Can't - still a proof as far as I know. I think I saw a proof 50 one time where it mentioned the wear. So as far as I know "proof" is the method the coin is made - so the coin will always be proof. If I recall correctly there was pattern IHC that was proof that also mentioned wear.
Mishandling wouldn't change a proof coin to an MS coin - though it should lower the grade. Even people who know the difference between a Proof coin and a business strike sometimes place "MS" before the numerical grade - no biggie.
Checked my '08 Red Book and see the listing for the 1950 PF-65 with a $50.00 value. Of course, the final price is always whatever a buyer will pay. I would want that 50p Roosevelt to be near perfect and professionally graded for $85.00. jeankay
I sure don't see anything there that makes me think that coin is a proof. The 1950 proofs weren't always well made, but raw and unable to see it in hand I sure wouldn't buy it as a proof.
I agree with Cave Troll, I honestly don't think that is a proof to begin with. Could be wrong though, since I don't have it in hand. Phoenix
In the CoinValues website the 1950 Pf65 lists for $50. IMO, When I use this pricing guide I buy my coins from 75-50% of their listed value when I can. That would be around $25 to $37.50. I feel that that is a fairer price than what's listed. If that coin is an MS65 then it's listed at $35 which means that $17.50 to $26 is reasonable in MS 65 state. Bruce
Can't say I quite agree with that Mark. A proof is not an MS coin is it? Doesn't MS refer to business strikes which a proof is not? It's either one or the other - can't be both. A dealer putting both on a holder (especially on ebay - the land of the uninformed) seems a bit crooked to me. I actually do understand your point but would this coin slab as an MS65 Proof?
Yep, a common mistake. Kinda like calling a cent a penny. Technically incorrect but we all know what they mean.
No, of course a Proof is not an MS coin, nor did I say it could be. And while "MS" should refer to a business strike, proofs are graded to the same (Sheldon/MS) grading scale. Hence, some people, even knowledgeable ones, place the "MS" in front of the numerical grade for proof coins. I don't see anything necessarily crooked about it.
maybe he was trying to say here is you Proof, that it is an ms65??? like someone didnt believe he had one. or it could just be a silly mistake.
If a proof coin entered circulation and received slight wear it may be graded PR-55. PF-55 tells us the coin was struck as a proof coin and it has slight wear. The coin would not be graded Proof MS-65 because those are conflicting terms. MS means 'Mint State' which implies the coin is a business strike. Below is an example of a circulated proof coin that has been graded PR-55.
Thank you HOBO, That is what I was trying to say in my last post.you have explained it beautifully.the point I was trying to get across was that there are different grades of proof as in circulated proofs.Proof is the way that the coin was struck. Thanks again, Coinman...
The seller more than likely added the MS instead of PF by mistake(As someone has already pointed out). The thing i never figured out is MS or PF 69, first strikes. In my opinion only coins that grade a 70 should be awarded the first strike designation. The first strikes go under the assumption that the fresh dies produce more pristine coins. Giving a 69 a first strike designation totally contradicts the pristine coin logic.
I would disagree. Even if a coin is the very first coin struck, it could still be possible for it to get a very minor hit or something to keep it from being a perfect coin. Don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from (I don't understand the first strike thing either! ), but, the first coin off of the die can still grade a 69. Or even a 68. I could be totally wrong too though, so I apologize in advance if I am. :hug: Phoenix