• 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.

PF70 with mark on rim burr - still a 70?

Started by qwasty-migration,

17 posts in this topic

qwasty-migration

qwasty-migration

Posted
Posted

Are post-minting marks on a rim burr considered damage to the coin? I have a Chinese 1998 1/2 oz gold scallop tiger coin that has a small tick on the rim burr, but it does not extend into the coin-proper. The coin was graded PF70 by NGC, but I'd like to get it reholdered into an edge-view holder, and I'm worried the coin may be reevaluated to actually be a 69, not a 70, which will hurt bigtime financially.

 

I suspected that the graders would not consider the rim burr to be part of the coin, and so any marks on it would not be considered in grading. Other than this small mark on the rim burr, there are no other marks on the coin, which would make this coin a solid 70 in that case. Anybody know?

 

You can clearly see the mark in the photos. It's very tiny, on the lower right, and not quite big enough to extend beyond the burr into the "real" coin areas. Burrs are usually a little rough, since they're not struck by the die, and left to form whatever natural shape they want during striking. However, a close look shows that this is probably a contact mark, and not a natural rim burr feature.

105848.jpg.2046906eda3957efd339aec39a88e44c.jpg

105849.jpg.f56d3bb8b247f49270b4ffbdb236e443.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qwasty-migration

qwasty-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted
never seen one of those, looks pretty sweet, any other pics?

 

Here's some normal, non-close-up photos for you. These are quite rare coins. The official planned mintage is only 2300, and rumors abound that the full planned mintage was not actually made. On top of that, most were damaged at the mint before they were packaged, and the packaging itself was inadequate to protect them.

 

The capsules they were placed in were often too large, and filled with dust and dirt that scratched the coins up as they slid around inside. They also contained PVC, which can still damage gold coins in unusual ways, like reacting with impurities, and leaving pitting on the surface.

 

Some of them may have been damaged by being mounted in jewerly, and still others may have been melted during the decades when these coins had no collector value.

105932.jpg.9050e9c697bc8dd570f29b64e6a65150.jpg

105933.jpg.5e84195fd596fe753be39e4913912e50.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
relicsncoins

relicsncoins

Posted
Posted
Any other opinions? Any comments from NGC?

 

Very cool looking coin.......As far as the grade goes, I've always thought the 70 grade was a little unrealistic as far as consistency goes. I would really love to crack out ten MS70 SAE's and re-submitt them and see how many came back at 70. I would suspect that not all of them would. It's bit of an expensive exercise to prove a point though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qwasty-migration

qwasty-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I know what you mean. However, I think it is possible to draw a line about what you consider "perfect". The only trouble is standardizing that line. For example, one very common criteria used in grading coins, diamonds, and other things is that you shouldn't use more than a 10X loupe to find flaws. The logic goes, if you need more than 10X to find a flaw, then it's not a flaw for all practical purposes. I also think that graders don't want to squint through microscopes all day :) But, they will if they find something and they need to figure out what it is so they can decide if it's really a flaw, or just an inconsequential mark.

 

For example, the close up photo I posted here is in the ballpark of what you would see with a 20X loupe, which is important in this case, because rim burrs normally have convoluted features that are not contact marks. You can see clearly that the mark in question is in fact a contact mark in this case. However, it's on the rim burr, which isn't technically isn't even supposed to be there because it's not a part of the coin. So, do you count it or not? That's where the line needs to be drawn.

 

I wouldn't count it myself. Anything on the burr, no matter how ugly, is not part of the coin-proper, and should be ignored. But, I'm not a pro-grader, and my opinion counts for squat until the day I b become one. I just wish I could get an official opinion from NGC about whether the rim burr counts or not. I'd like to have the coin reholdered in an edge-view, but if it's going to get downgraded to a 69, I'd rather return it to the seller with my return privilege and save myself a little time and a lot of money. I love this coin, but if it's not worth the arms and legs I paid for it, I have to let it go back.

 

I'm crossing my fingers. This Tiger coin really is gorgeous. Even if it isn't a 70, all the other ones are so often screwed up, this would still be a very nice 69.

 

By the way, can you tell the difference between PF69 and PF70? The coins at that link are even prettier than the Tiger coin I posted here. One is a 70, and the other is a 69. I need to post a follow up to it that points out where the difference is, since it's pretty unrealistic to spot it in just photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coinsman63

Coinsman63

Posted
Posted
I know what you mean. However, I think it is possible to draw a line about what you consider "perfect". The only trouble is standardizing that line. For example, one very common criteria used in grading coins, diamonds, and other things is that you shouldn't use more than a 10X loupe to find flaws. The logic goes, if you need more than 10X to find a flaw, then it's not a flaw for all practical purposes. I also think that graders don't want to squint through microscopes all day :) But, they will if they find something and they need to figure out what it is so they can decide if it's really a flaw, or just an inconsequential mark.

 

For example, the close up photo I posted here is in the ballpark of what you would see with a 20X loupe, which is important in this case, because rim burrs normally have convoluted features that are not contact marks. You can see clearly that the mark in question is in fact a contact mark in this case. However, it's on the rim burr, which isn't technically isn't even supposed to be there because it's not a part of the coin. So, do you count it or not? That's where the line needs to be drawn.

 

I wouldn't count it myself. Anything on the burr, no matter how ugly, is not part of the coin-proper, and should be ignored. But, I'm not a pro-grader, and my opinion counts for squat until the day I b become one. I just wish I could get an official opinion from NGC about whether the rim burr counts or not. I'd like to have the coin reholdered in an edge-view, but if it's going to get downgraded to a 69, I'd rather return it to the seller with my return privilege and save myself a little time and a lot of money. I love this coin, but if it's not worth the arms and legs I paid for it, I have to let it go back.

 

I'm crossing my fingers. This Tiger coin really is gorgeous. Even if it isn't a 70, all the other ones are so often screwed up, this would still be a very nice 69.

 

By the way, can you tell the difference between PF69 and PF70? The coins at that link are even prettier than the Tiger coin I posted here. One is a 70, and the other is a 69. I need to post a follow up to it that points out where the difference is, since it's pretty unrealistic to spot it in just photos.

 

They're both labeled which is PR70 and PR69.

 

The watermark of the link on the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Beam

Jim Beam

Posted
Posted

I do not know the value difference between a 70 and a 69 but to me I would only want it in an edge view holder if I thought the personal value/gratification it provided exceeded the difference in monetary value. If it was me, I would leave it "as is", I like it as a 70 and would not risk the potential down grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coinsman63

Coinsman63

Posted
Posted
They're both labeled which is PR70 and PR69.

 

The watermark of the link on the bottom.

 

But can you tell what the difference is?

 

In hand, but not from a photo online.

 

For all anyone knows that could be the same coin with two different grades listed for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qwasty-migration

qwasty-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Of, of course. I never expected anybody to do anything more than guess with just photos. The only reason I haven't posted the answer is because I simply forgot about it, and I've backburnered it for now.

 

In any case, what's your opinion on the rim burr issue? Do you think it should be considered in grading, or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qwasty-migration

qwasty-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It appears NGC agrees that minor marks on the rim burr are not relevant for a 70 grade. It was sent in for evaluation and reholdering, and they say the coin is still a 70.

 

I doubled checked NGC grading standards, and they only count marks that are visible under 5X magnification. The close up photos I posted approximate 10X and 20X magnification. The non-closup photos (I guess) approximate 5X magnification. The flaw would be difficult to spot under 5X magnification unless you knew it was there after looking for it with 10X or better.

 

So, not only is the flaw on the less-relevant rim burr, but it's also so tiny that it would be difficult to distinguish under 5X magnification. The rough surface of a rim burr just makes it blend in too, so it's less detracting from the overall eye appeal of the coin.

 

This was a toughie! But it appears the final word is in. The coin is a 70.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing