Strategy Advice: 1920-S Mercury Dime - Genuine AU Details (Cleaned) - Full Bands?
mmoran
Posts: 5 ✭
Hi,
I recently got my 1920-S Mercury Dime back from PCGS (Cert #56578806) and it was tagged as Genuine AU Details (92 - Cleaned).
To my eye, the central bands are 100% split and would qualify for the Full Bands (FB) designation if it were a straight grade. While there are some microscopic lines in the fields, the coin has a very old, attractive tone that seems to have formed over them.
I’m looking for advice on two things:
Based on the photos, do the surfaces look "market acceptable" enough to merit a Crossover to NGC or a Crackout/Resubmit to PCGS?
Does the strike look like a true Full Bands candidate to you?
Given the rarity of a 1920-S with FB, I want to make sure I’m not leaving a significant coin in a Details holder if it has a chance at a straight grade. Thanks for the help!
Comments
Obviously cleaned, borderline harshly cleaned, and not FB.
Cleaned by burnishing. It will not straight grade.
No full bands, might look good in a folder or something 🤔
To me, the coin looks like it has a shot at the FB designation.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I don’t think the fullness of its bands is the question.
(PCGS pops show more Full Bands than not for 1920-s dimes in Mint State.)
But the fact that PCGS called it ‘AU Details’ tells me it wouldn’t straight grade MS at any TPG.
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!
I've seen worse with the FB designation. Shame re:92.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
I think your first post is great and I am not being sarcastic. You know what you are looking at, you know what you want to find out and you provided a detailed image link. It's like the trifecta of a good thread.
As for the coin, my first reaction is that it's an AU55 or AU58 and that I think it has FB. If it's an AU then I could see the stray lines all over the coin as being evidence of circulation handling and/or sliding. These don't look like classic "cleaned" hairlines to me, but we are all only going at this with the PCGS images. What appears like it might also be problematic is the scratch between EPU and DIME on the reverse. It appears sharp and has moved a bit of metal. Overall, I don't know what the coin is worth in this holder, but if it came back as an AU55FB or AU58FB what would its value be? Perhaps a few hundred dollars?
The question then becomes the idea of throwing good money after bad. You have to weigh what the coin is worth in this holder, and your ability to ask a premium for it, vs. the time, effort and resources that would be required to generate a couple hundred dollars more income from it. If it sails through on the next submission then you won, if it takes two or more submissions or never gets straight graded then you lose, and the more you play the game the deeper the hole gets. So, I see limited upside on a resubmission and lots of possible downside.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Here’s a case where a great first post has led to a great response.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
While I don't agree with @TomB on the viability of the coin getting a straight grade, I do agree with his compliment to you about being a great first post. If you stick around a little, you will realize that this is high praise indeed, not just as a first post compliment, but from the source.
Regarding the FB designation, I can see it getting a FB if it straight graded. It's very close if not there.
However, again, I don't think it will straight grade as I think the surfaces will be seen as cleaning more often than not (that's how they appear to me FWIW), and so throwing more money after it might not be prudent.
If do you send it to NGC, treat it the same as PCGS. Crack it first.
I would put it in a kraft envelope or an old Whitman album and let it set for a few years before I tried it again, and would look closely at her again before I resubmitted. Sometimes ownership clouds our vision.
my 2c ...
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I know and feel your pain.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maint. Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Matte Proof Toned Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1916)
From the TV the band look split but there may perhaps be a minor blend in the center of the bands, would need a better closeup. Also appears to be cleaned from the photo, maybe different in hand.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Not worth sending in to try and get "FB designation imo.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
Thanks for all the responses. While it's not what I was hoping to hear, I really appreciate the expertise—especially the 'trifecta' compliment from TomB and the strike assessment from MFeld.
It’s a bit of a sting since I paid a Full Bands price for it, and I was under the mistaken impression that NGC might designate FB on a Details coin. Since that isn't the case, and the consensus is that the surfaces won't straight-grade, I think I'll just take my lumps and enjoy the coin for its great eye appeal. It’s still a 1920-S with a hell of a strike! Thanks again for the education.
I am wondering another question, though. Given the attractive old toning, do you think professional conservation (like NGC’s PCGS's) could ever mitigate the 'cleaned' look, or is the surface damage too deep?
I greatly appreciate the vote of confidence. Can I send the coin to you to grade.
These are photos of the coin I took prior to shipping it off to PCGS. FedEx is delivering the slab tomorrow.
I know at ANACS that if a coin Details they won't put any strike designations on the slab. I had a 1917 SLQ T1 that came back MS details cleaned and the coin has a Full Head. I don't know if that could be the same at the other services.
Life member of ANA
I also believe that all the services will give the FB designation to straight graded AU coins, but not sure if that is for all AU grades. I thought I have seen AU58's and AU55's with FB designations.
Life member of ANA
Wanted to add a thought to my earlier post ...
Your raw images make it look like the FB is a slam dunk ... and frankly, I based on those images I can see that coin in a straight grade holder (she's not original, but looking again she sure seems "market acceptable" if I try to do the composite of what I am seeing).
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Thanks! You’ve restored my confidence in my own assessments. I recently had a disappointing experience with an 1833 Half Cent that was flagged for "Altered Surfaces." To my eye, the surfaces didn’t look "altered" —especially for a coin that is nearly 200 years old.
I should start another thread but I think we've gone overboard with the damnanifcation of cleaned coins. There are CLEANED coins with harsh cleaners etc, and then there are coins gently improved.
I wrote this op ed for our coin club website:
https://www.abcoinclub.com/in-defense-of-the-cleaned-coin-why-we-need-to-stop-obsessing-over-microscopic-hairlines/