• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Your opinion of this Saint Gaudens, please

10 posts in this topic

I showed this coin on the PCGS board and received several informative comments. The consensus was that it is a problem coin because of some noticable digs in the surface. I would like to get your opinion because it is in an NGC MS65 holder. Is this coin consistent with what NGC typically calls an MS65 for this particular series? Could you take a look and tell me if you think that NGC was too liberal in this case?

 

Obverse: 1923-D MS65

 

Reverse: 1923-D MS65

 

Thanks,

 

Dan

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a really pretty coin Dan! As far as the grade, I have a 16-S in 65/NGC, and this coin is not entirely inconsistent. My only real concern is the bag marks in the field on the obverse above the date. But I will say that scans of coins have a way of deeply exxagerating marks on coins, especially gold. A small scratch ends up looking like a huge gouge, which I suspect is the case with most of the marks in your scan. The other thing to remember is that Denver Saints are notorious for weak strikes and overall lackluster appearance. I wouldn't pass final judgement unless I saw it in person, but it looks like NGC took a very PQ 64 and since the reverse was so nice, they bumped it to a 65 instead of a 64.67 as it probably is. If you truly think it's a 64, then ask the NGC folks to take a look at it for the grading guarantee. For reference, here is a link to my 16-S in 65: 1916-S Keep in mind 2 things, my scans aren't that great, and San Francisco gold almost always looks nicer the Philly or Denver gold (just my opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will post an attachment of my MS65-1923-D Saint for your viewing pleasure. You will notice a few ticks on mine as well, but in person they look negligable. I would not be too concerned about the scan of your coin. As was mentioned, they often exagerate the hits. Your reverse is a stone cold 66. This may be, as was mentioned, the overiding factor in the grade. Keep it and be happy. Overall, it is a nice coin. tongue.gif

60675-1923PSaint.jpg.d4c133b30413b7aae548fab34b830a10.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dig in Ms. Liberty's thigh combined with the straight line marks in the field make this coin an MS-64 IMO. The fact that the 1933 double eagle got an MS-65 grade when it was really an MS-64 is not relivent. The grade of 1933 double eagle was secondary to its rarity and fame.

 

One need only look at what happened to the grades on the coins that are in the King of Siam Proof Set a several years ago to see an example of the games that grading services play games. One service grades the coins and then the other service grades them all one point higher. Why? Because the upgrades got the coins into a different of holder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently read a posting from someone who expressed concern that his 1923-D Saint Gaudens may have been graded too liberally by NGC. The grade given was a 65 and this was the impetus for me to conduct a statistical analysis of the entire Saint Gaudens series minus the Wells Fargo hoard to determine if there may be any validity to this often debated claim. My objective was to obtain the percentage of coins graded by each grading sevice in each grade from MS65 and above and draw correlations relating to a particular grade's relativety to other grades and each grading service's relativety to each other in relation to the percentage of coins graded in each specific grade. The statistics were obtained from current population reports provided by the two major grading sevices, and from this data I must say that his concern may indeed be valid.

Historically NGC has graded 65 Saints more liberally than their counterparts at PCGS. The percentages are not really close, with NGC grading 65's 9.83% of the time to PCGS's 5.21%, or put in other words 47% of the NGC 65's would not make the grade at PCGS. Of course these statistics have been derived from data dating back to the inception of both companies, and it is entirely possible that current grading standards have changed at NGC and that 65's are now alloted with less frequency.

NGC really gets tough in the 66 grade actually becoming the rarer coin by a slim .94% to 1.11% ratio.

The 67 grade is practically the antithesis of the 65 grade with NGC becoming exactally twice as rare as PCGS. That's correct an NGC 67 Saint has come along only .025% of the time compared to .050% for a PCGS 67 Saint. Does this mean that a NGC 67 is better than a PCGS 67? Not necessarily however based on it's rarity in this grade, I believe it should at least have the same financial worth, which it does not.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The analysis assumes statistically identical submission pools for each grading service. Put another way, it assumes properly conditioned sample spaces. This assumption is not necessarily justifiable on its face.

 

Beijim

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites