MarkFeld

The question, which would certainly include dealers, was: “If there is a reasonable expectation that coin sellers or TPGs be truthful in all respects?” My point is, since it’s known that a lot of people lie, it’s unreasonable to expect every seller to be truthful. That doesn’t mean you’re not entitled to the truth, only that you won’t always get it. And based on any particular seller’s behavior and reputation, it might or might not be reasonable to expect him to be truthful.

It does matter. Because, whether dealer or collector, not all sellers tell the truth. And while you’re entitled to a truthful response, because you know that some people lie, it’s an unreasonable expectation that each seller will be honest with you, no matter what the circumstance.

As a general rule, we don’t allow returns of auction lots. There are rare exceptions however. One of my major job responsibilities - one in which which I take great pride - is screening auction lots for clients. Sometimes the client has a particular question, other times I’m asked for my personal assessment of the coin. Every once in a while, a client who has asked me to view coins for the first time, is surprised when I give a thumbs down to some of them. 😉

In the large majority of cases, I don’t think it’s necessarily about wanting the best coin or about ego. But rather, it’s a desire for confirmation of a coin’s quality (and thus, value) from a very highly regarded expert. Likewise, before buying NGC or PCGS graded coins, many collectors seek opinions from other collectors or dealers. They’re seeking reassurance regarding quality and value.

“..it simply put, indicates that that particular coin in that date n in that grade is in the top X% of all coins in that date n that grade that has been submitted to cac for evaluation, nothing more..” CAC doesn’t really take percentages into account or classify coins based only upon the ones that have been submitted to them. Simply put, CAC awards green stickers to coins that they consider A quality or B quality, but not C quality within a given grade. Or if you prefer, high end or mid range, but not low end.

True, of course, but my post was in response to one that stated:...and the CAC stuff, it should have NOTHING to do with the grade of a coin IMO but only the additional appearance due to toning, luster and the like.

Like it or not, CAC has a great deal to do with the grade of a coin. There should be enough opportunities to buy from sellers who offer return privileges, so as to avoid those who don’t.

“...yes if you want to build a business you should be honest.” You should be honest, regardless.

That response ignores the question asked. So I’d take it as evasiveness.

Thank you. I greatly appreciate that.

I’d have no hesitation in telling someone I thought a coin had been cleaned. And some people do care about that, regardless of its value. I don’t think that’s being mean or negative, just honest and informative.

If you’re in the vicinity of N.E. Numismatics, I recommend contacting them. They’re good guys and extremely knowledgeable. They should be able to provide approximate values for your coins, make suggestions regarding which ones merit grading - I doubt that all of them are - and can submit them on your behalf. They’re fair in their buy prices, too.

It could be the lighting, but the half dime looks cleaned to me. On the other hand, the half dollar looks very nice.

While it’s fine to hope or wish, I think it’s unreasonable to expect just about anyone to be “truthful in all respects”.

It depends who the dealer is. And ditto if the seller is a collector.

Just Bob, thank you for making me aware of this thread. The coin simply looks badly damaged, not like an error. And to put it mildly, I have a very hard time believing that anyone at Heritage who answers coin inquiries as I do, would call it an error. Brian ab, please either post the email from Heritage here or send it to me by private message. I look forward to seeing it.

Many coins which have been straight-graded by NGC and PCGS have been dipped or cleaned by some other means. This is one of them and I don’t think they would dispute that. When the grading companies feel that a cleaning is too severe for a straight-grade, they will note the cleaning and assign a details-grade, instead.

The assignment of a grade and encapsulation don’t effectively make flaws and a dipped appearance a moot point. At least for those who care about what the coin looks like. On the other hand, very few buyers would see the die crack you mentioned as a negative.

Not “contact wear” or wear of any kind, but rather, grade-limiting flaws. And they don’t appear to be merely “barely discernible”. The reverse (no matter how nice) rarely leads to a higher, rather than lower grade.

Based on the second set of pictures (which I'm guessing to be much more accurate), MS62, at best. Based on the first set (which should probably be ignored), MS64. I'd pass.

Thanks. When you said "eye to ear" I was looking higher up, literally to the ear, Before guessing MS63 for the grade, I had considered MS62.

If they had been taken from among the assay pieces, I believe their absence would have been noticed.

Greg, I enlarged the picture and don't see the scrape you're talking abiout.

I believe it's "solid for the grade" or better. If so, that's not quite the same as "strong for the grade". And I don't know why you think thy weren't ever in a bag.

So you can conclude that it looks like a “solid 66”, based just upon an obverse image? And despite the apparent contact on most of Liberty’s left (facing right) leg and on her breast area?