Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 1448406, member: 112&quot;]The reason that the ANA has always found cabinet friction to be separate and acceptable on an MS graded coin is quite simple. It&#039;s because there was a time when with certain coins it was provable that a coin had never been in circulation. Sometimes it was because the coin was never issued into circulation, they were bought directly from the mint by collectors. The taken home and put in a coin cabinet. And there they stayed until sold or passed on to the next collector.</p><p><br /></p><p>In modern times that reasoning has been taken completely out of context and extended to anything that might have caused light wear on the high points, and on any coin, including light wear from actual circulation.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you ask me, the PCGS explanation that a coin can have that light wear and still be called MS because the coin was never in actual circulation is a bunch of hooey ! Why ? Because everybody here knows dang well that you can go out a get (some) coins directly out of the cash register at a grocery store, coins that were absolutely in actual circulation, and there will be no wear or breaks in the luster on that coin. Then you can take that coin, submit it to a TPG and the coin will be graded MS.</p><p><br /></p><p>But yet it was a coin that was in actual circulation.</p><p><br /></p><p>Roll friction, album friction, or any other term they care to use, is nothing but an excuse to grade AU coins as MS. And the PCGS comments that ALL Saints have light wear and luster breaks is a bunch of nonsense. There are plenty of Saints out there that have no light wear or luster breaks. And they are correctly graded as MS. And yes, there are quite a few of them in PCGS slabs. So they disprove their own comments to the contrary.[/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