A Tale of Two Coins

Pictured below are two wonderful Mercury Dimes. Each coin appears as the first photograph in PCGS Coinfacts as the top graded example in existence in their respective grade/suffix. The first is PCGS MS68 CAC, pop 2 none higher. It barely misses full bands (it is definitely not fb, though I've seen worse slip through PCGS). The second is PCGS MS68FB, pop 4 none higher (definitely full separation, but there is a tiny graze on the bands that wasn't notable enough to disqualify it from FB). Most would probably agree that the 68 has far superior toning to the 68FB.

So what was the price difference between these two spectacular coins?

The MS68FB just sold for approximately $15,000 from a dealer. I just purchased the MS68 CAC at auction for $600, including fees and shipping.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You got a good bang for your buck! Very nice!

 

Ah, so you're the one!

 

I think yours looks much better. I don't see paying 14.4k more for some silly bands.

 

I bet registry fever is the reason. Some people have to have "the best" even though 99% of regular collectors would gladly choose your coin over the boring white one.

 

I like yours

 

I guess I'm a 1%er then, but that's okay, I don't mind.

The comment about registry fever and wanting the best though is exactly right - specially designed for collectors in which money is no object.

 

For the difference in price, I prefer the one you won. The first coin though, IMO, has more eye appeal. That being said, I wouldn't pay that much for it.

 

yup, sorry, couldn't resist this one . . . .

jpcienkus - To clarify, the first coin IS the coin I won.

 

Most excellent. I also see that my reading comprehension early in the morning is severely lacking! LOL.

congrats on adding that beautiful Merc to your collection.

 

I'm still learning about coin toning, and perhaps diagnosing this will always be sort of an art rather than a science, and I've got a lot to learn yet. That being stated, in my current view on toning, I think the coin the OP bought, may have had "dip" placed on the head area of the coin, and left the toning alone on the rest of the coin to give it the overall toned "look" that it has.

Then again, I could very well be wrong, but in any event, I still prefer the other coin much more over the OP coin. I prefer a naturally toned, undipped coin, one that hasn't been played around with, to try to improve it.

BTW, whether he realizes it or not, the OP is also caught up in the registry fever whether he is on the registry or not. Hey, it's a nice coin for sure, but $600 for a common date, circulation strike, mercury dime? I'd be very happy with a 67 for a lot less money. I don't mind spending $600 on a coin at all, but not a coin like that. Not to knock any collector, but I am knocking the "registry fever" thing which no doubt does get ridiculous at times.

 

Based on my experience, I disagree.

 

Hi Stephan - Have you even looked at my other posts? I love buying and photographing nicely toned Mercury Dimes of all grades. I have far more 66s and 67s in my collection than 68s. As to your other comments (toning, doctoring, etc), suffice it to say that you're incorrect.

I would add that there is nothing wrong with shooting for a top registry set if that is what interests you, and I did not intend for my original post to bash on registry set enthusiasts. I participated in a registry set in the past, but am not currently interested in the competitive aspects of coin collecting.

 

I'd definitely go with the one you bought. Nice find!

 

That's cool - I'm glad that you're enjoying our great hobby.

As for the toning, I've been collecting coins a long time, and I have the coins I collected as a kid, stored in house bedroom conditions, so I know what natural toning looks like over a period of decades. I am learning that coins stored in a house bedroom, and coins stored in a basement or attic, or whatever, can take on different toning characteristics.

Frankly, none of my early collected coins stored in a Whitman album look like that, none look even close to that. They weren't BU when placed in there, but some were AU type coins with basically original luster, that I bought in 2x2's, threw away the 2x2's, and put them in the album. I still think that much of this "unusual" toning in these TPG holders is doctored toning or perhaps unintentional chemical induced toning from dipped coins in which not all of the dipping residue was completely removed from the coin.

That being said, I guess all that may not bother most collectors these days but it bothers me. At some point in time, I guess these "psychedelic" looking toned coins came into vogue, and I guess I'll just have to accept that as part of the hobby now - doesn't mean though I have to like it.

 

I stand corrected. You must be right if the circulated coins you placed in your Whitman albums as a child don't look like this coin now.

 

Mercury dimes were before my time to find them in AU condition in circulation, but I've got the Roosevelt dimes and other silver coins which don't look like that. Sometimes I could find AU 50's and 60's silver coins in AU condition, but most, except for the keys such as a 32-S Washington quarter, were bought from dealers at the coin club in AU condition, usually marked BU on the dealer 2x2, and placed in my album. But you missed the point - I stated perhaps in other environments, toning could turn out different...maybe if I had stored them in a hot attic or damp basement the toning would be different...but that different?

I belonged to a very dynamic coin club and attended perhaps around 100 meetings in the past, and have attended some coin shows decades back in the 70's and 80's, and I don't recall any coins with that sort of toning back then. I would think that there would have been some Barber coins, etc, back then with that sort of toning if it existed. Perhaps that style of collecting toned coins wasn't in vogue, and dealers would always clean/dip their coins to get it off of there. Perhaps the sort of coin dips that cause that type of toning, hadn't been invented yet.

My youthful collecting was done by attending the coin club, an occasional coin show, subscription to Coin World, interaction with a few fellow collectors my age we would buy and sell off each other, and that was about it for my experience. Again though, I must have looked at many, many, many thousands of dealer's plastic pages, with 2x2's filled with coins, some of course were high grade but unslabbed, and don't recall the type of toning seen regularly on the TPG high grade coins of today.

Oh well, to each his own, if the coins were dipped, then they were dipped, and my main viewpoint is that as long as we collect coins, that's the main thing.

 

Congrats on a great score for the price! Luscious coin

 

You nailed it with the former commonality of dipping. Toning has not always been a desirable trait on a coin, and when people say "virtually every blast-white Classic has been dipped" they have this in mind.

Most coins like the (beautiful) Mercs posted here were white 30 years ago. This is unlikely contemporary toning.

 

Agreed. For me, I guess I'll just have to accept the fact that this dipping occurs on a regular basis these days.

I do recall the first time I heard that the major TPG companies, graded dipped coins. I didn't believe it at first...and now some of them even assist in that dipping effort.

Oh well, it is what it is. Fortunately, I still see coins out there, for example high grade Indian cents which I'm currently buying, the choice of some that are bright and shiny, and some with a beautiful deep brown naturally toned color...having the exact same grade from the same TPG. I'll take the naturally toned coin every time and even pay a premium for it. I'll leave the bright and shiny, and the psychedelic toned coins for somebody else to enjoy.