| Author |
 Replies: 38 / Views: 5,065 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
Remember, you can always take your business elsewhere.
|
|
New Member
 United States
18 Posts |
"Remember, you can always take your business elsewhere." You're right about that and would love to hear your opinion on whether this was appropriately graded at MS65?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
To be honest, I think they were generous with the quarter. There appears to be too many luster grazes and marks on the face, neck, and eagle's breast to make MS-65. I think a grade around MS-63/64 would be more appropriate. I am still scratching my head over that franklin though. I don't think there is much to question on the origin of that toning.
|
|
New Member
United States
18 Posts |
"To be honest, I think they were generous with the quarter. There appears to be too many luster grazes and marks on the face, neck, and eagle's breast to make MS-65. I think a grade around MS-63/64 would be more appropriate. I am still scratching my head over that franklin though. I don't think there is much to question on the origin of that toning."
I'll have to look for a better picture as the coin doesn't look like the photo. The face and neck really look clean in hand and under magnification. I had multiple people look at this prior to submitting and they were all wowed by the luster this throws off.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1554 Posts |
Well, I'll be the devils advocate on this TPG grading. Wouldn't send a coin to them and never had. I feel it pointless and unnecesary, a coin is what it is and any knowledgeble collector or dealer will pay you for your coin whether slabbed or not. Slabbing coins is good for authenticity but as for grading or toning issues I personally am not interested. When you first posted this coin I wondered about the toning and said as much, but, I'll take your word for it's handling. Good luck! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
I also think the quarter is over-graded at MS65, but luster counts for more than contact marks sometimes with TPGs. It also matters more when looking at a coin in-hand. Photos tend to emphasize technical flaws and diminish luster.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1081 Posts |
Strictly from the pics posted, I think the quarter is graded appropriately. TPG are supposed to be a neutral, objective opinion as to the grade of a coin. Now, they are not always neutral, however, your opinion is not either. It sounds like you have some sentimental feelings about these coins, which is great, but that shouldn't interfere if you want a strict technical grade. I submitted a 1950d Jefferson nickel and a 1956 type 1 proof Franklin half that I received from an original mint set my nana gave me. I thought they should have graded MS67 and PF67 respectively, but they each graded at 66. That nickel was one of the nicest I've ever seen and had amazing eye appeal, but it was a 66. I posted a pic and that was by far the unanimous opinion here as well. I had to accept that despite what I thought. Your proof looks original to me and looks to be a gem. |
|
New Member
United States
18 Posts |
I really do appreciate the comments that everyone is giving. The pictures really make the coin look horrible and will have to wait to get them back and take some better ones. It was really tough taking pictures of it with the glare coming off it and in hand it looked gorgeous.
The 1964D toned Washington that I posted pictures of above is what I'm now concerned about. If they are going to call the Franklin questionable coloring than what will they say about all the Washington's I pulled out of the albums? They came from the same set of boxes that the other coins were packed in. Will I be wasting my money sending those if they look like the one above?
|
| |
Replies: 38 / Views: 5,065 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/14/2012 3:24 pm
