Experienced clad quarter collectors - any of these look like a MS 66/67?

I want to send a long a couple of clad quarters in my upcoming submission.
I have zero experience with graded quarters, so I was hoping anyone with some more knowledge on the subject could tell me if any of these meet a grade that makes it worth it to slab them. These quarters are stunning in hand. The colors are vibrant, luster and eye appeal are premium.

I have posted the minimal grade required next to the year.
What say you?

Please just pick 2 or 3 that you believe may cut it.

1983 D - 66





1984 P - 66




1977 P - 67



1965 SMS - 68


1965 SMS - 68


1965 BS - 67




1985 P - 66+



1978 P - 67



1980 P - 67



1979 D - 67



1967 Business Strike - 67



1967 SMS - 68+




1976 D - 67



1970 D - 67+



1970 D - 67+



1966 SMS - 68



1982 P - 66



1980 D - 66+



1970 P - 66+



1972 - 67

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

1973 P 66+

1971 D - 67


1978 D -67



1974 D - 67



This is the only one that is going in for sure.

 

I cannot help you on grade, but in MHO I would only consider the 1982-P for slabbing.

 

given the minimum grades, I don't think that any of them cut the mustard. I am always particularly interested in 1982 and 83 quarters. The ones you list might get a 65 on a good day IMHO, but not a 66 or 66+

 

Thanks for the feedback Mike.

Thanks for the kind words geekpryde.

You touched on many things that I've been thinking about lately. It's been a personal dilemma lately.

 

I'll echo a little bit what geekpryde said. I follow Kryptonite also, and he does very well with the coins he sells (I've bought many a coin recently from him). He has a lot of higher-quality, higher eye-appeal, toned coins which you do as well. Granted most of the quarters I watch from him are silver, but I've seen some clads go for decent money as well. However, you'd probably need to be in the 65+ range to get a good return on your grading investment, the generic 64's seem to not do much more than break even, but at least still come out positive. But, if you can round up 100 of those to grade in one submission to make the discount, you'd probably have a much better shot at making a profit on each.

 

I think that many of them are lovely, but I think your "minimum grades" are high on almost all of them. For example, I really like that 70-P (especially the reverse), but I think it would grade 65, shot 66 -- but not 66+ or 67. Again, just MHO.

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can specify a minimum grade with a "+". I think you can just specify in whole integer values. If I'm wrong on that point, please let me know by posting a link here -- that's an interesting piece of info to know.

 

Yo Brandon, when I say 66+ for example, I mean it would have to get the (+) grade. Meaning it's at the high end of a 66 with superior eye appeal. The value difference between a non (+) and a (+) is significant in a lot of cases.

 

Most of these are very nice. I especially like the '83-D (sm motto), (2nd) '70-D, '82-P, '70-P, '77, and and '69.

I'd love to own the '83-D.

 

Both PCGS and NGC have the "+" designation which means higher in that point grade for superior eye appeal, etc.

http://www.ngccoin.com/coingrading/plus-and-star-designations.aspx

http://www.pcgs.com/grades.html

 

Check out this hot mess of an 83 P that was with this collection. lol

 

Yes, I'm well aware they both have the "+" designation, but I don't think you can specify it as the minimum grade when you make a submission. When you submit coins to PCGS and NGC, you can specify that you only want the coin slabbed if it meets a certain grade. That's what I was referring to.

 

I would agree with the above posters. You have very pretty coins that have a market. I DO agree that having them slabbed would generate a lot more revenue. I, for example, rarely buy toned raw coins, due to the market acceptability issues. Your coins are beautiful, and as you know, I've been very happy at what I have purchased from you. I haven't gotten the slabs back yet, but the two JFK proofs graded PF 67, and I am very happy with that. So, if you're willing to invest a modest amount of money in having the nicest ones in either NGC or PCGS plastic, you could easily sell clad beautiful coins, or Silver ones--in the toner market, it is the beauty and the reputation of the seller that sets the market, and you have both, IMHO. Just get the nice ones slabbed. Despite naysayers, the toned market is still rather lively, especially if you don't ask "moon money" for coins.

 

I didn't know that Brandon. So that is a good question you raise.
Also, if you do that, is there any fee associated with it if it doesn't meet your required grade? I assume there is, but is it the full fee regardless?

 

great toning on those!

 

Gotcha, I misread the part about wanting that to be the minimum grade. In that case I believe you're correct.

 

Greg, I do think that eye appeal is more important for toners than absolute max grade, unless a specific collector is looking for only top grade toners. Some of my best looking coins are MS 63-64, as the overall "gestalt" of the coin is far more important as a selling point to me than raw grade. Most of your MS 65 stuff would look great in plastic, and would sell for sufficient dollars to be profitable, once you develop a reputation like Shane. It may take a while, but if you submit your nicest coins, they will resell, and you will eventually make money.

 

Yeah you're right mDude. I am way over thinking it. I don't think it would be difficult to recoup the $20 average cost on coins that look like this as long as they are in problem free, uncirculated holders. So I suppose I have nothing to lose.

 

Do you have enough coins to do the 100+ bulk submission? It would be well worth it from the fee standpoint as I think the cost then goes below $10 per, which is a substantial savings and higher profit margin.