GTG: 1963 D Franklin

I have seen disparities both ways on grading, but to imply that NGC automatically grades 2 points higher than PCGS is ridiculous and shows that you don't know what you are talking about (with all due respect). And I say that as someone who has successfully crossed several coins to PCGS and has submitted to both services.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Back in the day NGC thought it was a 64. If resubmitted it might get a 65, but it wouldn't really be worth it as there are thousands graded at 65.

 

64 is the right grade for it.

This holder pre-dates the FBL designation. It looks like it has a good shot at being FBL, but a 64FBL is really only worth $30, so it isn't worth it.

 

I'm curious as to your thoughts of why the coin does not merit full gem status. I have seen a number of inferior specimens in gem holders.

 

That doesn't make it right. I've seen worse in higher grade holders as well.

The marks and surface condition look on par with a 65, sure. The strike is decent. However, the luster is really lacking. It may just be the pics, but the luster looks really weak on this coin. You need good luster for a 65.

 

You are correct. In hand the luster is just average.

 

I chalked up the luster, in part, to the pictures. I now understand your comments better; thanks!

 

You guys put too much stock in luster 'round here. When I see a coin like this, Strike and surface presentation alone merit gem grade. FBL gives it that extra umph and its got PLENTY of eye appeal.The luster IS there just partially muted because of the toning.I find this to be a very attractive coin and so did the OP obviously. Ive seen worse 66s !!