Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Insider, post: 3676913, member: 24314"]First let me say keep it coming.  Hopefully, folks will get to see both sides of the discussion with me playing the "bad" guy.  <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie8" alt=":D" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> Lehigh96, posted: "Completely unnecessary comment, I sell good quality coins and don't misrepresent them.  Furthermore, I wasn't the one who graded the "ugly duckling" as an MS67, NGC was." <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie12" alt="o_O" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie10" alt=":oops:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> Yeah, yeah, where have I heard that one.  <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie56" alt=":inpain:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />   "I didn't grade the "dog," I'm just the $eller."  "You have already admitted that corrosion is a progression [talk about an UNNECESSARY COMMENT] (see red text above).  Then you claim that the rainbow toned 43-S Jefferson is a problem coin because it is corroded (see green text above).  Earlier in this thread, you promised not to call rainbow toned coins damaged, yet you are calling this coin a problem coin which means you think it is damaged.  So where does one draw the line between what constitutes damage? [<img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> If the person is "informed" it becomes a personal decision] By your standard, the mere presence of any end stage (terminal) toning which is black in color is the delineating factor.  But that is your standard, not the standard employed by the TPGs.  [Yes, black corrosion that has etched the surface of a coin in such a way that it CAN NEVER be HONESTLY restored is TERMINAL CORROSION DAMAGE -  ALWAYS! I'm in the business of protecting the end user.  What other graders/dealers do is their business. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie60" alt=":kiss:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie60" alt=":kiss:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />]  And while I tend to be very harsh on coins with terminal state toning, this particular Jefferson has tremendous overall eye appeal and the terminal toning at the periphery is not distracting enough to warrant problem coin status IMO." [NGC agrees with you] Here is my standard (We all have them.  Many of us don't agree with yours or those of a major TPGS): If I'm able to see something on a coin, say that it is beautiful oxidation "damage" because the surface has been changed from its pristine original condition, AND STILL GRADE THE PIECE MS-70 if that is the case and the "damage" has not reached "End Stage" there is no contradiction.  That's because I can usually change beautifully toned coin back to its natural state without most knowing it was once "damaged."     As you know, at this time, color often adds value to a coin.   I love it when it is attractive yet I usually know what it actually is/caused it and can express the FACT:  You have posted a very beautiful, desirable nickel that is also corroded. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie85" alt=":smuggrin:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> "Just because they draw the line in a different place than you, doesn't mean they are wrong. [Where did you get the idea they are wrong?  Grading is SUBJECTIVE. They cannot be "wrong" because that grade is the PROFESSIONAL opinion of some experienced folks well above our pay grade.  Anyone (Even you: "ugly duckling") can disagree with an NGC grade; however, they better have a good reason.] Whatever their standard is for environmental damage should be consistent across all grades.  What should keep a coin with terminal state toning from grading MS68 or MS69 is that it detracts from the overall "EYE APPEAL" of the coin."  That said, the rainbow toned MS67 43-S Jefferson shown above is my current registry coin, and it replaced an MS68 which also had black rims [BTW, this is one of the most attractive War nickels I've ever seen!]." <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie57" alt=":jawdrop:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> <img src="https://i.imgur.com/1KBkWZm.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> "I'm glad you brought up Barber coinage.  This conversation all started because Typecoin told us that coins with excellent surfaces, luster, and strike will automatically [Not true if it has ugly tarnish] have excellent eye appeal as well, making the inclusion of eye appeal as an element of grading, redundant and unnecessary.  [The point I think we both are trying to get across to you and all market graders is this: GRADING CAN NEVER BE PRECISE AND UNCHANGING as more and more variables and subjectivity are added - NEVER.  All you Koolaid drinkers have helped build the "commercial sand castle."  Learn it, live it, enjoy it, continue to build "sets <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie8" alt=":D" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> of LABELS"," and try to defend this totally wacky mess created by coin dealers for you.  Meanwhile, don't disparage this "Chicken Little" poster!] I used to collect mint state Barber Quarters and can personally attest to how many otherwise gem Barber Quarters are absolute ruined by crappy toning and substandard eye appeal.  Now I know that you agreed with me that he is wrong, but I would still like to leave you with a few examples of these ugly gem Barbers (photos courtesy Heritage Auctions). <img src="https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B2%2F0%2F7%2F9%2F8%2F20798486%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /><img src="https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B7%2F5%2F1%2F1%2F7511771%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> <img src="https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B1%2F9%2F8%2F1%2F4%2F19814801%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> Instead of complaining about bumping the grades of rainbow toned coins due to exceptional eye appeal, I think we should be talking about downgrading coins like these due to abysmal eye appeal [Again, your subjective opinion <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie52" alt=":hilarious:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie52" alt=":hilarious:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />]. If the surfaces, luster, and strike are all great but the coin looks like hell, why should it be rewarded with a gem grade?" <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie5" alt=":confused:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie46" alt=":facepalm:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /><img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie9" alt=":eek:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />  Could it possibly be because the coins are worth MS-65 money?[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches