PO'ed and scratching my head. NGC Star designation review results.

[SkyMan]

I recently sent six coins in to NGC for a star designation review. I just got them back today. Exactly 1 came back starred. Needless to say this P'ed me off. (Particularly since the grouping of coins that I sent in came back in what appears to be an endlot of their plastic holders, e.g. quite unattractive marked white plastic for the center plastic piece).

 

I'm sorry, but I think I have a pretty good idea of what a superior looking coin is for the sort of material I sent in... three of the coins I sent in were Franklins. I certainly didn't expect all 6 of the coins to upgrade, but I figured 3ish would get the nod (although God alone knows which 3).

 

Given some of the absolute garbage that is starred I am fairly stunned that only 1 of these coins came back starred. Let's just say I won't be sending NGC any more coins for some time. You be the judge.

 

Here's the one coin that starred;

 

 

Here are the other five coins that did not star;

 

 

 

(For those of you that don't know the Franklin series this is probably one of the top twenty five 1954-D's in existence for looks).

 

 

This 1949-D is most likely in the top 10 in existence for looks. I've owned it for ~ 20 years, and have yet to see a better one. To add insult to injury, and since I was already paying for a designation review, I asked them to FBL the coin. It neither starred nor FBL. You make the call.

 

Let's just say, NGC has saved themselves the problem of making any more money off of me for a while.

[MarkFeld]

From the images, I would have guessed that the 58-D dime, the 54-D half and maybe the 49-D half would have received stars.

 

That said, since it's common knowledge and understandable that the grading companies are imperfect, it seems like a large overreaction to make comments such as "Let's just say I won't be sending NGC any more coins for some time" due to a disappointing submission.

 

Lastly, the fact that you think a given coin is one of the 10 or 20 best looking ones in existence (which I think would be impossible for you to really know, anyway) shouldn't/doesn't automatically have anything to do with whether it deserves a star or not. Sometimes the "best" isn't that good or that good looking.

 

I will be curious to see if other posters are more sympathetic or not, due to your tone. Still, however, I am sorry you were disappointed with the results.

[ctrl-migration]

CAC!

 

Personally, the mottled toning doesn't do it for me. Maybe that's why.

[jesbroken]

I think the 54 D and 49 D Franklin would be great candidates for a star in addition to the 57 D Washington, but then that's me and probably not the best opinion to consider. Great coins, all. Sorry you were dissatisfied with the results.

I seem to have NGC's silver grading down somewhat and no longer am completely put out with the reuslts of my submissions, but not their copper grading. I get burnt every time I send in copper(not NCS but NGC). If I think it stinks it scores and if I love it, then it fails. Go figure.

Jim

 

[kryptonitecomics]

The first quarter and second dime were puchased from me and I agree it was an absolute travesty that they did not receive the star as in hand....they are simply amazing. I had other coins in those submissions that also did not receive stars and they were head scratchers.

 

I think the problem here is consistency......not whether we agree or disagree on what constitutes superior eye appeal. When I look at the coins with just a touch of color getting the star and then others that are breath taking being passed up.....it does cause one to question one's sanity.

 

I also don't think it's fair to compair all coins of a certain denomination to each other when determining eye appeal becuase as we know....1921 Morgans do not tone like the rest of the series.....1957 and 1958 Frankies are very commonly found with spectacular toning....but I understand that may be asking too much of the graders at NGC to micro evaluate each date and each series.

 

I think all 6 coins had a serious shot at stars but like Sy...I would not have expected a clean sweep.....but that FBL sure looks FBL to me

[gmarguli]

The 1957 10c is blah. So-so obverse color which appears uneven and a generic reverse. I'd never expect this coin to get the Star designation.

 

The 1958-D 10c has a decent obverse ("waterspots" hurt the chances of the Star), but the reverse has thick toning and several spots. I would not expect this coin to get the Star.

 

The 1954-D 50c is hard to see from the picture. Looks nice, but not exceptional. I wouldn't be surprised either way with this not/getting the Star.

 

The 1958-D 50c is attractive, but not what I'd call exceptional. It doesn't appear to have enough obverse color (other than gold) to get the Star. I wouldn't be surprised either way with this not/getting the Star.

 

The 1949-D 50c has way too many black toning spots. I'd never expect this coin to get the Star designation.

 

Having said that, the 1957-D 25c is exceptional and I can fully see why it got the Star designation. That's the type of coin I'd expect to get a Star, not the others. Sorry...

[MarkFeld]

So, even with only a small number of replies to this thread thus far, we already have some major differences of opinion and additional reminders of the subjectivity in eye-appeal.

[WoodenJefferson]

 

NGC web page on Star Designations

 

From the NGC web site:

 

It is also of note that Star Designations are applied only with the unanimous consent of NGC's graders. If there is a single objection to a particular coin receiving a Star Designation upon quality control inspection, it loses the star.

 

 

So, if one grader is not partial to the tone or type of toning on your coin, it gets nixed. Too bad, I thought for sure that 54-D Franklin would have scored a “*”

 

[MikeInFL]

Here's what I said ATS on these coins:

 

"Please don't take this the wrong way, but I agree with NGC in this case. While they are all attractive, only the first coin sings to me."

[MarkFeld]

Here's what I said ATS on these coins:

 

"Please don't take this the wrong way, but I agree with NGC in this case. While they are all attractive, only the first coin sings to me."

Mike, I can understand that. Playing devil's advocate, however, I'd bet that MANY star coins don't sing to you.

[coinman1794]

I would STAR the 1957-D 25C and the 1954-D 50C. Both of those have awesome color that is smooth and appealing and truly exceptional, not splotchy or mixed with dark toning or white spots.

 

The 1949-D is an amazing coin for the date, but can't be given a star because of the dark spots; the 1958-D 50C is very close but NGC tends not to award stars to Mint set pieces that have a lot of white speckles; the 1957 Dime is very close as well, in fact it could be STAR #3 on a good day if it really pops in-hand. The 1957-D dime has brown at the reverse rims, and this is very average, despite the wild obverse, though it, like the 1958-D 50C, has a few white speckles.

 

 

[coinman1794]

Also, because the STAR designation is so subjective when being used to recognize eye appeal (as opposed to One-sided PLs or Cameoes, etc), the consistency of the graders is subject to relative perspective; if you send in a bunch of great coins, the best will get the STAR and the others will not becuase the coins end up being compared to each other. If submitted individually or with other coins not so attractive, the odds of them liking the coin and STARing it are greater. Just take my word for it...

[123cents]

All are nice but I like the 57-D and 54-D.

[James_OldeTowne]

I can really only speak to the dimes. My guess would be that they are just too darned "common" in beautifully toned UNC grades to warrant a star unless really special. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I have been hoarding toner Roosevelts for some time, and have three albums about full.

 

Incidentally, I financed my current Roosevelt dime efforts by assembling a 100% complete set of toned Roosies in NGC MS-66 slabs, mostly no-line fatties! I was able to sell that set for quite a pretty penny, and that profit, combined with the much lower cost of un-slabbed coins, is how I've been able to hoard so many.

 

One day, I should post some pics.

 

Sorry you didn't get stars on the other coins. Seldom do I see a starred coin where I couldn't figure out why it qualified, but I often see unstarred coins that seem like they should.

[PCcoins]

By the way nice coins Sy!

 

My opinion: the 57-d quarter deserved the star, hands down. I was surprised when I first seen it graded without the star!

 

The 54-d Frankie is a beauty, and should have received the star, not your average 54-d by any means.

 

I don't think the 49-d would have received the star, only because of the black toning on this coin. It should have been FBL!!!

[TomB]

"Ownership adds a point", but in this case I believe it adds a star. Sorry.

[Treeman]

The only one I would have personnally "starred" is the 54D half. Then again, I'm only judging by pictures, and the coins, in hand, may offer a completely different opinion.

[michael]

myself i would not have given the star to any of these coins you submitted

 

 

you are lucky to have gotten one

[cpm9ball]

NGC web page on Star Designations

 

From the NGC web site:

 

It is also of note that Star Designations are applied only with the unanimous consent of NGC's graders. If there is a single objection to a particular coin receiving a Star Designation upon quality control inspection, it loses the star.

 

 

So, if one grader is not partial to the tone or type of toning on your coin, it gets nixed. Too bad, I thought for sure that 54-D Franklin would have scored a “*”

 

This is where I disagree with NGC's policy. This is not a capital murder case. I think it should be a clear majority rather than a unanimous decision.

 

Chris

[physics-fan3.14]

Sy, you know I hold you in the highest regard and greatly respect your eye for color. Unfortunately, in this case I have to agree with Greg, Tom, and others. The quarter which did get the star appears to have deserved it, but the others not so much.

[MarkFeld]

myself i would not have given the star to any of these coins you submitted

 

 

you are lucky to have gotten one

Michael, do you really think he was lucky that the gorgeous looking quarter received a star? I think you got a bit carried away there.

[Oldtrader3]

I think that the '54-D Franklin should have earned a star. The dime is really nice also.

[michael]

mark the quarter is good on one side and below average on the other you look at the obverse and then the reverse is below average this is not a balanced coin both sides if both sides are toned should be great this is why i think the star is not deserved in this case

 

all the coins i got a star on both sides were monster not just one side hence a balanced coin

 

so for me the quarter does not deserve a star---- this does not mean that it is not a good coin but one side might be star quality the reverse certainly is not

 

not a well balanced coin

[michael]

now mark that proof merc dime you posted on here a week or so ago the proof 67 merc dime both sides were above average and a well balanced toned coin

 

hence i think this merc dime deserves a star it does not have a star but it does not matter it would be a desierable coin from many a buyers point of view and an easily selling coin to many dealers as the toning is way above average on BOTH SIDES hence well balanced

[michael]

also mark the star is based on all eye appeal and if you think grading is subjective which it is of course.......... well the star grade is even moreso

 

i have found that ngc has started to miss the boat on many starred coins and i think this has watered down the star desigation meaning in my minds eye since its inception in early 2000/2001

 

 

[lehigh96]

Sy,

 

Although you are not getting much sympathy or agreement from most of the other board members regarding your post, I feel your pain. I have posted on more that one occasion that the star designation is all over the map. Sometimes, I think they decide by flipping a coin it is so inconsistent.

 

However, I agree with most of the other members that neither Roosevelt Dime or the 54 Franklin deserve a star. The 1958-D Franklin is a tweener IMO and the 1949-D is a definite star coin IMO. I think that NGC is very tight with certain series of coins when issuing the star designation. Franklin Halfs and SLQ's come to mind. I rarely see these coins with the star designation.

 

To illustrate my point about NGC's inconsistency I will post three Jefferson Nickels below. Who can tell me the star status of each coin?

 

 

[toyonakataro]

I personally like most of the coins you posted here and that's more important to me than stars on the slab.

[MarkFeld]

mark the quarter is good on one side and below average on the other you look at the obverse and then the reverse is below average this is not a balanced coin both sides if both sides are toned should be great this is why i think the star is not deserved in this case

 

all the coins i got a star on both sides were monster not just one side hence a balanced coin

 

so for me the quarter does not deserve a star---- this does not mean that it is not a good coin but one side might be star quality the reverse certainly is not

 

not a well balanced coin

Michael, thanks for your reply. To my eyes, the quarter looks great (not "good") on the obverse and good (not "below average") on the reverse. And there are a large number of NGC star coins which aren't "balanced" on both sides.

[kryptonitecomics]

mark the quarter is good on one side and below average on the other you look at the obverse and then the reverse is below average this is not a balanced coin both sides if both sides are toned should be great this is why i think the star is not deserved in this case

 

all the coins i got a star on both sides were monster not just one side hence a balanced coin

 

so for me the quarter does not deserve a star---- this does not mean that it is not a good coin but one side might be star quality the reverse certainly is not

 

not a well balanced coin

Michael, thanks for your reply. To my eyes, the quarter looks great (not "good") on the obverse and good (not "below average") on the reverse. And there are a large number of NGC star coins which aren't "balanced" on both sides.

 

I have to agree.....one sided toners with stars can be found 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 vs dual sided toners so balance in my opinion has nothing to do with the star designation.....just one's personal opinion of a coin. (thumbs u

[braddick]

One of the reasons NGC uses the star designation is specifically because the coin is not 'balanced' in appearance. For example, a mint state Morgan dollar that is a strong PL on the obverse but not so on the reverse may well earn a star and a proof Lincoln with an obverse Cameo but either a weak or no cam on the reverse may garner the star.

 

Generally one side being much stronger than the other in a positive characteristic will earn a star vs the coin that doesn't share that 'one sided' quality.