I Need Some SERIOUS Opinions About This Coin

I'm seriously considering buying this coin.
I need your opinions about its grade.
This much I will tell you:
-- it's in a PCGS slab
-- it's NOT labeled Genuine (Details).
Grade it to a level that PCGS would use (e.g., not VF, but VF-15)
I know what PCGS graded it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't do copper but let me take a shot....

Looks like a VF/XF reverse, with a F obverse, I'm going to call it a VF25

 

Not a copper guru either. Early copper usually gets a bump, but if not details I would wager grade lowered due to surfaces. F15 is the highest I could justify in my mind. However, if they ignored surface porosity, maybe VF25 as a net between front and back. Early copper, especially 93 coins, just seem to get a huge benefit of the doubt in my eyes.

 

No question in my mind that this is the sort of coin that gets a bump because of rarity.
And of course then there's Market Grading (or is that the same thing).

I'll wait for more input before I expose the PCGS grade.
Since the difference in one step can be in the 4-figure range I want to get an educated consensus.

Who's our EAC people in here?
Condor?
Others?

 

VF20. Cleaned off corrosion, but as long as it is stabilized and no longer active, I don't mind a market grade. These are so scarce, that the TPG's don't mind letting them straight grade. And collectors.... well, beggars can't be choosers. Otherwise you may have to wait 20 years to find a "perfect" VF.

 

I'm at F15, with a probable bump to 20 for it being what it is.

Paging @Marshall & @Conder101

 

What do you mean it's not labeled genuine?
Reverse is better at VF
Obverse VG to me even with old copper flexibility. So that would grade F-12.

 

I think he meant it is straight graded, and not graded as "Genuine Details", which is what PCGS puts on lower grade details coins.

 

I see thank you. I was confused by that sentence.
The parentheses messed me up.
Genuine-Details would have been clearer to me.

 

I'm gonna stick my neck out and say that due to the surfaces, this would be an EAC G06.

 

I give you credit, @C-B-D, I won't even pretend to know how to grade in the EAC world.

 

I'll say VF20 netted to 15 for the corrosion.

Love that reverse design.

 

I'd say F-15.

 

@Jack D. Young I believe Jack is a guru at these. I'm certainly of no use, sorry.

 

I'm thinking VG10 on the obv, more of a F 12 on the rev. Definitely not a type I am comfortable grading!

 

When I took Grading 1 and 2 at the ANA Summer Seminars I found I had strong tendencies to do technical grading, not market grading.
That causes me grief on coins like this one.

A lot of your opinions were like mine.
I see the obverse as a VG-10.
I see the reverse as F-12, maybe even F-15.
Since split grades are no longer done AND the obverse tends to have precedence over the reverse I settled tentatively for VG-10.
But with your help I've decided I can live with F-12.
Which is good since that's what PCGS graded it, F-12.

Next thing I want to do is surf into PCGS and look up the slab number.
If there's an image of the coin I want to do a comparison.
Hopefully I can still get logged in there (the easy part) and find out how to look up slab ID numbers (often difficult to navigate around places like that).

If I want to go for it the next part will be negotiating the price.

Thanks to all who took the time and effort to help.

 

SCORE 1 FOR ED WOOD!

 

To me, for any 93 coin, that is a fantastic looking F-12. Most I have seen in that range for a 93 do not look as nice.

 

This is definitely out of my pay grade but I really like the coin. Hope it works out for you.

 

Since you wanted PCGS standards...



I say F-15