| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,308 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6389 Posts |
I bought this coin as a raw MS several years ago. When SuperDave organized a group submission to PCGS for forum members I sent this coin to be included. PCGS rejected it as "cleaned" (this was before they offered their Genuine service for problem coins). I later sent it back to PCGS and they once again rejected it, this time for "altered surface". I was uncomfortable leaving this tiny coin an a 2X2 holder so I recently sent it to ANACS, knowing they would slab it even if they found a problem. These are some of the outstanding photos SuperDave took of the raw coin in 2007. Care to guess how ANACS finally graded it?   |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Looks like it may have rim damage but I'd guess ANACS said AU50 details.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
If cleaned, it must be an old one. I like the look of the surfaces. The rim does look "filed", though I bet it's hardly noticable on such a tiny coin. I like it as AU-55/58.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
75% of the ANACS holders I see, have "cleaned" on them, or some other problem. This time, I am going to say that ANACS called this coin AU53 with no problems. The "rim damage" IMO, is not major enough to mention as a problem. Slight wipe awhile back, maybe. Nice coin.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
I think the coin is at least AU-58 for detail.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
266 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
763 Posts |
I will say AU55. I'm not sure if it merits a details grade or not. I'm sure the rim hit looks better when it is not so magnified.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
This is a Nice coin. I wish I had it in my NGC certifed collection. AU-55
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
It looks close to MS, but I agree with AU58 with the possibility of a details grade.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6389 Posts |
Well, Vermontensium had it exactly right. It still looks MS to me, with intact luster throughout the fields (partly subdued by the toning). Perhaps there is some slight rub on Liberty's breasts and right thigh, enough to drop it to AU. From that point, maybe the obverse rim issue at 9:00 caused some net-grading. Nevertheless, ANACS called it as problem-free, despite the PCGS rejection history. They also noted a repunched date which I was unaware of and still don't see in the photos or in-hand. I'm just happy to finally have gotten this little beauty into a problem-free slab.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
225 Posts |
I would have thougth it would have net graded due to the marks at 9:00, but maybe they just net graded it due to the very nice look.
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,308 |
|
Posted 02/17/2011 02:33 am
