ANACS crackouts/crossovers to NGC - guess the grades

[James_OldeTowne]

Here's a well kept secret: ANACS went through a surprisingly conservative phase during the transition from the small holders to the large holders. If you can find a small holder with that type of font - arial (or sans-serif), there's an excellent chance it's undergraded. I'm not surprised to see that incorrectly graded AU-50 actually graded AU-55 at NGC. It is no indication that NGC is somehow "looser", but rather that ANACS was just conservative during that time.

 

However, ANACS grading during this current era of the yellow holders is POOR. As far as I'm concerned, they are currently hardly any better than NTC or ACG.

 

Seriously.

[cpm9ball]

However, ANACS grading during this current era of the yellow holders is POOR. As far as I'm concerned, they are currently hardly any better than NTC or ACG.

 

Seriously.

 

Ha! Tell that to some of the folks at VAMWorld. They swear by ANACS and VARSlab.

 

Chris

[Hard Times]

Good morning,

Next up, a nice halve I cracked out. Guess the NGC grade. I know most of you will get it right given the past two evaluations......

 

 

[L1ncolnF4n]

Wow! I like that one, don't see how it got knocked to a 50, I think AU-58 at minimum unless I'm missing something big. I could see that up to MS-62.

[TJ'S Coins]

Wow! I like that one, don't see how it got knocked to a 50, I think AU-58 at minimum unless I'm missing something big. I could see that up to MS-62.

Agreed. Nice specimen. Something about the obverse fields may have brought it into the AU category. I'm surprised it was only a 50.

[123cents]

From the photos I would think about AU-58.

[Mark T]

I know this coin because I was looking at it when it came up for Auction last December. Your picture does not show all the marks and hairlines on the coin.

This coin was dipped for sure and maybe cleaned, the toning around the rims was caused by the dip . It is possible that what I think are hairlines are just marks from circulation that were amplified by the dip . The grade is probably correct at Au 50 however NGC probably gave this one a details grade.

I hope you do not mind that I posted a picture of this coin . I adjusted the contrast a bit . The reverse of this coin has better details then the obverse.

[Hard Times]

Mark,

The parallel hairlines you note in the very bad Heritage picture is the result of lighting up surface blemishes that are perpendicular to the light source. To help in grading this, on close inspection you would see that the hairlines are in reality distributed in random directions all over, and the ones not oriented perpendicular to the light source are not observed in the images from Heritage. This is typical of around 90% of all US circulated coins in top TPG holders at least for silver and gold. This is why it is so hard to assess the surfaces from the bad Heritage pics. I had the fortune of actually being at the Houston Money Show and inspecting all specimens including this one. What I can say is I would prefer this opportunity when bidding on any Heritage offering in the future because of the misleading images that do not tell the whole story on the surfaces of each specimen.

 

One could interpret the random hairlines in specimens made in these metals as acquisition during natural handling while in circulation. Having said that, such randomly oriented hairlines are found for sliver and gold specimens in low MS grades also when housed in top TPG holders. It is possible that such randomly oriented hairlines were also made from a light cleaning - although not obvious because they are random and not aligned in this case. The question then becomes, at what level do the top TPG guys interpret this as cleaned versus gradable? Of note, at present, NGC is grading strictly so this also has to be taken into account for your assessments.

 

There is no question it was dipped along time ago, and then acquired album toning over the decades. Again, when is this acceptable for a numeric grade and when will this be considered for 'Details' grading instead?

 

I hope this helps in assessing the NGC grade.

 

Thanks, Al

[James_OldeTowne]

The 1853-O A&R half looks EF-45 to me, despite the cleaning.

[Mark T]

My point was the obverse surface of the coin is probably acceptable for the Au 50 grade but not for Au 55 or above. I buy a lot of stuff from Heritage and can usually interpret their lousy pictures pretty well. Details wise the obverse is Au 50 reverse Au 55 , based on this I think the coin received Au 50 from NGC . I spend a lot of time photographing coins . Lighting can bring up stuff on a coin and make it look much worse then it is , however it can also bring up stuff that is not easily visible with just the naked eye.

I am really interested in the grade on this one. I was looking at this coin as a possible cross myself but was only willing to pay much less then what you did because I thought the risk on the coin was to high . I still think there is a possibility this coin received a details grade because of a light cleaning .

 

[Hard Times]

Hi Mark,

I spend alot of time photoing coins also so I can relate to what you said. Recall at the Money Show, Heritage had alot of 1853-O halves in their auction. I had the benefit of scrutinizing all of them on site as noted above, and ultimately decided to bid on this one, cognizant of the fact that yes, cleaning can be an issue for coins in ANACS holders (actually for NGC and PCGS also). Hence my experiment here and the education that comes with it. And I agree with all of your discussion above with respect to possible cleaning. Where I am confused is how dipping can leave the toning observed on the rims. An untold number of specimens out there have this toning progression from dark to blue to red-orange to gold going in from the rims. It seems to me that dipping residue would not leave such a progression or be focused on the rim after rinsing with water? The one time I had degradation of a surface depicted as some kind of toning or coloration resulting from dipping, it did not look like that, but instead a dark streak randomly placed on the surface where it was clear I did not wash off the dip. It was a Morgan and I sent it to NCS who successfully removed the dark streak without any negative impact. If what you say is correct, that means tons of specimens out there that have rim toning that most interpret as album toning, but are actually altered in what can be considered a negative way. So can you elaborate on this interpretation you presented above?

 

Thanks, Al

[L1ncolnF4n]

With those new pictures, I can see the AU-ness. I will revise my guess to AU details, or grade it out at 50.

[michael]

on the half that was in an anx 50 slab

 

i think ngc graded this coin

 

ngc au-50

 

nice looking really popular coin to boot

[Mark T]

The color of the edge tone just has the look that one would see after a dip .

I am not saying it is unattractive , based on your photos the coin looks fantastic. I am not an expert on this subject , I make my comments based on what I have seen with other coins . I hope NGC did not details grade this . Obviously I was looking at picking this coin up myself so there must have been something about it that I liked With that said the reason I did not bid higher was because of all those obverse marks from the Heritage picture along with the obvious dip. The risk reward at $ 500 was not worth it to me . I hope you prove me wrong !!

 

[physics-fan3.14]

The seated half I will guess graded NGC AU-50. It was dipped and retoned, I don't like it a whole lot, but it appears market acceptable. There is enough wear on her chest and thigh that this will be a lower AU, but there appears to be enough luster to get AU.

[Schatzy]

I will have to say high AU, I just don't know if it got AU58 so I will say AU55.

I think the toning is also market acceptable.

[Paul Kiraly 3]

XF 45+

[Hard Times]

Jaime is the Man!! He is nailing these grades!! Yeowza! But wait, there are more to come!!! All excellent commentary and grading. When I evaluated the coin at the auction, I thought it would cross at AU50, and it was better than the AU55's being auctioned at the same time when I had the chance to place them side by side in the lot viewing area. The limit looked liked strong wear on the breasts and legs. but I wonder if this is actually a strike issue instead... I would also make the case that worn coins will have nicks and hairlines on the surfaces, the question always will be how do they impact the grade and eye appeal. For this, compare my photos to the Heritage one and decide for yourself. I think my photos depict the better attributes while the Heritage ones show the negative, that is all one can say I think. The old dipping does not bother me, I don't mind this versus a gray almost lusterless AU that with a closer to original skin is popular right now. In fact, I am putting together a set of old dipped but retoned silver, I do like the look what can I say.

 

Here it is:

 

Tomorrow am I will put up the next one.

 

Thanks everyone, Al

 

[Mark T]

Wow , I should have raised my bid on that coin !!

Great pick up .

 

[Hard Times]

Mark,

Ah but what goes around comes around, the Barber half in the previous post that was graded XF Details, I got that in the same auction..... I am going to avoid ANACS yellow and blue labels unless I can see the coin in hand for now on. And again, for the 1853-O, I had the advantage of seeing the specimen in hand while you had to rely on the Heritage pic...... If I had not, I would have likely not bid that high either.

[Mark T]

My Best Au 58 Bust Half came from one of those old ANACS holders.

The Heritage photo was not the best so I picked it up for a good price :

It is now in an Au 58 PCGS Holder CAC certified.

 

 

[Hard Times]

Good morning,

Here is the next in the series. This one I submitted for Crossover, I did not crack it out first. I was not confident that it would come back with a grade to my satisfaction, so I took it to FUN in the holder. I then waited dutifully in line at the NGC table during their 1 hour when you can meet a grader (I think it was Salzberg) and have your coin evaluated. My question when I handed him this specimen was 'Will it cross as MS61, 62, or 63?' In 5 seconds looking at the coin, he said 'yes, next', and I moved on down the table to where Brian Silliman helped me fill out 3 separate submission forms for the crossover, raw (crackouts +), and foreign tokens, then made sure the home office would know to send all of them back together by putting the right information on all 3 forms. During this 20 minute process, I entertained Brian with my story or the coin that will follow this one, more on that tomorrow. My big concern here, which is why I sought the free opinion, was that the NGC graders might find some rub and call it a 58. So I put on the form that my lowest acceptable grade would be 61 for crossover. So did it come back in a NGC holder? If so, was it 61, 62, or 63? Personally, I think this is PQ (ouch, that overused term) for a 62 grade and the pics are accurate. You decide - so far, Schatzy is batting 100%, let's see how he and everyone else does on this one.

 

What is the NGC grade, if crossed, or, did it cross?

 

[L1ncolnF4n]

62, somewhat of a nice hit to the right of DOL on the reverse.

[James_OldeTowne]

MS-62 in spite of the old cleaning.

[Mark T]

Well a MS 62 is just a really, really good Au 58 :-}

 

I will lean towards 62 , I do not think they upgraded it to 63 .

 

This rim tone I like because of the blues, it is an attractive coin with nice eye appeal.

 

[123cents]

I would think it crossed at the same grade MS-62.

[physics-fan3.14]

In hand, how is the luster? If the luster is all there, I would say 63, otherwise, it stayed at 62. I like the rim toning on this one, even if it was dipped and retoned.

[Hard Times]

Flashy luster, not exploding, but not subdued, in between.

[Schatzy]

First I would like to say I love the die crack above states.

Since it is a weak strike on the obverse, I am going to say MS61. I don't see it getting MS63 and I can see it getting MS62.

[jtryka]

Wow, I wish these had been in separate threads!