A REAL “PQ” coin - An 1874 with arrows half dollar

[BillJones]

 

Some collectors don’t believe in the “PQ” (premium quality) concept. They think that it is a dealer hype that is used as a selling tool and an excuse to get more money for a given coin than it is really worth for the assigned grade. The fact is there are coins that are better, sometimes FAR better than average, for their grade, and here is an example.

 

I have to confess that the 1873-4 with arrows type coins are among my least favorite 19th century pieces. They are scarce and generally high priced because the mintages were low, and the type was only produced for two years. The low mintages were the result of the Panic of 1873, which was 19th century name for that economic recession. For whatever reason, many pieces have eye appeal issues.

 

These issues also lack the historical interest that the 1853 arrows and rays and 1854-5 arrows coins have. Those pieces were a reflection of the California gold rush. The huge influx of gold on the market as a result of that bonanza caused a change in the ratio of gold and silver bullion prices. As a result every silver coin that was then in circulation, except the tiny silver three cent piece, had a melt value that exceeded its face value. The arrows or arrows and rays were placed on the coins to indicate that the weight of these coins had been reduced from the previous standards and that melting or paying more than face for value for those coins was not worthwhile. The 1873-4 coins, on the other hand, had arrows at the date in indicate a tiny increase in weight that got the weights of the coins up to an even Metric System amount.

 

In the past I’ve gotten “type collector fatigue” when I got around to filling 1873-4 “with arrows” holes in my set. I have purchased low priced problem coins to fill these holes in the past. This coin is the unusual exception. PCGS graded this MS-63. It has wonderful eye appeal despite the fact that it has been dipped. It’s one of those unusual situations where the toning came back to produce a very attract silver and gold colored piece with great luster and wonderful eye appeal.

 

[MarkFeld]

Finally, a coin that is described as PQ and actually looks it! (thumbs u

[MBA101]

Really cool coin. I like the die cracks amongst the stars!

[jesbroken]

That makes three PQ coins I have seen. Great PU Bill.

[bsshog40]

That is very nice Bill!!!

[SkyMan]

VERY nice 63. Quite an attractive coin!

[relicsncoins]

Gorgeous, I really like that gold rimmed toning on silver coins. Someone ATS has a sig line with a bunch of Morgans with that type of toning, and it's quite attractive.

 

JJ

[MikeInFL]

Someone please explain to me why a dipped and retoned coin with high-point friction is considered PQ at 63? I, admittedly, don't follow these business struck coins well enough to know the answer. It is a pretty coin, to be sure, but why PQ for a 63? I would guess that this is much better than the other examples of a 63. Is this right?...Mike

[WinstonWare]

Someone please explain to me why a dipped and retoned coin with high-point friction is considered PQ at 63? I, admittedly, don't follow these business struck coins well enough to know the answer. It is a pretty coin, to be sure, but why PQ for a 63 -- I don't get it...Mike

 

This was my initial thought but I was shy and didn’t ask.

[BillJones]

Someone please explain to me why a dipped and retoned coin with high-point friction is considered PQ at 63? I, admittedly, don't follow these business struck coins well enough to know the answer. It is a pretty coin, to be sure, but why PQ for a 63? I would guess that this is much better than the other examples of a 63. Is this right?...Mike

 

This was my initial thought but I was shy and didn’t ask.

 

Well I guess this picture does not do this coin justice. The coin has no rub; the marks are trivial; there are no spots; and the luster is unbroken.

 

I sure am glad I'm not trying to buy coins for you guys. It would seem one would need to find MS-65 coins in MS-63 holders to please you.

[MikeInFL]

Fair enough, Bill.

 

I've not seen the coin in-hand, and would certainly yield to your in-hand assessment and greater experience....and like I said above, I don't look at these coins in this grade. However, if the marks are trivial, there are no spots, there is no high-point rub, and the luster is unbroken, then why a 63 and not higher -- or perhaps that's the reason it is a PQ coin?

 

Perhaps that's what you were saying when you said (which I missed when I read your post the first time):

 

The fact is there are coins that are better, sometimes FAR better than average, for their grade, and here is an example.

Just trying to learn from those with more experience than myself & thanks in advance...Mike

[WinstonWare]

I was more concerned about the dip than anything else. I thought that PQ coins were supposed to be original. Perhaps I was mistaken

[MikeInFL]

Winston, I guess it all depends on who's defining PQ, and like most things numismatic a certain amount of subjectivity and personal preference comes into play....Mike

[moovyz]

At first thought, the term PQ applied to an MS63 does seem contradictory. If it's PQ, why not 64? I was about to write a response agreeing 100% with Mike, then I started trying to apply that type of designation to something else and this came to mind...

 

 

The price in Kelly Blue Book for a low-milage, fully loaded Hummer may be $30,000, just for argument sakes. The may be 100 cars in the country that fit that description, all with the same mileage, all the same features. But clearly, there could be an example out there that's just a much nicer, more original or better paint, or whatever that would have no problem bringing MORE than that high figure.

 

 

Although I now can envision a scenario that gives a 63 a PQ designation, it still DOES come down to one thing... being able to get more money for the coin than a similar MS63 w/o the PQ sticker.

 

 

 

[WinstonWare]

Winston, I guess it all depends on whose defining PQ, and like most things numismatic a certain amount of subjectivity and personal preference comes into play....Mike

 

Yes I agree. Perhaps that’s just my preference.

[BillJones]

I was more concerned about the dip than anything else. I thought that PQ coins were supposed to be original. Perhaps I was mistaken

 

Most any 19th century silver coin, with the exception of Morgan Dollars, will be dipped, have unattractive toning or a couple distracting marks when it gets the MS-63 grade. An MS-63 is fairly far down in the grading scale. For most advanced collectors it's the last rung on the ladder in the Mint State scale.

 

You guys are WAY too hung up on dipping. I'm getting the sense that you think that anything has been dipped has been ruined, which is clearly not the case. CLEANED, which means the surfaces have significantly changed through would is often an abrasive process, is VERY different.

 

Dipping removes a very thin layer of metal that has been tarished. As such the coin still have full mint luster. If the dipping is done too often or if it is too hash, the mint luster is impaired and the coin is worth less.

 

In my opinion it's possible for a dipped coin to go has high as MS-65 although that would be the exception. The tarish removed in that case would not have amounted to much.

[WinstonWare]

I was more concerned about the dip than anything else. I thought that PQ coins were supposed to be original. Perhaps I was mistaken

 

Most any 19th century silver coin, with the exception of Morgan Dollars, will be dipped, have unattractive toning or a couple distracting marks when it gets the MS-63 grade. An MS-63 is fairly far down in the grading scale. For most advanced collectors it's the last rung on the ladder in the Mint State scale.

 

You guys are WAY too hung up on dipping. I'm getting the sense that you think that anything has been dipped has been ruined, which is clearly not the case. CLEANED, which means the surfaces have significantly changed through would is often an abrasive process, is VERY different.

 

Dipping removes a very thin layer of metal that has been tarished. As such the coin still have full mint luster. If the dipping is done too often or if it is too hash, the mint luster is impaired and the coin is worth less.

 

In my opinion it's possible for a dipped coin to go has high as MS-65 although that would be the exception. The tarish removed in that case would not have amounted to much.

 

No I don’t believe that a dipped coin has been ruined and I do understand the difference between a cleaned and dipped coin.

 

I was deriving my opinion from the fact that I have seen a number of undipped original coins sell for premiums over dipped coins. It was therefore my thought that original pieces would be considered PQ.

 

I appreciate and respect your opinion. I also appreciate what you bring to the boards. This is just what I was thinking….

 

[BillJones]

It is true that exceptional examples of original toned coins can bring very high prices relative to Gray Sheet or even the prices in retail guides, like Coin Values. My attitude about those prices, is let the specialists pay them.

 

What is more disturbing is the trend I've seen from the TPGs. I've seen toned PR-63 and 64 19th century seated coins in PR-66 holders. This so-called market grading is very misleading for those who are in the market for coins like this. What one should expect from a PR-66 is a near perfect Proof coin. What I've seen has been an original Proof with some really significant marks hidden in the toning. That's just not right so far as I'm concerned.

[WinstonWare]

It is true that exceptional examples of original toned coins can bring very high prices relative to Gray Sheet or even the prices in retail guides, like Coin Values. My attitude about those prices, is let the specialists pay them.

 

What is more disturbing is the trend I've seen from the TPGs. I've seen toned PR-63 and 64 19th century seated coins in PR-66 holders. This so-called market grading is very misleading for those who are in the market for coins like this. What one should expect from a PR-66 is a near perfect Proof coin. What I've seen has been an original Proof with some really significant marks hidden in the toning. That's just not right so far as I'm concerned.

 

Ah I think I see what you are getting at now. Thanks. I appreciate your taking the time to explain it to me.

[MarkFeld]

In my opinion it's possible for a dipped coin to go has high as MS-65 although that would be the exception.

Exception? I've seen numerous dipped MS66, 67 ad 68 type coins in PCGS and NGC holders. Ditto for PR66, PR67 and PR68 examples.

[BillJones]

In my opinion it's possible for a dipped coin to go has high as MS-65 although that would be the exception.

Exception? I've seen numerous dipped MS66, 67 ad 68 type coins in PCGS and NGC holders. Ditto for PR66, PR67 and PR68 examples.

 

Oh I agree. I've seen them in those high grade holders, but that not to say that those coin belong there. My standards are once you get to those levels, you should expect an original coin or a coin that has such a great look that you can’t spot the dipping. If the coin screams “I’ve been dipped!!!” and it’s in a MS or PR-66 or higher holder, I pass.

[MarkFeld]

Thanks for the explanation Bill.

[TomB]

It is my opinion, too, that this coin based only upon the single set of images in this thread is PQ for the grade of MS63. Please note that I believe the coin is PQ for the grade of MS63 and not necessarily for its perceived originality or lack thereof. In my experience, the industry standard for an MS63 Seated half dollar is below what this coin appears to be, which makes the piece PQ in my opinion. In truth, I would pass on this coin, but not because I think it low end or average for the grade. Rather, I would pass on it because I would want a different look for a coin in my collection. However, for the grade of MS63 relative to industry standard, I think the coin is PQ.

[BillJones]

This is one of those types I have no desire to agonize over. Over the years I’ve seen some truly unattractive 1873-4 with arrows half dollars in Mint State holders. I have no desire to sink $5K in to this type coin. I looked at a few PR-63 and 64 pieces, and was very disappointed in the look and even more disappointed with the prices, which were WELL beyond Gary Sheet “Ask.” Over the years I’ve seen so truly unattractive 1873-4 with arrows half dollars. When I saw this piece for less than $2K, I knew it would fit the bill.

[MikeKing]

the coin shows no rub

the surfaces are remarkably mark free for a 64 never mind a 63 seated half dollar

the dip was done correctly in that the luster is preserved very well

the coin is PQ for the grade.

end of story.