How does this grade MS67?

Bossman88 · April 15, 2013 10:48AM

With all the hits on the eyebrow, head, and neck. I just don't see it as a 67

[/URL]

ambro51 · April 15, 2013 10:54AM

I have been told a grader will pay more attention to the fields than the devices when evaluating contact marks....and despite marks on the bust the fields are unusually clean.

BryceM · April 15, 2013 11:02AM

I'd be pretty disapointed if I bought an MS67 Peace Dollar that looked like that.

wondercoin · April 15, 2013 11:05AM

I recently slabbed a 1969-D (not even in the pop report yet) and 1970-D Kennedy in PCGS-MS67 and based upon marks alone, both my coins are solid shot MS67+. I will certainly try them a few times for the + later this year. I know the chances are not exceptionally great on getting those pop top + grades, but, obviously "stranger things happen" as we have seen.

Wondercoin

Bossman88 · April 15, 2013 11:06AM

This appears to have been recently graded as it is in a three pronger and the new cert tag.
With a condition census of only 21 and none better i sure hope this isnt a new lower standard.

Regards, Larry

coinsarefun · April 15, 2013 11:14AM

Is this the one in coinfacts?

19Lyds · April 15, 2013 11:15AM

Please..........don't get me going or else I'll end up going..............

Bossman88 · April 15, 2013 11:21AM

I don't know if it is in Coinfacts.
I found it in an upcoming Heritage auction.
I would never buy it at 67 prices thats for sure

Regards, Larry

coinsarefun · April 15, 2013 11:24AM

<< I don't know if it is in Coinfacts.
I found it in an upcoming Heritage auction.
I would never buy it at 67 prices thats for sure

Regards, Larry

>>

My 2 cents......after looking through coinfacts you can get a feel for how scuffed up these come.
Some graded at that level have some face scrapes, this one does not appear to have many scrapes.
Maybe this year and mm comes scruffy?

Bossman88 · April 15, 2013 11:36AM

The 68D is tough to find without some minor marks.
But IMHO this coin does not even rate a 65+ based on the number
of hits to the eyebrow, top of head, smaller facial hits, and neck.

Regards, Larry

magikbilly · April 15, 2013 11:37AM

Well, it's not a 67. Yet. Is it?

Or, it's a 67 over time.

Or, one could ask why some truly old well circ coins with essentially minor "damage" won't get slabbed, but a coin with a single mark large enough to alter Kennedy's portrait expression can attain "67".

All I know is, without regard to the coin, date or MM, if I got this in the mail as a sight unseen 67 problem free coin, it would go back in the mail.

Sticker companies could offer copper color beans (C, like in the ABC song we all remember) for those coins which...

Eric

roadrunner · April 15, 2013 11:46AM

3 obvious grazes in the left obv field and a slice above the date are enough field marks for me to grade it no higher than 66. Then consider the facial hits.
I've owned Walkers cleaner than this that graded 64 or 65.

pcgs69 · April 15, 2013 12:34PM

if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63

sniocsu · April 15, 2013 12:39PM

No idea; it is not a 67 IMO

LindeDad · April 15, 2013 12:56PM

Some buyers need to buy the coin not the holder.

illini420 · April 15, 2013 1:00PM

<< This appears to have been recently graded as it is in a three pronger and the new cert tag.
With a condition census of only 21 and none better i sure hope this isnt a new lower standard.

Regards, Larry

>>

I can't see grading that 67, no matter how much better it might look in hand.

MacCrimmon · April 15, 2013 1:36PM

<< if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63 >>

Harry779 · April 15, 2013 1:52PM

"if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63"

I would have gotten an AU58+

MsMorrisine · April 15, 2013 1:53PM

< 67

Yukoncornelius1 · April 15, 2013 1:58PM

This coin should be in a 63 holder or maybe a 63+, how it got into a PCGS-67 is baffling to me.

Pokermandude · April 15, 2013 2:10PM

64+

leothelyon · April 15, 2013 3:06PM

There are two sides to the grade. First, how can 2 out of 3 graders and a finalizer give the nod for a 67 grade?
The flipside........it must be a highly lustrous example, perhaps prooflike.........what was the date again, a 1968-D.
This coin may have frosted devices as well. A coin with tremendous eye appeal will make those marks less relevant
and will always sell higher than most coins. This 67 grade is only an example of the PCGS graders wising up by
market grading the coin.
I have sold many coins like this for 5 -10x their value because once a collector sees such coins, they don't care
what it grades. They know that they have a very unique coin very few people have. And that others share their views
exactly and that means the coin will sell again. The odds that another coin with less marks but with the same level
of eye appeal is extremely thin. It's next to nonexistence!

Jobessi · April 15, 2013 8:46PM

<< "if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63"

I would have gotten an AU58+

>>

I'd be in the same boat, except mine would come back details, lol

DHeath · April 15, 2013 9:24PM

I agree with Leo that there's no substitute for seeing the coin in hand to learn why the graders saw 67. However, based on the pics, I find the coin uninteresting and common -- not a money coin.

DorkGirl · April 15, 2013 10:44PM

It's easy to micrograde when you have a pic that is the size of a dinner plate.

Prethen · April 15, 2013 11:26PM

I'd grade that a 65+. Way too marked up all over the head.

georgiacop50 · April 15, 2013 11:33PM

Does not look 67 in that pic.

However, the average Joe (which excludes all of us forumites, as we are all EXPERTS

), places too much emphasis on contact marks when grading.

Luster is the most important aspect of the grade and one can not judge luster from this pic.

tahoe98 · April 16, 2013 12:11AM

...i guess the fingerprint is on the slab.....

ricko · April 16, 2013 12:20AM

Grading from monster photographs is certainly much different than judging a coin in hand.... the photograph does not reflect a 67...however, I would not bet against the coin appearing much better 'in hand'.... Cheers, RickO

coinbuf · April 16, 2013 1:35AM

<< It's easy to micrograde when you have a pic that is the size of a dinner plate. >>

Agreed, almost any coin will not look very good with pics this size. I'm not saying it should have gotten this grade but one cannot grade a coin like this from these pics alone.

Kaline6 · April 16, 2013 2:08AM

<< if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63 >>

clevegreg · April 16, 2013 2:14AM

I could see it in a 66+ or a 67 holder....bet is is almost PL and frosty as all get out...take a look through the next 100 Mint Sets for this date and see what they usually look like.

Greg

jom · April 16, 2013 3:16AM

<< I could see it in a 66+ or a 67 holder....bet is is almost PL and frosty as all get out...take a look through the next 100 Mint Sets for this date and see what they usually look like. >>

That could very well be true about the date but that doesn't mean it should grade 67.

The problem grading this (or any coin) at those lofty MS levels is you can see the coin in hand. What if it has outrageous luster or it's PL or something the photo doesn't show?

The coin is probably at least a 65 given the limitations of the photo, IMO.

jom

keyman64 · April 16, 2013 3:32AM

It doesn't, for my collection at least.

Bossman88 · April 16, 2013 3:36AM

From PCGS PhotoGrade
MS/PR-67 Virtually as struck with minor imperfections, very well struck

This coin does appear to be very well struck. But it is no longer virtually as struck with all the contact marks that I see.
I honestly believe our hosts should buy it back and regrade it.

Regards, Larry

TwoSides2aCoin · April 16, 2013 4:45AM

Not sure about numerical grading, but if the graders had a coin that was the actual size of your photo in hand, they would likely need a hernia operation from picking it up.

veryfine · April 16, 2013 5:08AM

At that level of magnification, the marks appear to be very light.
The fields look extremely clean.

johnny9434 · April 16, 2013 5:16AM

that not a 67. not with them nicks. ill go 63/64.

roadrunner · April 16, 2013 7:50AM

<< I could see it in a 66+ or a 67 holder....bet is is almost PL and frosty as all get out...take a look through the next 100 Mint Sets for this date and see what they usually look like.

Greg >>

Shouldn't make any difference how tough the date is in high grade. It should be graded no different than a 1964 or 1970-D Kennedy. If it has amazing PL fields, then give a PL.
It it has an amazing strike then give it a "FS"or "SP" designation. But none of this stuff, including great luster neutralizes a pile of hits and grazes. As a MS67
it "should" compare very favorably to every other 67 of the same date previously graded. Maybe it was bulk submitted as part of 100 mint sets with a min grade of 66.

coinkat · April 16, 2013 8:06AM

This one needs to be seen in hand- once we are exploring GEM and higher- pictures are not enough

CaptHenway · April 16, 2013 8:09AM

<< if I had submitted that, it would have graded 63 >>

Had it come through ANACS while I was there, I would have called it an MS-63.

TD

coinkat · April 16, 2013 8:20AM

Okay there is a redeeming component to this- the size of the coin image is large enough to be viable for a serving of Spaghetti

Even by my standards-

Taylor101 · April 16, 2013 8:40AM

I sure don't think so...
Taylor

leothelyon · April 16, 2013 9:24AM

There are actually 3 1968-d Kennedy halves graded MS67 selling in Heritage. I wanted to see the slab pictures to see if they were proof-like. FWIW, the second coin is closer to MS67. But does anyone remember the cameo 1970-D haves that sold 3-4 years back, is my guess. I thought I had downloaded the pics but can't find them. Maybe it's a figment of my imagination but those coins had a bit of cameo frosted contrast.

roadrunner · April 16, 2013 9:34AM

A couple of MS66's from auction archives. In blown up mode the 1st one has a number of more severe marks than the MS67. The second coin is cleaner, but has
some less than exciting toning.

MS66 #1

MS66 #2

Heritage auction with 3 MS67's

Of the 3 MS67's the OP's coin looks to have the most hits. But not a huge difference. The 1966 NGC MS67 SMS right below them is essentially mark free.

DHeath · April 16, 2013 8:18PM

But does anyone remember the cameo 1970-D haves that sold 3-4 years back, is my guess.

They show up once in a blue moon. I own this one, and count it 64 PL with light cameo.

keets · April 16, 2013 8:42PM

-----a coin that's 1-1/2" in diameter shown the size of a dinner plate.
-----unstruck planchet flaws seen as "contact" marks.
-----opinions of members who don't collect the series or particularly care for Modern issues.

Priceless!!!

I suggest some searching of Mint Sets, rolls or even bags of this date/mm or even 40% Kennedy Half-Dollars to get a better perspective. oh, wait, those PCGS graders have probably done that.

Shouldn't make any difference how tough the date is in high grade. It should be graded no different than a 1964 or 1970-D Kennedy
and all Buffalo Nickels, regardless of date, should be graded the same. RR, I'm actually surprised to see you post such a thing........................

clevegreg · April 16, 2013 11:14PM

Good post Al...I couldn't agree more. Moderns aren't given their "due" by many, but that is fine. Those of us who HAVE searched out Gems over the years know the difficulty of
finding them, especially in certain years.

"Market Grading" takes place in many series. Compare a 81S in 63 to a 83CC in 63.

Greg

yellowkid · April 16, 2013 11:39PM

I don't think that what the rest of the population looks like should have any bearing in determining a grade. Not a 67 in my eye.

raycyca · April 17, 2013 1:24AM

NO WAY should that POS ever make a 67 holder. I agree a 66, no higher. There are 3 68 D's on E-bay alone, by OE person. I wonder how many he made in this single shot? How high have the Pop's gone in the last 3 months? I have several 65's that are better, my 66+ looks like a 68 next to that one.

mrpotatoheadd · April 17, 2013 1:36AM

<< NO WAY should that POS ever make a 67 holder. I agree a 66, no higher. >>

A 66 is a POS? What do you call 63's, then? Can you even post it here?

Just wondering...

How does this grade MS67?

Comments

The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!

My Jefferson Nickel Collection

The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!

My Jefferson Nickel Collection

Leave a Comment