Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;kSigSteve, post: 4639936, member: 72008&quot;]Nice idea for a thread [USER=22377]@ddddd[/USER].</p><p><br /></p><p>I would have said 3 for the first coin. The toning is very attractive but more luster would have moved it into 4 territory. I echo what [USER=15309]@Lehigh96[/USER] said about the levels. I personally feel his coin is worthy of a 5 given the transition of colors and the overall eye appeal.</p><p><br /></p><p>The second coin that [USER=97258]@toned_morgan[/USER] posted I would classify as a 2. The luster is nice especially in the video but to me I saw the lack of surface preservation before I saw the color. On the two coins prior I saw the color first and then began to grade and evaluate the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think when we are talking monsters the grade is such an important piece. If the grade isn’t higher than gem 65 than I don’t believe the coin can be called a monster. The elements of grading specifically surface preservation and luster are going to be the two key factors which determine monster or not. Coins with these two factors at 66 or higher are going to impact the overall eye appeal. A monster coin could essentially be a blast white Morgan graded 68 with blazing luster or even one with super deep mirrors. Hell any coin that brings moon money could be called a monster. Monsters are supposed to be scary not pretty. If I am scared to tell my wife what the coin cost than to me it’s a monster. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie101" alt=":woot:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/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