think, "Why send anything to the grading companies?". It seems like we just need to post images here and we'll get the bonified grade and originality results from, well, you know.
And as far as all of the coins you have shared with trying to make your of point. Based on the images mind you, I wouldn't even consider half of them. Seeing them in-hand might certainly change that assessment however.
> And as far as all of the coins you have shared with trying to make your of point. Based on the images mind you, I wouldn't even consider half of them.
Are you serious or just determined to defend yourself?
I will add, that the coins presented by RYK look attractive and original, having been photo'd with an obviously good, natural balance of lighting.
C'dude
<< <i>I lost track of this thread until this evening. As I originally posted, the coin looks like an AU-55 (detail-wise) and exhibits no heavy/detracting marks... a definite plus for a NM NO Eagle. I did purposely refrain from decisively commenting on its originality because the lighting makes the coin look washed out. I will offer this, Heritage's coin photography has gone downhill, IMO, over the past couple of years. I've seen a large number of coins from several of their auctions in hand (personally reviewing them) that didn't come close to the photos presented on their website or in catalog. Some look washed out online, but attractive and original in hand, then there's the few that look good online, and actually attractive & original in hand. Some look washed out and were definitely messed with/doctored/cleaned... and there are the occasional ones that actually look presentable online, but again lifeless and messed-with in hand. Either way, from personal observation, purchasing any coin based solely on their photography w/no return privilege is a big risk I'm unwilling to take. The photography and reaility tend to be too widely disparate. I would request dizzy to post some pics that show what the coin looks like without the harsh lighting.
I will add, that the coins presented by RYK look attractive and original, having been photo'd with an obviously good, natural balance of lighting.
C'dude >>
Outstanding post and you are spot on with your assessment of the Heritage images in contrast to the actual coin. I have learned to (in my own strange way) see "through" the images and get a sense for what I think the coin is going to look like in-hand. Is that risky? ...absolutely! Have I been successful & lucky with my risk taking, so far yes including this piece of $10 Southern Gold. I will certainly take my images of it this weekend and share them. My photography skills and equipment is less than spectacular but I think I can capture the coin closer to reality.