Should this scarlet letter wearing colonial be in a graded holder?

[BROADSTRUCK]

I've seen it before and always think it's F'g cute seeing it in a MS65BN PCGS holder... What do y'all say?

 

 

TT Description - Colonial 1787 Mass Half Cent PCGS 65 BN

 

Gem. Brown. Well struck. Pleasing surfaces. The centers are typically weak, however; all of HALF CENT is readable on the reverse shield. Designed by Joseph Callender, Massachusetts copper cents and half cents in 1787 and 1788 were minted under the direction of Joshua Witherle. These coins were the first to exhibit the denomination Cent as directed by Congress. The mint was abandoned early in 1789 in compliance with the ratifying of the constitution which forbade all but official copper. PCGS has certified six coins at this level with a mere four finer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[123cents]

Looks sweet. I think Mike King use to own one of these.

[TomB]

Doesn't appear to me to be the mark of a museum curator, but rather it might just be an old stain. As such, I don't think I have an issue with it in a graded holder.

[pakasmommy-migration]

A graded holder? Yes. - That grade? No.

 

[coinman_23885]

MS65 would be generous even if the stain weren't there; I believe I see wear on the high points. It looks AU55 to me (sans the distracting mark).

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Blood of our Forefathers?

If so, a higher grade may be warranted.

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[James_OldeTowne]

I hate TPG grading of Colonials anyway, so naturally I think PCGS blew it... but not because of that stain. I haven't a problem with that.

 

The coin looks like a terrific MS-60 to me, but there are examples in lower "technical grade" with much nicer details.

 

All this is stated with the caveat that it is a TeleTrade image, and they are usually lousy.

[Dudley the 1st]

MS65 would be generous even if the stain weren't there; I believe I see wear on the high points. It looks AU55 to me (sans the distracting mark).

 

I agree.

[BillJones]

MS65 would be generous even if the stain weren't there; I believe I see wear on the high points. It looks AU55 to me (sans the distracting mark).

 

I agree.

 

Are you sure that it is wear? Many examples of this coin display a situation where the copper did not fill the dies. If you are referring to the spot around the Indian's middle and the weakness on the shield on the reverse, that is due to strike.

 

Still I think that coin really is no more than an MS-60 when you consider that "F" on the obverse. It is WAY over graded at MS-65.

[messydesk]

I'm going to lay out my thought process on the grade, even though this is outside my area of expertise.

 

Ignoring the stain for the moment, it has a very even color and likely an even, silky luster. The bow, arrow, and legs have no contact marks on them, and this is where I would expect to see them. When I see a $20 Saint with no hacks across any of the rays on both sides, I know it's a special coin, and although this may be an "apples and coconuts" comparison, the lack of hacks attests to the coin's pristinity. The weakness in the central area I'm attributing to striking and not wear. If there are better-struck specimens, then I'll agree that MS65 and higher (I used to be able to simply say MS65+ to indicate that, but now I can't, thanks to the official "+" grades) should be reserved for them. Had this coin shown up in a GTG thread, I'd have said that mark-free plus not quite fully struck equals 64BN. Were it fully struck, I'd say 66BN.

 

That dad-gummed "F" on the obverse is sure distracting, though. I wonder how it looks in hand. Could be there's an equally distracting stain on the reverse from the beak to 7:00 rim that doesn't show up because of the picture. This is where the EAC net grades and corresponding pricing structure come in. I believe that at the time of auction, the Husak large cent collection had no fewer than 3 grades on each holder, including the PCGS grade.

[coinman_23885]

MS65 would be generous even if the stain weren't there; I believe I see wear on the high points. It looks AU55 to me (sans the distracting mark).

 

I agree.

 

Are you sure that it is wear? Many examples of this coin display a situation where the copper did not fill the dies. If you are referring to the spot around the Indian's middle and the weakness on the shield on the reverse, that is due to strike.

 

Still I think that coin really is no more than an MS-60 when you consider that "F" on the obverse. It is WAY over graded at MS-65.

 

I was referring to the middle and the shoulder on the obverse; I attributed the detail on the shield to a weak strike. If that is a weak strike, then I would agree 100% with a MS60 grade, net graded because of the mark. Thanks for clarifying about the indian's middle section; I would never have guessed that was a striking issue.

[e1cnr]

I do not see any problems to keep it from grading, do you?

 

weak strike, or wear - don't you need to handle the raw coin to tell?

 

 

was watching the coin on TT, but was near $6400 and felt too high for me