What are your thoughts on that 1901-S Barber 25c receiving a MS68+ ???
dizzyfoxx
Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭
...to become the inaugural "+" awarded grade 
...There's always time for coin collecting. 
0
Comments
<< <i>This thread is useless without pictures. >>
There is weakness of strike on one of the stars and some tiny marks on the cheek.
It is apparently the finest known of the key date in the series so it probably doesn't matter much what they call it.
I read a post by Don Willis that this coin was not the first one
graded with the Plus Secure designation - it was one of the first
ones so graded.
The video, of HRH holding the 1901-S, showed an amazing flashy coin -
and I'm sure each of those who graded the coin came up with the grade
of MS 68; they have a panel of 3 graders and the consensus of opinions
formulates the grade and the finalizer approves the grade - or not.
Four professionals examined the coin in person - and I defer to their opinion.
Of course, John Feigenbaum can send the coin to me and I'll
give it The MFH Green Bean Code of Approval.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
<< <i>A beautiful coin, but not a 68+. There is weakness of strike on one of the stars and some tiny marks on the cheek. >>
<< <i>It is apparently the finest known of the key date in the series so it probably doesn't matter much what they call it. >>
60 years into this hobby and I'm still working on my Lincoln set!
Even in the image you can see problems on the face.
Sure, the coin may be the finest ever 01S 25C, but that does not warrant the plus stuff. If this is the way the new game will be, then all PCGS did was create away to gain more revenue while further destroying the high end market. What a joke.
<< <i>In my opinion, PCGS blew it on this coin. Everyone knows it was out of a lower grade holder and dipped.
Even in the image you can see problems on the face.
Sure, the coin may be the finest ever 01S 25C, but that does not warrant the plus stuff. If this is the way the new game will be, then all PCGS did was create away to gain more revenue while further destroying the high end market. What a joke. >>
The more things change, the more they remain the same
<< <i>
<< <i>A beautiful coin, but not a 68+. There is weakness of strike on one of the stars and some tiny marks on the cheek. >>
<< <i>It is apparently the finest known of the key date in the series so it probably doesn't matter much what they call it. >>
Agree with the above. Can someone explain how to differentiate a 68 and a 68+?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Many dinosaurs like myself know this coin was dipped twenty years ago and has retoned. I am not a fan of dipping !
Dip it and strip it. However PCGS likes dipped coins as evident with this 01 S quarter.
If anyone is not aware of the Norweb Specimen of the 1893 S Morgan dollar(which was the finest known) and was dipped by NCS and ruined...
This is a reason I dislike dipping.
The ms 68+ 1901 S quarter is IMHO IS NOT THE FINEST 1901 S quarter
I own the finest 1901 S Barber Quarter which is in a PCGS ms 67 holder with its ORIGINAL SKIN and dripping with original luster.
To prove my point I will challenge the dipped 1901 S ms 68+ coin against my MS 67 coin for comparison. Time for a "SHOWDOWN"
Stewart Blay
<< <i>Many dinosaurs like myself know this coin was dipped twenty years ago and has retoned. I am not a fan of dipping !
Dip it and strip it. However PCGS likes dipped coins as evident with this 01 S quarter.
If anyone is not aware of the Norweb Specimen of the 1893 S Morgan dollar(which was the finest known) and was dipped by NCS and ruined...
This is a reason I dislike dipping.
The ms 68+ 1901 S quarter is IMHO IS NOT THE FINEST 1901 S quarter
I own the finest 1901 S Barber Quarter which is in a PCGS ms 67 holder with its ORIGINAL SKIN and dripping with original luster.
To prove my point I will challenge the dipped 1901 S ms 68+ coin against my MS 67 coin for comparison. Time for a "SHOWDOWN"
Stewart Blay >>
Stewart, I think you'd have a better chance of achieving a showdown if you were to challenge the OWNER of the MS68 (plus) quarter instead of the COIN, itself, as you did above.
please share with us your extensive experience with having seen "fully struck 1901-S Quarters" which i have no doubt factored into this assessment. also, that's sort of harsh considering you're grading from a picture.
<< <i>There is weakness of strike on one of the stars and some tiny marks on the cheek.
please share with us your extensive experience with having seen "fully struck 1901-S Quarters" which i have no doubt factored into this assessment. also, that's sort of harsh considering you're grading from a picture. >>
MS68 requires a full strike. End of story.
Is your better than Gene Gardners?
Stewart I also have some nice Barbers and would love to talk to you. If you are interested
you can send me a private message.
Darrell
as you would say, end of story.
<< <i>
<< <i>There is weakness of strike on one of the stars and some tiny marks on the cheek.
please share with us your extensive experience with having seen "fully struck 1901-S Quarters" which i have no doubt factored into this assessment. also, that's sort of harsh considering you're grading from a picture. >>
MS68 requires a full strike. End of story. >>
There is rarely, if ever an "end of story" when it comes to opinions regarding the grade of a coin. While your standards apparently require that an MS68 display a full strike, the major grading companies don't share those standards.
For the coveted 68 designation (not to mention 68+) they sure as heck should IMHO.
These are the types of coins, in fact, regardless of price, I would avoid like the plague. The dipping, the egos, and the politics are three facets of the hobby that I find extremely distasteful. If this is what the hobby was really about, I would have been outta here in 3 nanoseconds.
Dwayne F. Sessom
Ebay ID: V-Nickel-Coins
And yea I once spent 6 figures on one coin, but that coin, which is probably rarer than the 1901-S quarter on an overall basis, would sell less than one fourth the price of this piece.
Personally, I believe that the James Stack coin (auctioned in 1975) and Sunnywood's 66 are superior to this "newly graded" piece. Both were original, strong and undipped.
I think I need to make it to more big auction viewings
so as a mere mortal, I can still oogle and hold similar coins
<< <i>If I had submitted that coin, I would have been lucky to get a 66
In a word, "BINGO"!!!
Which is why I will have no part of this game.
If I am not mistaken, Stewart's '01-S in the Eliasberg coin, a beautiful PCGS MS67, with the impeccable originality that one would expect from that provenance. Another one was the Hugon coin, which I did not care for. The third MS67 was a drop-dead gorgeous coin that Gene Gardner bought from Mike Printz at Larry Whitlow, if my memory serves me correctly. Unfortunately I was not collecting the series when that one came along, but I'm glad that it now resides in Gene's magnificent set in very good company with his other great coins. I loved that one best for the colors. (Incidentally, I owned several incredible Barber quarters of other dates that had very similar toning to Gene's 1901-S, and suspect they were all out of one outstanding prior group.)
My own 1901-S was a very original PCGS MS66 that I felt rivaled the Hugon coin. David Akers commented that it wouldn't be out of place in a 67 holder. But I did prefer the Eliasberg coin and Gene Gardner's beautiful coin to mine.
The current PCGS MS68+ is said to be the same coin as the blast white dipped NGC MS68 from the Superior Boys Town sale in 1990. If so it has acquired toning in the last 20 years, which would not be surprising. (In other words, I am NOT saying the new toning was intentionally accelerated in any way - in fact it looks quite natural.) There is good reason to believe that this may in fact have been the James A. Stack coin, as there is no other known example of this quality prior to 1990, besides the coins already mentioned above. It would only be possible to determine if one had the coin, the original photos from the 1975 sale, and the Boys Town catalog all together for comparison. The dipping and retoning of course makes a confirmation more difficult.
I will only say that the Eliasberg-Blay coin, the Gardner coin, and the [? James Stack]-Boys Town-MS68+ coin are all wonderful examples of this notable rarity, as was the coin I owned (which, along with my entire set, now resides permanently in an extremely major collection), and the Hugon coin. Those are really the top five examples IMHO (six if the James Stack coin is NOT the MS68, but it probably is).
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I purchased an 1895-O at the show that was the most incredible quarter I think I have seen and will put up a photo of it once I get it to Todd for imaging.
It has great toning and a strike for the date. Those who like white coins will hate it but then my preference is for original toning. That's just me though.
Glenn
Website-Americana Rare Coin Inc
The only coin close to my coin is the coin in Gene Gardners collection. Mine has more blast with lemon and lime, gold and green colors. Genes coin is toned and mottled with deeper color.
The ms 68 + is the NGC coin from the Boys Town sale which was dipped and PCGS crossed it for Bowers and Merena auctions where it brought $327,000.
Stewart
<< <i>When I was collecting the series, there were three PCGS MS67, and none higher.
If I am not mistaken, Stewart's '01-S in the Eliasberg coin, a beautiful PCGS MS67, with the impeccable originality that one would expect from that provenance. Another one was the Hugon coin, which I did not care for. The third MS67 was a drop-dead gorgeous coin that Gene Gardner bought from Mike Printz at Larry Whitlow, if my memory serves me correctly. Unfortunately I was not collecting the series when that one came along, but I'm glad that it now resides in Gene's magnificent set in very good company with his other great coins. I loved that one best for the colors. (Incidentally, I owned several incredible Barber quarters of other dates that had very similar toning to Gene's 1901-S, and suspect they were all out of one outstanding prior group.)
My own 1901-S was a very original PCGS MS66 that I felt rivaled the Hugon coin. David Akers commented that it wouldn't be out of place in a 67 holder. But I did prefer the Eliasberg coin and Gene Gardner's beautiful coin to mine.
The current PCGS MS68+ is said to be the same coin as the blast white dipped NGC MS68 from the Superior Boys Town sale in 1990. If so it has acquired toning in the last 20 years, which would not be surprising. (In other words, I am NOT saying the new toning was intentionally accelerated in any way - in fact it looks quite natural.) There is good reason to believe that this may in fact have been the James A. Stack coin, as there is no other known example of this quality prior to 1990, besides the coins already mentioned above. It would only be possible to determine if one had the coin, the original photos from the 1975 sale, and the Boys Town catalog all together for comparison. The dipping and retoning of course makes a confirmation more difficult.
I will only say that the Eliasberg-Blay coin, the Gardner coin, and the [? James Stack]-Boys Town-MS68+ coin are all wonderful examples of this notable rarity, as was the coin I owned (which, along with my entire set, now resides permanently in an extremely major collection), and the Hugon coin. Those are really the top five examples IMHO (six if the James Stack coin is NOT the MS68, but it probably is).
Best,
Sunnywood >>
Sonnywood, wasn't your coin originally in a 65 holder?
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Amazingly a bunch of forum members believe they have grading skills superior to PCGS and can grade accurately simply from looking at pictures on the computer.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
I may be a forum member but I know a few things about grading coins,especially Barbers. In addition to my 1901 S barber quarter,I also own the 1900 O in PCGS ms 68. I have seen all the PCGS ms 68 Barber quarters. I own the finest collection of Barber dimes. I never grade from images.
What I am saying is though that I do not promote the idea of putting a dipped coin in a PCGS ms 68+ holder is a very good message. What PCGS has said is that dipping coins is O.K. I have seen many coins ruined by dipping. Dipping is not O.K. Show me an original $4 Stellar that has not been monkeyed. Can you imagine going to a coin show and seeing many dealers with a cup of silver dip at their booth. Dippety Dippety Do ! Do you think that is good?
Stewart
<< <i>Hi wei,
I may be a forum member but I know a few things about grading coins,especially Barbers. In addition to my 1901 S barber quarter,I also own the 1900 O in PCGS ms 68. I have seen all the PCGS ms 68 Barber quarters. I own the finest collection of Barber dimes. I never grade from images.
What I am saying is though that I do not promote the idea of putting a dipped coin in a PCGS ms 68+ holder is a very good message. What PCGS has said is that dipping coins is O.K. I have seen many coins ruined by dipping. Dipping is not O.K. Show me an original $4 Stellar that has not been monkeyed. Can you imagine going to a coin show and seeing many dealers with a cup of silver dip at their booth. Dippety Dippety Do ! Do you think that is good?
Stewart >>
Stewart, I'll bet you a container of dip that Wei was not talking about you.
<< <i>
<< <i>Hi wei,
I may be a forum member but I know a few things about grading coins,especially Barbers. In addition to my 1901 S barber quarter,I also own the 1900 O in PCGS ms 68. I have seen all the PCGS ms 68 Barber quarters. I own the finest collection of Barber dimes. I never grade from images.
What I am saying is though that I do not promote the idea of putting a dipped coin in a PCGS ms 68+ holder is a very good message. What PCGS has said is that dipping coins is O.K. I have seen many coins ruined by dipping. Dipping is not O.K. Show me an original $4 Stellar that has not been monkeyed. Can you imagine going to a coin show and seeing many dealers with a cup of silver dip at their booth. Dippety Dippety Do ! Do you think that is good?
Stewart >>
Stewart, I'll bet you a container of dip that Wei was not talking about you.
Mark said it.
Besides, not a lot of dealers dip their coins at their booths. Most prefer to do it in their hotel room. That's true even at the Baltimore show. That unisex individual locking stall with its own sink doesn't have good temperature control.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Wei, agreed, I have ALWAYS said you cannot grade from images, period.
I have not seen the MS68+ in its current state, so I am in no way making any comparison between it and the other coins I discussed. I last saw it in 1990, when it was blast white, and that is a LONG time ago !!
Best,
Sunnywood
Edited to add: by the way, for such a rarity there sure a lot of nice high end examples ... Eliasberg, Hugon, Sunnywood, Gardner, Blay, and the new MS68, that's at least six comfortably above the gem level.
Also, yes my coin was once in an early generation PCGS MS65 holder. What a great find that was!! As soon as I saw it, I knew it was extremely conservatively graded, and that I had to have it. However, the other bidders had the same idea, so I had to pay what was then solid 66 money anyway. As I do not ever crack coins out, I resubmitted it once in the holder and got the 66. At least three folks whose opinions I greatly respect advised me to crack it and submit it raw for a 66 / shot 67, but I always did my submissions in the holders.
P.P.S. for anyone who doesn't know, Stewart Blay is as expert in the Barber quarters as anyone.
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I have to agree. There are MS Barber quarters cleaner than this coin, probably as blasty, and certainly better struck....and very few will merit a 68+ grade. The thought that a finer 1901-s could exist is very realistic. By 1975 only one superb gem 01-s had hit the market. 25 years later there are possibly half a dozen. In another 10 years there could be a few more. Every Barber quarter date was saved in roll quantity, many still waiting to be "rediscovered." And what would you call a 1901-s that had no facial ticks and a fuller strike? You'd either have to give it the same 68+ grade or 69. MS68 Barber quarters are rare enough. To start calling them + when they have obvious marks (even if tiny) seems a bit of a stretch.
It really doesn't matter how 1901-s quarters are typically struck. It only matters how they compare to a fully struck specimen. And if they never come full-full, then there shouldn't be anything higher than a standard 68. Many 1892-1909 S mint Barbers do come >95% fully struck. Many have full detail in the claws and stars. One has to leave room in the grading scale for the piece that has fully struck claws, arrow feathers, stars, and inner shield lines. There could easily be such a 1901-s out there. I think too much importance is being attached to the blast of the luster. And Stewart has a good point about a + sign to a coin that has been dipped. In another 20 yrs the coin will look quite different and much more mottled. It could be time for another dipping then
If this MS68+ 1901-s Boys Town coin is the James Stack specimen, it was graded PCGS MS66 at one time (pre-dipping)....2+ pts lower than what it is today. And the Stack coin's eye appeal before dipping was considered stunning even though it has slightly mottled toning. In 50 yrs it won't matter though because it's eye appeal will have degraded back below what it was when it was fully original. Some mint state points will have been temporarily gained and then lost during that period....the fate of nearly all dipped coins.
roadrunner
<< <i>Hi wei,
I may be a forum member but I know a few things about grading coins,especially Barbers. In addition to my 1901 S barber quarter,I also own the 1900 O in PCGS ms 68. I have seen all the PCGS ms 68 Barber quarters. I own the finest collection of Barber dimes. I never grade from images.
What I am saying is though that I do not promote the idea of putting a dipped coin in a PCGS ms 68+ holder is a very good message. What PCGS has said is that dipping coins is O.K. I have seen many coins ruined by dipping. Dipping is not O.K. Show me an original $4 Stellar that has not been monkeyed. Can you imagine going to a coin show and seeing many dealers with a cup of silver dip at their booth. Dippety Dippety Do ! Do you think that is good?
Stewart >>
I usually dislike dipped, blast white silver coins, but in SOME CASES, if done carefully, it can dramatically improve a hideous, splotchy monstrosity. The real question is, what did the coin look like prior to the acid bath? I do not have a problem with PCGS assigning an exceptionally high grade to a dipped coin.
<< <i>...The current PCGS MS68+ is said to be the same coin as the blast white dipped NGC MS68 from the Superior Boys Town sale in 1990. If so it has acquired toning in the last 20 years, which would not be surprising. (In other words, I am NOT saying the new toning was intentionally accelerated in any way - in fact it looks quite natural.) There is good reason to believe that this may in fact have been the James A. Stack coin, as there is no other known example of this quality prior to 1990, besides the coins already mentioned above. It would only be possible to determine if one had the coin, the original photos from the 1975 sale, and the Boys Town catalog all together for comparison. The dipping and retoning of course makes a confirmation more difficult.
I will only say that the Eliasberg-Blay coin, the Gardner coin, and the [? James Stack]-Boys Town-MS68+ coin are all wonderful examples of this notable rarity, as was the coin I owned (which, along with my entire set, now resides permanently in an extremely major collection), and the Hugon coin. Those are really the top five examples IMHO (six if the James Stack coin is NOT the MS68, but it probably is).
Best,
Sunnywood >>
The James A. Stack coin was also in Auction '80 (at a then seemingly crazy $85,000) with slightly better pics than the 1975 sale. As noticed by Aegis3 on page 2 of this thread Baltimore Bowers Auction 1901-S Quarter there is a small area on the reverse between the eagle's wing on the right an the top of the arrows that shows in both the 1990 auction pics and the 2010 pics confirming the same coin. But in comparing that area with the 1975 and 1980 pics of the Stack coin I could not match them up as those older pictures were small and just don't have good enough resolution.
It may well be that it is the Stack coin. Seems like that was the rumors I had heard back then or maybe it was even been mentioned in an article at the time. Just don't recall for sure and unless there are better pics of the Stack coin; or someone notices another identifying feature to compare or an insider tells the story, it may be difficult to confirm.
As far as the grade, since I have not seen it in person, I find it hard to form any meaningingful opinion from pictures in regard to esoteric grades like 66, 67 and 68. I will go out on a limb and say it is Gem New as opposed to Used. Hows that for precision.
Here again is the scan of the lot description for the NGC-68 that was auctioned at $550,000 in Superiors May 1990 sale and is now the PCGS-68+. Could not get the entire reverse pic without breaking the spine on the catalog. And that missing part is where the identifying darker area is. It is easily seen in the recent Bowers photo.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Calling it an MS68 is gradeflation at its best. This is a great example of the line moving.
By plusing this coin, PCGS has already proved how inconsistant they are and how this new service will only add to the misery.
Also, I know the graders typically don't know who the owner of a coin is when grading, but when this sucker came into the grading room it would be hard to believe if anyone in the room didn't know the full history (grading history and ownership) of this coin.
That said, it's still a pretty quarter
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>Judging from the previous posts it's apparent that a bunch of people here don't need the benefit of viewing a coin in person or posessing knowledge and experience in handling Barber quarters to be a know-it-all about the merits of an MS68 key date quarter.
Amazingly a bunch of forum members believe they have grading skills superior to PCGS and can grade accurately simply from looking at pictures on the computer. >>
I saw the coin, if the grade was covered up very few average internet collectors IMO would think this was a ms68+. It did not knock my socks off like the christmas tree toned MPL shown 2 weeks ago.
Can i expect this much tone with my slabbed coins in 20 or less years
While this is a rare and lofty baby even if i could buy it, i would always be unhappy knowing what has gone on in the past with it. For the money required to own a coin like this i would rather have something with a little more "WOW"
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"