Would this Mercury dime qualify for PCGS Full Bands?

I didn't think it was full bands either, but it was in an old ANACS holder with the full bands designation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Still looks full enough to me. Lets have a picture of the slab, please, both sides.

 

Very nice. Good enough for me.

 

Not sure what you are looking at, but that middle band is not split. The only thing we can say is that we are judging the coin based on a photo. Maybe a different photo would show that the bands are split; this one doesn't.

 

Maybe it's my imagination, but, I think there is an indentation all the way across, between the two bands. Grant you, in the image it is affected by color and reflection changes of the toning. Being in an older ANACS slab, factoring in the simplicity of this designation, (either we have a full rut, or we don't) and until we get better photos, I'll stay with my first impression and give benefit of doubt to ANACS.

 

It has been my experience that old ANACS was somewhat generous with all designations (FSB, PL, DPL, etc). I never take the designation at face value, unless I have personally inspected it and it meets my criteria. That has been my experience, but yours may differ.

 

There is only one way to settle this, it's Christmas, gift me the coin and I will confirm upon arrival.

 

What's wrong with that ANACS holder? Soon you can sell this beauty stating "old white ANACS slab, will certainly upgrade to MS67+ FB STAR nowadays"... only reason I can see is a registry set!?

 

I agree with you on this. I recently bought a 1944 S Jefferson nickel in the old ANACS slab that was graded MS66FS. When I got it, several of the steps were fused together. It wasn't even close to FS, so I returned it. I didn't think ANACS could miss something this bad, but I guess they were generous, as you stated.

 

With most said the middle doesn't look separated that mean not full band.

 

So, would this be an example of how older, more generous standards have gotten stricter, less generous, tougher, etc. over the years?

 

It may be two sided. The grading may be getting a little more lax, but the attributions getting stricter. I haven't looked at enough older graded coins to make that call.

 

I voted I don't know because I don't know what PCGS's standards are for the FSB. If it's like their sub-par standards for the FBL then I'll say maybe.
But if I were to judge based on my personal opinion I would say no FSB no matter what TPG.

 

ditto

 

I don't think you can make any generalizations like that. There have been periods of stricter grading and looser grading, and there have been periods of stricter designations and looser designations. All the TPGs have these phases - I don't think there are any broad macro trends that you can identify with any reliability. Knowing which periods were stricter or looser, and at what TPG, is a trick that comes with experience - and those with the experience can exploit that to their advantage.

 

The older ANACS holders are collectible in their own right, and I have never had a problem getting a fair price for them. If you disagree with the designation, it might be worth leaving alone.

With this said, the coin looks better than MS64 to these eyes. And I have had success with crossing or upgrading coins from these holders into PCGS holders, so it might be worth considering a crossover (i.e. submitting in the old ANACS holder). Also as Lehigh points out, the coin could look differently in hand. Also, TPGs are sometimes more liberal on issues that are weakly struck. Is this issue known for a weak strike? This is worth investigating in my opinion. I still think no on the FB designation, but stranger things have happened.

 

Yes, this one is known for having a weak strike.

 

I thought it was, but I don't readily collect these by date and mint mark (especially the older ones). I think it is worth a cross over submission.

 

I passed on this one...it was a hard decision though because it's a really nice coin. It just didn't look FB to me when I compared it to some other same date examples that had the designation. Still a very nice coin though.