| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,452 |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
I'm sending this coin to PCGS and wanted some opinions. It's got beautiful luster but I'm concerned that the surfaces may have been played with in the past. The previous owner gave me his grade opinion and said the surfaces might be problem if I try to slab it. Since it's a free submission on PCGS' quarterly special I thought I'd give it a shot. Thoughts on a grade?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1055 Posts |
There is some wear present. Can't see any hairlines in the pic but it does look un-natural bright to have wear present. I have a hard time grading classic gold but will take a stab.
I will go with AU-53 details
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6385 Posts |
I would guess this is a mint state coin. The photos don't show tremendous luster but what does show appears intact over the fields. I would expect dullness in the fields if the coin had been worn.
The scattered nicks on the reverse should limit the grade to MS-62 max. I don't see any particular indicator for "played with" surfaces, but then I never do on those coins that PCGS rejects for "altered surface".
It's worth a shot if the quarterly special applies and you are already sending in a submission. Good luck, and please let us know how it does!
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I agree with Jaobler. I see very little wear and great luster in the fields. The only thing holding it back that I can see is lack of luster on the Indian's face and some of the other devices. This could be enough to drop the coin to a 58, but I can't see it going below AU-58 grade-wise. My guess for this coins, if no problems, is MS-62.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10982 Posts |
Well this coin was graded AU58 per the previous owner. The high points of the obverse do show a bit of a rub and I agreed with his grade.
It doesn't show up well in the pics (seller's images posted) but there is a glossy, almost semi-polished, look to the devices. I bought it a year and a half ago for $490 delivered so even a Genuine holder won't break my heart.
PCGS has it now and I'll post the results when they're available. Thanks for the opinions.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
PCGS I don't believe will body bag it.
If luster is good MS-62 or 63
If luster is not so good AU-58
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Got it back a few days ago. Not real happy but at least it only cost the round trip shipping. 92 = cleaned.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
obviously PCGS thought the coin to be cleaned or otherwise altered.
this is one and only one of the reasons I disagree with slabs, if left in this plastic tomb the coin will always and for eternity carry this stigma (geniune), while I and others here did not see anything wrong with the sufaces of this coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1523 Posts |
Why would they not grade the details and mark it as altered surface?ANACS would have.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Quote:
Why would they not grade the details and mark it as altered surface? PCGS notes the problem with a number, in this case 92 for cleaned, and slabs them in "Genuine" holders. This particular coin is lightly cleaned but otherwise in very good shape. AU details at a minimum. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1523 Posts |
Since you didn't pay to have this slabbed I would send it to another grading company and at least get it graded even if it has been wiped.
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,452 |
|
Posted 02/06/2010 11:36 pm
