| Author |
Replies: 19 / Views: 5,940 |
|
New Member
United States
19 Posts |
I'm looking at coins on ebay and some grades seem totally out of whack with the pictures. For example item this one: http://www.ebay.com/itm/1908-Indian...262567755431 (not sure that link will work so also copying the pictures here). It's graded MS65. But look at it, it's quite worn, how can that be? Did somebody swap in a low grade to a high grade holder? This seems to be the rule on ebay and not the exception, most coins I looked at graded MS64 or higher looked like they could not possibly grade that high. Am I missing something?   
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6384 Posts |
The certificate number checks out but I agree this coin looks worn. I suppose the weak detail at the wreath high points, shield edges, feathers, lower hair curls, necklace, and ribbon end could be caused by a bad strike but these areas show some color change which usually indicates wear. The obverse also seems to have some significant hairline scratches. So, a very marginal "gem" IHC with negative eye appeal, offered at full PCGS retail price. Better snap it up before someone else jumps on it! 
|
|
New Member
 United States
19 Posts |
Thank you for your reply Jaobler! The "9" in the date is almost worn smooth. Unless I'm really confused an MS65 should look practically like new, no? When you say the certificate number checks out, isn't it still possible that somebody swapped a low grade coin into a holder that used to hold a high grade coin? If that's the explanation then it seems it's happening a lot because more MS coins on ebay look well below MS grade than look legitimate. Here's an example of another coin on ebay that was graded MS64, so it graded lower than the other one, but it looks a million times better. How can this coin be MS64 while the other one is MS65? I'm trying hard to educate myself here so I don't get burned. Thanks a million for any adivce!   
Edited by Gregory Grant 08/11/2016 07:00 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Maybe it is just an out of focus image and that's why the details look "Mushy" There seems to be lots of Lustre and it looks like the camera auto focused on the surface of the slab and not the coin itself. PCGS DO make plenty of stuff ups but I doubt that they would give an AU coin a MS65 grade.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
I would guess that it's simply poorly photographed.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
I'm thinking poor photography is at work here. Quote: The "9" in the date is almost worn smooth. Unless I'm really confused an MS65 should look practically like new, no? That is a strike issue. A single device can't just wear away naturally while leaving everything else seemingly perfect. Learning the difference between strike weakness and wear is often difficult, especially from photographs.
|
|
New Member
 United States
19 Posts |
So what you're saying is that it was made that way and therefore that doesn't count against the grade? Shouldn't that be indicated on the holder? I mean it's an eye sore because like people say it looks like wear. What I notice the most is the top leaves of the wreath on the back, on the other pic I posted you see every little stem, there's hardly a trace of that detail in the other picture. If that's just due to the bad picture then it's a *really* bad picture. I'm half tempted to buy the thing to find out. Thank you all for your opinions, as you can tell I'm relatively new at this. Well I collected coins as a kid but my dad confiscated my collection when I was a teenager to make up for a large phone bill.
|
|
CCF Advertiser
United States
1533 Posts |
The coin is an MS-65, but has a weak strike. RB copper is often brown on the high points and it is easy to confuse this with wear, especially in a photo where you cannot see the luster over the high points.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
506 Posts |
I agree that it's a photograph issue. I think it is most likely because of a poor choice of lighting angle that caused some of the devices to look flat. Quote: So what you're saying is that it was made that way and therefore that doesn't count against the grade? Shouldn't that be indicated on the holder? Most often, weak strikes are not a one-time thing but common for a certain issue. After a while, you'll probably get a sense of which dates tend to be struck weak or other striking issues. It's just another facet of collecting a certain series. By definition, mint state means the condition in which a coin left the mint, so in that aspect it doesn't change MS vs AU. However, once you get into the higher mint state grades (65 and over), strike does play a factor in the grade. All things being equal, a coin with a weaker strike may get, say, a 65 while another coin with just stronger strike may get a 66. This coin is on the boarder of when they more consider strike so, if it is weak as opposed to bad photographs, the strike probably was not considered as strongly. Or, another possibility is that this would have qualified for a higher grade if it had a stronger strike but the weak strike might have brought it down to 65 (this is hypothetical, as I don't know if it is a weak strike and I have no idea how to grade Indian Head cents).
|
|
Valued Member
United States
314 Posts |
Quote: Well I collected coins as a kid but my dad confiscated my collection when I was a teenager to make up for a large phone bill. This is not a numismatic comment, but that's a sad story.
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
@ktyr, not wear; it's a very weak strike. The 1942-S is notorious for that.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
54280 Posts |
On the half dollar, you can go to NGC, and see the photograph there and see that it is the same coin that they graded. I personally think "weak strike" would be an appropriate comment on the holder. But then, it would depress the price, perhaps.
Remember the sage advice: "Buy the coin, not the holder."
Show your financial support of the Coin Community Family (click here)See my topic on Mexican Numismatic Medals (click here)
Edited by nss-52 09/05/2016 09:53 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3210 Posts |
KTYR walkers from San Francisco during the 1940s are notorious for weak strikes, especially 1940-1945, 46 is a bit better. Typical weakness includes the thigh hand and Eagles mid breast feathers. Not wear just poor striking. 40s walkers with full strikes from San Francisco command more money because of these issues
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1601 Posts |
Maybe I should start a new thread with this, but it's really the same issue, so I'll leave it unless a Moderator thinks otherwise. Going back to the photo of the walker, I'd give it a details grade for the small attempt to clean it (improperly, of course) on either side of 12:00. Anybody else? And the reason I came to visit this sub-forum today was to ask about the following coin: you vs. PCGS How would you score it?  The reverse is either a very weak strike or struck through something. But what about the coin as a whole? It has been graded by PCGS but what would you give it? I'll post the entire slab this afternoon but I'm curious to hear some independent opinions.
Edited by Biedercoins 09/09/2016 07:47 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4589 Posts |
A weak strike will be mostly uniformly weak - that is the dies didn't press down all the way and so while metal flowed, it didn't fill the highest parts of the relief.
Struck through 'grease' affects only the portion of the die where the 'grease' was.
It's also possible to have both.
-----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 5,940 |