I believe the coin grades much much higher than 62BN PCGS value is at $67 - 64BN=$90 - 65BN=$150 I have gained a lot of very helpful information on here. I am hoping to get some of the finer points and what it takes to image a coin as close to "in hand" as possible. First off, in hand, it is veryclose to RB there is a lot of red poking through the brown. These first shots are with the lighting severely diffused so it appears a consistent brown - I'll reshoot later with direct lighting and axial - to better capture colors and the luster .
Not worth it to resubmit. Personally, I'd crack it and toss the plastic. I think they niced it for the lack of luster and the reverse die, it's worn....even though it's not fair to grade discount for that on a Lincoln IMO. Look how they treat the 20's S mint coins. I think it's a 64.
Nice coin, but I would not resubmit/crackout this one. With the small dings running down the center of the obverse, personally I don't think this coin is an MS-64. So at best, a breakout might net you an MS-63RB, and that's if the service agrees with you on color. Looking at actual sales records at Teletrade, I see a lot of variance in the hammer price of the 1914 Lincoln in the MS-62 to MS-64 range. To my eye, it looks like buyers are actually (*gasp*) buying the coin instead of the holder. So unless you are planning to sell it sight unseen, you're not going to recover the costs of the second slabbing.
Thank you for the comments. My inclination is now to leave it be, if I do resubmit it, I'll crack it out and submit it with this MS62BN still in the slab for just a reholdering.. LOL Just following up on this mission or exercise in futility... Turns out this coin doesn't want to look that different by varying the lighting position so I changed the lighting type. The first shot is white balanced with a halogen spot trying to get it to reflect the luster. This shot is probably more what the coin looks like in hand. Who sits under daylight halogens?? It was shot with (2) GE Reveals at the 10 & 2 position using the white balance from the halogen.
The 14 is a nice coin but I think that hit low on his coat is the reason for the lower grade. I too would not resubmit at this time as there is not enough upside potential.
I think I commented on this coin in another thread that it looked better than a 62. Made me scratch my head. A mentor of mine says that when you have a head scratching grade, you should ask yourself, "What am I missing?" Lack of obverse luster is the only thing that concerns me with the coin, and if I had to guess, that's why it may have graded 62. What are we missing?
Not saying that it is the case with this 1914, but sometimes PCGS and NGC will market grade very nice looking AU58 coins using the MS62 grade. This is especially true with semi-key and key date coins. So, if the coin looks like an MS64/MS65, but just has a tiny tiny bit of rub that can hardly be seen, it may end up in an MS62 holder instead of an AU58 holder that it technically belongs in. An additional possiblity is that on copper coins PCGS will knock a coin down pretty hard, especailly copper, for odd toning/spotting and usually limit the grade to a max of MS62 or maybe MS63. Hard to tell if it's just really exaggerated in the photo, but there is some red-purple spotting on the left wheat ear on the reverse of this 1914. Perhaps PCGS didn't like the look of this in hand? I know that sometimes purple-red colored spots on copper is evidence of corrosion and should be avoided, without seeing it in hand though it's hard to say whether that is a possiblity here.
I feel that the MS-62 is very close. The bag marks on the profile can ding the grade. The reverse looks like some partial grease struck through. But over all this is a very good coin for it's age.
