Care to Guess 1883-P No Cents -= REVEALED =-

[wdrob]

I am curious as to what others think a coin such as this might grade? There is also a link to a small video that gives a better representation of the mirrors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appreciate any opinions.

 

 

[jpcienkus]

Beautiful V nickel!!

 

As I don't know this coin, I'm going to SWAG it: MS65 PL

[physics-fan3.14]

When was it graded? If it is designated as PL, then it is not yet in the census - there is only one listed, and I own it.

 

That being said, it has strong PL tendencies. I can't tell the grade from the photos, so I'll guess 64* with a shot at PL.

[MarkFeld]

I'll guess PR64.

[wdrob]

Thanks for weighing in Joe, Jason, and Mark.

 

Yes Jason I am fully aware of that 'One' PL you have

 

I was glad to have you weigh in on this one since PL is your area and I have looked quite a bit at the pictures of yours, but only from HA.

 

Also it was just graded.

 

I will see if any others wish to weigh in and then I will reveal.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I'll guess PR64.

 

I can't see the rims, but do the proofs of these typically have weak strikes? I'm looking particularly at the stars on the obverse and the left ear of corn on the reverse.

[$ilverHawk]

I'll guess PR64.

 

+1

[MarkFeld]

I'll guess PR64.

 

I can't see the rims, but do the proofs of these typically have weak strikes? I'm looking particularly at the stars on the obverse and the left ear of corn on the reverse.

 

I'm not sure about "typically", but I have seen a number with sub-par strikes. Also, many business strikes display weak stars on the obverse and less reflective surfaces than this coin.

 

The picture of the coin in the holder, especially considering the partial cameo contrast on the reverse, was also a major consideration in my guess.

[Coindude]

With those kind of hints how could I not choose 64PL. For the record I would have guessed PR64.

[wdrob]

Firstly Jason, your lone PL coin is safe and there were many heavy hitters weighing in; I appreciate that.

 

If I were to say I was not disappointed with this grade then I would be telling a lie. I was certain that this coin had either one of two results; 1.) either they would penalize it for the slight inner rim damage and possibly conclude that it was jewelry mounted and body bag the coin, or 2.) they would recognize it immediately as a PL coin but possibly deduct a point for the above mentioned inner rim damage.

 

I can only assume that they decided that it was not PL enough for their liking but I do think the grade of 65 (it just needed a PL at the end) was appropriate as there is only a couple small areas of concern. Now if they had knocked it down one point for the inner rim or that small scratch in front of Ms. Liberty (which btw is exaggerated in this picture because of the angle) and placed MS64 PL on the coin I would not be disappointed and could understand that grade.

 

But as it stands I feel they missed it on this one. This coin will be submitted again by someone in the future (I do not resubmit coins at all) and I am sure that it will eventually be recognized for what it is.

 

 

 

 

 

Jason, since there are many that have their own stickers; CAC, WINGS, PQ, etc.... I am looking forward to you coming out with a PL sticker that I can place on the slab and feel oh so much better.

 

Thanks again for all the opinions.

 

 

[yonico]

 

But as it stands I feel they missed it on this one. This coin will be submitted again by someone in the future (I do not resubmit coins at all) and I am sure that it will eventually be recognized for what it is.

 

 

i just saw ths thread (too late), but also thought it was a proof before i saw the grade in the last post.

 

i would suggest you send it back not as a re-submission, but under "designation review"

[jpcienkus]

Thanks for revealing the grade Bill.

 

I almost guessed it as a proof. I looked at the rims for a long time, but not knowing the series, I stuck with MS. Especially since you talked about the mirrors.

 

Once I saw Mark F's post, I thought I was way off.

[wdrob]

 

I studied the diagnostics for a proof closely and this coin does not meet the requirements so I therefore concluded that it must be a business strike and just one of the first off of new dies or possibly after freshly polished dies.

 

I submitted it as a MS coin and did not write PL since that is sort of a given if it meets the requirements. I think it meets the requirements for a PL and would have been proud to have seen it as a PL but I will have to think about what you suggest Johnny as far as a "designation review".

 

I will read up on that and then decide if it is worth my time.

 

Everyone's opinions have been invaluable to me since, although I have a long way to go in accurately grading coins, I was just surprised I could be so far off on this one.

 

 

 

[wdrob]

 

i would suggest you send it back not as a re-submission, but under "designation review"

 

I just checked on what that was and sure enough, it costs money. That is why I do not re-submit. It just encourages mistakes in my opinion.

 

 

[yonico]

i would suggest you send it back not as a re-submission, but under "designation review"

 

I just checked on what that was and sure enough, it costs money. That is why I do not re-submit. It just encourages mistakes in my opinion.

 

 

Of course it does.

But if you send it under designation review, the graders would focus on the designation part of the grade. It doesn't guarantee anything, but at least they will spend these 5-6 seconds checking if it meets their standards for the designation rather than the technical numerical grade, you know?

[wdrob]

You make a very valid point and considering it is not an extreme amount of money, and a 5 day turn around (+/-) I think I will consider it.

 

Thanks for the suggestion.