@Insider2 said:
From what I see, Eye appeal is more than 10% of a grade. I believe it often kicks the grade up by at least a point for many coins. I'll not mention a major coin to proof my observation.
Yes, exactly my point about how a star like designation might combat that happening.
I agree, in theory. However, I have seen many star coins which appear to have already received a grade bump for eye appeal, in addition to the star.
Yes, but PCGS could start fresh with a stricter standard.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Insider2 said:
From what I see, Eye appeal is more than 10% of a grade. I believe it often kicks the grade up by at least a point for many coins. I'll not mention a major coin to proof my observation.
Yes, exactly my point about how a star like designation might combat that happening.
I agree, in theory. However, I have seen many star coins which appear to have already received a grade bump for eye appeal, in addition to the star.
Yes, but PCGS could start fresh with a stricter standard.
They could, but I don't see that happening.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
looking at the "big picture" I see that everything absent a plain numeric grade is foisted upon us as describing a coin better, but what it really does is:
pigeon-hole coins.
decrease/remove the ability and need to know how to grade.
increase the price of coins across the board.
harm coin values going forward as new designations are added.
here's how I already view TPGS and the coin market. a dealer submits a coin which is technically an MS64 with pleasant tone and nice, clean surfaces. the TPG encapsulates the coin as an MS65 because it has nicer than average color, a one point "eye-appeal" bump. when the dealer gets the coin back he "markets" it at a price equivalent with an MS66. the coin gets bought because it really is pretty and some collector ponies up for it.
time passes and the coin is offered for sale again and bemoaned as an example of grade-flation as it gets resubmitted a few times and ends up as an MS66.
it has been my stance for quite a long time that TPG's should be in the business of grading coin, not ranking them in the market to be priced off of a sheet at least partially sponsored by that TPG. grade a technical MS64 as an MS64 and allow the market, which is us, function as it should.
@rainbowroosie said:
If you need a holder to tell you the coin has eye appeal, you need a new hobby.
That's too simplistic. Look at the big picture. What you think has eye appeal another collector will not. One member here seems to disprove of toning no matter what it looks like. The Super Nova $20 is a perfect example. Ideally, we need to learn what the largest number of professionals and big spending collectors think is attractive.
Absolute BS I do not and will not ever need to follow what someone else thinks is pretty, possibly the most idiotic statement I've ever seen posted. Your idea of what a collector is seems to be the definition of a lemming.
Lemming: "a person who unthinkingly joins a mass movement, especially a headlong rush to destruction"
No one gives a RA about your perception of beauty or what you choose to believe. For now, I suggest you read my post again as it is written in simple English.
Try this: If you choose to eat dog poop because it appeals to your taste, that's fine. It's your taste. The majority of folks don't eat dog poop. The point I'm making is there are some things that a majority of collectors prefer. The people WHO CHOOSE to learn (no one is forcing them and they are not lemmings either) what those things are will usually do better that the poop eaters!
Hopefully my attempt to educate you ABOUT THE WAY THINGS ARE is no longer idiotic and I accept your apology.
Your opinion seems to be what's appealing is only what the majority accepts. That's not eye appeal, that's marketing appeal. Two totally different things.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
@rainbowroosie said:
If you need a holder to tell you the coin has eye appeal, you need a new hobby.
That's too simplistic. Look at the big picture. What you think has eye appeal another collector will not. One member here seems to disprove of toning no matter what it looks like. The Super Nova $20 is a perfect example. Ideally, we need to learn what the largest number of professionals and big spending collectors think is attractive.
Absolute BS I do not and will not ever need to follow what someone else thinks is pretty, possibly the most idiotic statement I've ever seen posted. Your idea of what a collector is seems to be the definition of a lemming.
Lemming: "a person who unthinkingly joins a mass movement, especially a headlong rush to destruction"
No one gives a RA about your perception of beauty or what you choose to believe. For now, I suggest you read my post again as it is written in simple English.
Try this: If you choose to eat dog poop because it appeals to your taste, that's fine. It's your taste. The majority of folks don't eat dog poop. The point I'm making is there are some things that a majority of collectors prefer. The people WHO CHOOSE to learn (no one is forcing them and they are not lemmings either) what those things are will usually do better that the poop eaters!
Hopefully my attempt to educate you ABOUT THE WAY THINGS ARE is no longer idiotic and I accept your apology.
I will never be able to learn anything of value from someone like yourself who advocates for group think brainwashing, I have never and will never extend an apology to you.
LOL, one is not called for. Suggesting an apology was a humorous post in line with the nonsense you posted accusing knowledgeable numismatists of acting as lemmings. You were given a gift. Unfortunately, it may as well have been written in Greek. Happy collecting!
I think from a business perspective, it would drive submissions.
The market would then decide the importance on a coin-by-coin basis.
My experience with NGC star coins is that they don't stay in stock very long at all.
Hobbyists certainly aren’t always going to agree on what constitutes exceptional eye-appeal. And on a personal basis, I’m fine with or without such designations. That said, far more times than not, I believe that NGC star coins are uncommonly attractive or appealing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Bring on the PCGS STAR! It may be impossible because they have linked the + with grade and eye appeal.
If they can "correct" that and change the meaning of the + on the web site, a star can be introduced. They may take some jokes about following NGC's lead but it will be well worth it. Again it will put the two top TPGS more in sync.
Something to think about...When designing a perfect grading system, the more characteristics (strike, marks, etc) that can be evaluated separately from each other the more precise the system will be.
Need proof: The ANA screwed things up by combining marks and amount of wear in the circulated ranges. If I tell you I have an AU-50 coin, you don't know what it looks like.
Now, If I tell you I have a "star" coin, you still don't know what it looks like but you do know that it was impressive enough to get a "WOW" from some really jaded graders!
@TwoKopeiki said:
We can then talk to John about adding a star validation sticker to CAC
Nah, but he could tighten up just a little. The "bean" has proved to be another of his very successful ideas.
If he did a Gold, A, B (green) and C (brown) bean, he could keep the money for every coin sent in. Another TPGS, ready to go with very little cost! LOL
@MFeld said:
Hobbyists certainly aren’t always going to agree on what constitutes exceptional eye-appeal. And on a personal basis, I’m fine with or without such designations. That said, far more times than not, I believe that NGC star coins are uncommonly attractive or appealing.
When applied for toning, I largely agree; however, there is also the issue of the degree of toning. It seems that there are a plethora of Morgan Dollars with a tiny sliver of peripheral toning that get stars when many deserving coins do not for other series. That cheapens the designation. It takes more than a little sliver of toning to make me happy. I also think the designation is cheapened when there are tons of common coins with one side semi-PL surfaces and 1950-1973 coins that receive stars for incomplete cameo contrasts.
@TwoKopeiki said:
We can then talk to John about adding a star validation sticker to CAC
Nah, but he could tighten up just a little. The "bean" has proved to be another of his very successful ideas.
If he did a Gold, A, B (green) and C (brown) bean, he could keep the money for every coin sent in. Another TPGS, ready to go with very little cost! LOL
@rainbowroosie said:
If you need a holder to tell you the coin has eye appeal, you need a new hobby.
That's too simplistic. Look at the big picture. What you think has eye appeal another collector will not. One member here seems to disprove of toning no matter what it looks like. The Super Nova $20 is a perfect example. Ideally, we need to learn what the largest number of professionals and big spending collectors think is attractive.
Absolute BS I do not and will not ever need to follow what someone else thinks is pretty, possibly the most idiotic statement I've ever seen posted. Your idea of what a collector is seems to be the definition of a lemming.
Lemming: "a person who unthinkingly joins a mass movement, especially a headlong rush to destruction"
No one gives a RA about your perception of beauty or what you choose to believe. For now, I suggest you read my post again as it is written in simple English.
Try this: If you choose to eat dog poop because it appeals to your taste, that's fine. It's your taste. The majority of folks don't eat dog poop. The point I'm making is there are some things that a majority of collectors prefer. The people WHO CHOOSE to learn (no one is forcing them and they are not lemmings either) what those things are will usually do better that the poop eaters!
Hopefully my attempt to educate you ABOUT THE WAY THINGS ARE is no longer idiotic and I accept your apology.
I will never be able to learn anything of value from someone like yourself who advocates for group think brainwashing, I have never and will never extend an apology to you.
LOL, one is not called for. Suggesting an apology was a humorous post in line with the nonsense you posted accusing knowledgeable numismatists of acting as lemmings. You were given a gift. Unfortunately, it may as well have been written in Greek. Happy collecting!
Wow a gift from the all knowing skippy ohhh ahhh Strangely I feel more like I just dealt with a used car salesman than I got a gift.
@TwoKopeiki said:
We can then talk to John about adding a star validation sticker to CAC
Nah, but he could tighten up just a little. The "bean" has proved to be another of his very successful ideas.
If he did a Gold, A, B (green) and C (brown) bean, he could keep the money for every coin sent in. Another TPGS, ready to go with very little cost! LOL
JA could charge for every coin assessed if he wanted to. The TPG's do it.
Designating the "lower third" with a brown bean would hurt his business. No one wants his coin tagged low grade/quality. (Removing the sticker-of-shame wouldn't remove the assessment from CAC's public database either. So that's no workaround.)
If CAC stigmatized poorer coins by documenting their failings submissions would drop considerably. Might even kill the business.
Lance.
@lkeigwin said:
If CAC stigmatized poorer coins by documenting their failings...
But they're not failings. If you were to somehow remove the bottom third of coins, there would be a new bottom third. However you do it, there will always be a bottom third.
Unless someone can figure out a grading system where all coins are above average. Ask Garrison Keillor, maybe?
@PerryHall said:
No. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ……… not's what on the holder. Thought I would add to your statement.
Agree. And it all boils down to this...Informed, and knowledgeable collectors KNOW what is considered "beautiful" by the majority (95%) of collectors, dealers, and TPGS's at a given time. For example, rainbow Morgan's have been sought after for some time. You don't need to like them.
BTW @coinbuf that opinion is not "Greek" to the vast majority of us lemmings who seek the best examples.
@TwoKopeiki said:
We can then talk to John about adding a star validation sticker to CAC
Nah, but he could tighten up just a little. The "bean" has proved to be another of his very successful ideas.
If he did a Gold, A, B (green) and C (brown) bean, he could keep the money for every coin sent in. Another TPGS, ready to go with very little cost! LOL
JA could charge for every coin assessed if he wanted to. The TPG's do it.
Designating the "lower third" with a brown bean would hurt his business. No one wants his coin tagged low grade/quality. (Removing the sticker-of-shame wouldn't remove the assessment from CAC's public database either. So that's no workaround.)
If CAC stigmatized poorer coins by documenting their failings submissions would drop considerably. Might even kill the business.
Lance.
Disagree. The beans come off very easily AND just as now, no one knows for sure if a coin without a bean (that is not a dog) has ever been submitted.
@lkeigwin said:
You suggested a brown bean. Bad idea. It would go into the database regardless.
Or maybe you were joking.
Lance.
While the "brown bean" was sort of a joke; you need to give folks with "C" coins something for their money. What data base are you writing about? I was under the impression that no CAC records were public.
@PerryHall said:
No. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Or with a star designation beauty is in the eye of the holder 🤷🏻♂️
But really, from a business perspective I think it’s a good idea for PCGS to do it. Will increase revenues and it’s competitor has already demonstrated that it’s a service that many appreciate. I also think it would be helpful when buying based on photos. Gives you confidence that it will also be attractive in hand.
To answer the question.. While I can see some benefits from PCGS doing this, my answer would be no. First and foremost, a coin's beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If I find a coin beautiful and eye-appealing, I wouldn't want a grader telling me it's not! Put yourself in that position..
Secondly, the star designation ATS was just a ploy to bring in more capital.. and it worked! I've seen many eye appealing coins in star designated NGC holders. I've also seen many unappealing coins in star designated NGC holders.
@ilikemonsters said:
To answer the question.. While I can see some benefits from PCGS doing this, my answer would be no. First and foremost, a coin's beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If I find a coin beautiful and eye-appealing, I wouldn't want a grader telling me it's not! Put yourself in that position..
Secondly, the star designation ATS was just a ploy to bring in more capital.. and it worked! I've seen many eye appealing coins in star designated NGC holders. I've also seen many unappealing coins in star designated NGC holders.
I agree that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Now everyone take a deep breath and ...never mind - great poll question. For now, have you ever seen an ugly coin that a fellow collector thought was beautiful?
This should not be a difficult concept to UNDERSTAND. Everyone has developed a "taste" for what they like - in ALL THINGS. Even so, some have better "taste" than others. The closer your opinion merges with what is considered to be the prevailing idea of "good taste" the better it is. That does not mean you are wrong (it's YOUR taste - what YOU like). You will just be considered to have POOR TASTE taste by the Lemmings. There are subtle and not so subtle consequences for being out of step with the folks who have the power (TPGS and CAC with coins) to dictate what is and what is not considered to be "tasteful" at a point in time all through history. Tastes CHANGE too! Simple as that.
My dear departed grandmother mixed purple, pink, black and chartreuse colors in her living room. Until I developed a "taste" of my own, I saw nothing "wrong" with it!
Instead of a star like ngc, pcgs should use a little yellow banana since most people like bananas
and it is a known fact that bananas are the most popular fruit in the world.
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
I understand that TPG's really appraise coins rather than technically grade them. Of course PCGS needs a Star like descriptive for premium quality coins. As an example look at how many proof Ikes are graded 70 DCam now. Those 3 or 4 thousand dollar coins a few years ago are now about 1/5 the price. However there are a few 69 DCams that have that caked frost first strike look that are cheap if you can pry them from smart collector hands. Across the street those coins are in 69 Star Ultra Cameo holders as NGC rightly won't put that 70 grade on them.
How so? I have found the appearance of a coin's LUSTER to be extremely important for both authentication and grading. Therefore, not over-rated at all.
@Insider2 said:
How so? I have found the appearance of a coin's LUSTER to be extremely important for both authentication and grading. Therefore, not over-rated at all.
Sure...If you wanted to go Yep, Nope, Nope, Nope, Yep, Nope....All day without using magnification and be able to score high statistically on original surfaces.
Look at his % of beans on mega-toner MS67 saints as opposed to MS66 & MS65.
I think he can't be bothered by coins he thinks are not worth his time.
Toning can hide a lot of bad stuff.
JA just plays the percentages.
Also...If JA didn't bean some of those top-pop saints he would loose credibility.
Here is a coin I just bought...(CAC reject)
I can see old damage under the toning but it's still an 65A coin to me.
(BTW...many C 1907 coins out there for sale...The most of any saint year I think...Do be careful of this year)
Pcsg says
60% preservation
15 % strike
15% luster
10% Eye Appeal
I agree but you must know Luster & Eye appeal get combined to 25% for those who like blast white coins.
I DO NOT!
BTW...The above coin was $3000
Show me a CAC/07-saint that can beat it for that price
Also...I take requests...
PM me if you want a saint recommendadion & you are NOT a dealer.
I search every day.
Next year marks the 10 year anniversary of plus grading. Like it or not, it was a game changer. The top two TPG's implemented it simultaneously. The collector community embraced it. Price guides and auction sales reflected it.
Shortly before plus grading came JA and CAC. Another big move. Another boost for the industry. Another whopping ovation.
It wouldn't surprise me if we see a market changer next year. It's time. PCGS star-grading isn't it. PCGS likes to lead, not follow. A strict PQ designation might do it. Make it rare. Make it special. Call it what you want.
I like the notion that collectors should decide what's great and worth a premium. The practical matter is that most collectors need to be told.
Lance.
@lkeigwin said:
Next year marks the 10 year anniversary of plus grading. Like it or not, it was a game changer. The top two TPG's implemented it simultaneously. The collector community embraced it. Price guides and auction sales reflected it.
Wow. It is hard to believe it has been that long. I remember the initial announcement like it was yesterday.
Comments
Yes, but PCGS could start fresh with a stricter standard.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
They could, but I don't see that happening.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That's too simplistic. Look at the big picture.
looking at the "big picture" I see that everything absent a plain numeric grade is foisted upon us as describing a coin better, but what it really does is:
pigeon-hole coins.
decrease/remove the ability and need to know how to grade.
increase the price of coins across the board.
harm coin values going forward as new designations are added.
here's how I already view TPGS and the coin market. a dealer submits a coin which is technically an MS64 with pleasant tone and nice, clean surfaces. the TPG encapsulates the coin as an MS65 because it has nicer than average color, a one point "eye-appeal" bump. when the dealer gets the coin back he "markets" it at a price equivalent with an MS66. the coin gets bought because it really is pretty and some collector ponies up for it.
time passes and the coin is offered for sale again and bemoaned as an example of grade-flation as it gets resubmitted a few times and ends up as an MS66.
it has been my stance for quite a long time that TPG's should be in the business of grading coin, not ranking them in the market to be priced off of a sheet at least partially sponsored by that TPG. grade a technical MS64 as an MS64 and allow the market, which is us, function as it should.
Welcome to the Brony club?
Your opinion seems to be what's appealing is only what the majority accepts. That's not eye appeal, that's marketing appeal. Two totally different things.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
LOL, one is not called for. Suggesting an apology was a humorous post in line with the nonsense you posted accusing knowledgeable numismatists of acting as lemmings. You
were given a gift. Unfortunately, it may as well have been written in Greek. Happy collecting! 
I think from a business perspective, it would drive submissions.
The market would then decide the importance on a coin-by-coin basis.
My experience with NGC star coins is that they don't stay in stock very long at all.
No leave it alone. The 🌟 is overrated on most of the ngc coins i see.
Hobbyists certainly aren’t always going to agree on what constitutes exceptional eye-appeal. And on a personal basis, I’m fine with or without such designations. That said, far more times than not, I believe that NGC star coins are uncommonly attractive or appealing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Bring on the PCGS STAR! It may be impossible because they have linked the + with grade and eye appeal.
If they can "correct" that and change the meaning of the + on the web site, a star can be introduced. They may take some jokes about following NGC's lead but it will be well worth it. Again it will put the two top TPGS more in sync.
We can then talk to John about adding a star validation sticker to CAC
8 Reales Madness Collection
Instagram: 8 Reales Numis
Something to think about...When designing a perfect grading system, the more characteristics (strike, marks, etc) that can be evaluated separately from each other the more precise the system will be.
Need proof: The ANA screwed things up by combining marks and amount of wear in the circulated ranges. If I tell you I have an AU-50 coin, you don't know what it looks like.
Now, If I tell you I have a "star" coin, you still don't know what it looks like but you do know that it was impressive enough to get a "WOW" from some really jaded graders!
Nah, but he could tighten up just a little. The "bean" has proved to be another of his very successful ideas.
If he did a Gold, A, B (green) and C (brown) bean, he could keep the money for every coin sent in. Another TPGS, ready to go with very little cost! LOL
We need less designations and grades rather than more.
When applied for toning, I largely agree; however, there is also the issue of the degree of toning. It seems that there are a plethora of Morgan Dollars with a tiny sliver of peripheral toning that get stars when many deserving coins do not for other series. That cheapens the designation. It takes more than a little sliver of toning to make me happy. I also think the designation is cheapened when there are tons of common coins with one side semi-PL surfaces and 1950-1973 coins that receive stars for incomplete cameo contrasts.
AVOID BROWN BEANS !!
Brown sticker-only registry sets.
8 Reales Madness Collection
Instagram: 8 Reales Numis
Wow a gift from the all knowing skippy ohhh ahhh Strangely I feel more like I just dealt with a used car salesman than I got a gift.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ……… not's what on the holder.
Thought I would add to your statement. 
JA could charge for every coin assessed if he wanted to. The TPG's do it.
Designating the "lower third" with a brown bean would hurt his business. No one wants his coin tagged low grade/quality. (Removing the sticker-of-shame wouldn't remove the assessment from CAC's public database either. So that's no workaround.)
If CAC stigmatized poorer coins by documenting their failings submissions would drop considerably. Might even kill the business.
Lance.
But they're not failings. If you were to somehow remove the bottom third of coins, there would be a new bottom third. However you do it, there will always be a bottom third.
Unless someone can figure out a grading system where all coins are above average. Ask Garrison Keillor, maybe?
Agree. And it all boils down to this...Informed, and knowledgeable collectors KNOW what is considered "beautiful" by the majority (95%) of collectors, dealers, and TPGS's at a given time. For example, rainbow Morgan's have been sought after for some time. You don't need to like them.
BTW @coinbuf
that opinion is not "Greek" to the vast majority of us lemmings who seek the best examples.
Disagree. The beans come off very easily AND just as now, no one knows for sure if a coin without a bean (that is not a dog) has ever been submitted.
You suggested a brown bean. Bad idea. It would go into the database regardless.
Or maybe you were joking.
Lance.
While the "brown bean" was sort of a joke; you need to give folks with "C" coins something for their money. What data base are you writing about? I was under the impression that no CAC records were public.
Those that pass are able to be verified on their website.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I’ve noticed that most threads with any longevity devolve into CAC discussion.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Then no brown bean. Of course JA had it all figured out from the beginning.
NO. And that's why NGC gets my exceptional toners.
Or with a star designation beauty is in the eye of the holder 🤷🏻♂️
But really, from a business perspective I think it’s a good idea for PCGS to do it. Will increase revenues and it’s competitor has already demonstrated that it’s a service that many appreciate. I also think it would be helpful when buying based on photos. Gives you confidence that it will also be attractive in hand.
To answer the question.. While I can see some benefits from PCGS doing this, my answer would be no. First and foremost, a coin's beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If I find a coin beautiful and eye-appealing, I wouldn't want a grader telling me it's not! Put yourself in that position..
Secondly, the star designation ATS was just a ploy to bring in more capital.. and it worked! I've seen many eye appealing coins in star designated NGC holders. I've also seen many unappealing coins in star designated NGC holders.
That is fabulous.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I agree that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Now everyone take a deep breath and ...never mind - great poll question. For now, have you ever seen an ugly coin that a fellow collector thought was beautiful?
This should not be a difficult concept to UNDERSTAND. Everyone has developed a "taste" for what they like - in ALL THINGS. Even so, some have better "taste" than others. The closer your opinion merges with what is considered to be the prevailing idea of "good taste" the better it is. That does not mean you are wrong (it's YOUR taste - what YOU like). You will just be considered to have POOR TASTE taste by the Lemmings. There are subtle and not so subtle consequences for being out of step with the folks who have the power (TPGS and CAC with coins) to dictate what is and what is not considered to be "tasteful" at a point in time all through history. Tastes CHANGE too! Simple as that.
My dear departed grandmother mixed purple, pink, black and chartreuse colors in her living room. Until I developed a "taste" of my own, I saw nothing "wrong" with it!
Instead of a star like ngc, pcgs should use a little yellow banana since most people like bananas
and it is a known fact that bananas are the most popular fruit in the world.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Why not. Not a bad idea.
It would give owner a way to assert this is an A or B coin (but perhaps plus already does this).
However I am not sure how one would reconcile this with the plus designation —star would be redundant?
No, just a factor in grading.
With all the labels out there, and the race to a 100 point grading system, how many possible labels for a single series?
Over 200.000 possible labels? And I know I have left some out. Every possible option at least doubles the number of labels.
Soon the slab will be 12" long just to list all the items on the label.
100 point System
+
- (If you have a +, then there needs to be a -)
First Strike
Eye Appeal
Hoard
PL
DPML
Special
Gold Shield
Autographed
Today we are selling stars , plus signs and stickers.
So much for the coin. .
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I understand that TPG's really appraise coins rather than technically grade them. Of course PCGS needs a Star like descriptive for premium quality coins. As an example look at how many proof Ikes are graded 70 DCam now. Those 3 or 4 thousand dollar coins a few years ago are now about 1/5 the price. However there are a few 69 DCams that have that caked frost first strike look that are cheap if you can pry them from smart collector hands. Across the street those coins are in 69 Star Ultra Cameo holders as NGC rightly won't put that 70 grade on them.
I would prefer a PQ grade per below
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1028183/should-pcgs-have-a-pq-grade#latest
Good Grief No !!!
Luster is over rated.
If I wanted something that looked like a AGE I wouldn't be buying 100 year old saints.
(looking at you JA)
You can keep your bean
I'd rather have a + anyway
My Saint Set
@ReadyFireAim said: "Luster is over rated."
How so? I have found the appearance of a coin's LUSTER to be extremely important for both authentication and grading. Therefore, not over-rated at all.
Sure...If you wanted to go Yep, Nope, Nope, Nope, Yep, Nope....All day without using magnification and be able to score high statistically on original surfaces.
Look at his % of beans on mega-toner MS67 saints as opposed to MS66 & MS65.
I think he can't be bothered by coins he thinks are not worth his time.
Toning can hide a lot of bad stuff.
JA just plays the percentages.
Also...If JA didn't bean some of those top-pop saints he would loose credibility.
Here is a coin I just bought...(CAC reject)
I can see old damage under the toning but it's still an 65A coin to me.
(BTW...many C 1907 coins out there for sale...The most of any saint year I think...Do be careful of this year)
My Saint Set
Late to the thread. One word. No.
Best, SH
Nope. Don 't want any TPG (or anyone else) telling me what does (or doesn't) appeal to my eye.
Pcsg says
60% preservation
15 % strike
15% luster
10% Eye Appeal
I agree but you must know Luster & Eye appeal get combined to 25% for those who like blast white coins.
I DO NOT!
BTW...The above coin was $3000
Show me a CAC/07-saint that can beat it for that price
Also...I take requests...
PM me if you want a saint recommendadion & you are NOT a dealer.
I search every day.
My Saint Set
Next year marks the 10 year anniversary of plus grading. Like it or not, it was a game changer. The top two TPG's implemented it simultaneously. The collector community embraced it. Price guides and auction sales reflected it.
Shortly before plus grading came JA and CAC. Another big move. Another boost for the industry. Another whopping ovation.
It wouldn't surprise me if we see a market changer next year. It's time. PCGS star-grading isn't it. PCGS likes to lead, not follow. A strict PQ designation might do it. Make it rare. Make it special. Call it what you want.
I like the notion that collectors should decide what's great and worth a premium. The practical matter is that most collectors need to be told.
Lance.
Wow. It is hard to believe it has been that long. I remember the initial announcement like it was yesterday.