Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jaelus, post: 2517363, member: 46237&quot;]Mint records are notoriously inaccurate, even in many cases for business strikes, let alone special strikes. The absence of mint records is not by any means conclusive, and I don&#039;t think anyone would even argue that. Also, I realize that PL signifies that the coin looks like a proof, but proofs also look like proofs. Do you think that PL is so cut and dry that no proof has ever been designated as PL, or does PL include both proof-like strikes and inconclusive proofs?</p><p><br /></p><p>As I said above, this isn&#039;t just a hunch of mine. While not conclusive by any means, there is supporting evidence enough to indicate that it&#039;s possible that it is a proof. Plus you haven&#039;t seen this coin in hand; the pictures do not do it justice. I&#039;ve seen (and own) many proofs and proof-like strikes of Austro-Hungarian coins from the Franz Joseph period, and the look of this particular coin is more indicative of an actual proof rather than just a proof-like strike.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve seen a double standard with NGC on these. PL wasn&#039;t even designated on world coins until relatively recently, and now they are frequently overlooked. Submit a US coin that is a proof or proof-like and you will get the designation because they are much more familiar with those series. For world coins you have to resubmit or put notes on the submissions and call them while the coins are being graded, just to get a PL on an obviously PL coin.[/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