MarkFeld

You’re most welcome. The answer to your question isn’t an easy one. If a coin truly deserves a higher grade, I think it has a better chance, if submitted raw. A large part of the reason is that it’s easier to assess a coin out of a holder. On the other hand, I know of extremely sharp collectors and dealers who have been disappointed and surprised by raw submissions. Coins that you think should upgrade can still downgrade. And if the coin is resubmitted in the holder, you don’t have the downside of a downgrade. The bottom line is that I believe there is more upside and downside in submitting raw, rather than in the holder. It depends how conservative you prefer to be.

Welcome to the forum. Many, if not most believe that “grade inflation” has been a fact of life over the past few decades. Before you resubmit any coins, I suggest checking actual selling prices of them at the current grade, vs. a grade higher. Sometimes, a resubmission isn’t merited, due to only minor upside potential in value. And of course, there’s no guarantee that the grade will go up. So I wouldn’t necessarily “expect” a higher grade. Perhaps try a small number of regrades and see how that goes?

Countless metal detector finds are free of the type of voids in design detail that you’d apparently expect. And that includes many coins that are several decades older than yours.

There are plenty of other matches. Among others, look at the marks on the rim.

I think it’s just the angle. But it doesn’t really matter, as the coin looks AU and artificially toned. I’d avoid those listings altogether.

If you see a “G” it’s not a “no FG”.

Spend it - it wasn’t made that way.

Here’s one option: https://www.ngccoin.com/boards/forum/13-coin-marketplace/

Can you post a link to his listings?

David, in case someone wants to make an edit, linked below is the page on the NGC site which mentions designation review as an option. https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/

It looks corroded.

“Failed to cross” means that a coin in one company’s holder was submitted to a different grading company, which rejected it for crossover into their holder. The rejection could have been at the same grade (or, if applicable, a lower grade noted on the submission invoice as acceptable by the submitter). To my knowledge, crossover submissions at higher grades than the current grade are not accepted by NGC and PCGS.

Sorry, but based on how it was stated, I strongly disagree with “3. Properly graded coins will cross”. That’s definitely not necessarily the case. It might be because coins are more difficult to scrutinize in holders, bias or some combination thereof. I’ve heard of numerous instances in which coins failed to cross, were subsequently cracked out and submitted, then graded the same or even higher then the failed crossover grade.

I though that, other than the color, the obverse looked plausible but that the reverse weakness didn’t compute.

That’s a very nice example and I agree with Coinbuf on the crossover issue. if ultimately, you’re going to want a coin in a particular holder, I wouldn’t buy it in a different one.

The coin looks artificially toned. And considering the detail on the obverse, portions of the reverse look surprisingly weak. There are more than enough reasons to avoid this piece.

From NGC’s website: NGC assigns its trademarked Star Designation to coins with exceptional eye appeal for their assigned grade. Eye appeal is the most subjective attribute of a coin, but there are many standards shared by numismatists. Exceptional eye appeal may include attributes such as vibrant, colorful toning; intense luster; or, in the case of Proof coins, especially strong cameo contrast. To receive a , coins must be free of any obvious planchet irregularities, and display no bothersome spots or blemishes. Toned coins can be of a single color or multicolored but cannot have any areas that are dark brown, approaching black. It's important to remember that coins with the Star () Designation can fall anywhere within the grades to which they are assigned. For example, a coin graded NGC MS 64 could be at the lower end, mid-range or higher end of NGC MS 64. NGC applies the to qualifying coins in its normal course of grading. Coins already certified by NGC can be resubmitted and reviewed for using the Designation Review service.

I understand just fine, how marks affect the grade. Here’s an MS63 - look at the marks on it, a number of them worse than on the coin in this thread. http://images.goldbergauctions.com/php/lot_auc.php?sale=60&site=1&lot=2952

If the coin fails to grade 60 or better, it will be because in hand, it displays rub/wear that isn’t apparent in the images. It won’t be because of the marks you mentioned. They are perfectly acceptable and usually seen on uncirculated examples.

Welcome to the forum. The pictures aren’t real sharp, but from what I can see, the coin should grade at least AU58 and possibly as high as MS63. So it might be worth getting graded. Below is link to authorized NGC dealers (who could hopefully assess the coin and if warranted, submit it to NGC on your behalf). Enter your zip code in the “location” box and you can see which dealers are in your area. https://www.ngccoin.com/services/dealer-listing.aspx Edited to add: Even as an ungraded AU coin, it should currently be worth $500+ wholesale.

It looks like a normal example, currently worth $4.80, due to its silver content.

Welcome to the forum. That’s a large date.

For all we know at this point, the coin could have been a very bad deal or a very good one for the buyer, at the price paid. I wouldn’t suggest that Bryceandrew offer anything at this time.

Sorry, but your posts tell me that it would be much better for you to learn a lot more about coins, the rare coin market and condition/grading, before you even think about spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on coins.

As different as they look, all of the pictures indicate that the coin has been cleaned and that the color is not original.