Your thoughts on this coin?

[MarkFeld]

Someone at Pinnacle, whose name will be kept secret for now, bought this coin, (graded MS64 by NGC) recently. Three other people at the company do not like it. What are your thoughts on its appearance? Thanks for your opinions.

 

 

Link

[EVillageProwler]

Mark,

 

That coin has one heck of a nice look to it. Assuming that it's a true UNC, I can't tell from a scan if MS64 is proper.

 

However, the big issue is if the coin is truly an UNC. It seems like one of those coins that easily can be graded a ChAU... Perhaps the distinction is easier to make if I were holding the coin.

 

I guess the obv strike bothers me too much. That date normally comes well struck.

 

EVP

 

[keithdagen]

I really like the toning, but the coin does not appear to be well struck at all. I would probably pass on the coin just because the grade of the coin is too steep for the strike you get.

[michael]

i have seen this coin in person last week.examined it for three hours straight

 

it is a fully original toned coin it is really technically better than a 64 it has little to no contact marks and is cleaner markwise than any ms65 i have ever seen in an ngc/pcgs holder

 

it is a really unusual coin and i think most will not understand this coin

 

the originality is superb and the colors are very good on the coin

 

sincerely michael

 

folks this is how an original coin comes there are prooflike surfaces underneath the toning also

 

but again only being in a 64 holder many like the magic of 65/66/67/68 nothing wrong with that just the way it is and with many not having seen a coin like this and not understanding the toning many since they do not understand this coin fear it and thart is just human nature and stay away from this coin out of fear they do not understand it so they fear it so they shun it

 

kind of like if you look into a dark room in a basement you just are scarde now if it is well lit you look in and are not afraid just human nature

 

not all but most fear what they do not understand

 

and that is okie also currently the market rewards coins that are blast white and/or lightly toned even if the coin has been dipped and then retoned lightly on the edges just the way it is

also the market reaards coins that are understood by most soooooooooooooo liked by most

sincerely michael

[ETsMiddleFinger-migration]

I'm sure there is a nice looking coin in there somewhere, but that toning is awful. I'd suggest removing it from it's 'slab' (is that the correct term?) and a dip in something to get rid of the stains.

[TomB]

Somehow, Mark, I knew that this would be the coin you were going to link. I actually like it very much and think it to be a gorgeous coin, provided that the strike is the issue and not ancient wear. Since michael has seen it in person and believes in its mint state originality I feel better about the coin. Tell the others at Pinnacle that I have always liked it.

[MarkFeld]

By the way, this is the description of the coin on our website, with more to follow later after I hear additional comments :

 

DESCRIPTION:

 

Ok, maybe you can help me out here, a little bit. Apparently, I like this coin a lot more than some other "Pinnacle people". The prooflike surfaces, the gorgeous, deep multicolored toning on the obverse, along with the deep rose-colored reverse with hints of green and turquoise did me in. Just 12 graded higher by NGC. Buy it quickly and prove me right! Save my job, please?

[keithdagen]

Michael,

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the originality of the piece, no doubt, and most of my coins are in the AU-58 to MS-63 range, so this is high-end for me already. But the strike is very weak, and I would prefer a coin for my personal collection that has a better strike.

[pmh1nic]

My only concern was what FC57 shared on the other forum regarding the luster. The photograph (or my monitor) gives it a flat appearance. Otherwise (IMHO) it's a beautiful coin.

[Klectorkid]

A very nice coin, looks very PQ for a 64.... might upgrade.

[Oldtrader3]

Mark: I really like the coin. For one thing, I do not think anyone could have achieved those results artifically. Anyway, I like the coin.

[CarlWohlforth]

So, Mark, why didn't the others like it? Was it the obverse strike?

 

I'm a total convert to the toning thing BTW and like this one pretty much. I can see the coin is proof like and original.

 

However I prefer your NGC 1891. I'd rather have a proof than a proof like

[Guest]

I'd rather have a gorgeous blazing color coin with a flatness in the strike like this one than your typical dipped out, somewhat nicked up, well struck PCGS coin. Of course like Keith I'd love this coin with a full strike, who wouldn't. We don't always have those choices. Toss in a full strike and I bet the price would be 30-50% higher. Like Michael, I sort of prefer subtle mint state coins that many other people just don't "see."

 

roadrunner

[IrishMike]

Hmmm, would have to see it in person, the color is great but the strike turns me off.

[Tradedollarnut]

I think it'd be real interesting if the coin was actually a PCGS MS65 and you put it up on the CU chatroom stating it was an NGC 64 asking for comments.

[Hoot]

Absolutely delicious coin! I had my doubts about the BU quality of the coin at first, but after reading Michael's post, that went away! The strike may be slightly weak, but the originality is soooooooo strong! Wish i could add it to my ever stagnant type set! What a wonderfully beautiful coin.

 

Hoot

[michael]

wow a great coinpost and responses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

i wish someone would tell many of the posters at the pcgs boards to get a life

and please ONLY post coin related things like this post!!............

 

many great comments!!!!!

yes

this coin is deeply toned and is mottled and is proof like, not with mintstate lustre

like many later dated seated halves come in ms so with thedeep toning there is no luster to come

thruogh the toning like you see with the deeply toned proof silver seated coins of the 1860's

 

 

 

this coin makes it fully original appreaance this way!! and of course in this current market the market

acceptance for this coin is low,,,,, does this make this a bad coin??.............no...........

 

that is why it is in an ngc ms 64 holder and not higher it is market graded

and that is

just where the market is

and how the comapny grades currently based on what the market will accept and that is okie it makes total sence

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

i mean you have to run a company on what is currently in favor in the market

i mean if people like to eat rotten eggs then if you run an egg company

you need to select all the rotten eggs and package and sell them and throw out the fresh ones!

 

such is the market not good or bad

but in a for profit business you need to give the market your customers what

they want and sometimes that is a good thing and sometimes that is not so good

but such is life

 

this coin is the ugly duckling at this current market stage.... is it for me??........ no........ is it in reality?? no

but perception is everything but the majority of the market doesnot accept this coin currently

 

i mean look at the tulip mania with the ultra modern

coins graded monster high grades within a certian service bringing moon money!

and that is okie

but remember in my opinion there was a price to pay with the tulip mania and this will reveal itself

in this coin market also down the road,,,,, how far ? i do not know

but it is a coming..............

 

now that is okie as the hobby of coins is a hobby

and many

like dfferent things

and of course even with many that like the same things there are still wide differences

of opinions

on the same coin and that is great as grading and what we like and are

passionate about are extremely inexact sciences!!

 

 

now this coin to me technically is better than most pcgs/ngcms 65 seated halves

i mean the way ms 65 seatred halves are currently graded i do not thinkmost of them are 65 coins in 65

holders but that is the current market

 

i have seen a ccrrently graded ngc 65 pan pac that if it was an ms seated half it would be in a 66/67 holder

 

and that is okie! that is the way 65 seated halves are graded!! but not for me at their current prices.........

am i right or wrong i guess only time will tell and that is okie with me!

 

for me this ms 64 coin at 1100 is a steal and overall is technically superior to most all ((common dated if there

is such a thing as a common gem seated half)) but you get my drift

seated halves graded ms65

at 2x to 5 x the price of this coin in 65 this 64 coin is a great!!!!!!! coin and a great value in my opinion!

 

 

but again coins is a personal thing and as always the last hundred or so years of coins

there is huge market acceptance for certian coins and certian looks but as with all things

 

they pass tomorrow is another day with many different things on the horizen!

 

sincerely michael

 

why do i get so little thanks for the many things i say that nobody will say or wants said?..............

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

What can I add after Michael's somewhat lengthy post?

 

Yes, the obverse strike is weak (and I wish it weren't) but not enough so to discourage me from appreciating the coin.

 

EVP - it is truly UNC/MS, though from the images I can see why you raised the issue.

 

Tom B. - how did you know that was going to be the coin I would post an image of?

 

Carl - I never said I was the one who liked the coin, but I confess, I bought it and wrote the description I posted previously

 

I posted the images because I thought it was a great example of the subjectivity involved in coins. I think it's very pretty, if not beautiful (I am always afraid of over-using terms like beautiful, PQ, high-end etc - you should hear me on the phone with clients - a few of them constantly try to pry those words out of me and rarely succeed! One of them posts to this board, as a matter of fact).

 

However, three different people at Pinnacle independently concluded that they didn't like the coin. Perhaps it's darker than the images if you don't tilt it just right under the light and maybe because of that it will be harder to sell than a lighter coin. I'm not trying to say that I'm right and that they are wrong, merely that I was surprised that I was in the minority and it reminded me of how subjective this can all be.

 

Thanks for the replies. I think I'll check out the feedback on the other board now.