Didn 't think I won anything from the ANR Drew St John Auction
pf70collector
Posts: 6,747 ✭✭✭
I only bidded on one item but thought I lost it. Nice surprise this morning.
NGC 1941 10C MS 67 FB PL
NGC 1941 10C MS 67 FB PL
0
Comments
Box of 20
Lot 505
And on the lighter side, Lot 402
Half eagle is for a customer. The roller press cent is fo me
Tom
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Now I am beginning to believe it is the dies, even though one is Philly and the other is San Fran. (Same dies were usually shipped to all mints at times, correct?) I need mystery solved!!!
I'm here
Let me start off by making a simple comment that coins are sort of like art -- one man's masterpiece is another's OK piece of art, and vice versa. The only common accepted universal opionion is that everyone's opinion will be different. You can ask 10 people for an opinion and get 12 different opinions
- Early date Mercury Dimes are commonly struck with fadeaway letters -- letters that fade in to the rim. This is less so common on later date Mercury Dimes.
- I saw that NGC coin in the auction and chose not to bid on it. Many reasons, most of which are personal preference, but some are just a matter of experience. 1) NGC standards for Merc grading are not the same as PCGS standards. The BIGGEST difference is FB. Most NGC dimes don't cross to PCGS because of the bands...NGC typically is much less strict on giving out an FB designation than PCGS and most dimes don't cross for that reason. Now you might say who cares about a cross, and you're right, but cross or not, if you're buying an FB dime it should have no-question FB...I passed on the NGC PL Merc because for the picture it clearly doesn't have FB...as such, it's just an interesting looking non-FB Merc that's really expensive. 2) NGC grading standards for Mercs are very different also. Typically an NGC Merc will grade to 1-2 points less at PCGS because both services have a different idea of what a Merc at a given grade should look like. Again, if you don't care to cross and are happy with what NGC defines as the grade for a given Merc than that's fine...however, I can't see the 41 Merc as a 67...that's just personal opinion.
- Now an overall observation on Merc grading. Mercs graded between 2001 - 2004, or the ones that are STILL left on the market in holders circa that time frame are typically overgraded and wouldn't grade as such today if they were cracked out and sent in raw...trust me on this as I've experimented with this to the tune of a couple of thousand $$ this year. That said, there are still accurately graded Mercs out there from this time frame and yet there are still some undergraded as well, but for the most part all that's left out there are dimes that are overgraded by 1-2 points.
The above is important to keep in mind as I make my next statement (speaking of PCGS):
You cannot look at 10 Mercs graded circa the above time frame and compare them to a new Merc and think it will grade like they did -- it will not! I have a 26-D Merc that has similar fadeaway to the 42/1, albeit a much better overall strike on the obverse and some chatter/weak strike on the reverse, and it is also in a 65FB holder. I made this coin last year. Yet this year I sent in a 25-D that has better strike and less fadeaway than the 26-D and today it grades a 63FB -- Bunk! I also sent in a second 26-D that is FULLY struck, brilliant with luster but it had 1 small hit on Miss Lib's neck and it came back a 63FB. The 63FB had 0 hits on the reverse while the 65FB had almost no diagonal band on the reverse and lots of hits on the fasces. There is no rational explanation for the grading other than 2 possible conclusions:
The remaining Mercs on the market are either overgraded, or they are properly graded and the standards have changed. IMHO it is actually the perfect storm -- BOTH!!
They're grading Mercs not only technically (like they did in the OGH days) but in addition they also need to have noteable eye appeal, and thus the grading of Mercs today is even more stricter than it used to be way back when...let alone in the past few years, and on top of that the stuff that's out there (not all, obviously, but a great deal) is overgraded.
As sad as it is, with key date Mercs, high-end registry set collectors are (regretably) sometimes buying the holder these days more often than the coin. Why? Because if you need a 67FB dime and try to make one by looking at the 25, or so, other 67FB's you've seen or have, and they dime comes back a 65FB you're scratching your head and have usually lost some serious $$. So, if you need that 67FB, you'll likely find one that's probably as nice as your 65FB but it will be in a 67FB holder, and then you have to make a decision of either owning the 65FB or the 67FB.
Case in point...I just (so called) upgraded 2 of my 65FB's to 66FB's, but in truth (and I'm sorry to have to admit this) neither of the 66FB's that upgraded the 65FB's was any better than the coins in the 65FB holders. If the 66FB's were cracked out and sent in raw, there's a good degree of likelihood that they would grade a 65FB...one could even lose its FB designation, I'm certain. Although both the 66FB's had more eye appeal than the 65FB's, IMHO, but because toning/eye appeal is subjective if they were sent in for grading raw and the new graders that looked at them didn't think the toning added to eye appeal, both coins come back graded lower than they are now.
Also, there are a lot of coins out there in holders that have been cleaned, whizzed and AT'd. One coin, with nice color, was cracked out of a holder and when rinced in Acetone (to get rid of any surface contaminents) prior to sending in to PCGS for grading -- the color went "POOF"! How's that for you...nice going on detecting the AT. Bunk! This coin was obviously graded circa 2001 - 2004.
Yet today, at PCGS, totally original coins that I personally took out of a book, are coming back AT -- what a joke! AT simply means, "I don't really like the color and if I slab it I'd have to give it a high grade because the coins is very clean. I can't give it a high grade so let me just say it's AT because the color could be questionable...because I've made that mistake in the past, slabbing AT coins that is, and I don't want to make the mistake and be held accountable for it."
Anyway, that's my brain dump....net-net: I didn't care for the NGC Merc because of the stated grade and the FB designation (although that means absolutely nothing) and today I would submit that if the 42/1 was sent in cold/raw to PCGS, it would have a hard time grading 65FB. My 28-D looks better than that and it just came back 64FB.
I know someone who cracked a PCGS 42/1-P 63FB trying to get a 64FB and it came back in a BB for questionable color -- funny, but not funny to the tune of nearly 8G's -- so you get my drift.
Best, Mike.
PS. No inuendos above...but Merc collectors simply need to adjust to a new reality of PCGS Merc grading. I have, and things are just fine now