64 P Kennedy....Grade anyone?

Found this one in an old box at my late grandmother's place. What does everyone think?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There is too much glare on the plastic to be able to clearly see the surfaces of the coin. If possible take the coin out of the holder and retake the photos.

Unless the coin is exceptional (e.g., MS-66 or higher - which I doubt it is) it is probably only worth melt value or very, very slightly above melt.

 

Let's try these....could not get the best photos, but gave it a shot.

 

Hard to be sure with those photos, but I'm inclined to agree...nothing in either photo makes me think it's got much if any premium attached.

If I just had to stab, I'd say it's in the mid-high 50's...maybe an AU55-AU58. Looks like there's some wear below the part of the hair, and then maybe just the beginnings of some wear on the cheek bone. There also appears (though it could be the plastic...not sure) to be a really odd set of what look like triangular dings just above the ear.

 

I'd say AU-55. It's worth more as junk silver than anything else. There are millions of these in relatively pristine condition.

the fact that it came from family may prove to be its greatest value, however. Nice find!

 

Too bad you didn't find a whole bag full.

 

Okay...I have been working on the picture thing....same coin, better process on my side to get the pictures right...high 50's is current thought, these change anyone's mind??

 

If that's "better process" and those pictures are "right" then yeah, my mind is changed...low 50's at best now due to what appears to be a complete lack of mint luster remaining.

At this point, to be honest, unless you're just looking for a grading exercise, there's really not much point in wharrgarbling about a few points either side of 50...it's junk silver, period. Of course, that was also true earlier, when it looked nicer in the other pictures...it was still WELL south of an MS coin in any grade, and a 64 Kennedy is only going to carry a premium in the highest MS grades.

It FEELS to me like you think this coin is something special, and you're trying very hard to get someone to agree with you. I'm afraid no set of pictures in the world (other than an outright altered set) is going to change the facts that:

1) The coin is lightly worn below the part of the hair
2) Light wear is beginning to show on the high points of the cheek bone
3) There's 3 triangular dings above the ear that almost certainly can't be "bag marks".

It's a plain ole lightly circulated 90% silver Kennedy. Stash it or sell it, or start a set of circulated Kennedy Halves with it.

 

I agree. Value?

$10.62 melt, as of this moment.

 

Thanks for the input....not a value question....grading exercise as I am learning. I was giving it high AU to low MS, but the education here is invaluable to my learning curve as a collector. Found the better pictures helped my grading as the dings above the ear become much more visible in the good pictures. The family value is why I keep in the collection.

I have this one in a set of Unc Kennedy Halves....I put it on low end of MS with the linear toning. How far off am I? I know the pictures have me rethinking a little.

 

If this is all a grading exercise, then by all means, let us continue! I stand to learn as much as anyone, I'm sure.

As for the most recent one, I'm going to have to disagree with it's MS grade at all. If it IS truly uncirculated, then it is, in MY opinion, a fairly abused uncirculated coin. Of course, that gets into the whole debate between "Mint State" and "Uncirculated", etc.

=======<BEGIN SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC MONOLOGUE HERE>========

As an aside, I always believe there should be a distinction between the two, or at least one should be ruthlessly clear about one's intent. For example:

Let's take a planchet, put it in a press, and strike a coin on it. It is, at that very minute, both "Mint State" and "Uncirculated". We can be certain on both of those. Since it hasn't even left the press yet, it clearly hasn't "circulated" anywhere, and is, by definition, in the condition or state it was in when the mint struck it.

As soon as it leaves the press, however, things can start getting a little out of whack.

Let's say a careless mint worker drops it on the floor, and a couple more step on it, before someone sees it, picks it up, and tosses it into the correct bin.

Obviously, we'll now have a damaged, and possibly worn coin. But, this can't really be called "Post Mint Damage" can it? It happened AT the mint.

By definition, the coin is STILL in "Mint State". It hasn't left the mint yet, so this IS, indeed, the state it was in at the mint. Of course, it's obviously not what is MEANT by "mint state".

But where do we draw the line on the damage? "Bag marks", which are by definition damage from contact, are allowed on a "mint state" coin, even though they were not present when it was struck. So...is "scuff mark from the floor"...which is damage from contact...also acceptable if it happened in the process of the mint handling the coin?

And note here...ALL of this still leaves the coin "uncirculated"...nobody has spent it, received it in change, or even acquired it from a bank.

Once on the subject of circulation, we get into the whole 'shelf wear" issue, or what have you. A coin can certainly wear simply from handling in collection...in and out of an album, or 2x2, or picked up and returned to a shelf for display, etc etc.

This coin too is clearly not "circulated"...but has been handled in many of the same physical ways as a circulating coin might be, resulting in the same type of wear.

It's obviously not "mint state" at that point...but is it "circulated"?

Having said all of this...

=======<END SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC MONOLOGUE HERE>========

I, personally, can't agree that this is a mint state, or even uncirculated coin. Here's why:

1) Again, look at the hair below the part, particularly directly above the ear. See how smooth it is? Now, admittedly, this IS a business strike coin, and some 64's were struck pretty weak...but note how it seems to sort of "blend" into more defined hair lines, as it "falls off" from that center blank area? To my eyes, that says "wear". In EITHER case, it certainly detracts from the grade, and if "mint state", it's going to be at the low end.

2) Now look at the high point of the cheek, just right of the nose and below the "end" of the eye. See how it's slightly "muted"...that is, it's somewhat more "dull", or doesn't "pop" like the areas around it. Again, these suggest wear.

3) On the reverse, look at the feathers on the eagle's neck. See how the feathers are "blending" together, and not clearly defined? More indication of wear.

Now...all 3 of those are simply observations of the most commonly worn points on a Kennedy half. There may be other evidence of wear elsewhere, but those are the 3 places I check first on any coin listed as "mint state" or "uncirculated".

Aside from those areas :

4) In the field of the obverse, between Kennedy's mouth and the "L" of Liberty, there is a fairly significant gouge or ding.

5) There are 3 (maybe 4, can't tell if it's a mark or a ding) dings in Kennedy's hair, below and very slightly left of the E. They're in a row, making it seem more to me like PMD than a simple "bag mark".

6) Draw a diagonal line from the ear to the "B", and about halfway along it you'll find 1 or 2 MORE ding(s) that look(s) like the ones in 3 above.

7) There's a large ding on the top of the F in "HALF DOLLAR" on the reverse.

======================

Any or all of these things COULD be significantly better, worse, more/less noticeable, etc, on the coin in hand. Only you can be the judge of that.

And, to be sure, ALL of them CAN be explained, perhaps, by things other than circulation.

However...for ME, anyway, I'd need some fairly detailed explanation and re-education to call that a mint state or uncirculated coin.

Hard for me to tell how much mint luster remains on this coin, from that photograph...but I'm going to presume there's a significant amount, otherwise it would not have been considered "uncirculated" at some point. For me, there's a bit too many dings, marks, and wear spots to go anything above AU55, and possibly lower (perhaps as far down as an XF4x grade) depending on how it looks in hand.

I could, of course, be in for the re-education I asked for above...so YMMV, certainly.

 

What the heck is wharrgarbling? I like the sound of it, and now want to use it in everyday conversation.

 

tldr.

 

:too-funny:

Well, its origin is fairly simple. It's the sound a dog makes when drinking from a sprinkler :



As an internet meme, however, it is generally accepted to mean the pointless rambling, yelling, or arguing that frequently occurs in forums.

For example, when a couple of posters get going about Obama vs Bush, it's a near certainty that both of them will, at some point, wharrgarbl.

"BUT BUSH'S TAX CUTS MADE US ALL _______!!!11!! OMG HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID NOT TO SEE THAT?!?!?!"

"BUT OBAMA AND THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND __________ OMG YOU EVIL KENYAN TERRORIST SOCIALIST!!!11!!"

That sort of thing.

Intelligent, informed discourse USUALLY isn't wharrgarbl...but it can get that way fairly quickly, ESPECIALLY if the discourse is leading to a relatively pointless end.

In this case, it PROBABLY would have, since, bluntly, the difference in an MS63 or MS64 64P Kennedy Half is...well...not much, and has no real practical significance in any market. So...why wharrgarbl about it?

Of course, all of my flowery description and analysis of "wharrgarbl" IS, for the most part, "wharrgarbl"...so...take from this what you will.

 

gboulton,

love the review. thank you for the time and effort to evaluate.

I agree my original MS evaluation is probably off....this coin would be lucky to make MS now the pictures highlight what my eyes didn't see in initial review. It is a high AU in my opinion though as the look of the coin in hand is nice and the reverse of the coin is in much better shape (since my focus is on the reverse, I give it more emphasis in final grade). I have found all early Kennedy's are weak in the hair around the part, especially towards the back of the head. I tend to use the "sharpness" of the hair that is present as more of a guide

Now if we contrast the 64 we have been discussing with the 1965 I have in the collection, you can easily see how much "cleaner" this coin is....however, the hair, by the back of the part is still very very weak....not wear though? I find many that look almost bald in that spot, even some in MS graded TPG holders. When the design changed in '91 time frame, that was one big area of change. I do believe though, that hair in that location would be critical for higher grade MS coins....kind of like steps, bell lines, etc....but not as definitive and thus no special adder to a grade.

Additional thoughts?



P.S. Your side monologue is one of the biggest reasons I get confused in my learning curve...some dings are okay, some are not....some color is awesome, some spots are not...the education continues.

 

For me, determining "wear" or "weak strike" on a Kennedy has always been a bit tricky as well, but I've found a couple of guidelines that...while I don't know how 'correct" they are...usually allow me to come up with a grade reasonably close to what the "experts" do.

1) The easiest way, for me, to distinguish is simply to look for wear elsewhere. The cheek bone is the BIG "giveaway" for me. The Kennedy half has a VERY pronounced high cheekbone (much as the late president himself did) when examined under a loupe. You might examine some proof coins first, just to get a feel for what you're looking for here.

If you drop straight down from the 'point' of the eye...the trailing "end" of it if you will...and look directly to the right of the bridge of the nose, you'll see a very "high" point on well struck coins. This point begins to wear VERY quickly, and the first sign is a "dulling" of the area, which will show up in photos as a different color/texture. Witness here (taken from your most recent photo)



If there's wear there, then at least SOME of the hair loss is probably wear as well.

2) Next, I take a look at how the hair lines themselves are formed, or how they 'fade" into the weak area. Weakly struck examples, in my experience anyway, tend to leave "hints" of hairlines in the "bald" area (for lack of a better term) and the hairlines around the edge are fairly well defined and clear.

In worn examples, on the other hand, the transition is gradual, and gradually moves from completely smooth to "well defined" as we move out.



See how the area is completely smooth, and then the hairlines increase in clarity slowly as they move out?

Now, take a look at this one.



While it's tough in the low res pic (sorry, best I could find quickly *heh*) to see the hints of remaining hairline, note how just beyond the "bald" area, the hairlines are sharp and distinct.

A wear pattern doesn't tend to "smooth out" a very small area and leave the surrounding edges completely undisturbed..it tends to "blend" or "blur" the edges, growing progressively less detectable as we move out from the high point.

3) Finally, the rest of the coin just says "circulated" to me (in both examples). The dings above the ear in both don't SEEM to be bag marks to me, for example.

===========

Again...opinions may, of course, vary widely...and it's nearly IMPOSSIBLE to ever post an image and say "You are seeing the coin as I do." Even the BEST, most representative photo is still going to be viewed on someone else's monitor, with their settings, in their software.

 

High XF in my eyes.
AU doesn't allow for much wear at all.
This coin, while light on wear, has enough to bring it below AU... IMO.

 

Melt that badboy!

 

Most collectors use the terms 'mint state' and 'uncirculated' interchageably.

I may be all wet but to me the word 'mint' in the term 'mint state' refers to the process of striking the coin rather than the building in which it was struck.

As far as the coin that fell on the floor and was stepped on, I would say it may be damaged but not worn. Wear (when we are talking about coins) refers to circulation wear. Stepping on a coin does not constitute circulation.

Assuming the coin suffered damage from being stepped on I would say the coin is simply damaged. Sure the damage happened in the Mint and the coin never circulated but it is now damaged. I doubt any of the top TPGs would grade it (unless it was some super rarity).

What if there were a fire in the storage vault at the Mint and all of the coins were damaged? Some of the coins may have partially melted, others have some distortion, the nylon and Kevlar bags melted and stuck to several coins, and the rest of the coins suffered smoke damage. These damaged coins have never left the Mint. Would you call them "mint state"? (I would not. I would call them damaged.)

'Mint state', when used with a numerical designation, refers to the state of preservation of the uncirculated coin after it was struck. Lots of bag marks may garner a grade of MS-60 or MS-61 while a coin with no imperfections may be graded MS-70.

I agree. The "uncirculated" coin is still mint state (unless it was damaged).

Cabinet wear occurs when a coin is placed lying down (usually on a soft surface) in a coin cabinet and, over time, as the coin is jostled when the drawer is opened and closed time and time again, the high points of the surface of the coin in contact with the drawer liner become slightly worn due to the friction between the coin and the drawer liner. Yes, it is wear but it is not circulation wear. This is how early coin collectors stored their coins and many mint state examples of early coins have cabinet wear. While this may not be acceptable for a modern coin it is often forgiven (or not judged too harshly) for early coins.

 

Excellent insights and clarifications, Hobo. Thanks!