MarkFeld

“A gold sticker would equate to a "plus" grade, a green sticker would equate to a straight grade and a "C" level coin would get a details grade or a net grade.” I think the above portion of your post is either incorrect or unclear, as follows: A gold sticker indicates a coin that’s solid for the next grade up (or better) and doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with a “+” grade. As an example, a coin currently in a 65 holder with a gold sticker will probably grade either 66, 66+ or 67 at the new grading company. It’s expected that most C coins will be graded a point lower then they did at PCGS or NGC, but with a “+”. So for example, if CAC has rejected a coin in a 65 holder because they thought it was of C quality, the new service will likely grade it 64+. On the other hand, if they rejected a coin in a 65 holder because they thought it was over-dipped, cleaned or with some other issue that merited a details (rather than straight) grade, they will assign a details grade.

Not among us graders, as I recall. But that doesn’t mean other people outside of grading companies weren’t talking about it, even back then.

I think that in general, grading (including CAC assessments) is based on a combination of how a given coin stacks up against others of the same date, as well as those of the same type.

What an off-base and asinine post. Since he hasn’t had one “hissy fit”, it would be impossible to have “another”. A true “hissy fit” is when someone like yourself has had poor results at CAC and makes numerous negative posts about them.

.

Your 1886 looks like a cleaned AU example. I hope you weren’t thinking it was a problem-free, high grade mint state piece.

I don’t think it was baiting the OP, as much as it was taking yet another shot at Mr. Carr.

I agree that it would have been better to start a new thread, but the coin looks genuine.

Yes, I read what you have written, including this about a dealer and grading companies - perhaps you can understand why I thought you had a trust issue with them: "The physics of XRF is quite sound, what I don’t trust is the firmware, the stores network security, or their staff. I’ve been targeted by a lot of pathetic online and offline harassment and believe this is one more example. The other NGC graded example also weighs only 11.3g so the assertion the tolerances are tight is demonstrably false. if grading companies were infallible and or final there would be no cross grading, regrading, or crack out game. if the people harassing me can hack a jewelry stores XRF or convince them to deceive me, what makes you think they can’t do the same to a grading company or mail service." If I owned the coin and despite the feedback I received here, still thought it was a valuable silver example, I'd submit it to NGC or PCGS for authentication as such. Please note, I'm not recommending that you do that, because I think it would be a waste of money. Best of luck to you, as I don't think anything will convince you of something you don't want to believe.

I and everyone else who has commented think it's a normal example. Nothing about it indicates otherwise and a specific gravity test should confirm that. Of course if you don't trust dealers or grading companies, there's' no reason to have the coin checked out. Another alterative would be to buy a couple examples of that date and examine their edges. Even though the color might show minor variances, it will likely be very close and hopefully give you peace of mind.

Here’s the other image referenced above (which also shows that the coin isn’t a silver planchet error):

Posted a short time ago by “Shamika” on the PCGS forum: “i just got off the phone with Dave. As he said, news of his demise have been greatly exaggerated although his health is still a major concern. He said he has closed his eBay store and is discontinuing much/all of his writing (including email) until his health improves. I'm certainly praying for him.”

If it were, and a picture of similar quality to the one here was provided, that would be sufficient for a “firm opinion”. While your recommendation certainly applies to many, if not most coins, the conspicuous doubling on the 1969-S DDO excludes the need of a reverse image and of an especially clear obverse shot. The same can be said of the 1955 DDO. Still, we’re in agreement that more is better than less, when providing images for purposes of attribution.

Why didn’t you post the picture of the coin’s edge that you included in your other thread? It’s by far, the best proof as to the composition of the coin - it’s a normal 1971-D half, not one that was struck on a silver planchet. For those who are interested, here’s an image that was posted to a different thread:

I disagree, as it’s quite clear that the imaged coin isn’t the 1969-S DDO.

I’d look beyond eBay sales to prices realized by various auction companies.

Sorry, but from what I see in the images, my guess is that the coin is a cleaned AU example and neither PL nor DMPL.

There’s a procedure in place to be able to have a CAC sticker applied to a new holder if the cert number is the same (or even if it isn’t, under certain conditions).

No, I wouldn’t agree that it will be a “niche, focused high-end servicer..”. I think they anticipate grading lower grade, as well as lower value coins, not just “high-end” and high value examples.

The so-called “biggest challenge” you mentioned probably won’t be much of a challenge, at all. Almost everyone who actually knows John, likes him as much as or more than his “worshipers” from afar. I say that as someone who has known him for more than 40 years, as a former employee, a friend and someone who has seen him interact with dozens of collectors and dealers.

What did he say that made you think that (about higher end coins’)? I didn’t pick up on such a hint.

Good for you and I mean that, sincerely.

Presumably, from non full steps to full steps. But to me, it doesn’t look anywhere close to full steps.

It's a very minor difference, but I believe that the sales in which the coins surfaced were in the early 90's, not the late 80's. I was a a grader at NGC from 1991-1998 and as far as I know, none of the coins were submitted until after I had started grading there. I suppose that the submitter(s) could have purchased the coins before that time and initially held them for a few years, but I doubt it.

It looks just slightly different from a genuine example.