<< <i>I think every coin starts at 70 and loses points for flaws of any kind.
There are innumerable ways (combinations of non-perfection) for a coin to reach 58
a touch of wear, with associated contact marks and loss of luster, is the most common >>
I vote with Baley. There are many roads to AU58, and they don't all start with wonder coins or GEM mint state coins when the first person outside of the mint touches it.
Some of the other definitions flunk the reality test. For example, maybe 1 out of 5,000 Morgan dollars might grade out at MS68 by current standards, if the coin comes fresh from a mint sealed bag after normal travel to the bank. So using the definition of AU58 as a MS68 with light wear, it means that single wonder coin is the only one from the bag that can be graded AU58 after light wear, all the rest immediately would get lower than that after friction wears away the high points.
About 500 of the 5,000 Morgans will grade out at MS65 or higher. So again, those that say AU58 is a GEM (MS65 or better) coin with light wear are saying that only the top 10% of the coins in the fresh mint bag can grade out at AU58 after a few days or weeks of circulation.
Lakesammman, Are you gonna have your Beaver Sniffed
I don't know what to say......
I'm pretty sure it already past the test - that's a secure plus holder.
"My friends who see my collection sometimes ask what something costs. I tell them and they are in awe at my stupidity." (Baccaruda, 12/03).I find it hard to believe that he (Trump) rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world. (Putin 1/17) Gone but not forgotten. IGWT, Speedy, Bear, BigE, HokieFore, John Burns, Russ, TahoeDale, Dahlonega, Astrorat, Stewart Blay, Oldhoopster, Broadstruck, Ricko.
I would think it a coin just barely circulated, regardless of what it was coming out of the mint bag. Thus not all AU58s are created equal. Certainly, they are perhaps the best argument for not being too fixated on price guides and holders.
Improperly Cleaned, Our passion for numismatics is Genuine! Now featuring correct spelling.
AU-58 = slightest brush of wear, very good eye appeal, simlilar in appearance to an MS-63 or 64 coin except for the light bit of wear on high points.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I apologize in advance but my mind went into a crazy place...and my fingers followed in step with the desire to type this.
In a race, 2nd Place is also referred to as the 1st Loser. So, when seeking nice MS examples, I would say that AU58 would be the 1st Loser. This is not to say that many AU58 coins don't have high value and are not beautiful. The exact opposite is true in many cases. This is just another perspective...although a smart arse perspective.
"If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64 Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>Some have lofty expectations for their 58's. Nothing wrong with that but I think anything above AU63 is a PQ coin and should be priced accordingly. >>
I've always paid Mint State money for the AU-58s that find their way into my collection. I'd rather have a no problem AU-58 than a marked up, technical grade low in Mint State piece.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>To me, it means it could be anywhere between MS-68 with a hint of rub, or a beat to death MS-60 with a hint of rub. >>
I like how you think. That's certainly true.
<< <i>I've always thought an AU58 grade should be graded AU-58/65 (or such) reflecting the overall quality of the specific coin. >>
Again, very good. For the time being, I think a lot of us make that connection, already, whether consciously or unconsciously, when we go to bid on or sell the real good ones.
It means you have to look real close to see any trace of friction,if it's easily noticeable then it's a 55. A nice one leaves you wondering if it 's uncirculated or not. Here's such an example.
Here's one of the sellers pics from where I bought it.I admit that when I got it in hand I thought it would grade 65+.WRONG AU-58!!!!
<< <i>I admit that when I got it in hand I thought it would grade 65+.WRONG AU-58!!!! >>
There does appear to be some soft rub all over that coin, but principally showing up on the animal's head, horn and ear. That said, that hardly answers the question whether this is a circulated or uncirculated coin. I could easily see chalking that up to storage rub, and a mint state grade assigned, accordingly.
In any event, that color should knock it up in the market. A coin on the cusp like this one can upgrade into mint state money for its color. I know that sounds counter-intuitive, if not, just plum unintelligible, but that's what we're into with this market grading business. It's all about eye appeal, there. That's what does it.
To me it has to be close enough to a 63 so as to trigger a disputed amongst numismatists as to whether it is 58 or 63, and there has to be at least 35% vote each way.
They are out there, but a lot of the 58s are wannabes that are really 55s and 53s underneath.
This AU58 I purchased is much better than some MS64 I've seen; so I am quite happy. The price was almost up there with it's counterparts though....I picked it base on my eye appeal. it may be a wrong way to buy but I love this one.
To me the "perfect" AU-58 has a slight rub, no significant marks and great eye appeal. If I like it and it's a tough coin in general, I'll pay close to MS-63 money for it.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@tradedollarnut said:
<< <i>To me, it should be a coin that has VERY MINOR wear on the high points, has VERY MINIMAL contact marks, still retains a lot of luster and is essentially an MS68 that circulated for a very limited period of time... literally, maybe once or twice. >>
You forgot to add that you get to buy it for less than MS60 money just to complete the fantasy.
To me it's a coin with definite wear, not just on the highest points but also in the fields - which also show evidence of circulation marks. It has more luster than an AU55 and MAYBE a few less marks, but really it's about the extra luster. It's a coin that definitely circulated, not just from the bank around the block a few times.
IMO, the services would grade more consistently if they threw away the artificial MS60 ceiling/floor and just assigned an overall desirability number to a coin taking wear and/or friction into account in the net grade process. It does appear to me that's where they're headed.
This is going to be a fun thread to TRASH in my good time as I read through it as one thing I am is very opinionated . It will also serve to educate a bunch of us - including me - about what goes on in the "real world" of the commercial coin market where folks actually back up there opinions with cash!
Please forgive my abrasive defense of my opinions
@tradedollarnut, you get it first. I have learned to respect your opinion - backed up with your tremendous success, wait, wait, here it comes....BUT LOl. this:
"To me it's a coin with definite wear, not just on the highest points but also in the fields - which also show evidence of circulation marks. It has more luster than an AU55 and MAYBE a few less marks, but really it's about the extra luster. It's a coin that definitely circulated, not just from the bank around the block a few times."
Your description of an AU-58 coin may work for you. It may also have come to work for many coin dealers pushing grades but it bears no relationship to the actual definition of that grade. Sure, sure, grading has evolved and now AU-55's are bought and sold as MS but IMO, posts as off-the-wall as yours only screw up the simple task of grading a coin.
AU-58 coins should only have a very slight (barest trace) amount of "cabinet friction" (LOL, friction wear) on their highest relief.
AU-58 coins do not have noticeable wear in the fields.
Original AU-58 coins have virtually all of their mint luster.
Au-58 coins have very few noticeable marks.
So 1-4 is the way the AU-58 grade was intended to convey IMO, knowledgeable folks like us should pass along the true written standards to folks who do not know as much as we do. Then, as they become informed, they can dilute the actual standard as much as they like - just as you have done here. Without a standard (followed or not) all that is left is personal opinion and confusion.
As an "unrealistic idealist," I'll need to get back on this thread soon.
A minute trace of abrasion on the highest point and/or disturbance of field luster. The only current designation that comes close is "AU-58" and this is often questionable.
@kurtdog said: "Those "contact marks" you reference are called "PMD" on a circulated coin. They're no grading criteria. At least, not technically.
DELETE I think you may be misinformed. Contact marks are generally not considered "damage" by any knowledgeable numismatist/grading seminar instructor I know UNTIL they actually are severe enough to be called damage. There is a big difference between some deep reed marks and a gouge or large scrape! BTW, it appears you may be misinformed about both technical grading and commercial grading.
@kurtdog continued: "From a market grading standpoint, they're meaningful to the degree they negatively impact on "eye appeal."
Meaningful? You think? The marks on a coin are one of the most important factors when grading MS coins!
@crypto79 said:
<< <i>I agree with most, it's a gem coin with a slight rub. >>
That doesn't make any sense. A MS63 with light rub and high luster is still a AU58???. If you think that is what a 55 is then I would say a 55 is the level where wear starts not just friction rub. if you don't know the difference take 2 new quarters out of a roll, they can be baggy, rub one hard between 2 other clad quarters for 2mins and the between you fingers for 2 more mins. that is a 58.
You changed his comment to make your point. This: "A MS63 with light rub and high luster is still a AU58???."
The poster used the word GEM with slight rub. An MS-63 is not a "gem."
BTW, I like your experiment to make an AU-58. A suggestion to actually make a 58 is to only rub the high points of a "gem" coin like a fresh, original, red cent with virtually no marks. They are easier to find. in change.
@BuffaloIronTail said: "Cabinet rub...........plain and simple. Hence the word "slider"."
Usually a "slider" is closer to the type of coin TDN described with obvious wear and more scruffy fields than a true AU-58 with nice fields and some cabinet friction..
And in the days before certification people would call sellers a fraud and the bad ol' days when sliders and even true 58's were sold as mintstate. That's one of the reason's the grading services started they would say and still do so they would not get ripped.
My how things have changed and the au coins in mint state holders and the dealers lobby for this and now imo most have been a bit. Brainwashed as far as I am concerned. Au-58 grade was started for exactly why folks were calling all those new.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
@RedTiger said: "I vote with Baley. There are many roads to AU58, and they don't all start with wonder coins or GEM mint state coins when the first person outside of the mint touches it."
Agree
"Some of the other definitions flunk the reality test. For example, maybe 1 out of 5,000 Morgan dollars might grade out at MS68 by current standards, if the coin comes fresh from a mint sealed bag after normal travel to the bank. So using the definition of AU58 as a MS68 with light wear, it means that single wonder coin is the only one from the bag that can be graded AU58 after light wear, all the rest immediately would get lower than that after friction wears away the high points. "
IMO, this is a bit unrealistic. It is a miracle that any "true" 68 Morgan's exist (proofs excluded) as these large, heavy coins took a tumble off the press bed on the way to the bank. Better to pick a lighter coin like a Mercury dime where AU-58's are quite plentiful by the strictest definition of that grade.
I have a nice 58 Walker 1916 That that fits the 58 definition. If it was a bust half it would probably be called new. That I don't agree with. Even if there are hardly any real ms bust halves out there. So be it. Call it what it is. I don't have access to shrink the file or merge it ,together like I used to. So I don't post images anymore. Like y'all care."
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
@stman said: "I have a nice 58 Walker 1916 That that fits the 58 definition. If it was a bust half it would probably be called new. That I don't agree with. Even if there are hardly any real MS Bust halves out there. So be it. Call it what it is."
LOL, What are you trying to do, make grading easy? I've been in a grading seminar where the instructor spends an hour or so teaching the class about original surfaces, luster, the different types of wear, flat strike, etc. so they can distinguish when a technical MS coin becomes a technical AU coin. Then he spends the next hour or so telling them to learn to ignore what they see because they will need to decide how much loss of luster caused by actual friction wear they will personally tolerate on a coin before it drops to AU. Then they'll need to learn over time what the major TPGS's tolerate.
Amazingly, since MS no longer means "free from any trace of wear" is it any wonder that a majority of us have different standards for Uncirculated. Thankfully, the major TPGS make that decision for many of us.
You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates.
m
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......
An AU58 is NOT a gem coin with slight rub. It can be, but it may not be. AU58 designates wear, and is independent of its MS grades (if hypothetically it had no wear). The reason an AU58 can be so wonderful, is that sometimes you have a coin that would otherwise grade ms64 or 65, but for the slightest of wear, the price drops significantly.
Personally, i would rather find a really nice 63 or 64 in most cases. What is a really good is an AU55 that is as nice as an AU58 that is as nice as an MS65!
Tyler
You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates.
m
LOL! Thanks, I saw the red "banned" on one poster and thought, well he's still posting so I bet he had the great idea to use the red square for his icon. I was actually jealous that I had not thought of it!
Lucky I enjoy reading my own posts and arguing with myself. Now I see why no one was getting fired up.
@ARCO said: "An AU58 is NOT a gem coin with a slight rub. It can be, but it may not be. AU58 designates wear, and is independent of its MS grades (if hypothetically it had no wear)."
Due to your post, you probably know this already. It is a concept that is covered in a grading class. An AU-58 SHOULD indicate a coin with just a little friction on the high points. Problem is, we can have two AU-58's with the exact same "little amount of friction;" yet one of the coins is baggy and the other is "gem." In the real world, the baggy AU-58 is not considered an AU-58 while in a classroom its "technical grade" is.
Comments
See that little bit of luster break above the eye?
That is 58 wear
There are innumerable ways (combinations of non-perfection) for a coin to reach 58
a touch of wear, with associated contact marks and loss of luster, is the most common
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I think every coin starts at 70 and loses points for flaws of any kind.
There are innumerable ways (combinations of non-perfection) for a coin to reach 58
a touch of wear, with associated contact marks and loss of luster, is the most common >>
I vote with Baley. There are many roads to AU58, and they don't all start with wonder coins or GEM mint state coins when the first person outside of the mint touches it.
Some of the other definitions flunk the reality test. For example, maybe 1 out of 5,000 Morgan dollars might grade out at MS68 by current standards, if the coin comes fresh from a mint sealed bag after normal travel to the bank. So using the definition of AU58 as a MS68 with light wear, it means that single wonder coin is the only one from the bag that can be graded AU58 after light wear, all the rest immediately would get lower than that after friction wears away the high points.
About 500 of the 5,000 Morgans will grade out at MS65 or higher. So again, those that say AU58 is a GEM (MS65 or better) coin with light wear are saying that only the top 10% of the coins in the fresh mint bag can grade out at AU58 after a few days or weeks of circulation.
<< <i>
Lakesammman, Are you gonna have your Beaver Sniffed
I don't know what to say......
I'm pretty sure it already past the test - that's a secure plus holder.
<< <i>Lakesammman, Are you gonna have your Beaver Sniffed
I don't know what to say......
I'm pretty sure it already past the test - that's a secure plus holder. >>
No they are just now sniffing, so the previous whereabouts are unknown on if it has a clean bill of health!
In a race, 2nd Place is also referred to as the 1st Loser. So, when seeking nice MS examples, I would say that AU58 would be the 1st Loser. This is not to say that many AU58 coins don't have high value and are not beautiful. The exact opposite is true in many cases. This is just another perspective...although a smart arse perspective.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>Some have lofty expectations for their 58's. Nothing wrong with that but I think anything above AU63 is a PQ coin and should be priced accordingly. >>
I've always paid Mint State money for the AU-58s that find their way into my collection. I'd rather have a no problem AU-58 than a marked up, technical grade low in Mint State piece.
<< <i>To me, it means it could be anywhere between MS-68 with a hint of rub, or a beat to death MS-60 with a hint of rub. >>
I like how you think. That's certainly true.
<< <i>I've always thought an AU58 grade should be graded AU-58/65 (or such) reflecting the overall quality of the specific coin. >>
Again, very good. For the time being, I think a lot of us make that connection, already, whether consciously or unconsciously, when we go to bid on or sell the real good ones.
Here's one of the sellers pics from where I bought it.I admit that when I got it in hand I thought it would grade 65+.WRONG AU-58!!!!
<< <i>I admit that when I got it in hand I thought it would grade 65+.WRONG AU-58!!!! >>
There does appear to be some soft rub all over that coin, but principally showing up on the animal's head, horn and ear. That said, that hardly answers the question whether this is a circulated or uncirculated coin. I could easily see chalking that up to storage rub, and a mint state grade assigned, accordingly.
In any event, that color should knock it up in the market. A coin on the cusp like this one can upgrade into mint state money for its color. I know that sounds counter-intuitive, if not, just plum unintelligible, but that's what we're into with this market grading business. It's all about eye appeal, there. That's what does it.
<< <i>Often, I like an AU58 coin more than a beat up 62----------------------BigE >>
me too!
They are out there, but a lot of the 58s are wannabes that are really 55s and 53s underneath.
This AU58 I purchased is much better than some MS64 I've seen; so I am quite happy. The price was almost up there with it's counterparts though....I picked it base on my eye appeal. it may be a wrong way to buy but I love this one.
There is a HUGE difference between AU58's. Some are beautiful and some are dogs!
To me the "perfect" AU-58 has a slight rub, no significant marks and great eye appeal. If I like it and it's a tough coin in general, I'll pay close to MS-63 money for it.
My perfect AU58.
This is going to be a fun thread to TRASH in my good time as I read through it as one thing I am is very opinionated . It will also serve to educate a bunch of us - including me - about what goes on in the "real world" of the commercial coin market where folks actually back up there opinions with cash!
Please forgive my abrasive defense of my opinions
@tradedollarnut, you get it first. I have learned to respect your opinion - backed up with your tremendous success, wait, wait, here it comes....BUT LOl. this:
"To me it's a coin with definite wear, not just on the highest points but also in the fields - which also show evidence of circulation marks. It has more luster than an AU55 and MAYBE a few less marks, but really it's about the extra luster. It's a coin that definitely circulated, not just from the bank around the block a few times."
Your description of an AU-58 coin may work for you. It may also have come to work for many coin dealers pushing grades but it bears no relationship to the actual definition of that grade. Sure, sure, grading has evolved and now AU-55's are bought and sold as MS but IMO, posts as off-the-wall as yours only screw up the simple task of grading a coin.
So 1-4 is the way the AU-58 grade was intended to convey IMO, knowledgeable folks like us should pass along the true written standards to folks who do not know as much as we do. Then, as they become informed, they can dilute the actual standard as much as they like - just as you have done here. Without a standard (followed or not) all that is left is personal opinion and confusion.
As an "unrealistic idealist," I'll need to get back on this thread soon.
A true AU-58 may even reach MS-64 if the coin is not expensive.
A minute trace of abrasion on the highest point and/or disturbance of field luster. The only current designation that comes close is "AU-58" and this is often questionable.
Cabinet rub...........plain and simple. Hence the word "slider".
Pete
On the cusp of MS, but nicer than MS-60 , 61, and 62, in many cases.
@kurtdog said: "Those "contact marks" you reference are called "PMD" on a circulated coin. They're no grading criteria. At least, not technically.
DELETE I think you may be misinformed. Contact marks are generally not considered "damage" by any knowledgeable numismatist/grading seminar instructor I know UNTIL they actually are severe enough to be called damage. There is a big difference between some deep reed marks and a gouge or large scrape! BTW, it appears you may be misinformed about both technical grading and commercial grading.
@kurtdog continued: "From a market grading standpoint, they're meaningful to the degree they negatively impact on "eye appeal."
Meaningful? You think? The marks on a coin are one of the most important factors when grading MS coins!
PS That banned sticker is the best!!!!
@MikeInFL said: "A coin that costs less than an MS 60 and more than an AU 55."
Mike, you're kidding right?
You changed his comment to make your point. This: "A MS63 with light rub and high luster is still a AU58???."
The poster used the word GEM with slight rub. An MS-63 is not a "gem."
BTW, I like your experiment to make an AU-58. A suggestion to actually make a 58 is to only rub the high points of a "gem" coin like a fresh, original, red cent with virtually no marks. They are easier to find. in change.
@BuffaloIronTail said: "Cabinet rub...........plain and simple. Hence the word "slider"."
Usually a "slider" is closer to the type of coin TDN described with obvious wear and more scruffy fields than a true AU-58 with nice fields and some cabinet friction..
IMO, whomever sold that to us as a 58 left $$$ on the table, Beautiful coin!
And in the days before certification people would call sellers a fraud and the bad ol' days when sliders and even true 58's were sold as mintstate. That's one of the reason's the grading services started they would say and still do so they would not get ripped.
My how things have changed and the au coins in mint state holders and the dealers lobby for this and now imo most have been a bit. Brainwashed as far as I am concerned. Au-58 grade was started for exactly why folks were calling all those new.
@RedTiger said: "I vote with Baley. There are many roads to AU58, and they don't all start with wonder coins or GEM mint state coins when the first person outside of the mint touches it."
Agree
"Some of the other definitions flunk the reality test. For example, maybe 1 out of 5,000 Morgan dollars might grade out at MS68 by current standards, if the coin comes fresh from a mint sealed bag after normal travel to the bank. So using the definition of AU58 as a MS68 with light wear, it means that single wonder coin is the only one from the bag that can be graded AU58 after light wear, all the rest immediately would get lower than that after friction wears away the high points. "
IMO, this is a bit unrealistic. It is a miracle that any "true" 68 Morgan's exist (proofs excluded) as these large, heavy coins took a tumble off the press bed on the way to the bank. Better to pick a lighter coin like a Mercury dime where AU-58's are quite plentiful by the strictest definition of that grade.
image >>
This "Photo-Bucket non-image" is appearing in many posts. Someone not paying their bills? Forum incompatibility?
I have a nice 58 Walker 1916 That that fits the 58 definition. If it was a bust half it would probably be called new. That I don't agree with. Even if there are hardly any real ms bust halves out there. So be it. Call it what it is. I don't have access to shrink the file or merge it ,together like I used to. So I don't post images anymore. Like y'all care."
@stman said: "I have a nice 58 Walker 1916 That that fits the 58 definition. If it was a bust half it would probably be called new. That I don't agree with. Even if there are hardly any real MS Bust halves out there. So be it. Call it what it is."
LOL, What are you trying to do, make grading easy? I've been in a grading seminar where the instructor spends an hour or so teaching the class about original surfaces, luster, the different types of wear, flat strike, etc. so they can distinguish when a technical MS coin becomes a technical AU coin. Then he spends the next hour or so telling them to learn to ignore what they see because they will need to decide how much loss of luster caused by actual friction wear they will personally tolerate on a coin before it drops to AU. Then they'll need to learn over time what the major TPGS's tolerate.
Amazingly, since MS no longer means "free from any trace of wear" is it any wonder that a majority of us have different standards for Uncirculated. Thankfully, the major TPGS make that decision for many of us.
I recently speculated on this seated dollar. So this thread has been very helpful
PCGS very light wear with good surface preservation.
NGC a 60 or 61, same coin.
It means 4 of my 8 graded Morgans on the way back to me got graded AU58.
@Insider2
You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates.
m
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......
An AU58 is NOT a gem coin with slight rub. It can be, but it may not be. AU58 designates wear, and is independent of its MS grades (if hypothetically it had no wear). The reason an AU58 can be so wonderful, is that sometimes you have a coin that would otherwise grade ms64 or 65, but for the slightest of wear, the price drops significantly.
Personally, i would rather find a really nice 63 or 64 in most cases. What is a really good is an AU55 that is as nice as an AU58 that is as nice as an MS65!
Tyler
LOL! Thanks, I saw the red "banned" on one poster and thought, well he's still posting so I bet he had the great idea to use the red square for his icon. I was actually jealous that I had not thought of it!
Lucky I enjoy reading my own posts and arguing with myself. Now I see why no one was getting fired up.
@ARCO said: "An AU58 is NOT a gem coin with a slight rub. It can be, but it may not be. AU58 designates wear, and is independent of its MS grades (if hypothetically it had no wear)."
Due to your post, you probably know this already. It is a concept that is covered in a grading class. An AU-58 SHOULD indicate a coin with just a little friction on the high points. Problem is, we can have two AU-58's with the exact same "little amount of friction;" yet one of the coins is baggy and the other is "gem." In the real world, the baggy AU-58 is not considered an AU-58 while in a classroom its "technical grade" is.
I thought everyman knew what an AU 58 was.
To me AU58 often means an MS62 that I'm getting a deal on.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
AU58...the current rage and justification for a premium, second only to tarnish....Cheers, RickO