| Author |
 Replies: 1,517 / Views: 102,435 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
194 Posts |
Is it too much to ask for a 70 to represent perfection to the naked eye, after looking for a limited period of time (+/-15 seconds per side)? Big vendors appear to have gotten a break on grading, on this set. That not only establishes an unfair bias against individual collectors, but also turns on its head the value of the TPG itself. I have less animosity against the mint than against the grading. |
|
Valued Member
United States
110 Posts |
Quote:Is it too much to ask for a 70 to represent perfection to the naked eye, after looking for a limited period of time (+/-15 seconds per side)? Big vendors appear to have gotten a break on grading, on this set. That not only establishes an unfair bias against individual collectors, but also turns on its head the value of the TPG itself. I have less animosity against the mint than against the grading. I respect this opinion and I may very well be venting 100% of my frustration on the SF mint. I have spoken with people who have visited the PCGS grading room on multiple occasions and they were all under the impression that the graders have no idea who's coins they are grading. I have not seen this with no own eyes, but a nicked up coin in PCGS 70 plastic speaks for itself into regards of your statement. Erik |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Why is it every time the mint comes out with some new set it is always a gripe-fest? Am starting to think the collector community as a whole is impossible to satisfy. First they don't make enough, then they make too many, it is priced to high, quality isn't good enough...it just goes on and on and on. I would wager a bet if the mint gave away pre-graded PCGS MS70 coins for free, collectors would still find something to whine about. I must confess....I am a hard to please person as well...but geez people....this is getting tiresome.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7197 Posts |
 Next would be the gripe that the holder was scratched during shipping!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
2224 Posts |
Quote:
a nicked up coin in PCGS 70 plastic speaks for itself Quote:
the collector community as a whole is impossible to satisfy Quote:
collectors would still find something to whine about. Alot of truth to these statements! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Is it too much to ask for a 70 to represent perfection to the naked eye, after looking for a limited period of time (+/-15 seconds per side)? No its not, but youve just had bad luck with that. The sets I got were amazing and many of the others I have seen have been as well. Quote:
the collector community as a whole is impossible to satisfy Im guilty of being over critical at times too. I also learned the hard way if you want 70s, but them dont chase them raw |
|
Valued Member
United States
223 Posts |
Everybody has their own thing, and that's what make this place great.
Has anyone seen an NGC population report yet on this set?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
102 Posts |
Quote:Even if the commems have the same wash, they might not spot as much because of the alloy, 90% Ag, 10% Cu. All dollars, halves, quarters, and dimes are the same 90% stuff. The only other .999 things that come to mind are the ATB pucks and the 9/11 commem medals. If you're right and fine silver coins are more susceptible to spotting, danger lurks ahead, as the Mint has expressed the desire to switch from 90% to fine silver. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
I may be in the minority on this one, but I would prefer they moved away from the .999 to 90% for the uncir and proof versions if it would fix the spotting problem. The bullion can stay .999
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
If they change the percentage of silver they would have to change the design of the reverse and thus create a new coin.
"One ounce fine silver"
These are pitched as "collector versions" of the bullion silver eagle.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
The term "fine" has nothing to do with expressing silver is 99.9% pure. "Fine" or "fineness" is simply a term used instead of the word percent or percentage. You can see ".999 fine" just as well as ".900 fine" if you replaced fine with percent it would read "99.9 percent" or "90.0 percent". So the only thing that would change for a 90% coin would be the number....from .999 to .900. The .999 is assumed to be a known degree of purity with the ASE. Most other nations print the actual degree of fineness right on the coin. So in essence the coin would not have to change....people would just have to be informed of which type coin had which level of fineness. In some circles "fine" is thought to be considered .999 but technically in true millesimal terms, from which "fine" derives, fine can express any percentage of content. Edited by unholyroller
09/07/2012 09:45 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
102 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
Please re-read my post..has been edited for correctness.
Another way to express "fine" is to say "fine silver" is 1.000 pure or 100% silver...nothing else. The number placed in front of "fine" then expresses the content of said object as a percentage, or in our case, millage of pure silver. So .999 fine silver has a content of 999 parts per thousand of silver. Almost pure, but not quite.
I can see where I am taking more of an old school approach to the term, and I conceede that some, if not most, will use the term Fine Silver to presume 99.9. Just a differing of opinion.
Edited by unholyroller
09/07/2012 10:09 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1027 Posts |
A 90% coin would be larger than the current ASE, either greater diameter, thicker, or both. It would also be roughly 11% heavier. The current coin weighs a total of at least 1Toz and contains at least 0.999 Toz silver (unlike gold Eagles which contain 1.000 Toz of gold). For a 90% coin to still contain at least 0.999 Toz silver it would need to weigh at least 1.11 Toz. The coin would be larger, 3.35cm3 instead of 2.96cm3 so either the diameter, the thickness, or both would have to increase. It is my understanding that the mint would not re-size the dime, quarter, half, and dollar if they changed them all to 0.999 silver because the economy of scale actually makes 0.999 blanks cheaper than 0.900 ones. Basically the only reason anyone still makes 0.900 silver is to satisfy the mint's production whereas 0.999 silver has the entire market. They actually have to refine to 0.999 then add copper to get back to 0.900 and then only the mint will buy that silver. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
The coin would be the same size but since it it no longer bullion it would just be a different percent silver. The point was NOT making it fine (.999) silver because of spotting so it would just read "one ounce of silver" or no mention of the silver content at all. It would be a different coin.... ...and "fine silver" is .999 silver. You can think it is a different percentage but you would be wrong. ...kinda like thinking "Sterling silver" comes from Stirling Scotland" and can be any percentage silver...wrong again Quote:
fine silver [¦fÄ«n ′sil·ve™r]
(metallurgy)
Silver having a minimum fineness of 999; considered to be pure silver.
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms, Edited by Foxwoods Man
09/07/2012 12:23 pm
|
| |
Replies: 1,517 / Views: 102,435 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 09/06/2012 7:25 pm
