Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GoldFinger1969, post: 2370175, member: 73489&quot;]<b><font size="5"><span style="color: #00b300">My 1884-O &amp; &quot;Undergrading&quot;:</span></font></b>&nbsp; I may have determined why/how the MS64 DMPL is high-quality for a 64 and maybe deserving of an MS-65.</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&amp;threadid=222533" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&amp;threadid=222533" rel="nofollow">https://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&amp;threadid=222533</a></p><p><br /></p><p>According to a resident slab expert at CU, the slab is version 3.5 which was ONLY produced/used in December 1989 and maybe for ONLY the last week of that month !&nbsp; The &quot;Bubble&quot; in coin prices had begun months sooner but a resurgence would last through early-1990.&nbsp; So I am not sure if grading standards had been eased by the time this slab was used.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is the NEXT slab -- 4.0 -- that is the 1st &quot;Green&quot; holder, despite the greenish-looking appearance of the 3.5.&nbsp; I am pretty sure mine is not 4.0 (used from Jan 1990 - 1995).</p><p><b><span style="color: #0000ff"><br /></span></b></p><p><b><span style="color: #0000ff">Anyway, the link above is a good reference.</span></b>&nbsp; Maybe some vets here can tell us for sure what slab(s) are associated with clear PCGS overgrading.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]484488[/ATTACH][/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