What would you grade this mercury dime at?

Any thoughts? Looks awful close to a FB to me, thinking of sending it in to NGC.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Do they still differentiate between FB and FSB? If so, it makes FB at least. Numerically, it looks like an easy 66 to me. Maybe higher. I personally don't care for the toning spots, but I realize they actually help grades lately.

 

NGC just uses FB designation. Thanks!

 

MS 65, toning is very distracting

 

Looks real close to FB. Recon ya might have something there.

 

Agreed, but aren't the TPGs outright REWARDING that kind of toning these days? I have actually proven this is true to my own satisfaction with my own submissions.

 

I'll profess that I do not have the grading skills to say I can comfortably take that stance. I will say, however, that I've seen a few toners lately, that when scrutinized, do not seem to fit the high grade given to them.

 

Different route to the same conclusion. Major auction catalogs bear out this conclusion as well. It seems we're approaching the state of "the uglier, the better". I won't play. Let the uber-rich overpay for corrosion.

 

MS64 / MS65

 

Here's WHY I think it's at least a 66. 1) I can see no trace of bag marks or contact marks in any prime focal area, just toning spots. 2) It exhibits full "ghosting" around "E PLURIBUS UNUM" which is a remnant of metal flow occurring at the wing area on the other side. This is evidence of an unmessed with coin. 3) Always tough to see in ANY still photo, but I believe I see what evidence I can EVER see of superior flash and luster under these toning spots. With the caveat that I HATE grading from still photos (That's just the way I roll.), I see something here well better than a mundane 65.

But wait, these pictures weren't taken by GSC, were they?

 

A fair argument. I just couldn't go 66 because the toning (which I'm actually a toning fan) bumps down eye appeal for me. That and I don't have your level of expertise in grading (yet)

 

Seriously, I had nowhere near the confidence I now have in my grading skills until I took Brian Silliman's course last year at ANA Orlando (Spring), the two days before Opening Day. It was WELL worth the money I spent. I learned more in those two days, working with ANA's grading sets, than in the last 5 years combined.

And Brian's a hoot, too. Irreverent, snarky, and anti-PC.

 

I shot the photos today really quick. Here are my thoughts on the coin. There is a TON of luster under the toning. It is an original coin, not dipped like a lot of those on the market. The coin is virtually flawless as far as bag/contact marks go. If it goes for anything, I shot the coin in its current slab, which is an old NGC holder, which gives it an MS67 (I agree. The toning may not be as attractive as a blast white coin to some people, but it shows an original coin, and the coin is technically sound with tons of luster under the toning). The reason I asked was I was looking at the bands, and it looked FB to me (I have others that are FB, and no more split than these), so I was thinking of sending it in for a designation review.

 

If it's not in a "fingered" insert NGC holder, I'd go for the des review. If the holder does have that newer style insert, it may not fly as a FB. That itty bitty something about 2/3 of the way from left to right on the center bands concerns me a bit.

 

Isn't it only the center band that counts?

 

To whom?

 

I believe NGC looks at all the bands, I know they look at all the bell lines on a Franklin.

 

I am a 65
There are some breaks in the luster on the reverse.
It has some great luster though.
What color is the toning?

 

NGC

 

Dark brown to black.