LordM 2026 FUN show report (live updates from the floor)

Oh well. At least you have my shaky animated GIF to show the cartwheels on that one.

 

Well, here's the update on two of the NGC submissions. The ones I paid for "Fast Track" service on. (My two Ancients will of course take a lot longer.) That Fast Track $15 add-on fee was definitely worth it. These coins (my 1564 Saxony thaler and Randy's 1803 half dollar) are coming back after only about three weeks, instead of 3-6 months.

First, let's look at Randy's 1803 half dollar. Below are the NGC photos of it. I asked Doug Plascencia, their photographer, if these pics were taken before or after the conservation I'd paid for. Apparently it turns out NGC did not conserve the coin, for whatever reason. I hope we didn't get billed for that conservation that didn't happen! I'll have to check the invoice.

I think the photos turned out quite well. It is a decent coin with nice details, despite an old cleaning (and Randy got it for a song, well before the show). I predicted XF details, or VF+ details, minimum. I did have my doubts that it would get a straight grade.

Y'know, looking at these photos, I think it might actually be a good thing that NGC did not conserve it to a lighter shade. It's kind of dark in hand, and the secondary toning is mottled, but as you can see here, it's got some subtle colors to it and it's really not terrible looking as-is.







@Randy Abercrombie - I know you're dying to see your results, so here they are.

*PS- The Photovision images do not appear to be on the cert page yet. Just the crummy looking slab shots so far. I'll bet they'll update that later.


.

 

Next, let's examine the NGC results and photos of my 1564 Saxony thaler.

If you read this whole report, you'll recall that I bought this coin at the show.

When I saw the pics below, I was delighted. I think it looks fantastic here. Doug Plascencia does good work.






You may recall that I expressed hopes earlier that this coin would receive a straight grade of XF40, but that a result of VF30-35 would have been acceptable to me.

I was partially vindicated by the results, but also disappointed.

Being rather twitchy about "details" grades, and a stickler for straight-graded coins, I was paranoid that this coin would get a details grade for an old mount removal (that's the bane of so many old thalers). So I had examined the edge closely for traces of an old jewelry mount, and didn't see anything.

As it happened, that did not come to pass. They did not ding it for a mount removal. Whew!

What they did spank it for, however, was cleaning. I didn't see that one coming. It got an "XF details/cleaned" grade. Rats!

OK, so this 462-year-old coin got cleaned at some point. That’s not surprising. What is surprising (to me, anyway) is that NGC would not deem this particular case to be “market acceptable” and give it a pass. I’ve seen much worse in straight-graded holders.




Oh well. So it goes. I still think it is a very nice coin, and perhaps I'll have to loosen my standards a bit. I do make occasional exceptions to my "straight grades only" policy for my Ancient & Medieval stuff, and this 1564 coin does predate my arbitrary 1600 AD date cutoff that I use to divide "medieval" from "modern". I really only apply the straight grade rule to post-medieval material. This coin is nearly 500 years old, after all.

So I think some leniency is in order, and I'll be adding it to my collection. I'm happy to keep it until an upgrade happens someday.

 

So how 'bout that. My coin and Randy's, from continents and centuries apart, but both got exactly the same grade result. I did not foresee that.

 

No, Randy bought that one (in a local SC auction, I believe), well before the show. He brought it to the show with him for the NGC submission.

 

I figured you'd be satisfied with that result. For what you paid for that coin, I reckon you'd come out smellin' like a rose if you ever did decide to sell it.