Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2819697, member: 1892&quot;]You got a genuine laugh out of the disclaimer. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Meaning no offence, only the very finest of coin images have a hope of enabling the observer to discern anything above 66, much less between 69 and 70. These ain&#039;t those. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m keeping this lighthearted because, frankly, the difference between PF69 and PF70 is pretty much empirically proven to be consistently indistinguishable by examining TPG results. PCGS is the most consistent of the TPG&#039;s, but all that means in my experience is they get more than two-thirds right. Otherwise, you could easily get a 70 out of a coin that deserved a 69, or a 69 out of a coin that deserved a 70. What we opined regarding the coin, even if it were a slam dunk, would not be of consequence. ASE&#039;s are assembly-line cash cows for TPG&#039;s, known by them to be majorly purchased by &quot;collectors&quot; who wouldn&#039;t know a 69 from a 70 if it kicked them in the crotch, and don&#039;t exactly get the consideration extended to an 18th Century Gold Eagle. Junior graders get the ASE&#039;s. I&#039;ve seen axe murder victims in ASE 70 slabs, and flawless Fleur de Coin examples in 69.</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, 70&#039;s carry a fair premium for this issue. No, I don&#039;t believe the stress and extra cost of sending in bullion coins hoping for that 70 (69&#039;s won&#039;t comp the cost of submission) is an effective use of your time.[/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