Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 905570, member: 112&quot;]This in reply to both - </p><p><br /></p><p>Mark - when you said - </p><p><br /></p><p><i>&quot;In many, if not most cases, the ANA standards to which you refer are general and ambiguous enough such that they do not allow one to distinguish one grade from the next.&quot;</i></p><p><br /></p><p>These are the specific standards I was talking about - </p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: Red">From PCGS - </span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS/PR65: Minor marks/hairlines though <b>none in the focal areas</b>, above average strike</span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS65: Gem Uncirculated There may be some scattered marks, hairlines, or other minor defects. If the flaws are in a main focal area, <b>they must be minor and few.</b> Hidden marks and hairlines can be larger. On dime-type and smaller, they almost always must be in the devices or must be very minor if they are in the fields. On larger coins, there can be marks/hailines in the fields and in the devices, <b>but no major ones</b>.</span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">Now that&#039;s pretty plain. There is no ambiguity.</span></p><p><span style="color: Red">It says flat out that there can be no major/significant marks in prime focal areas if a coin is to be graded MS/PF 65.</span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">From the ANA - </span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">General Descriptions</span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS65 - Contact Marks: Light and scattered <b>without major distracting marks in prime focal areas.</b></span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">Morgan Dollars</span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS65 - Light and scattered <b>without major distracting marks in prime focal areas</b></span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS65 - No trace of wear; nearly as perfect as MS67 except for a few additional minute bagmarks or surface mars.</span></p><p><span style="color: Red"><br /></span></p><p><span style="color: Red">Jefferson Nickels</span></p><p><span style="color: Red">MS65 - No trace of wear; nearly as perfect as MS67 except for some small weakness or blemish. Has full mint luster, but may be unevenly toned, or lightly fingermarked. A few minor ticks or marks may be present.</span></p><p><br /></p><p>- so when you said <i>&quot;the standards to which you refer&quot;</i> - those and only those are ones I was disagreeing about. They are not ambiguous or unlcear in any way shape or form. They are quite specific in regard to major marks in focal areas. And they say flat out that<b> none, zero, not even 1, major mark</b> is permitted in the prime focal area if the coin is to be graded MS65.</p><p><br /></p><p>And 900, please tell me what part of those standards are vague in regard to major marks in the prime focal areas ?[/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