Here's a few more for your opinions. I'm trying to learn this grading thing. First, here are two 2000 Sac dollars. The first one has some sort of spotting or soiling on the surface. How would you grade this coin? Compare to the second example which shows some circulation marks, but no spots. Also, how would you guys rate this Susan B. and JFK? The JFK looks like a proof that made it into circulation at some point.
the sackie, doesn't matter the grade, end result is net uncollectable, same with the sba its only value from now til eternity is face. The jfk i'd call pr-58 as an impaired proof.
Why do you say that? And further, if that is true, why does (just by way of example) PCGS say that a 2001-S Sac Dollar in PR-65 is worth $60? That doesn't seem uncollectable. Or why would they value a 1979-P Wide Rim SBA in MS-64 at $75? Regardless, I'd still like to know how you would grade them. Just for my education.
They all look "About Uncirculated" to me. Along with the grade, it's always helpful to include descriptive adjectives, like "splotchy toning", "distracting contact marks" or "mishandled proof".
yes, a circulated proof JFK. Also, I would never value anything at PCGS prices, unless I were going to sell them. The Saci and the Susie are both circs, so who cares. You are referring to high grade PCGS values, not applicable here.
I think you guys are missing the point. I realize you all consider the coins worthless. The exercise, however, is to help me learn how coins are graded and why.
I'll take a shot at them. I would call the 2000-P Sac AU-55, with a slight rub, but some poor coloring. The 2000-D Sac I would say is MS-63, but does have counting machine damage, so it would not be graded. I'll go with AU-50 on the Susan B. Anthony and PF58 on the Kennedy. Hope this helps.
