A Real Dilemma! What would you do if...(REVEALED!)

[newprepper]

It's a really ugly and horrible coin. I suggest you sell it right away. I will be merciful and purchase from you so you will not have to lose anymore sleep over it.

 

Thank you.

 

 

You are really nice.......why can't more be like you?

[coinman1794]

Looking at the image (which obviously, is a big disadvantage, compared to seeing the coin in person), it is not obvious to me that the coin is under-graded or that it deserves the FBL designation.

 

The toning appears to be uneven and splotchy on both sides, and that alone, can keep such a coin from an MS67 grade.

 

I've never known splotchy color to preclude a Franklin from a higher grade (for whatever reason)! However, the pictures are just quick snapshots that don't show it very well; and this thread is really not about what you think this coin grades, but rather what you would do assuming you do think it's a 67FBL. The pictures are just a courtesy.

 

That might be the case, but Mark and Jason know their Franklins. I personally agree with them, given the look the coin does not seem a slam dunk for a 67. I do know of splotchy or unappealing color on a Franklin lowering the grade (at least IMO).

 

Unappealing color can lower the grade on any coin type. Splotchy color is ubiquitous on Franklins, and this one has no unappealing qualities, though the pictures do it little justice.

 

However, this is not a thread about my coin, it's about what you would do in a similar situation. I’m not asking for advice on what I should do with this specific coin, I'm curious about the general subject of holders versus the coins inside them, and I want to get an idea of where the collecting community is on that. I know what I am going to do/have done….that will come later on!

[JIM F.]

See PM, and what I REALLY think!

 

It's all good.

 

 

[DirtyGoldMan]

I have not read all of the responses. I would keep the coin in the old holder and send it to the CAC. I am a huge fan of old holders, there are many others who are, and once you lose the cachet of the old holder, you cannot regain it.

[Arizonadesertrat]

Looking at the image (which obviously, is a big disadvantage, compared to seeing the coin in person), it is not obvious to me that the coin is under-graded or that it deserves the FBL designation.

 

The toning appears to be uneven and splotchy on both sides, and that alone, can keep such a coin from an MS67 grade.

 

I agree

[Walkerfan]

It's a tough call and I have thought alot about it. But I think that I'd keep it in the old slab, as you have NO guarantee of an upgrade and, once you try, you'll lose that cool slab forever. Send it to CAC to get their opinion first----It'll only cost you 10 bucks or so.

[alacratstore-migration]

I guess sending out to CAC is the best option, rather trying something on your own.

[Conder101]

edited, Sorry repeated something already mentioned. Didn't read the whole thread before responding.

[coinman1794]

Looking at the image (which obviously, is a big disadvantage, compared to seeing the coin in person), it is not obvious to me that the coin is under-graded or that it deserves the FBL designation.

 

The toning appears to be uneven and splotchy on both sides, and that alone, can keep such a coin from an MS67 grade.

 

I agree

 

As an aside: splotchy toning alone will not prevent a high grade on a Franklin, or most 1956-1958 mint set coins. It will on many other coin types, however. It is the luster, presence of attractive color, and marks that make the difference. The toning on Franklins is almost always "splotchy."

 

 

 

 

[coinman1794]

It's a tough call and I have thought alot about it. But I think that I'd keep it in the old slab, as you have NO guarantee of an upgrade and, once you try, you'll lose that cool slab forever. Send it to CAC to get their opinion first----It'll only cost you 10 bucks or so.

 

Yes, Walkerfan, when I was in this situation, I was struck by the complexities of the dilemma.

[coinman1794]

The responses have all been very interesting! Keep them coming. (thumbs u

 

How would/wouldn't your responses change if this coin were a part of your inventory, you had put several hundred dollars over the price of an MS66 into it, and wanted it to realize its full potential so it could be sold at a profit?

 

(This is, again, based on the premise that you have seen the coin in-hand and you DO believe it to be undergraded.)

 

 

[coinman1794]

Did you ever answer the question as to what generation slab it was? A gold embossed slab, especially a 2.1, would make me hesitate a bit more.

 

Yes, I did, Jason. It's back on page one, post #6024830 - Sat Sep 22 2012 08:20 PM

 

Oh, sorry, I missed that. In that case, I would keep it in the old holder.

 

Thanks, Jason, and welcome back!

[Keigwin]

CAC is the sensible thing to do. I agree with Mark that a gold sticker says nothing about FBL's, however.

 

I like the old holder and a lot of collectors feel the same.

Lance.

[TheCoinGeezer]

It may be the photos but I'm not seeing neither MS67 nor FBL.

[coinman1794]

What do you think of the 1956 50C and 1957 25C I posted on page 4?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The responses have all been very interesting! Keep them coming. (thumbs u

 

How would/wouldn't your responses change if this coin were a part of your inventory, you had put several hundred dollars over the price of an MS66 into it, and wanted it to realize its full potential so it could be sold at a profit?

 

(This is, again, based on the premise that you have seen the coin in-hand and you DO believe it to be undergraded.)

 

 

I am going to again stick my neck out, and suggest that Mr. Feld may have encountered this problem in the past.

 

Then again probably not......it is such a long shot, considering all the boring stuff he deals in.....

[MarkFeld]

What do you think of the 1956 50C and 1957 25C I posted on page 4?

 

Even if he thinks those coins might be over-graded (I have no idea whether he does), that doesn't mean your coin will necessarily receive a grade which also appears to be over-graded.

[coinman1794]

And that's not what I asked him. Mark, what do you think of the 2 coins?

[MarkFeld]

And that's not what I asked him. Mark, what do you think of the 2 coins?

 

True, it's not what you asked him. But my guess is that the question you did ask was in order to make the eventual point I addressed.

 

In answer to your question, based on the images, I probably would have guessed MS66, not MS67.

[RWB]

Lots of assumptions being made....

[coinman1794]

And that's not what I asked him. Mark, what do you think of the 2 coins?

 

True, it's not what you asked him. But my guess is that the question you did ask was in order to make the eventual point I addressed.

 

In answer to your question, based on the images, I probably would have guessed MS66, not MS67.

 

The two coins were posted to demonstrate that uneven color can happen on confirmed MS67s, but I did so with the caveat that it was an aside from the topic of the thread. I asked TheCoinGeezer what he thought of the color because the page turned, and I wanted people to go back and see the other coins before they were buried in the thread.

 

This thread has never been about my coin, so there's no reason to try and convince anyone. Opinions concerning the original coin and the 2 other coins posted are certainly welcome, on the other hand, though I am more interested in the thought processes of collectors and dealers when faced with similar situations; and I am intrigued by the consistency of the answers thus far!

 

But to respond to your grade opinion, Mark:

 

I never suspected this coin was under-graded when I purchased it via online images. I am always cautious when purchasing high-grade mint set toners, and am inclined to stop at MS66, myself. Mint Set coins in MS67 need to be seen in person to be appreciated because it is often the little things that make or break the superb-gem grade. It was the cool color and the old slab that attracted me to the coin, originally.

 

[Kurtdog]

The responses have all been very interesting! Keep them coming. (thumbs u

 

How would/wouldn't your responses change if this coin were a part of your inventory, you had put several hundred dollars over the price of an MS66 into it, and wanted it to realize its full potential so it could be sold at a profit?

 

(This is, again, based on the premise that you have seen the coin in-hand and you DO believe it to be undergraded.)

I'll tell you this much, you sure know how to ask the questions. The trouble is, I don't think we have the answers. As I never like to let a little detail like that stop me, though, here's the best I think I can do.

 

You've got money invested in it over NGCMS66, right? If you send it to NGC and it grades NGCMS67, you win. If it grades NGCMS67FBL, you win big. What do you have to lose by submitting it to NGC? Well, for one, that collectible slab it's presently in. Trash that. For two, there's a chance you'll get that same, identical, grade, only now the coin will be in a modern (i.e., noncollectable) slab. So, you'd want to consider that, too. In other words, "Hey, if you're not going to upgrade it, put it back in that collectible slab!" Not going to happen.

 

It's also not going to hurt if you send it to CAC and see how they bean it. If they bean it gold, you know you've got half the game licked. You got the upgrade. Now all you need is the FBL. If it doesn't go gold, though, do you really need that FBL? What I'm trying to say is, realize, you send it to CAC and lose, you don't lose a thing. On the other hand, you send it to NGC and just break even on the grade, you lose the appeal of the collectible slab.

 

What that tells me is, go the less invasive route, first. CAC isn't going to perform surgery on that collectible slab, while NGC is. Before you go into the operating room, get that second opinion. If it's a gold one, now you feel better letting the surgeon operate. See how CAC beans it. If it's gold, you're more confident going into the surgery. If it's green, maybe you just want to take the patient home and take good care of it.

 

My personal opinion? Even if it got the gold, i.e., the thumbs-up for the surgery, that baby stays in that slab, I don't care what I had invested in it. FWIW...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[coinman1794]

Great analysis, Kurtdog!

[physics-fan3.14]

Your best bet might actually be to bring it to FUN this year. If Mark Salzberg is doing in hand grade reviews like he did last year, he will tell you on the spot what he grades it - and then you can choose what to do with it. I had him review a couple of coins for me at last years FUN, and it was the most valuable 3 minutes of my collecting hobby. He will also explain exactly why he graded it what he did.

[TomB]

Go for the gold (sticker).

[coinman1794]

Your best bet might actually be to bring it to FUN this year. If Mark Salzberg is doing in hand grade reviews like he did last year, he will tell you on the spot what he grades it - and then you can choose what to do with it. I had him review a couple of coins for me at last years FUN, and it was the most valuable 3 minutes of my collecting hobby. He will also explain exactly why he graded it what he did.

 

That's certainly not a bad suggestion, though its not always practical.

[coinman1794]

I am actually surprised that the responses here were virtually unanimous! Most prefer keeping the old holder and seeking an opinion from CAC before anything else. I was struck by the added complexity of the dilemma caused by the potential for an FBL designation, and yet the responses still preferred CAC, even though that issue would not be addressed.

The Reveal:

Fortunately for those who sent me private messages begging me not to liberate this coin, I did in fact keep the 25-year-old, 2.1 generation slab and send it to CAC. For $10, I was able to confirm my belief, as it was in fact awarded a Gold sticker.

The popularity of the Gold sticker contributes to a substantial premium in value, as gold stickered coins sell for many multiples of the assigned grade, and in some cases, more than the next grade up, and sometimes, the next grade after that! So, in some ways, it is better to have a Gold sticker than the higher grade. Add to that equation a very early slab that is in excellent condition, and there was really nothing to lose by keeping it.

 

On one hand, it can be tempting to get an under-graded coin like this maxed -out so that you don’t have to worry about it later on, but on the other hand, I’ve always been one to try to appreciate a coin on its own merits, despite the truly convoluted eccentricities of the PCGS/NGC/old-holder/CAC-green/CAC-gold market. This coin would max out at $35 raw, regardless of quality, but the ink on the slab label makes all the difference.

 

Ultimately, I think accepting it as-is, and adding the Gold sticker allows the coin to be appreciated more for what it is, rather than as a maxed-out 67FBL. The Gold sticker says it exceeds CACs standards, i.e., it is under-graded. It does not address the bell lines, and that is a drawback; but at least the ambiguous Gold sticker will force you to evaluate the coin more closely to determine what is really going on with it!

 

More pictures:

 

 

Its hard to catch the gold hologram!

[physics-fan3.14]

Well, good for you Doug. The CAC says nothing about FBL in this case (so you won't catch that premium) - but people will definitely bid at the 67 level for it. The bottom set of bell lines are clearly full in this picture, but that still doesn't answer whether it deserves FBL (still can't tell on the top set of lines). On the 56, the top set of lines is more often weak than the bottoms.

[coinman1794]

Thanks, Jason!

 

The toning (and glare) hides the upper bell lines from view. Even if the upper lines were not there, it qualifies for FBL under PCGS standards! Nevertheless, this one is staying put in its 2.1 slab with Gold sticker.

[Walkerfan]

Beautiful coin, slab and sticker!! You made the wisest choice. IMHO.