Case Study: 1938-S PCGS MS68+ "FB" Dime $364,250 - Everything that is Wrong with Our Hobby

Watered down scotch tastes a little like beer.

I'm a scotch, burbon and wine man myself. I always found beer to be too heavy, but a light beer can be good at the ballpark on a very hot day.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree completely! Scotch on the rocks is my drink of choice; light beer at the bowling alley.

 

A relevant question is, who was the underbidder? It took two to tango to get to that price.

 

If you look at coins graded at this level, it is the “nasty” toning and associated eye appeal that separates them from the blast white premium gems. When people look at my collection, they say “what happened to that one” when they see an untoned coin. The comment isn’t an indictment of that individual coin, rather it is an observation that the coin looks odd in an otherwise matched set.

I understand what you are saying here but I don’t think this is true, and IMO it does a disservice to tell collectors who prefer untoned coins this to placate them. The fact is that toning and eye appeal are an extremely important part of grading in the ultra premium gem grades. Andrew needs to understand that the toning he abhors is the primary reason this coin was graded MS68, and that his expectation that high graded coins should be spotless is totally unrealistic.

 

The grading services give bumps for attractive toning all the time. An otherwise MS-63 can become an MS-64 or 65. Of course some of the buyers can't see the marks under the toning. They only see the color.

 

I don’t like that we even call it a grade bump. It is simply a holistic form of grading. Yes, a coin with an MS63 surface preservation level and gem grade luster & eye appeal deserves an MS64 grade. Too often we get stuck in the mindset that surface preservation is the end all be all, and should serve as a grade limiter. That is completely contrary to the market grading system.

In the context of this conversation, I’m not talking about color bumps, rather I’m saying that MS68 & MS69 20th century silver coins almost always display extravagant eye appealing toning that separates them from their untoned counterparts with similar surfaces.

 

Somethings fishy and that's a lot of money that makes people do things they would not do for a paltry amount. I not suggesting anything illegal happened but that amount of cash , can turn a honest person into a accepting type . Dillan

 

https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/l...llar-overton-101-rarity-5-15-stars-ms-62-pcgs

$100k cheaper, but this one is actually rare, not a ranked pseudo-rarity. Also prettier.

But if you are trying to win the ego contest, then this is not for you. It is only the fourth/fifth finest known.

 

I think the Mercury Dime is prettier, by far.

 

Nothing that a fine toothed triangular file and a gentle buffing can't fix - should easily double the value

 

Did the coin change? Nope. Did the holder change? Yup. That all.

This shows the pathetic state of the market.

 

I remember seeing a movie in which some service guys were making different kinds of booze from grain alcohol and one of them advised "Put in some Iodine and that'll make it taste like scotch."

 

I've never understood the animus towards you. You haven't done anything to them.

 

I'd rather have the 1796 Pogue MS62 half and the extra $100k. The Mercury Dime is admittedly nice, but it isn't $364k special. Not even a $100k special to me.

 

You seem to take the position that color can bump up a coin half a point to a point. Assuming that we agree with that for conversation, how do you justify the 2-3 point bumps that many toners get? Before Laura killed Coin Facts, I enjoyed looking at all the coins that upgraded especially from Legend Auctions. I watched the 1904-O Morgan from the Northern Lights Collection go from MS64 to MS65 before ultimately ending up in a MS67 holder and selling for $35k-$40k. When adding that many points you are now grading color and not the coin. Put another way, the color is weighed so heavily that it makes most of the other criteria pretty much worthless. I'd hardly call that "holistic" grading.

 

I'd argue he was crazy for giving business to someone who constantly bashed him. Why would you line her pockets? It isn't like this is an 1804 dollar we're talking about here. The dime can ultimately be replaced with another yet to be made 68+ FB coin for his registry set. Have no fear, grade inflation is here.

 

I ignore toning when I grade. I like toning insofar when it signifies that the coin is original. In some cases I would pay a modest premium for attractive toning. I would pay a good premium for red toning because it is such a thin band on the color progression. But I will not overgrade toned coins simply because they are toned.

 

Don't forget the 65+ CAC Morgan that also went up to 68, with a brief stop at 67+ CAC (now an AB coin).

I can also accept 0.5-1.0 points for color, but the 2-3 point bumps are indeed ridiculous. And what makes it worse is the inconsistency of these bumps. Why are the AB or Northern Lights examples receiving these bumps and not all strong toners?

I'll also add that if TPGs want to make color the main element of grading, they should publicly announce it. Somewhere on their pages about grading, they should clearly state that nice color will supersede surfaces, strike, and luster (an example would be nice...show two technical 65 coins and explain that the one with monster color is really a 67).

 

Maybe there should be a separate eye appeal grading scale (like 1-10 or A-J with 5 or E being average). A MS65 monster toning could then be a 65-10 or 65-J or something like that.

 

That is a possibility. Or another would be to go back to what Anacs and a few others did back in the 1980s (and maybe place 50% of the weighted grade on eye appeal).


Picture borrowed from here:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/959656/post-your-old-anacs-photo-certificates