Does this look like a MS-66 to you?

http://cgi.liveauctions.ebay.com/27...007QQitemZ170220840745QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

I'm just tempted to underbid just for a laugh. At best thats a MS-60 in my mind.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm not familiar with the Hawaiian stuff, but NGC and Heritage are solid. I guess you don't like the toning ?

 

Looks good to me. Probably envelope storage toning. Not dipped out - nice original piece.

 

It's a nice coin. Wouldn't care to grade from the pics, very hard with that uneven toning.

 

Its the toning. Telling you, if its not blast white...... The coin is or at least very close to a 66. I see nothing other than toning wrong with this coin. I would be very proud of that coin in my collection. Look at the fields, the high points on the coin, not a mark to be seen. no rubs. Nice, very nice actually. I bet that it brings in 1700-2000.

 

I see nothing in the images to indicate that the grading was off for that coin. Furthermore, what would be funny (as in "for a laugh") about bidding low?

If you think it looks like a 60, it appears that you need some help with your grading skills and a better understanding of toning.

 

I think the guys at NGC are getting a little old.:loud:

 

I'm sure they'd love your help. Give Steve Eichenbaum a call and detail how you can help NGC grade properly with your younger eyes. I'm sure they'll be appreciative.

As for the coin, it looks nice and I can't readily see any marks that would preclude the MS66 grade.

 

The coin is a nice grade for wear, or rather lack thereof. I think the 66 is a bit highish though, perhaps 64. And I do not care for the toning at all.

 

"Perhaps 64" based upon what, other than that you don't care for the toning? I see no flaws that would prevent it from grading as high as MS67, so, from the images, have no quibble with the assigned grade.

 

It fascinates me that ONE individual can look at a PICTURE of a coin and say that the THREE PROFESSIONALS who graded the coin IN HAND are wrong. Aside from the fact that the picture will distort the grading, i sincerely doubt that the same standards are even being used.

 

I got the world coin book from heritage and looked to see if it was in there as they are for the same auction and the coin listed on ebay isn't even in the book. They do show a 1883 1/4 dollar graded MS 66 by NGC and it shows a light tone and good luster.

Looking over the one on ebay you can't really make out any of the details in the beard so it is just to hard to say. I would agree though that if NGC calls it a MS 66 it would have to be MS 65 to MS 67 as they are never too far one way or the other.

Very nice example. I find the toning to be attractive.

 

A very sharp, original coin with eye appeal. I don't understand the OP.

 

just someone who does not understand or like toning.

 

Don't jump to conclusions, thats how wars and disputes start.

While I like toning, I can't see how the coin got it's grade. It looks like unattractive and gross, like a PVC stain (especially the back). The toning is very uneven. For example, the obverse has some questionable areas, including the "Red Eye," the speckled toning behind the head and the....man, I can't describe the look in the focal area in front of the face. It's completely uneven between those two areas. Look at the lettering as well. You can see areas where the toning has not completely covered the lettering.

The back is far worse. The one half (with the 1/4 value) is much darker and much more uneven than the D section. In fact, notice how the toning doesn't seem to "cut" the coin in half well. It looks like it intersects between 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock vs. 12 to 6 o'clock halving or 3 to 9 o'clock halving. In fact, that halving only adds to the detrimental negativity of the toning. It's not "natural," it just abruptly stops and it shows.

Also the colors of the toning is completely off. Instead of some uniformity, it's like some silver-plated stuff I have: all random and blotchy. Plus some of the colors are turn-offs.

Again, I find your disparaging remarks to be patently offensive and boorish.

 

NGC and Heritage are solid?????????????????

We just had a thread where it's obvious that NGC is loose with their grading on poorly struck coins.

A couple years ago there was a letter in NN where an NGC slabbed proof was resubmitted to NGC and it came back body bagged. Resubmitted again and it got slabbed at a different grade than was originally slabbed.

The Mickley 1804 Dollar was graded AU at best by THREE Numismatic professionals and even Salzberg admitted that it shows "some handling" but NGC still gave it a 62.

That's just three examples of the many I have observed over the years.

Solid!!!!!! Not in my book.

Furthermore, the only thing that can be marginally determined from that picture is the strike and contact marks. Based on the picture, I think the eye appeal is on the negative side based on the toning and there could be hairlines under the toning. To agree with the assigned grade based on that picture is a leap of faith or just plain blind faith in NGC.

 

The toning looks completely original to me and like that I have seen on a number of other coins of that type. I happen to like it OK, but even if you don't, that in itself doesn't make the coin a lower grade.

 

Do you own DD and bid at your own risk...
http://toolhaus.org/cgi-bin/negs?User=heritageauctiongalleries&Dirn=Received+by&ref=home

 

Don't these guys have enough money to run a stupid shipping department or what?

 

The coin looks absolutely fine to me as an MS-66. One thing people need to learn is that different types of coins have different looks when they tone. That has the right look of toning for an Hawaiian Quarter. The coin appears to be mark free, with absolutely original toning and luster evident beneath the toning. I think its a great coin compared to much of the dipped out material out there.

I think many people are way too hard on NGC as well. I will feel confident in saying that NGC has a better group of graders working for them now than PCGS does. NGC is grading very tightly at present, but very consistently. PCGS is blatantly undgergrading coins, as well as being all over the place. Anyone can put MS-65 coins in MS-63 holders all day long and be considered "conservative." But that doesn't make it accurate. At present, I would trust NGC much more with authentication than PCGS, especially for rare and esoteric pieces.