| Author |
 Replies: 8 / Views: 1,171 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
436 Posts |
Well, if pgcs says environmental damage, I sure wouldn't give au money for it, no matter what I may think.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
588 Posts |
whats environmental damage?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
whats environmental damage? Most commonly, miscellaneous weathering caused by the coin having lain outdoors for a period of its' life. This particular coin shows far too much wear even in the small photos for consideration as AU Details; technically, without the damage, I'd be hard-pressed to even consider it EF. This is hardly an uncommon issue, and the owner spent more than the coin is worth by having it slabbed. |
|
Valued Member
 United States
280 Posts |
thanks guys I figured $60 for the coin was a lot but I wanted to see what yall thought
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
Most commonly, miscellaneous weathering caused by the coin having lain outdoors for a period of its' life. This particular coin shows far too much wear even in the small photos for consideration as AU Details; technically, without the damage, I'd be hard-pressed to even consider it EF. Really? I usually agree with you on grades, but I would have guessed this coin as having AU details. It is hard to see the details from the pics; however, the reverse eagle appears to have full wing details, a full tail, and breast detail; all of which would be muted in XF imho. With that said, it's still not a coin worth getting slabbed. Edited by johnny54321
11/08/2009 12:48 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Really? I usually agree with you on grades, but I would have guessed this coin as having AU details. Here's my thinking, with the understanding that we're working from pretty small photos. The shield details are pretty strong, indicative of a good strike. There's a "plateau" area down the middle of the obverse. I see that as wear, being pretty much flat to the dark edges. On the reverse, I see very little left of the breast feathers. Given what seems like a nice strike, for me this adds up to XF. Of course, with such small photos I'm just as likely to change my mind if I saw the coin in-hand. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
ere's my thinking, with the understanding that we're working from pretty small photos.
The shield details are pretty strong, indicative of a good strike. There's a "plateau" area down the middle of the obverse. I see that as wear, being pretty much flat to the dark edges. On the reverse, I see very little left of the breast feathers. Given what seems like a nice strike, for me this adds up to XF. Of course, with such small photos I'm just as likely to change my mind if I saw the coin in-hand. Fair enough, thanks for the explanation. I see a lot of "roughness" on the breast that leads me to think there is a lot of detail there, but it may just be the photo. Although I don't see "luster" from these pics, the overall look of the coin leads me to think there may be a lot remaining, but I could be wrong. I agree that I would need to see it in hand to make a final decision as the pics may be misleading. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Keep in mind, the minute the term "environmental damage" comes up, all considerations of luster go out the window. Even if the coin has only weathered in the outdoors - PCGS only chooses one code to give a Genuine slab and the coin could have been further cleaned after discovery - its' surfaces can no longer be trusted.
|
| |
Replies: 8 / Views: 1,171 |
|
Posted 11/07/2009 6:41 pm
