<< <i>I've seen and love the coin. I'd rather have it in the oldest "8" holder I could.
K >>
I would have not been able to break that out of a 68* holder especially when I suspect that it's probably graded correctly and in the right holder already. With all do respect, DH is not The Highlander.............What a WONDER COIN...................MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Fantastic coin. Sure would like to see it in person with my own eyes.
Lots of discussion in this thread about crossover to PCGS; RD; RB; downgrade to PF67RB on crossover; the coin speaks for itself regardless of what plastic it is in and what grade is on the label inserted into the plastic.
Let me toss out other points to ponder and respond to.
The pictured coin is an MPL and NCG grades it PF68RB*. In other words two numerical grades less than a perfect PF70RD* [or just PF70RD at PCGS].
If the pictured coin was 100% blazing red [ok, orange] would it get a bump to PF70RD? Or would it, though 100% red, still not make the 70 grade?
If not; and if you took out one of the PF70RD proof Lincoln cents minted in the past 10 years [or for that matter the MS70RD 2003 Lincoln Cent] and compared these recent PF and/or MS 70 RD cents to the pictured coin [in 100% Red of course], would there be anything you could perceive and verbalize back to us that clearly establishes that 1909 MPL is so inferior in condition to the two recent PF and MS 70RD cents? that it warrants a 68 or 69 grade?
Or is there simply no difference in the quality of the three coins?
If there is no difference in quality, does that not leave one with the conclusion that the MPL [in 100% Red condition] will never get a 70 grade simply because the TPGs who are asked to grade the coin refuse [for their own reasons, regardless of the merit of the coin itself] to hand out a 70 grade on a 101 year old coin?
Thoughts and questions such as the above just reinforce the truth that grading is a matter of "opinion"; subjective; and not subject to objective, technical and precise quantification.
Notwithstanding the above, I love the look of that MPL
<< <i> While I agree with what you say, there's no way I would pay an extra $100k for a single point [ie: going from a PQ66 to a PQ67]. >>
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences.
<< <i> While I agree with what you say, there's no way I would pay an extra $100k for a single point [ie: going from a PQ66 to a PQ67]. >>
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences. >>
I am certain there are, too. And in the past I've paid huge sums to upgrade two points. But I started a thread a few years ago and discussed mostly with wondercoin what a comfort level for a single point was... it's still around in the archives.
Bottom line is it's the collector's money and collection and he can do what he wants. But I can and will disparage the Registry game that causes a correctly graded coin to be downgraded when it is 'clearly a point finer' than its new peers. Save the downgrades for when NGC [or PCGS] actually DOES overgrade a coin and it needs to be done.
Oh boy - I do hope PCGS never looks at the population report when grading a coin, or worried about the Registry Set "game" (yes, it is a sport for the collector).
A copper with no carbon spots, ticks, nicks, scratches, wear (no nothing-pardon my grammar), could and should arguably grade a 70- no matter what the year. (Stewart Blay's 1919 is a 69 - not sure what the problem with it is).
That NGC 68 IS a grade nicer than the pic of the PCGS 67. In my opinion, (well, with only that large pic to go by) not sure how it graded 67...
If not; and if you took out one of the PF70RD proof Lincoln cents minted in the past 10 years [or for that matter the MS70RD 2003 Lincoln Cent] and compared these recent PF and/or MS 70 RD cents to the pictured coin [in 100% Red of course], would there be anything you could perceive and verbalize back to us that clearly establishes that 1909 MPL is so inferior in condition to the two recent PF and MS 70RD cents? that it warrants a 68 or 69 grade?
In full red condition the grading of MPL's no doubt closely mirrors the Indian cents and also the Barber/matte Buff coinage of that same era. They give out 68 and 69 grades to essentially hairline free specimens with the deepest mirrors and flashiest looks. With 3,000,000+ 1963 proof cents minted under modern conditions, it's no wonder that by attrition alone, no 09vdb PF is probably going to make the 69/70 grade. That's 420 vs. 3 MILL! It's comparing apples and oranges in both total numbers and in the quality of coinage of these 2 periods (1909 vs. 1963). The TPG's allow for some incidental contact on older proofs, not so for the moderns. It's like judging the 1804 PF68 bust dollar vs an 1870 PF68 dollar (2 diff. eras and totally different standards). I've yet to see a perfect PF70 anything in a TPG holdered classic coin. There are really no perfect coins, esp. 101 year old ones. It doesn't help that the deeper toning on a 101 yr old coin can very effectively hide tiny imperfections in the surfaces. The brilliant full red proofs give no such advantage with every minute defect in plain view.
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences.
Comparing the big dollar Saint market which is roamed by some of the deepest pocket investors in the world vs. the MPL market is once again, apples vs. oranges. Right now there is but one big dollar MPL. Big dollars have been chasing Saints for many decades. The MPL craze really only got started after 1990 and for the most part after 2000. It was hard to give away MPL's, even full REDs, in the early 1990's. There is good reason to double up in price on a rare saint from 66 to 67 when only 2 coins might exist and there are half a dozen collectors vying for them. In the MPL sets those guys can look at 67 RD's and be just as happy vs. a 68RB. The RB's are in a different class. It's only in recent years that color aficionado's have been pushing "pretty" RB's to challenge the REDs. But whose to say if that a 5 year trend has staying power? Gem Saints have been a top series since gold was banned back in the 1930's. The Saints also don't have to worry about this B/RB/RD distinction. It makes all the difference and reduces the number of high end coins.
With NGC's proclivity to give out a grade bump on eye appeal, we can't consider an NGC68 vs a PCGS67 as a full 1 pt difference on most coins. In anything the green stickers have proven this with quite few NGC coins now being downgraded 1-2 pts to make them market saleable. That not occured with PCGS.
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
Stunning MPL. Breathtaking, really. And a great discussion/debate. The best of CU.
What do you think caused PCGS to drop it to 67? I'm struggling. Everyone knows PCGS is tougher with copper and we're rarely surprised to hear about downgrades. But just what problems did PCGS have with 68 here? Lance.
<< <i>Stunning MPL. Breathtaking, really. And a great discussion/debate. The best of CU.
What do you think caused PCGS to drop it to 67? I'm struggling. Everyone knows PCGS is tougher with copper and we're rarely surprised to hear about downgrades. But just what problems did PCGS have with 68 here? Lance. >>
Haven't seen the coin in person, but being ultra picky in looking at the images (as I would expect a grader deciding 67 vs. 68 to be on the coin itself) it looks like there is a tiny spot on the N of ONE on the reverse, very small, but maybe that, plus the lack of original red color is enough to keep it from 68?
Roadrunner's comments about different eras and comparing apples to oranges is on point and accurate; yet they also evidence the "grading of coins is subjective" truth that we all know [well,.......... should know].
I suspect that if given a choice between "subjective opinion" grading of coins and "objective, technical, precise, quantifiable" grading of coins, I would choose "subjective opinion" simply because it fits in with human nature.
"One plus One equals Two" may be mathematically correct, but it is boring.
PF68RB* v. PF67RB is not mathematically correct, but is way more fun. Everyone has a different opinion on whether it is one or the other. As is should be. Just like a painting, a song, a pretty woman, a handome man, or a movie. You may like a painting, a song, a woman, a man, or a movie alot. I may like it/her/him a little, or not at all.
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW
Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
This has been a most enlightening thread. Two thoughts come to mind immediately. First I would posit this is the best matte proof coin out there by consensus of opinion. Now the discussion regarding NGC vs PCGS. Are not all of these illustrious forum members those who say buy the coin, not the holder? If you own what is recognized to be the best almost universally, does it really matter what the plastic says?
Major rarities universally acclaimed as the best coin should be exempt from numerical pricing other than being more than those coins a layer below. I know this does not work for those chasing registry glory, but then should collecting be about the coin or the glory of owning it?
That leads me to my next thought that would be perhaps copper coins should have a grade based upon strike, luster and the color should not matter. They will all be brown someday, even if it is in 200 years from now.
Retired United States Mint guy, now working on an Everyman Type Set.
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW >>
Brian, My understanding is that every Monday morning PCGS updates its population report data on its website. It is now Tuesday morning here on the east coast and the population report still shows no PR67RB Lincoln cents graded for the 1909VDB MPL. Is the coin CURRENTLY in a PR67RB holder or do you have an agreement from PCGS that it will be put into a PR67RB holder in the near future. "It ain't official until it IS official" Steve
<< <i>That leads me to my next thought that would be perhaps copper coins should have a grade based upon strike, luster and the color should not matter. They will all be brown someday, even if it is in 200 years from now. >>
Thank you - I agree with you on that point. With one caveat.
Here's were we agree - IMHO; Color, just like eye appeal, is temporal. I see that you realize that -- you are illustrating by using an extreme time example (200 years), but the point is understood.
Having said that, I've often wondered why grading services do not offer mandatory "adjustment" or grade "check-up"services to willing participants to compensate for the time element. A coin gets a 'time label' to ensure that it is still accurately graded at any given time. A 'movable' CAC, if you will.
Coins do not only degrade, and get worse (some do), but some actually improve with time. The toning may mature and such. Perhaps the Watkins Legend coin is an example.
Here's were I do not understand your point. If we do grade copper coins on just "based upon strike, [and] luster", can that not change as well? Especially luster. Strike might be a more lasting feature, but I think that surface conditions really matter. In other words, you can have a coin with a great strike and lousy surfaces, and the other way around, as well.
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW >>
Brian, My understanding is that every Monday morning PCGS updates its population report data on its website. It is now Tuesday morning here on the east coast and the population report still shows no PR67RB Lincoln cents graded for the 1909VDB MPL. Is the coin CURRENTLY in a PR67RB holder or do you have an agreement from PCGS that it will be put into a PR67RB holder in the near future. "It ain't official until it IS official"
Steve >>
imo, there are no advance agreements with PCGS they look at the coins and they get graded. Sometimes it just takes a bit longer to get posted.
Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
Are not all of these illustrious forum members those who say buy the coin, not the holder? If you own what is recognized to be the best almost universally, does it really matter what the plastic says?
I was a member of that "buy the coin-not the holder" group.....once. Now I will probably stay in the group of buy the coin, but make sure it's in the right holder to start with. I thought that an honest coin in an NGC holder if every bit as equal as a PCGS coin would get the same price (or at least within the 5-10% which held during the 2004-2008 run up). Well, I was dead wrong. And since about 75% of my personal coins have been NGC that's one that hit in me squarely in the wallet. When guys like Jim Swan told me that back around 2002 I sort of dismissed it. A good coin is a good coin...period, right? But when I auctioned off some nice 65-67 NGC CAC seated coins not too long ago what I found out was that "they weren't PCGS"....that's what the 20-30% lower prices said just for being in a different holder. It shouldn't be so, but it still is. Baby being tossed out with the bathwater syndrome. You can't usually cross them (I tried a number of times on some of them). And if you crack them out you are potentially risking no grades on toned coins, which nearly all of these were. This is definitely not your grandfather's coin market.
I think it's a beautiful piece of copper, and deserving of the 68* holder it was previously in. However, I agree with TDN (maybe even more strongly), I think any collector taking a 1 point downgrade just to get it in a different piece of plastic to play in a registry game is nuts.
If it's the finest known, and most everyone that has seen it believes it's a point higher than any of the other 67's, that must tell you something about grading standards and the crossover game.
<< <i>Are not all of these illustrious forum members those who say buy the coin, not the holder? If you own what is recognized to be the best almost universally, does it really matter what the plastic says?
I was a member of that "buy the coin-not the holder" group.....once. Now I will probably stay in the group of buy the coin, but make sure it's in the right holder to start with. I thought that an honest coin in an NGC holder if every bit as equal as a PCGS coin would get the same price (or at least within the 5-10% which held during the 2004-2008 run up). Well, I was dead wrong. And since about 75% of my personal coins have been NGC that's one that hit in me squarely in the wallet. When guys like Jim Swan told me that back around 2002 I sort of dismissed it. A good coin is a good coin...period, right? But when I auctioned off some nice 65-67 NGC CAC seated coins not too long ago what I found out was that "they weren't PCGS"....that's what the 20-30% lower prices said just for being in a different holder. It shouldn't be so, but it still is. Baby being tossed out with the bathwater syndrome. You can't usually cross them (I tried a number of times on some of them). And if you crack them out you are potentially risking no grades on toned coins, which nearly all of these were. This is definitely not your grandfather's coin market.
roadrunner >>
All you gotta do is look through Heritage archives and you will find that many, many NGC pop top classic coins sell for the same price as PCGS-graded coins a point lower. Yes I know there are exceptions. But it takes mad skills and experience to predict which of the few available high-end NGC coins could cross at the same grade to PCGS. Unfortunately it's been proven that I don't have them yet.....
Comments
K
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
<< <i>I've seen and love the coin. I'd rather have it in the oldest "8" holder I could.
K >>
I would have not been able to break that out of a 68* holder especially when I suspect that it's probably graded correctly and in the right holder already. With all do respect, DH is not The Highlander.............What a WONDER COIN...................MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Lots of discussion in this thread about crossover to PCGS; RD; RB; downgrade to PF67RB on crossover; the coin speaks for itself regardless of what plastic it is in and what grade is on the label inserted into the plastic.
Let me toss out other points to ponder and respond to.
The pictured coin is an MPL and NCG grades it PF68RB*. In other words two numerical grades less than a perfect PF70RD* [or just PF70RD at PCGS].
If the pictured coin was 100% blazing red [ok, orange] would it get a bump to PF70RD? Or would it, though 100% red, still not make the 70 grade?
If not; and if you took out one of the PF70RD proof Lincoln cents minted in the past 10 years [or for that matter the MS70RD 2003 Lincoln Cent] and compared these recent PF and/or MS 70 RD cents to the pictured coin [in 100% Red of course], would there be anything you could perceive and verbalize back to us that clearly establishes that 1909 MPL is so inferior in condition to the two recent PF and MS 70RD cents? that it warrants a 68 or 69 grade?
Or is there simply no difference in the quality of the three coins?
If there is no difference in quality, does that not leave one with the conclusion that the MPL [in 100% Red condition] will never get a 70 grade simply because the TPGs who are asked to grade the coin refuse [for their own reasons, regardless of the merit of the coin itself] to hand out a 70 grade on a 101 year old coin?
Thoughts and questions such as the above just reinforce the truth that grading is a matter of "opinion"; subjective; and not subject to objective, technical and precise quantification.
Notwithstanding the above, I love the look of that MPL
<< <i>
While I agree with what you say, there's no way I would pay an extra $100k for a single point [ie: going from a PQ66 to a PQ67]. >>
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
<< <i>
<< <i>
While I agree with what you say, there's no way I would pay an extra $100k for a single point [ie: going from a PQ66 to a PQ67]. >>
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences. >>
I am certain there are, too. And in the past I've paid huge sums to upgrade two points. But I started a thread a few years ago and discussed mostly with wondercoin what a comfort level for a single point was... it's still around in the archives.
Bottom line is it's the collector's money and collection and he can do what he wants. But I can and will disparage the Registry game that causes a correctly graded coin to be downgraded when it is 'clearly a point finer' than its new peers. Save the downgrades for when NGC [or PCGS] actually DOES overgrade a coin and it needs to be done.
A copper with no carbon spots, ticks, nicks, scratches, wear (no nothing-pardon my grammar), could and should arguably grade a 70- no matter what the year. (Stewart Blay's 1919 is a 69 - not sure what the problem with it is).
That NGC 68 IS a grade nicer than the pic of the PCGS 67. In my opinion, (well, with only that large pic to go by) not sure how it graded 67...
In full red condition the grading of MPL's no doubt closely mirrors the Indian cents and also the Barber/matte Buff coinage of that same era. They give out 68 and 69 grades to essentially hairline free specimens with the deepest mirrors and flashiest looks. With 3,000,000+ 1963 proof cents minted under modern conditions, it's no wonder that by attrition alone, no 09vdb PF is probably going to make the 69/70 grade. That's 420 vs. 3 MILL! It's comparing apples and oranges in both total numbers and in the quality of coinage of these 2 periods (1909 vs. 1963). The TPG's allow for some incidental contact on older proofs, not so for the moderns. It's like judging the 1804 PF68 bust dollar vs an 1870 PF68 dollar (2 diff. eras and totally different standards). I've yet to see a perfect PF70 anything in a TPG holdered classic coin. There are really no perfect coins, esp. 101 year old ones. It doesn't help that the deeper toning on a 101 yr old coin can very effectively hide tiny imperfections in the surfaces. The brilliant full red proofs give no such advantage with every minute defect in plain view.
There is precedence for this. In 2008, Heritage shows a PGCS MS66 and MS67 1909-D St. Gaudens being sold for $86k and $218k respectively. Population is similar to the VDB in respect to both 67's being at least 2/0. I'm certain there are more occurrences.
Comparing the big dollar Saint market which is roamed by some of the deepest pocket investors in the world vs. the MPL market is once again, apples vs. oranges. Right now there is but one big dollar MPL. Big dollars have been chasing Saints for many decades. The MPL craze really only got started after 1990 and for the most part after 2000. It was hard to give away MPL's, even full REDs, in the early 1990's. There is good reason to double up in price on a rare saint from 66 to 67 when only 2 coins might exist and there are half a dozen collectors vying for them. In the MPL sets those guys can look at 67 RD's and be just as happy vs. a 68RB. The RB's are in a different class. It's only in recent years that color aficionado's have been pushing "pretty" RB's to challenge the REDs. But whose to say if that a 5 year trend has staying power? Gem Saints have been a top series since gold was banned back in the 1930's. The Saints also don't have to worry about this B/RB/RD distinction. It makes all the difference and reduces the number of high end coins.
With NGC's proclivity to give out a grade bump on eye appeal, we can't consider an NGC68 vs a PCGS67 as a full 1 pt difference on most coins. In anything the green stickers have proven this with quite few NGC coins now being downgraded 1-2 pts to make them market saleable. That not occured with PCGS.
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
roadrunner
What do you think caused PCGS to drop it to 67? I'm struggling. Everyone knows PCGS is tougher with copper and we're rarely surprised to hear about downgrades. But just what problems did PCGS have with 68 here?
Lance.
<< <i>Stunning MPL. Breathtaking, really. And a great discussion/debate. The best of CU.
What do you think caused PCGS to drop it to 67? I'm struggling. Everyone knows PCGS is tougher with copper and we're rarely surprised to hear about downgrades. But just what problems did PCGS have with 68 here?
Lance. >>
Haven't seen the coin in person, but being ultra picky in looking at the images (as I would expect a grader deciding 67 vs. 68 to be on the coin itself) it looks like there is a tiny spot on the N of ONE on the reverse, very small, but maybe that, plus the lack of original red color is enough to keep it from 68?
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
I suspect that if given a choice between "subjective opinion" grading of coins and "objective, technical, precise, quantifiable" grading of coins, I would choose "subjective opinion" simply because it fits in with human nature.
"One plus One equals Two" may be mathematically correct, but it is boring.
PF68RB* v. PF67RB is not mathematically correct, but is way more fun. Everyone has a different opinion on whether it is one or the other. As is should be. Just like a painting, a song, a pretty woman, a handome man, or a movie. You may like a painting, a song, a woman, a man, or a movie alot. I may like it/her/him a little, or not at all.
"Viva le differance".
Roadrunner said this:
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW
Plastic
<< <i>I can sum it up in one word.....
Plastic >>
Makes me wanna go stand in the swimming pool!
Major rarities universally acclaimed as the best coin should be exempt from numerical pricing other than being more than those coins a layer below. I know this does not work for those chasing registry glory, but then should collecting be about the coin or the glory of owning it?
That leads me to my next thought that would be perhaps copper coins should have a grade based upon strike, luster and the color should not matter. They will all be brown someday, even if it is in 200 years from now.
<< <i>Roadrunner said this:
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW >>
Brian,
My understanding is that every Monday morning PCGS updates its population report data on its website. It is now Tuesday morning here on the east coast and the population report still shows no PR67RB Lincoln cents graded for the 1909VDB MPL. Is the coin CURRENTLY in a PR67RB holder or do you have an agreement from PCGS that it will be put into a PR67RB holder in the near future. "It ain't official until it IS official"
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
<< <i>That leads me to my next thought that would be perhaps copper coins should have a grade based upon strike, luster and the color should not matter. They will all be brown someday, even if it is in 200 years from now. >>
Thank you - I agree with you on that point. With one caveat.
Here's were we agree - IMHO; Color, just like eye appeal, is temporal. I see that you realize that -- you are illustrating by using an extreme time example (200 years), but the point is understood.
Having said that, I've often wondered why grading services do not offer mandatory "adjustment" or grade "check-up"services to willing participants to compensate for the time element. A coin gets a 'time label' to ensure that it is still accurately graded at any given time. A 'movable' CAC, if you will.
Coins do not only degrade, and get worse (some do), but some actually improve with time. The toning may mature and such. Perhaps the Watkins Legend coin is an example.
Here's were I do not understand your point. If we do grade copper coins on just "based upon strike, [and] luster", can that not change as well? Especially luster. Strike might be a more lasting feature, but I think that surface conditions really matter. In other words, you can have a coin with a great strike and lousy surfaces, and the other way around, as well.
Just some thoughts.
<< <i>
<< <i>Roadrunner said this:
Most here including myself have never seen this coin in person. To judge it's 68 status by a photo is clearly futile where one or two well-hidden hairlines can knock the technical grade back 1 pt. If the coin's technical surfaces clearly meet the requirements for a 68 grade, then PCGS will eventually grade it as such. In the meantime we will have to be content with a PCGS PF67+ coin with great eye appeal. But a gold sticker would be nice!
This was a statement that reflects true common "cents" concerning this coin, well said!
I also liked what Justacommeman said, Registry set collecting is an animal I do not know or pretend to understand. I guess at the end of the day it's the same coin regardless. The coin doesn't know what holder it's in so I doubt that it's feelings will be hurt...................MJ
BW >>
Brian,
My understanding is that every Monday morning PCGS updates its population report data on its website. It is now Tuesday morning here on the east coast and the population report still shows no PR67RB Lincoln cents graded for the 1909VDB MPL. Is the coin CURRENTLY in a PR67RB holder or do you have an agreement from PCGS that it will be put into a PR67RB holder in the near future. "It ain't official until it IS official"
Steve
imo, there are no advance agreements with PCGS they look at the coins and they get graded. Sometimes it just takes a bit longer to get posted.
I was a member of that "buy the coin-not the holder" group.....once. Now I will probably stay in the group of buy the coin, but make sure it's in the right holder to start with. I thought that an honest coin in an NGC holder if every bit as equal as a PCGS coin would get the same price (or at least within the 5-10% which held during the 2004-2008 run up). Well, I was dead wrong. And since about 75% of my personal coins have been NGC that's one that hit in me squarely in the wallet. When guys like Jim Swan told me that back around 2002 I sort of dismissed it. A good coin is a good coin...period, right? But when I auctioned off some nice 65-67 NGC CAC seated coins not too long ago what I found out was that "they weren't PCGS"....that's what the 20-30% lower prices said just for being in a different holder. It shouldn't be so, but it still is. Baby being tossed out with the bathwater syndrome. You can't usually cross them (I tried a number of times on some of them). And if you crack them out you are potentially risking no grades on toned coins, which nearly all of these were. This is definitely not your grandfather's coin market.
roadrunner
If it's the finest known, and most everyone that has seen it believes it's a point higher than any of the other 67's, that must tell you something about grading standards and the crossover game.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
<< <i>Are not all of these illustrious forum members those who say buy the coin, not the holder? If you own what is recognized to be the best almost universally, does it really matter what the plastic says?
I was a member of that "buy the coin-not the holder" group.....once. Now I will probably stay in the group of buy the coin, but make sure it's in the right holder to start with. I thought that an honest coin in an NGC holder if every bit as equal as a PCGS coin would get the same price (or at least within the 5-10% which held during the 2004-2008 run up). Well, I was dead wrong. And since about 75% of my personal coins have been NGC that's one that hit in me squarely in the wallet. When guys like Jim Swan told me that back around 2002 I sort of dismissed it. A good coin is a good coin...period, right? But when I auctioned off some nice 65-67 NGC CAC seated coins not too long ago what I found out was that "they weren't PCGS"....that's what the 20-30% lower prices said just for being in a different holder. It shouldn't be so, but it still is. Baby being tossed out with the bathwater syndrome. You can't usually cross them (I tried a number of times on some of them). And if you crack them out you are potentially risking no grades on toned coins, which nearly all of these were. This is definitely not your grandfather's coin market.
roadrunner >>
All you gotta do is look through Heritage archives and you will find that many, many NGC pop top classic coins sell for the same price as PCGS-graded coins a point lower. Yes I know there are exceptions. But it takes mad skills and experience to predict which of the few available high-end NGC coins could cross at the same grade to PCGS. Unfortunately it's been proven that I don't have them yet.....
Who is John Galt?