Does this look like a MS-66 to you?

From the picture I can't tell . but it very well could be a 66 under that ugly toning if the originol surface is well preserved .
rzage

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes. Looks like a nice original piece to boot.

 

I'm no expert on these, but I don't think they are "world" coins. I think they are considered part of the US series; they're in the Red Book.

Hawaii was a kingdom at the time (1883), and became a US territory in 1900 (according to Red Book).

 

OK... I plead guilty. Yes, it is a bit arrogant. On the other hand, it's just a personal opinion.

In a sense, "buy the coin, not the holder" means I may be disagreeing with 3 pros with much more experience than I have when I pass on a coin due to perceived overgrading.

 

Due to the noteriety of the 1804 dollar, this will always be a high-profile anecdote.

At the EAC convention in Dallas, I was privileged to hear an NGC man give their side of the story on this one. As I recall, this coin was graded AU when it had significant toning on it. That toning obscured the coin's surfaces, so it was graded AU as a "defensive" measure - conservatively graded since they couldn't be sure.

Then the coin was "conserved", thus presenting a clearer picture of the coin's true surfaces. In their opinion, there was no trace of wear, so it merited a 62.

In that respect, giving it a 62 speaks very highly of their integrity ! They had to know there would be much criticism, so they must have felt strongly about giving it a 62. They stuck to their guns.

I truly hope I'm giving a clear recollection of what I heard. I don't want to distort such a high-profile issue as this one; if I'm off, someone please post up.

And yes, I feel NGC and Heritage are very solid and fair. No one's perfect; there will always be anecdotes about foul-ups. The key is

• how many / how severe compared to their full body of work
• how do they stand behind their product when something is not right

In my experience, they are true professionals.

 

I toning is Ugly IMO, But still look past that and from those pictures the coin lloks mark and problem free. That toning is deceiving

 

I truly hope I'm giving a clear recollection of what I heard. I don't want to distort such a high-profile issue as this one; if I'm off, someone please post up.

And yes, I feel NGC and Heritage are very solid and fair. No one's perfect; there will always be anecdotes about foul-ups. The key is

• how many / how severe compared to their full body of work
• how do they stand behind their product when something is not right

In my experience, they are true professionals.[/quote]

I read somewhere ( I think Coin Values ) That the approval rate wasabout 90% for PCGS and 84% for NGC , with ANACS maybe 82% , meaning they got the grading right about 85% of the time between them . The % I give are probably off a couple % points.
rzage:smile

 

I read somewhere ( I think Coin Values ) That the approval rate wasabout 90% for PCGS and 84% for NGC , with ANACS maybe 82% , meaning they got the grading right about 85% of the time between them . The % I give are probably off a couple % points.
rzage:smile[/quote]


Who determines whether "they got the grading right" or not? :whistle:

 

That explanation regarding the toning obscuring the surfaces of the 1804 Dollar, a "defensive measure", etc., conflicts with much of the grading that NGC and PCGS do. There are countless deeply toned coins which receive high/non-defensive/non conservative grades.

Furthermore, when it comes to high profile rarities, the grading companies appear to be extra lenient in their grading and seem to have unannounced contests to see who can grade the coins high enough to get them into their holders instead of those of their competitors.

 

I am curious what is the source of your information?

 

Examples please.

 

Examples? I attend about 15 major coin shows per year and examine thousands of certified coins at each one of them. My main focus is on toned, high grade type coinage. I also view about a dozen major auctions per year. Lastly, I was a grader at NGC for 7 years. You are free to take my word about what I said, or not.

 

Just experience with submiting to the services at present, contact with dealers who submit literally thousands of coins to both services and the knowledge of who the graders are at the services presently.

 

There are many coins to which examples could be made, but two good areas are Bust Halves and Morgan Dollars. In both of these series, I have seen coins that look technically Gem defensively graded MS62-64 because of toning. Many of theese coins could have been dipped and they would have been blast white with superb luster. Then they would have easily graded gem.

Of course, I am not advocating going out and dipping nice original coins.

 

On the other hand, I see many toned Bust Half Dollars graded MS63 to MS66, which, if dipped, I believe should/would grade lower than their current grades.

 

Who determines whether "they got the grading right" or not? :whistle:[/quote]
Don't know , maybe their reveiw board , all I know is that I read this in Coin Values and don't they own ANACS , also in the article ANACS got the worst rating of the 3 , even though it was only a couple % PTS. lower than NGC. Why would they trash their own company.
rzage:smile

 

Here is just one example of many.

PCGS MS68.

 

Now that looks much better than the auction coin. You can see the toning quite nicely in pleasing colors.