Which would you rather own?

Let's pretend they both have the same price tag, --and in fact they are pretty close anyway-- which of these two coins would you rather own?? Same date, same denomination, ...

http://www.nfccoins.com/item.aspx?pid=922415-06&cid=27

http://www.nfccoins.com/item.aspx?pid=921975-05&cid=27

,,..the 58 looks like a 63 and the 62 looks like a 55(!).....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I would take that 58 any day over that 62.

 

Agreed, like the 58 more.

 

The top coin

 

If I wanted it for my personal collection, the 58 would be a much better choice (of these two). But if I was purchasing to resell it, then I would go for the 62, because a lot of people go just for numbers, and I could probably sell it for more.

 

Agree, the obverse fields on the 58 are nothing short of sensational. A few trivial marks on the cheek... The reverse isn't quite as nice, but the generally held consensus is that the obverse should be weighted at 60% when grading which suggests to me the coin is severly undergraded.

Check-out the NGC photos of the coin...,,

http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/CertResults.aspx?CertNumber=3432206-009

Be sure to look at the rest of the coins in this particular NGC submission, they pretty much body-bagged nearly every coin in the submission with NET grades, this was one of the few that actually got an un-impaired grade. Who ever sent these coins in must have flipped-out when they got them back. Kind of hard to believe NFC would have bothered sending these in if they were cleaned and otherwise had problems.

 

Not me. In fact if I had bought it sight unseen as a generic date MS62 it would get returned to the seller, even if the coin were a better date, say an 1908-d with motto for example. That is, of course, if I had paid MS62 money for the coin to begin with.

 

The one of the left

 

I like the look of the bottom coin better.

 

This is a poster child of what is wrong with US grading system. Making a false delineation, and declaring wear is more severe than any other defect is an error that occurred 150 years ago, and is still plaguing US numismatics.

Think of it this way. What if you simply graded a coin based upon how close to perfection it is regardless of source? A wear spot would not cause a coin to grade below 60 any more or less than a contact mark. Simply start at 70 with a perfect coin, and start deducting from there for any reason. Then you would easily see why the coin on the left is more desirable. This is how ancient coins are graded.

 

In this case I would chose the AU over the MS. besides the bag marks the MS has some red spots in the feathers.

old low grade MS coins will have bag marks, you just want to find the most appealing ones & get them at a good price. the AU is cheaper and more appealing.

 

AU 58 I would choose. MS 62 looks a little weird. XD

 

http://www.pcgs.com/grades.html
[TABLE="class: servicetable, width: 758"]

[TD="bgcolor: #F1F6FA"]AU-58[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #F1F6FA"]Full detail with only slight friction on the high points[/TD]
[/TABLE]



[TABLE="class: servicetable, width: 758"]

[TD="bgcolor: #F1F6FA"]MS/PR-61[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #F1F6FA"]No wear. Multiple heavy marks/hairlines, strike may not be full[/TD]
[/TABLE]

 

This thread illustrates perfectly to me why I believe many higher end AU coins to be super bargains. My Morgan collection in particular features many AU55-58 coins for which I paid a lot less than MS coins of the same date/mm.

 

No brainer, AU58. Regardless of the book price difference, they are almost always nicer than 60-62 coins.

 

I suppose I could send it back in, but what's the point? The coin pretty much speaks for itself. Cost? About half of what it would be were it properly graded.

 

We've all seen examples of "AU63" blazers. But all these coins started their lives in bags, with most of them getting beaten up pretty badly before they were released into circulation. So, wouldn't you expect the AU58 coins to be distributed the same as the MS coins -- a few examples with beautiful fields and almost no marks, but most beaten up like a lower MS coin?

Or am I making the wrong assumption about MS grade distributions? If most MS coins are higher than 62 -- not the graded population, but the population as originally distributed -- then never mind.

 

I've got some nice looking MS62 coins in my collection. Is this one as nice as the AU58 that I posted of the 5000 Reis? Nope, but it's still accurately graded and was priced accordingly when I bought it. I certainly agree with you on mint state coins graded below MS62. They traditionally tended to be AU coins with additional bag marks, which baffles me a bit. As of the last few years however, a lot more coins are finding their way into MS61 holders, with almost none turning-up in MS60 slabs. Or at least that's been my own observation.

 

i pick up the left one! Au-58....looks good to me..

 

In the PCGS/NGC grading world, I would go for an AU58 coin over and MS62 coin most of the time.
Price-wise there are many bargains available.