Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;TypeCoin971793, post: 3438438, member: 78244&quot;]Because I have studied how photos portray luster. The OP coin likely has booming satiny luster that is highly attractive, but the one I posted is a step above in that is has a sparkling, gem-like quality to it, like the 1964 half I posted earlier. I personally like that look better, and would more willing to pay up for it over toning like on the OP coin. It’s not a quality you see as often as satiny luster.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Good. I’m sure the market will attach a just premium to it even in a technically-correct holder. But attaching a premium to a bumped-up grade is double-dipping and overpaying.[/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