• 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.

Fake holder, or coin that turned.

Started by Danye West,

28 posts in this topic

MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted

My guess is that it's neither a fake holder nor a coin that turned. And that it looks noticeably better in person, tilted and rotated under a light..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted

There are a couple of possible explanations.

 

This is a fairly old (20 years) holder, and the coin may have toned while it was in it. The piece may have been dipped and was not properly rinsed. The piece may have had some toning when it was slabbed and may have grown darker over time.

 

The second explanation is that the coin may have looked pretty much this way from the beginning. There was a time when NGC assigned Mint State grades to many toned silver coins. Not everyone agreed with their opinion which resulted in some fairly significant price differentials in the sight unseen slab market. (e.g. The Blue Sheet).

 

My guess is that the piece has changed in the holder over time. The toning also might look better in person. At any rate my take is that the asking price is on the strong side.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nutmeg Coin

Nutmeg Coin

Posted
Posted

Sellers of high grade coins will usually employ glowing rhetoric reflecting the unique colors and details. I'm not sure what the technical pricing analysis shows, NGC only goes up to MS67 for the non-FSB: https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/us/mercury-dimes-pscid-31/1920-10c-ms-67-price-history-coinid-14928 It looks like it sold at SB for half that price.

 

http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/AuctionDetail/4928/2942868/1 http://www.stacksbowers.com/BrowseAuctions/LotArchive/tabid/805/AuctionID/6008/Lot/5246 Layered in richly original orange-copper, antique gold, and midnight blue, this frosty Superb Gem is sure to excite the Mercury dime toning enthusiast. Nearing perfection and exceptionally attractive as well -- you won't find a finer 1920 Mercury dime in a NGC holder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CO Collector

CO Collector

Posted
Posted

It sold for $881 at the March 2014 Stack's Bowers auction:

 

"Description

Layered in richly original orange-copper, antique gold, and midnight blue, this frosty Superb Gem is sure to excite the Mercury dime toning enthusiast. Nearing perfection and exceptionally attractive as well -- you won't find a finer 1920 Mercury dime in a NGC holder."

 

I'd make these photos smaller if I knew how...

 

A0000026675-uscoin-zoom-1-0.JPG

 

A0000026675-uscoin-zoom-1-1.JPG

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raisethis2

Raisethis2

Posted
Posted

That coin can't look as bad as the photos imply when it's in hand. It's just God awful looking in those pictures. I also agree that if that's representative of it's current state, it's turned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

If they felt the coin had been improperly stored, or that it had "undergone natural environmental deterioration" potentially zero.

 

Improper Storage.

The NGC Guarantee does not apply if a Coin submitted for Appearance Review is determined to have a lower grade than that originally assigned to it by NGC, but it is also determined by NGC that the holder has been subject to abuse, alteration or improper storage conditions such as (but not limited to) extreme temperature, moisture, damaging environmental conditions, excessive light, excessive motion or vibration or any other extreme conditions.

 

Deterioration of Certain Coins.

The NGC Guarantee does not apply to certain Coins where the appearance of the Coin changes over time (deterioration). NGC shall make the sole determination as to whether this deterioration has occurred. The following specific parameters apply:

In certain Coins, natural environmental deterioration may cause undesired features to appear, such as (but not limited to) spotting, hazing, PVC and corrosion. Spots, for example, can occur on modern silver Coins as a result of the minting process or other natural conditions over which NGC has no control. Therefore, the NGC Guarantee does not apply to Coins exhibiting any of these issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
Since SB sold it without mentioning any issues, I doubt that NGC would be able to invoke the in holder argument.

 

Whatever decision a grading company might make on a coin sent in for review, it won't be based on a description from a seller or auction house. Nor should it be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nutmeg Coin

Nutmeg Coin

Posted
Posted

An objective assessment on a guarantee claim would have to be based on how the coin stands with other MS68 non-FSB Mercury dimes. The SB experts did not see it as a coin with significant "issues"; so an NGC judgment on the coin would be based on objective ANA grading standards.

 

PCGS photograde: http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Mercury/Grades

https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-5/grading/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
An objective assessment on a guarantee claim would have to be based on how the coin stands with other MS68 non-FSB Mercury dimes. The SB experts did not see it as a coin with significant "issues"; so an NGC judgment on the coin would be based on objective ANA grading standards.

 

PCGS photograde: http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Mercury/Grades

https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-5/grading/

 

No, an NGC judgment would be based on NGC standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr.Mcknowitall

Mr.Mcknowitall

Posted
Posted
An objective assessment on a guarantee claim would have to be based on how the coin stands with other MS68 non-FSB Mercury dimes. The SB experts did not see it as a coin with significant "issues"; so an NGC judgment on the coin would be based on objective ANA grading standards.

 

PCGS photograde: http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Mercury/Grades

https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-5/grading/

 

No, an NGC judgment would be based on NGC standards.

 

And changing market standards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
An objective assessment on a guarantee claim would have to be based on how the coin stands with other MS68 non-FSB Mercury dimes. The SB experts did not see it as a coin with significant "issues"; so an NGC judgment on the coin would be based on objective ANA grading standards.

 

PCGS photograde: http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Mercury/Grades

https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-5/grading/

 

No, an NGC judgment would be based on NGC standards.

 

And changing market standards?

 

Are you saying that those two things are different? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr.Mcknowitall

Mr.Mcknowitall

Posted
Posted
An objective assessment on a guarantee claim would have to be based on how the coin stands with other MS68 non-FSB Mercury dimes. The SB experts did not see it as a coin with significant "issues"; so an NGC judgment on the coin would be based on objective ANA grading standards.

 

PCGS photograde: http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Mercury/Grades

https://www.davidlawrence.com/books/the-complete-guide-to-mercury-dimes/chapter-5/grading/

 

No, an NGC judgment would be based on NGC standards.

 

And changing market standards?

 

Are you saying that those two things are different? ;)

 

lol

 

Not me....I am not opening my mouth on that one. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
numisport

numisport

Posted
Posted

In my opinion no MS coin should be 68 without being well struck. Then beneath those heavy toning spots certainly there is surface erosion or "pitting". No possible way it should bring MS 68 money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
In my opinion no MS coin should be 68 without being well struck. Then beneath those heavy toning spots certainly there is surface erosion or "pitting". No possible way it should bring MS 68 money.

 

Why? If a coin is perfect, other than with respect to strike, why should it automatically be penalized by more than two points? And if you think that should be the case, why stop at 67 instead of an even lower grade?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted

If seen in hand I'd bet that coin has little luster....it's just that often when coins get that heavy toning it diminishes the luster.

 

As to the grade: Well, maybe they just were a little zealous with the grade. NGC back in the day would often give these higher grades to heavily toned coins. I've seen many like that...if you like the coin just pay the appropriate price. Although, I don't think I'd pay that eBay price...

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bourse28

bourse28

Posted
Posted

I would wager the coin went bad in the holder.

 

Its important to turnover coins quickly. Tarnished coins will get worse over time unless stored in stasis or a vacuum.

 

I can't c an offer for serious money for it by someone and then if a really low offer they are a fellow optimistic on outcome of conservartion. Its a serious candidate for NCS.

 

This piece is a case in point of buying at least with a photo available or sight seen. It is a coin I would consider un-sellable, so argument about grade would be a pointless absurdity. If its shopped around the bourse room a response might be:

a. Throw it back in the roll lol

b. My gosh who graded this - lol

c. Would you take melt?

d/ Is this a ship wreck coin? Looks like its been under for sometime.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
messydesk

messydesk

Posted
Posted

Good example of a coin that should be competently photographed before sold online. It should also be reholdered due to the poor quality of the plastic from that era and the lack of light getting to the coin.

 

The lack of detail from a severely worn die is unbefitting for a grade of 68, as it kills the eye appeal. The strike is below average as well, and while the FB designation is there to allow the strike to be specifically cited regardless of grade, the typical 1920 has a better strike than this. The luster and surfaces must be outstanding, but I sure can't tell from the pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
numisport

numisport

Posted
Posted

Any silver coin with those toning spots in front of her nose if dipped will reveal surface problems. Other than strike or worn die this coin is not near perfect in terms of surface preservation. And no we don't apply a market grade to Mercury dimes. (yet)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing