| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 741 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5256 Posts |
Here's another coin I recently submitted to PCGS for grading, hoping for a full steps designation. Given the inconsistency of FS determination at the TPG's, it's always a crap shoot when trying for a FS grade. So I'm asking for your opinion on the grade and whether it got a FS label from PCGS. I'll post the results in a couple days.    |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
868 Posts |
Nice looking nickel, but I'm going to say no to FS due to the FS due to the bottom center step being "broken". IMHO
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
17739 Posts |
 Very nice coin but not FS.
Inordinately fascinated by bits of metal with strange markings and figures
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
MS65FS. I can find at least five full steps nickels in their image catalog for 1952-S that have bigger interruptions in the steps than your coin. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin...images/84048Just to be clear, I am trying to predict whether PCGS will grade this nickel as Full Steps. By the strictest application of the FS guidelines, this coin might be a hair shy of FS. PCGS varies strongly by year and mint, particularly in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Edited by Brandmeister
02/18/2025 4:46 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
57559 Posts |
I'll say MS-65, but no to FS.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1391 Posts |
A very nice clean coin but the strike on both sides is a bit weak holding this coin back to MS65 IMO.
As to FS - I think as Brandmeister has stated, it could go either way. There are definitely examples in PCGS slabs that look similar and are graded full step.
I say PCGS doesn't give this one the designation due to the weaker strike however.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6011 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5256 Posts |
Well, @Brandmeister nailed this one, both with the grade and the steps. I thought this was more likely than not to get a FS designation when I sent it in, but it definitely was a gamble. If it hadn't gotten FS, it would have been worth less in the slab than the cost to grade it. Fortunately, it went my way this time!   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1257 Posts |
Congrats on a great outcome!  |
|
Moderator
United States
161253 Posts |
Outstanding!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
Fantastic grade! It's amazing the price difference that FS designation makes on years with rarity. Congrats on a calculated risk paying off. =)
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
33743 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
As Lefty Gomez once said, it is better to be lucky than good. =P
Although I would interpret this as a case where skill led to strategically placing a bet in the path of opportunity.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
57559 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3135 Posts |
Question (that I'm pretty sure has been asked and answered on other threads...)
Do you have to request FS inspection/designation from PCGS and/or NGC, or do they automatically check for that? Having looked at a lot of graded Jeffersons, it seems to me that PCGS is a little freer about granting that designation that NGC may be. I have a few that I've considered sending in, but it would be good to know the process beforehand. Thanks.
"Nummi rari mira sunt, si sumptus ferre potes." - Christophorus filius Scotiae
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5256 Posts |
For PCGS as least, there's no need to request that since it's supposed to be reviewed automatically. However, there's a spot on the submission form to list the PCGS coin number, and since a full step Jefferson and a regular Jefferson have different PCGS #'s, I listed the FS number. I doubt it affects their judgement, but it made me feel better that they would have to have a reason to change it. Quote:
You got lucky. No argument there! |
| |
Replies: 18 / Views: 741 |
Posted 02/18/2025 3:44 pm
