The fascination and demand, rightly or wrongly is what it is. And actually seems to be growing. This second journal post stops "mid-stream" because of the length, so please read part three which is the final part coming later today or Saturday. Thank you in advance for reading this. This has always been a very important topic for all serious collectors, and one that I'm sure will continue to be. I know it is for me.

Greetings Collectors,

The debate between who is the better grader in all of numismatics has all but eliminated everyone but the top two. PCGS & NGC have for years now been the "go to" slabs that most collectors prefer their coins to be housed in. There are fanatical supporters for both of these top tier 3rd party graders. As far as who is best, as in, who is the "tougher", as in who is when a grade is finally put on the slab, the masses can be satisfied that the MS-65 that the slab says, is indeed a truly "GEM" example is constantly being debated. Of course grading is, as I'm sure each of you have heard, subjective. It is just one persons opinion of what grade the coin should have. But actually for many years now, it's been for the most part, what two persons opinion is, of the coin in question. Whether this actually goes down the way PCGS & NGC and Anacs and virtually all the rest say it goes down is: The coin is submitted, a grader assigns a grade and then it is looked at once again by a different grader (or quality control person??) to make sure the 1st grader got it right. This is what makes today different from the early years and in my opinion, still makes it exactly the same as the early years.

In those early years (late 1980's through the early 1990's) slabbed coins were just starting to catch on. Of course there were the "old timers" that resisted the whole concept. "I mean really, you mean to tell me that I'm gonna have to own and look at my coin through this rectangular piece of plastic"? "Not being able to actually hold and touch my coin"? "I don't need this plastic slab to protect my coin". "I'm not an insufficiently_thoughtful_person". "I know to hold the coin by edges, and not use an ice pick and sandpaper to remove residue and/or encrustation". "I've been collecting since Biblical times". "Well, not really that long, but I have been collecting a while". "Long enough to know when the day comes that one can no longer hold a coin in one's hand, well then, this hobby will be dead".

This has ended up being so far from the truth, with the vast majority of these stubborn old timers, being now the same ones that are getting graders to grade the graders, as in, the concept of the CAC "green bean". What happened early on in the embryonic stages of third party grading was that only one person would look at, and assign a grade to a particular coin. And if that person was very conservative and their mindset being, the coin had to be a super specimen to attain a gem MS-65 status. Many times these old original graders would throw coin after coin under the bus. I mean it took one hell of a coin to make MS-65 and 66. And a very tough grader coupled with the fact no one looked over his shoulder to see if he called the grade correctly, meant that many times there were MS-65-66 coins masquerading in MS-64 slabs. And lower mint state coins by the dozens sitting in AU-53 & 55 holders. Thus you end up with crack out candidates and/or coins worthy of a "green bean" or better.

You know what I think? I think that today there are still graders out there that have a real hard time assigning higher grades to coins. They always want it to be known that if they looked at the coin and said it was a MS-65, or a 66 or 67, well then, you could definitely take that "65" or better, all the way to the bank. It was "for sure" solid for the grade. Maybe "cast iron" would be a better adjective than "solid". And in addition to that, I think that the top two or three grading companies are so damn busy, a grader assigns a grade and that second individual either does one of three things. Number one, he doesn't even take that "second glance" or "post grade" inspection. Number two, it's not enough of an inspection that would catch anything less than a VF-30 sitting in an AU-58 holder or vice versa. Or finally, number three, it's gonna take a blatant error by the grader of the 1st part to gain an "overrule" of the grade assigned by the grader of the second part. (these guys and gals do not want to have their professional toes stepped on) Thus you still, even after all the quality control safeguards installed, along with extra sets of eyes, still will have a coin slabbed that is only one man or woman's opinion of that particular coin's grade. Thus the need and the growing acceptance of CAC, which stands for Certified Acceptance Corp.

This is the end of part two. I had the entire piece completed on what I wanted to say about the old green holders from PCGS, but it was way too long and I know many of you lose interest with a long journal post so I split this one directly in half. Please read part three if you have the time and are interested in the least. I will wait to post it til after "mail time" when I will hopefully have my two little Mercury dimes to share with the final part conclusion. Thanks for reading.

The coin pictured below is one I have shared before in a past journal a year or two ago but one that is worthy enough to share again. In my opinion I have not seen a type two 1956 Franklin proof in cameo that looks as good as this coin. I got it from an auction many years ago when there weren't anything else to be had but PCGS OGH and "fattys" by NGC. And I paid well in excess of gray sheet along with well in excess of FMV at the time. I think this is just another example of an old green holder coin being very solid for the grade, if not under-graded. I have studied photos of this coin in comparison to what it looks like when it's sitting on the table in front of me, or better yet, when I have it in my hand looking at it under the magnification of my "opti-visors" and I will tell you this. This is one awesome looking coin. As near to perfect as one could get. And from a time when the archaic methods of the U.S. Mint makes many in the know wonder how we can have any decent proof coinage from the 1950's at all in existence today. This coin has frost that is caked, caked, caked. And mirrors you could shave in. To say this coin in person is "eye candy" would be an under-statement. As I said when I posted this pic before, "The moon, the sun and the stars" all lined up when this coin was produced, and one that I would be very hard pressed to find another to replace it with. At least one that would rival this piece in "eye appeal". This coin in my opinion is just one "kick " PCGS OGH Proof. And one I'd never part with. Oh, and by the way, The black you see in the pic on the left, is me and my camera being reflected in the deep mirrors. Thanks again for reading and for looking, and please stay tuned for part three, the conclusion.

Happy Collecting!

WKF

Silver to gold ratio is currently at 34.871 That's just a wee bit lower than just yesterday. WOW silver at $42.70 & gold at $1489 even. What a ride!