Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;johnmilton, post: 3504766, member: 101855&quot;]They lower the grades for stuff like that because the slab companies want to make the grades more &quot;generic.&quot; They can even put a &quot;details&quot; grade on coins that have mint caused defects that are severe enough.</p><p><br /></p><p>For every collector who is not put off by that reverse alloy mix issue, there are probably three others, if they bid on that coin as an MS-63 or 64, who would feel cheated when they got it. If collectors were given the choice, many would take the coin with no mint caused issues over the perfect one. This is especially true for older 18th and 19th century U.S. coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>When I was dealer I had an 1866 With Rays Shield Nickel in a SEGS holder. The coin was a perfect MS-65 with bright luster and good eye appeal except for one thing. It had a lamination on the obverse. Most of the metal was still hanging from spot. It would hard to think of a coin that was more &quot;Mint State,&quot; BUT that defect killed the value of the coin. SEGS mentioned the lamination on the holder, and it was probably in that holder because PCGS, NGC or both companies had refused to grade the piece.[/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