grade this saint.

I'd go AU58 or MS60. It would not make any real price difference unless you can get 64 or above in common dates.

For me the principle is that of circulation with AU vs. MS. The coin actually changed hands and encountered wear for it to be AU. Most of them were in bags in Europe for decades. You dip those puppies and they are going to look AU, it is very subjective. Basically the grading service do not want to weaken their standards too much, frankly I would not want an AU58 coin in an MS64 holder, it would be kind of embarrassing, and when I sold it I would have to let it go at discount to realistic standards.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

after reading many........many threads and viewing pics on several forums, i'm going to say that it's all in the pic. The quality of the pic. The person taking the pic. The type of camera snapping the pic, the light involved in the pic, the angle. All this coupled with a true eye for the pic. It's all in the pic. When a no brainer MS can look like an AU or an AU can look like a high dollar coin...the pic.

I say this from various forum readings, etc. My coin is irrelevant. It really boils down to the moment you pull out the wad to exchange mentioned wad for coin.

 

I'm still confused by the folks who think this is a 61 or less? What are you seeing that I am not? Looks like a pretty clean coin to me.

 

agreed usc96, while I am a member of the Morgan-clan I would grade this at around MS-63

 

Many Objectively Will Support Your Statements!!

I, and many others who've handled seemingly countless "Top Tier" TPG specimens, concur with your observations, and can support your arguments with product in hand.

Rather than extending great efforts in generating visual proof by locating, photographing, posting, responding to arguments that the incidents are rare and images are poor, I prefer to post supportive links.

I believe this link of a MS64 Plus specimen will support some arguments previously posted: http://www.ebay.com/itm/1929-P-Sain...53?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item19cd310e19

Although photos can be deceiving, I suggest that one should compare the Reverse image of this coin with that of the image posted by the OP. Please examine carefully, as this coin commands an appreciable premium. Pay special attention to the upper edges of the wings, head, breast, device, rim detail.

I'll let you judge for yourselves whether this meets the grade given.

I have an experienced opinion which I suspect will differ from the majority, but may be aligned with the observations of Doug. :thumb:

 

I have cracked out better date $20s in old PCGS holders that have gone from XF45 to AU58 and AU50 to 58.

The grading company's argument in grading style used to be, "there is not much of a price jump in the various grades, we need to be conservative in grading so as not to contaminate or weaken the standards and allow creep ups and shifts of populations that continue to come out of Europe"; to "these people are making a living and supporting our upper class lifestyles in certified coins, therefore we need to give these coins the absolute maximum grade so the good times will continue to roll".

 

thanks for the well thought out responses. I wish I were able to take better pics. Not that it would make it look like a 7 but i'd like to convey a proper likeness. I appreciate everyone chiming in. That 1929 is no joke, what a beaut! I don't have a camera that can capture that sort of closeness. My photo skills could use an upgrade.

Anyway, i think everyone one of these coins are beautiful and everyone has a great story to tell if they could talk. It's a shame if the standards have gone down as much as you say. That is too bad and a disservice to everyone.

 

i also like this T$ thread...right along the lines of discussion here.

http://www.cointalk.com/t52960/