Geo VI NFLD 5c - Not Sure ICCS Got This Right.

I'll say AU 55. Wear on the band of the crown and behind ear. These are very hard to grade for someone who doesn't collect them ... and to see what the highest parts of the design are and wear first.

I agree with AU but might have been given a details
because of the damage on the rim.

@fortcollins - right!

I agree. Definitely has been lightly circulated.

I have to disagree with the consensus here.

I agree with the ICCS grading. I think its appropriate.

I don't see any wear at all really. Especially none in the band of the crown where there are still jewels evident. Contrast the pics with a perfect example and you'll see.
The scratch someone noted between the R&G is probably a die crack.

I would venture that the rim ding above WF is largely what contributed to the grade being only MS-60. The surfaces are imperfect as well.

This brings me back to the issue of strikes vs wear in regard to Newfoundland coins. Not all Newfoundland coins were actually struck as MS65 coins and slid down the grading ladder through wear. New dies bore MS65 results but quickly degraded from continuous use, so only the earliest planchets stuck with them bore such high grades.

Looking at Silver101's 10 cent example, specifically at the hair behind the ear, it doesn't look worn to me. I'd guess the hair delineations were never any more distinct than they are now, like the coin was always that way. Like it was struck MS-61 and now down graded to MS-60 due to the rim ding and imperfect surface.

Anyway, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. :)

Cheers all!