Let's see your newest acquisitions!

Here is my new Buffalo. NGC MS-67.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This was an NGC MS66 RB that crossed to PCGS MS65 RB (grade and photo came in yesterday). This is, by far, the most beautiful Mint State Lincoln Cent in my collection -- and might be the most beautiful Mint State Lincoln I've ever seen. I bought this back in March off eBay for $100, admittedly a steep toning premium, but worth every penny to me for the stunning, eye-popping color.

 

I have always had a decent collection of coins from my grandfather but since his passing my collection has almost doubled as we clean out his house and find coins absolutely everywhere! Boxes full of proof sets hidden under dressers, coins in boxes in the basement that has flooded multiple times, they are simply everywhere. Now I have almost 400 coins that need to be stored and cataloged. Here are a few pictures of my favorites:

and since i can only upload 5 photos, the rest are on my photobucket: http://s1241.photobucket.com/albums/gg513/iang02807/Coins/

 

Why on earth would you cross that out of an MS66* holder? Very pretty coin!

 

I dont think the 1 point grade drop matters much on a toner of this caliber.

 

True. I am just waiting for PCGS to rip off NGC (again) and start giving a star equivalent.

 

A '57-D 65RB is a $1 coin, per the PCGS price guide. Clearly it's about eye appeal. I paid $51 for a colorful one. I probably would have left WL's cent in its NGC 66* holder, if it was all about resale.

Not sure what brg5658 means by PCGS ripping off NGC again. Didn't NGC follow suit with plus grading? Each leads and follows. I don't see PCGS doing in star grading, though.
Lance.

 

Here's a new variety addition to my redbook set. A little conservatively graded at PCGS XF40. This curl 2 die marriage is tough to find!
Lance.

 

PCGS and NGC announced plus grading jointly on the same day in the spring of 2010.

I was referring to the edge-viewable holder. NGC released a version of the edge-viewable holder in late 2005 with the St. Gauden's Double Eagle in mind. PCGS followed suit in 2007 when they started holdering Presidential Dollars in edge viewable holders, and only recently moved away from their faulty gasket design to make the edge viewable holder the default.

Oh yeah, did I mention NGC has also been detail grading coins for a couple years, and PCGS finally figured out that people would like more than simply "Genuine" on their overpriced piece of plastic in the past 6 months. Of course, ANACS has been details grading coins for years....just PCGS was the last of the big-3 to catch on.

Not a big deal, just ragging on PCGS a little since it seems NGC usually gets the brunt of all the harassment.

 

That is great.

 

That's a neat one, Lance! :thumb:

Did you happen to purchase it off of David Kahn? I remember seeing something similar in his inventory a week or so ago.

Keep 'em coming, man! Maybe I'll share some of by newly-acquired CBHs sooner or later...

-Brian

 

Actually the price guide differences between those two grades is only $16 (nothing to freak out over!). This is a common coin, with uncommon color. I crossed this to PCGS to see if PCGS would bless the color as natural and to get a PCGS TrueView (out of the slab) photograph. I didn't care at all about the Guide Prices on this coin. No plans on ever selling this, but honestly if I did sell it, I am sure I would get just as much in a PCGS 65 holder vs. an NGC 66 holder since the value of this coin is in the color (not the grade). There might even be more interest in this in the PCGS holder (since PCGS is typically stricter with copper) and with the eye-candy TrueView photo.

Price Guide Value:
- NGC MS66 RB = $20
- PCGS MS65 = less than $4 *

* PCGS only listed prices for RD's

 

I hear you about NGC getting unfair harassment, alright!

But to be correct, PCGS announced plus grading in March 2010 as part of their Secure Plus hype, well before NGC. Not that it matters much, or that it even was a particularly good idea.

As for details-grading on genuine coins, PCGS is just brain dead. Why cryptic codes in the first place? And now that you can get details it is not the default. You have to specify it. (Ask me how happy I am to choose the nature of a coffin when I am expecting a problem-free grade.)

I am not a fan of prong holders (they spoil photographs) but I'm learning to live with them. I wish collectors were offered a choice.
Lance.

 

I just realized PCGS has another motive for using prong holders... the trueview service.

 

Lance, you are correct that it was March 2010 (March 25th to be exact), but according to PCGS's own website, the announcement was a joint announcement by PCGS and NGC: http://www.pcgs.com/Articles/Detail/6140 PCGS started actually putting the "+" on the slabs before NGC, but I would not classify a 60 day lag by NGC as PCGS being "well before" them.

I'm also not a huge fan of prong holders. On coins the size of a cent or smaller it makes good images almost an impossibility. I know you have a personal story about a large cent from NGC, but all in all I much prefer NGC's holder to that of PCGS. Besides that it actually looks professional, I think a lot more research has gone into theirs (alla Smithsonian contracts). I wish they would both settle on a prong holder that only took up the real-estate of the NGC prongs, but that was transparent to avoid covering up possible rim issues.

 

All TrueView images are taken of raw coins before they are holdered.

 

Paul, I know it's not a rare or expensive coin. But to enjoy it in your collection why pay $30ish dollars for regrading, plus $20 for TrueView, plus shipping both ways, time, etc.? It's ultimately your money, and I know you're amassing quite a collection of "Phil Arnold" art work, so it's your decision.

I'm not sure what you mean by PCGS being "stricter" with copper. You mean with the AT/NT nonsense or with the numerical grade itself? Given it's not worth much in either MS66 or MS65, I assume you're talking about copper toning? In which case I'd say that I have never seen any evidence of that.

On a side note, I have recently picked up a couple coins that have TrueView images, and let's just say that my impression is that the TrueView images are juiced to death. There is some major saturation boosting happening on their side.

 

Exactly... so if you buy a coin in the new PCGS slabs, and it doesn't have a trueview... your pics will obviously not look as great thanks to the prongs. What do you do? Send it back in, have it cracked and imaged, then reslabbed.

RE oversaturation of images... yeah, Phil, the TrueView guy, just throws TONS of light on the coin to get the colors that he wants you to see... it's not great photography, it's great manipulation of light and related elements.

 

I would agree that PCGS is tougher on copper than NGC, with regard to grade in particular but often with color designation too. There are many indicators like pop reports and auction sales but my impression is based on crossing many dozens of early small cents and a close relationship with some of the best dealers in copper. But you know the saying about opinions.

Trueviews for colorful coins can be very skewed, I agree. As a professional coin photographer I have compared many Trueview'd coins to the real deal and often I scratch my head. Occasionally the image is spot-on. And often, on untoned or slightly toned coins. But something is very wrong with the color saturation for many of the recent images. It is very disappointing and sometimes downright misleading.
Lance.

 

I don't think PCGS cares how misleading the images are as long as they can keep charging $20/pop...