Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Gregg, post: 3200503, member: 90419&quot;]To be honest, that gives me paws (1).</p><p><br /></p><p>From my noob perspective I don&#039;t understand why a coin couldn&#039;t be a technical MS66 and have fantastic eye appeal without the need to express that eye appeal as a full point or two in grade. </p><p><br /></p><p>That is, why do people think allowing eye appeal to override technical standards is a good idea when eye appeal is so terribly subjective.</p><p><br /></p><p>It seems to me that technically grading it at MS66, but with fantastic eye appeal, is more straightforward than tacking on 1.5 points for toning. (If that is what happened).&nbsp; I think that plays right into the idea that the shift over to market grading is about the cash.&nbsp; Having this be more art than science turns the grading services into a priesthood.&nbsp; I don&#039;t care for that.</p><p><br /></p><p>The market already adjusts for eye appeal.</p><p>Two coins of the same grade, the more attractive one gets more money.</p><p>The grading services don&#039;t need to change their methodology here.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>NOTES</p><p>----------------------------------------------------------</p><p>1: Paws = Pause, lol... get it?&nbsp; It is late on Friday. I need a drink.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in