Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Kirkuleez, post: 2183695, member: 36864&quot;]Personally I wish that Doug did work for a TPG, then we could have some consistency.&nbsp; His grading is in line with what it always was until recently.&nbsp; Why do you think that everybody re-submits coins in old slabs looking for an upgrade?&nbsp; TPGs, particularly PCGS, in the early days were very strict on grades.&nbsp; Some would argue that grading standards haven&#039;t changed, but I would disagree.&nbsp; An argument for another day.&nbsp; I recently cracked out my three cent nickel proof set from their old rattlers because the slabs have been beat to death over the years and resubmitted them.&nbsp; The set averaged about PR-64, not a single one came back lower than PR-65.&nbsp; Some had jumped three points.</p><p><br /></p><p>Back to the topic...</p><p>The coin that I posted is MS details due to an obvious cleaning, but was shown to display the characteristics of the die misalignment of the die paring and strike weaknesses that they display.&nbsp; Mine is a decently struck example, while the OPs coin show a weaker strike.&nbsp; i still think that NGC went WAY too strong with the grade, but I don&#039;t disagree with calling it an AU. The lack of luster doesn&#039;t bother me, as I said previously, even MS large cents hardly show much luster or cartwheel, just typical of the series.[/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