Can Something With This Flaw Be Considered " Proof 65 Or Higher? " ($50 Buffalo)

I tried uploading them through imgur with higher quality resolution but the system wouldn't allow me to, so I had to drastically reduce the resolution just for these pictures to upload.. they don't give the best representation of the coin, but hopefully enough to get my point across.

If anyone has any suggestions for third party uploading sites that coincommunity accepts please let me know, I thought imgur would be a safe bet.. but apparently not.

Quick... market it as "the Moth Eaten Buffalo" ... absolutely true to life depiction of the stuffed Buffalo used as the model for the coin, INCLUDING the part eaten by moths...

65 doesn't equal perfect. It's darn nice, but the reason we have 66-70 is for even nicer examples.

That moth bite would drive me crazy. But that's not a long trip

If you can return,do so. It may be the photos,but it does not even look proof. It looks business strike.
John1

It took me 15 seconds to edit and upload your imgur image here with no loss of resolution.

The image you tried to upload is exactly why we have a limit here. The single image you tried to upload was almost 1MB (984KB) and is 80% background and 20% coin.

PCGS has graded 67,000 Gold $50 Buff Proofs. Of that number, only 266 (essentially one-third of one percent) have graded below PR69. Even with the understanding that coins submitted to PCGS are a pretty selective sample, it's not unreasonable to think that the coin here would join the other six PR65 examples in a PCGS slab. Count your blessings - I'd hate to be the person who got one of the three PR63's.

The evidence indicates to me that it's a planchet flaw rather than damage, as others have opined. That being the case, by comparison to the quality of the overwhelming majority of this issue (really, who cares about the grade of a bullion coin?) I could call it 65. Sometimes the curve forces itself.

It_is a bit bothersome that MCM would use the terms "Gem BU" and "Guaranteed Proof 65 or better" in the same writeup, though.

There's a couple of things wrong with MCMs marketing statement.

Typically, when you say a coin is certified it means it's been looked at by one of the TPGs and put into some kind of slab, not a Mylar flip. Who certified the coin? MCM?

Also, the coin is a mint state coin, not a proof (according to the filters on MCM's website, they only sell slabbed proof gold Buffalos), so indicating a minimum quality of Proof 65 doesn't make sense. Maybe it's a typo on the website and they meant to say Mint State 65? If you send the coin back, then you could point it out to them and maybe they'd change the website




I also agree that it looks like a planchet flaw. If it is a planchet flaw, then it probably would get a uncirculated details grade instead of a straight grade MS65.

For some reason I cannot edit posts on mobile unless I am missing something.

I just wanted to add that the above is a different coin with a different description but same " BU Gem " title, so it's an error. I'm fine with MS, just don't like that hole in the bison. Minor bag marks I don't mind.