Are Coins Higher Than 66 Really Worth The Premium?

At this point, I'm not buying anything but, I would think that getting into the higher grades it becomes very difficult to find older coins without those few nicks. It seems that the difference between grade numbers gets closer and closer as you reach the upper MS range simply because of the likelihood of a very small mark over the course of 100+ years.

It becomes a matter of rarity, I think.

I would go for MS 66 CACs.

First, lets clear up the misconception that 67 coins are ALWAYS going to look better than 66. We know that's not true because we often see 66 coins selling for more than 67's because of the eye appeal factor which is objective (not subjective).

If you look at the actual sales prices for any given series from ebay, or Heritage, or Great Collections, you will be able to ascertain that a grade does not always equal a price. In many instances you can see MULTIPLES of prices paid for the "same" coin in the "same" grade from the same TPG, issued during the "same" period and sold near the same time.

So lets first eliminate the myth that grade = price. It is just as often not true. You can get average prices paid for a grade, but that's all those are - averages.

Second - you do need to be able to tell the difference between the grades. That comes from experience and looking at the same coin many times, best viewed from NGC or PCGS, which are the most reliable graders we have to work with.

Yes, I know they are not perfect, but that's for another time. No one is better than they are at getting it right more times than not.

If you've been collecting a set of Oregon Classic Commemoratives, as one of our members is showcasing right now, you do need to know what a 66 looks like (and he does) by viewing hundreds, or even thousands, of the same coin and date/mm. He's buying raw and submitting to PCGS. He had better know his grading if he's doing that. He does. But it came from experience. If you don't have the experience you need to rely on something as an example, and the two top TPG are the best places to look.

If you can't tell the difference between grades, either buy the lower and be happy, or learn the differences.

Third, it is a total misconception that a 67 coin is usually going to be a huge price difference over a 66 (or their averages). Regardless of the two numerical numbers you are examining, the largest difference between one grade and another for price is going to be the census figures from those two TPG's. All the numbers are there for you to see and use. What you find is that strictly using a 66 to 67 grade comparison on a heck of a lot of coins is just silly, in both directions. If I DO NOT buy a 67 1946 Iowa commemorative over a 66, then I haven't checked the average prices to see that a 67 is very little money more.

There are just as many "problems" with huge price jumps from 64 to 65, or any other two numbers. Comparing only two numbers for a single coin is not a wise choice. Examining the full run of both average prices, highest price, lowest price, and numbers on the census is what should be used. Not a one grade point to another comparison.

Some coins go KER BOOOOM from a 63 to a 64, and for any other numerical comparison. What you should do is look at those average prices and see what fits your collecting goal and budget best.

By the same token, try to find an ASE in less than 69. They are almost all 69 and 70. Trying to find a 67, or a 66, would be a real challenge. And yes, their "census" might show a 66 as having only two graded, but that doesn't make it "rare" or "desirable" except by the really misinformed (I can make any 69 down to a 64 (REALLY rare) in about 3 seconds), it just means that almost all are graded 69 or 70.

I call this a CLIFF comparison. As an example if the prices for grades are: 63-$100, 64-$170, 65-$275, 66-$900, then the 65 is at the bottom of a cliff. The PERCENTAGE JUMPS (not the dollar price differences) really big going from a 65 to a 66. Not so much for the 63 to 64 to 65. So in this case I see the bottom of the cliff being at a 65, and that is the grade I look for initially.

That allows me to get the best coin I can without jumping to the moon. And it has nothing to do with a 66 to 67 comparison a whole LOT of times.

All these numbers are available to you to use. If you spend a little time spending your coin money based on your own comparisons, you will not only get nicer coins for better prices, but you will know you are doing so.

Then, you can continue to do so with almost ANY coin.

This sounds familiar. I recall it being said about MS-67 Commems 20 years ago as well as other super-high grade coins. They were considered "investment grade". Very few people were buying Draped Bust dimes, quarters, halves, and dollars as these were for "collectors". If you look back at prices then and now, you'll see the investors got killed buying super-high grade common coins and the collectors did quite well.

I thought moxking was correct on all points. Awesome post.

It is also a matter of personal preference. I know some people for whom any imperfection would grate at them so much that it would be painful for them to own any coin.

Collect what you like.

That being said, don't be upset if your $1000 population 2/0 MS67 modern coin becomes a $100 MS67 population 1/1 coin when some other collector gets his into a MS68 holder after a few devoted upgrade attempts.

Caveat is that this does not apply to classic coins, particularly 1850s and earlier, where a properly graded MS66, say, Large Cent or Liberty Seated dime is truly a very rare coin and well worthy of the huge premiums it will command.

I buy what I think has the best eye appeal. There are some 66's in my Washington registry I could upgrade to 67's but I'd have to spend a ridiculous amount of money and sacrifice eye appeal, attractive toning, or both to do so, and to me, it's just not worth it. I agree with both Moxking and Typecoin here.

My collection is toned mercs... Sometimes a MS-63 will belong in my set before a 66-67FB... However, I am going for something different, I guess my collection in subjective