Grade this AWESOME 1967 SMS Kennedy Half!

Good point. I was just trying to bring up something for discussion.


I tend to agree with what Troll said.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This isn't what this post was about. I don't go around dipping coins left and right to sell them off. This is the first coin I've ever had dipped, because it looked horrible. In this thread, I was simply asking if you thought the coin

a)looked better
b) would grade higher
c) and what grading company I should send it to

So if you could get out of the moral discussion, that would be great.

 

In spite of the negative comments about flipping, the coin does look great.
That is a very scarce cameo.
Good luck.

 

Thanks a lot Frank!

 

Paul:
Personally, I see nothing wrong with making a buck or two on a coin. Whether you hold it for a year or 6 hours, you are selling a coin to someone who will appreciate owning it.
I have sold coins in the past, and my family won't let me do it any more, because I act as tho I am losing a child. I moan & groan as I seal the package.
I guess that I am the same way with my Red Books & Blue Books, I have tons of duplicates and even sold a box of dups at one time, and I made a nice profit on them....but I still miss them.
I do own one of the ugliest 1st edition, 1st printing Red Books in existance, and yet I can't bring myself to sell it, even tho I have several that are near mint. However, if I ever do sell it, I will make a profit on it, or not sell it!
Sure, unlike coins, I cannot dip the books, but I can clean them up and make them more attractive. Still, is that bad of me? I have a collection of old books and periodically dust them, use furniture polish on the bindings to keep them soft so that the bindings won't split and crack. Is that cheating someone if I someday sell them? I think not.
I do have an 1893 Barber half dollar that is solid black. I am going to send it to NCS to 'conserve' it and then hopefully it will be slabable. Right now it is as unattractive an AU-58 as any coin in existance -- and has one of the strongest strikes that I have ever seen, yet it needs help... and it will someday get the help that it deserves.
Same with your coin, pre-cleaning it was ugly and unattractive. Now, it is a wow cameo SMS, and that is a really scarce coin.
Good luck with your sale, if you decide to sell it, or......who knows you may decide to fall in love wit hit.

 

Personally, I think it looks much better, and I would rather have the latter as opposed to the former. If you do decide to sell it, as long as it was neutralized properly and will continue to look that way for the next buyer, I don't see why there should be any moral doubts as to whether this is right or wrong.

 

My friend is going to send the coin in to PCGS late next week for me....So I won't see it for a while...lol....Hopefully it will come back DC =)

 

Except that I think one of the members here works for PCGS and may alert someone to be on the lookout for that coin... not because it looks like it was dipped, but because they have knowledge of it from reading this board.

 

I don't think they can simply say, "oh, I think this is the same coin" and reject it....it's based on objective (kind of) observation, not subjective.

 

I personally think the coin would grade a 66 cameo. In my personal opinion I would send the coin to NGC. I don't think there is quite enough obverse contrast for it to be called Dcam, but it is tough to tell just from a picture.

 

I used to work there, and IMO they would not do that. If they felt the coin in it's current state is DCAM regardless of being dipped, they will call it DCAM.

 

I don't believe that he works he works for them anymore.

My first though is that it won't make DCAM....its not very thick, and the little part on the REV where it is lacking would put it down to CAM. Still a nice coin and like Zane said...I would send it to NGC.

Speedy

 

Like a hit and run victem? Personally, I would have been more interested in the coin before it was dipped. If I suspect a 1967 has been dipped, I would not buy it. And when you look at this coin, you can see parts of it that look dipped when compared to the shiny background..

Ruben

 

Except for the shield and the part under the eye where there should be a pronounced wrinkle. This coin now looks obviously dipped. I'll accept it from an old Morgan assuming that it was obviously done a long time ago, but forget a new '67 Kennedy. There are millions of fine undipped examples.

Ruben

 

Metal Detecting in a grave yard is more ethical.

 

do they really do that?

 

Wow. I never knew that either. I'd bet there are some surprised collectors out there who submitted coins and got them back looking so different. It might even make one wonder if it was the same coin.

 

Well, isn't that special...


Ben