| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 2,666 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2145 Posts |
Quote:
NGC slabbed it as MS(62), which seems awfully generous. I'd be thankful for a 62 and leave it at that. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Here is a photo of your coin in 2005 with the same cert number. The coin sold at Heritage in 2005 and 2008. In 2008 it sold for $4600. Congratulation on your purchase of a beautiful example that was graded correctly. It appears that the coin was recently attributed O/O.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
752 Posts |
Thanks, Slider23, for showing us this past photo of the coin. It seems that it has been slabbed by NGC for a while, and I am guessing it may have been in an album for decades before that. I got it for significantly less than that 2008 price and I love the coin--it will represent its type very well in my US coin collection. I am trying to learn to navigate some of the "gray areas" between AU(58), MS(61), and MS(62) more effectively, and I am thankful to this forum for helping me learn through experience.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18664 Posts |
Quote:
I am trying to learn to navigate some of the "gray areas" between AU(58), MS(61), and MS(62) when you have a heavily toned coin it makes it even more challenging determining the difference between these grades. having the coin in hand helps a lot as one cannot rotate a photo in the light, which in a lot of cases, is needed to see minor wear from circulation especially if its a high end AU58. for the MS61/62 it typically comes down to the eye appeal and number of surface issues, scratches, abrasions, small dings etc. on your coin I did not see any circulation wear based on the photos. I felt it was not strong enough for a 63 grade and not enough issues to drop it to a 61. therefore MS62 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
Nice looking dime, I've always loved the Gobrecht no stars in the field look the best. I was a bit late to the game, but pegged it at MS61 before I scrolled down to post and saw the grade had been posted. I missed the O/O mintmark though.
"Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2¢ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
752 Posts |
Just like with my 1796 dime, the dealer/ cofounder of PCGS suggested that I try to cross this coin into a PCGS holder. I said I would be willing to accept even an MS(60) grade, given the surfaces seeming just slightly too abraded to be a 62 for me (I would have guessed 61 for this coin).
PCGS also refused to cross this coin, again citing "Questionable Color." I still think it is an attractice coin, and I've heard people with more experience and expertise than me take both sides on this one, some saying they thought the toning was natural and some saying they thought it to be unnatural.
Again, I bought the coin and not the holder, but it would be nice for this type coin to be in a PCGS holder in a PCGS box with the rest of my dimes.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188440 Posts |
That is terrible. Two disappointing results.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1094 Posts |
The coin does not appear to have any wear. Love the toning. I collect 1/2 dimes and have several with similar toning. I thought MS 62 due to the eye appeal as well. These dimes, 1/2 dimes and 3 cent silvers from this era were so small that scratches like the one on the obverse are probably extremely difficult to see with the naked eye. Great purchase.
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 2,666 |
First Page
Posted 01/14/2021 12:34 pm
