• 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.

Opinions sought

Started by Dudley the 1st,

24 posts in this topic

RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Nice EF-55 dime. Average marks except for crimp on obv rim. Dipped a couple of times, but not a major problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dudley the 1st

Dudley the 1st

Posted
  • Author
Posted

While the photo presented may not adequately display the originality of the coin, there is more than enough luster to make it appealing. If anyone would care to provide a " Grading Breakdown " , I would be interested to see how you estimated this coin. One note, while this is considered a " Common Date " coin, it is of the scarcer variety or more difficult to locate, Medium O . Any remarks regarding how the grading company ( NGC ) may have considered this factor in determining a market value grade if at all, would be interesting. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James_OldeTowne

James_OldeTowne

Posted
Posted

To me, it isn't really "dipped white", but more like "dipped blah". Is it in a "details holder" for some sort of altered surfaces? or altered color?

 

Overall, an average coin at the expected grade range, but if you tell us it's VF-30, or MS-68+, then I'd have a few much choicer comments to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brg5658

brg5658

Posted
Posted

I guess it's in an AU50 or AU53 holder. But, I'm not very familiar with this series.

 

I don't have an opinion on the color, but some of the luster may be muted by the lighting method for the photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dudley the 1st

Dudley the 1st

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I was hoping this would have attracted more member response. The coin in question is encapsulated in an NGC holder and graded AU58. Did the Graders get this wrong ?

The piece presented has also been verified by CAC, and is the single coin verified at the grade. Did they get it wrong as well or was the difficulty locating this variety in upper end grades a possible reason the coin may have been generously graded and verified ? Or is the coin simply over-graded by two independent sources ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I was hoping this would have attracted more member response. The coin in question is encapsulated in an NGC holder and graded AU58. Did the Graders get this wrong ?

The piece presented has also been verified by CAC, and is the single coin verified at the grade. Did they get it wrong as well or was the difficulty locating this variety in upper end grades a possible reason the coin may have been generously graded and verified ? Or is the coin simply over-graded by two independent sources ?

 

While it's not my kind of look, I have no argument with the assigned grade for the coin. I see barely a trace of wear on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SPeck95512

SPeck95512

Posted
Posted

I'm in agreement w/ Mark. I was thinking it was a possible MS60, but on the low end. The luster appears very muted but not non-existent but the blast white of too many dips makes it a pariah in most serious collections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Further thoughts on Dudley's dime:

 

An AU ("AU-58") coin will have only slight luster breaks and the tiniest amount of abrasion on the high points. Based on the photos, nearly all of the obv field and half of the rev fireld show obvious absence of original luster. This is typical of coins that have been handled well beyond the limit for "about uncirculated." Thus, my grading guess of "EF-55."

 

(When I learned to evaluate and grade coins from Frank Katen, about uncirculated was a "stop point." This meant that it was a tightly defined, singular condition that had no span. Therefore, AU-58 is the only "AU grade" and coins with more pronounced loss of luster and/or abrasion are extremely fine - never AU. Got to leave now -- time to take the Quetzalcoatlus northropi out for a ride. Maybe we’ll stop at the local pet shop for a snack….)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walkerfan

Walkerfan

Posted
Posted

I have NO ISSUE with the surfaces---it's dipped but still looks OK to me. :)

 

I would have graded it more in the AU 50-53 range. I really don't see it it as a MS 60. Looks to have some light rub on the breast and head.

 

I think it's a VERY nice coin, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
e1cnr

e1cnr

Posted
Posted

I think the issue is photography related

 

to be upper AU there needs to be plenty of luster

the photo shows none, given the impression of being dipped to death

limiting it to lower AU or EF

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dudley the 1st

Dudley the 1st

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I think the issue is photography related

 

to be upper AU there needs to be plenty of luster

the photo shows none, given the impression of being dipped to death

limiting it to lower AU or EF

 

 

 

As I had mentioned earlier there is more than enough luster on this coin to make it quite eye-appealing with Frosty and Smooth surfaces to make it attractive for the Grade and Variety, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

The photos show a lot of luster in protected areas but missing elsewhere - a clear sign of a very lightly circulated coin.

 

It's still a nice coin. Look at some of the photos in the old Kam Ahwash book on dimes if you want to see luster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keigwin

Keigwin

Posted
Posted

An AU58 should have no luster issues. I would have guessed low AU.

 

Based on the TPG, and that JA green-beaned it, I can only conclude that the photos are deceiving.

Lance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James_OldeTowne

James_OldeTowne

Posted
Posted
I was hoping this would have attracted more member response. The coin in question is encapsulated in an NGC holder and graded AU58. Did the Graders get this wrong ?

The piece presented has also been verified by CAC, and is the single coin verified at the grade. Did they get it wrong as well or was the difficulty locating this variety in upper end grades a possible reason the coin may have been generously graded and verified ? Or is the coin simply over-graded by two independent sources ?

When I first saw the image, my gut feel was "AU-53". However, that being said, the imaging could easily be hindering appreciation of the true luster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hard Times

Hard Times

Posted
Posted

If CAC says it is solid for the grade AU58, then I am thinking I will agree with the OP when he says it has ample luster. I haven't seen CAC miss and that is why green beaned holders are going for more - but hey maybe they do but it is probably the imaging - sometimes it is very hard to capture the luster bands on AU coins because they don't always explode under the light, they are AU after all. Nice half dime! (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing