JIM F.

Just noticed my 1866 3CS is labeled 1866 3CN.  It now has a CAC sticker also, so reholdering is not a good option since no guarantee CAC will resticker.

The 1951-S is one I am considering buying which is the only 51-S PL certified by NGC.  Here is a 1949-S that I own. 

6 minutes ago, bsshog40 said:

Is the one you posted yours or just a pic that you provided. It's a nice PL also. 

Since my post was the first one in several years, I assumed it was for me.  My mistake.

I am not Jason.  Surely, you should know that.

Here is the PL coin in its NGC holder.  I think the sole example.

What would be insightful is what did Jules Reiver consider the coin?  The HA auction lists some previous sales, but unless one can refer to the sales catalogs from those sales, it is unknown what grade was assigned by previous owners.  

Recently purchased from Stacks auction as PCGS PF-63.  Just found out it was previously in a NGC MS-64 holder.  Clearly identified by the marks at end of nose and in left obverse field.  Totally different values.  What should I do?

Perhaps that is true for some years.  1857 proof half cent Breen varieties B-1 and B-2, however, are due to 2 separate  and unmistakable dies, and have nothing to do with die states.   But if NGC doesn't attribute them, well, so be it.  

Does NGC have a census on the B-1 1857 proof half cent?  Also does NGC currently denote this variety upon request?  Thank you. 

1 hour ago, JIM F. said:

New pickup.  

Mohawk,

I think the face poking out of the coin makes is very unusual.  This is the seller's description.

Islands off Caria, Rhodes AR Drachm 

Circa 205-190 BC

Aristakos, magistrate

Obverse: Three-quarter facing head of Helios, head turned slightly right 

Reverse: Rose; caduceus left, magistrate?s name ARISAKOS above

References: SNG Helsinki 588, Ashton 285

Size: 16mm, 2.84g

Numismatic Notes: Good VF and nice tone! 

New pickup.  

A few Prussian 20 Mark Gold coins.  What do you think?

My first ancient acquisition in a long time.  

Recent pickup, I liberated this 1880-O from the GSA packaging and got some crud off with acetone.  Anyone want to take a guess what it might grade, and/or identify a VAM?  Thanks for looking.

Kinda reminds me of SEGS who would certify ANYTHING!  Anyone shudder when I mentioned SEGS? 

Finally, after many years, I have a 1910-S Lincoln.  As a kid in the 70's it was impossible to find in change, and a bit pricey back then from the coin shops.  So now I have one graded by PCGS in MS-62 BN and under 100 bucks.  It's about time.

It depends upon your intent.  If looking to submit a raw coin, then NGC and PCGS pretty much are the most accepted services, especially if you plan to sell the coin.  NGC will attribute a PL designation to some series that PCGS will not, so if that is a consideration you will probably want to go with NGC. That is not to say that ICG and ANACS are not good grading services, but they are not readily accepted in the sight unseen marketplace (I don't think CAC will sticker them).

If you are looking to purchase previously graded coins, then things get a bit more complicated.  At one time ICG graded coins were considered more valuable than both PCGS and NGC (at least according to the gray sheet).  My experience with ANACS graded coins is that the early small white holdered coins seem to be on par with PCGS and NGC, and I have always had them crossover at the same grade.  On the  other hand, I don't have any experience with the newer gold and blue ANACS holders, but the coins tend to sell at a discount to NGC and PCGS.  A lot of collectors like the old PCGS and old (fatty) NGC holders, since the perception (and in many cases reality) is that coins in the early era were graded more conservatively.  I have noticed that gold CAC stickers tend to appear on the older holders.  I hope this added more clarification than confusion.

Is it worth a shot at 67?  What appear to be gray spots are reflections off of the holder. 

I wonder what would happen if you tried applying bleach to the surface. I am NOT advocating this, if this sounds interesting perhaps a test on a common nickel using proper skin and eye protection.

There are some fairly nasty industrial solvents that might do something, but the cost of the solvents probably exceeds the value of the coin.

You can use a q-tip to help remove debris. Debris will re-deposit if coin is left in acetone for an extended amount of time -- usually just a few minutes should be sufficient.

What about toning "specks" on early Matte proof buffs?