Via text message, I asked three friends what they thought of it. Two were all for it. The third was my friend Michael, a dealer in North Carolina, and while he didn't say anything bad about the NEN coin above, he told me to hold off buying it, because he said he had one he could sell me for a lot less. Michael sent me pictures of another one in an NGC VF30 holder. So same grade, different plastic. I was initially pretty lukewarm on it, because in his quickie photos, it did not appear as eye appealing as the PCGS coin from NEN. But he swore that was because of the reflections on the slab. It was too difficult to photograph through the slab, he said, so he offered to send it to me on approval, and if I didn't like it, he'd pay the return shipping. So I said yes, I'd check it out. In hand, I found the look of the NGC coin from Michael to be satisfactory. It is darker brown, but the surfaces look decent enough. Though in the same technical grade as the PCGS coin from NEN, Michael's asking price on the NGC coin was $175 less, and a full $250 less than NEN's original ask price on their coin. That made the decision pretty easy. It's not so much that NEN's coin was overpriced (I would have bought it from them), but rather that Michael offered me a really competitive price on his. Mind you, I still can't seem to get good photos of it myself. I'll have to send it back to NGC to get proper professional (PhotoVision) images for it, and then pay the reholdering fee as well. But that's OK; I think it's worth that added hassle. (And my Roman aureus also needs reimaging and reholdering at NGC anyway). What do you think? Is the NGC coin the better buy than the PCGS coin, at $175 less? (Bearing in mind that you're comparing PCGS TrueView images against my own unprofessional shot-through-the-plastic images of the NGC coin).