"Just Having Fun" MS68 PCGS Slab! 0

[RWB]

I'll open the bidding at $5.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

A proof 68 Rosie should have full clean smoking hot torch and maybe deep mirror surfaces. So the discussion should involve clean surfaces and heavy cameo contrast to quality for real eye appeal right ? Why spend 10 k for a highly contested unc grade when '64 Proof 69 Ultra Cameo coins are available for a couple hundred bucks.

 

Apples to oranges. And grades for proof coins - low value, as well as high value ones - can be just as easily and "highly contested".

 

I think he presenting an "eye appeal" suggestion for the average collector, in that a proof 69 (and obviously he means a non-contested proof 69 UC) would have a a presentation of all the details of the design as intended in a non-questionable manner, vs.a highly contested...excepting a few specialists or dedicated registry participants....unc. coin that has marks that are not, as he suggests, exactly expected on what would be a "clean" surface. It is his way of stating "$10,000 for what? I am just a collector that wants to enjoy the coin, not have bragging rights or registry points or investment gains or losses."

 

I tend to agree, in general. If I was spending the 10K, I would not find the marks persuasive to me as a collector as an example of a clean surface, regardless of background stories or rarities or colors, or registry, etc., or what a specialist or expert presents.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Good chance this thread will be "alive and well" 90 days from now as I pulled the coin from the bank this afternoon and I am preparing to send it to Mark for inclusion in the Heritage Summer ANA (Anaheim) auction. The coin will have no reserve and will sell for whatever Roosie dime collectors determine it is worth.

 

But, tonight I enjoy what could be perhaps my final evening with the special dime as I might never see it again.

 

Wondercoin

 

From your lips to God's ears, on never seeing it again.

[MarkFeld]

A proof 68 Rosie should have full clean smoking hot torch and maybe deep mirror surfaces. So the discussion should involve clean surfaces and heavy cameo contrast to quality for real eye appeal right ? Why spend 10 k for a highly contested unc grade when '64 Proof 69 Ultra Cameo coins are available for a couple hundred bucks.

 

Apples to oranges. And grades for proof coins - low value, as well as high value ones - can be just as easily and "highly contested".

 

I think he presenting an "eye appeal" suggestion for the average collector, in that a proof 69 (and obviously he means a non-contested proof 69 UC) would have a a presentation of all the details of the design as intended in a non-questionable manner, vs.a highly contested...excepting a few specialists or dedicated registry participants....unc. coin that has marks that are not, as he suggests, exactly expected on what would be a "clean" surface. It is his way of stating "$10,000 for what? I am just a collector that wants to enjoy the coin, not have bragging rights or registry points or investment gains or losses."

 

I tend to agree, in general. If I was spending the 10K, I would not find the marks persuasive to me as a collector as an example of a clean surface, regardless of background stories or rarities or colors, or registry, etc., or what a specialist or expert presents.

 

He probably is. However, that point could also apply to many Proof coins, where a one point grade difference can result in a price difference of thousands of dollars and for which the grade can also be hotly debated.

 

Additionally, I said "apples to oranges" because many collectors prefer to pursue extremely well preserved business strikes, which, as opposed to Proofs, were not intended to be saved and can present a much greater challenge.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

A proof 68 Rosie should have full clean smoking hot torch and maybe deep mirror surfaces. So the discussion should involve clean surfaces and heavy cameo contrast to quality for real eye appeal right ? Why spend 10 k for a highly contested unc grade when '64 Proof 69 Ultra Cameo coins are available for a couple hundred bucks.

 

Apples to oranges. And grades for proof coins - low value, as well as high value ones - can be just as easily and "highly contested".

 

I think he presenting an "eye appeal" suggestion for the average collector, in that a proof 69 (and obviously he means a non-contested proof 69 UC) would have a a presentation of all the details of the design as intended in a non-questionable manner, vs.a highly contested...excepting a few specialists or dedicated registry participants....unc. coin that has marks that are not, as he suggests, exactly expected on what would be a "clean" surface. It is his way of stating "$10,000 for what? I am just a collector that wants to enjoy the coin, not have bragging rights or registry points or investment gains or losses."

 

I tend to agree, in general. If I was spending the 10K, I would not find the marks persuasive to me as a collector as an example of a clean surface, regardless of background stories or rarities or colors, or registry, etc., or what a specialist or expert presents.

 

He probably is. However, that point could also apply to many Proof coins, where a one point grade difference can result in a price difference of thousands of dollars and for which the grade can also be hotly debated.

 

Additionally, I said "apples to oranges" because many collectors prefer to pursue extremely well preserved business strikes, which, as opposed to Proofs, were not intended to be saved and can present a much greater challenge.

 

Of course. I did mention "uncontested" proof 69 UC, with the understanding that even such an contested designation would still be contested, because it always would and will be,, and is contested when there is a significant price spread. It is human nature. I think the present coin is an example of this, especially when there are unexplained marks, with not the slightest effort to acknowledge the marks. It is my opinion there should still be straightforward and direct acknowledgement of obvious questionable surface marks, when collectors have a question about same, and not avoidance by the person(s) offering the coin. The marks are there. Say so. It is not the end of the world to admit there are marks, instead of opining in a manner that suggests it does not matter.

 

As another example, we both have had a mutual interesting occurrence, in fact two occurrences, of even very knowledgeable professional graders and a somewhat able collector being left scratching their heads about value of a coin without marks and with superior surfaces and details, and a somewhat rare coin. But, there was not misdirection or avoidance involved.

[coinman_23885]

A proof 68 Rosie should have full clean smoking hot torch and maybe deep mirror surfaces. So the discussion should involve clean surfaces and heavy cameo contrast to quality for real eye appeal right ? Why spend 10 k for a highly contested unc grade when '64 Proof 69 Ultra Cameo coins are available for a couple hundred bucks.

 

It isn't a proof coin.

 

I do not think he is stating the coin in question is a proof. He is simply presenting an "eye appeal" example for collectors, a sort of what you see is what you get. He is not trying to make a point of rarity or comparison of rarity between an unc. and proof, or a quantitative issue.

 

You're right. I jumped to conclusions and stopped reading after the first sentence. I still think the comparison is way off.

[Wondercoin]

"I still think the comparison is way off."

 

I guess we'll let the Roosie collectors determine if the comparison is "way off" or not. If my customer's dime fetches $300 or $400 in the no reserve auction, then perhaps the comparison was on point. If the coin fetches thousands upon thousands of dollars, then we know the comparison was, indeed, "way off".

 

Wondercoin

[lehigh96]

A proof 68 Rosie should have full clean smoking hot torch and maybe deep mirror surfaces. So the discussion should involve clean surfaces and heavy cameo contrast to quality for real eye appeal right ? Why spend 10 k for a highly contested unc grade when '64 Proof 69 Ultra Cameo coins are available for a couple hundred bucks.

 

Apples to oranges. And grades for proof coins - low value, as well as high value ones - can be just as easily and "highly contested".

 

I think he presenting an "eye appeal" suggestion for the average collector, in that a proof 69 (and obviously he means a non-contested proof 69 UC) would have a a presentation of all the details of the design as intended in a non-questionable manner, vs.a highly contested...excepting a few specialists or dedicated registry participants....unc. coin that has marks that are not, as he suggests, exactly expected on what would be a "clean" surface. It is his way of stating "$10,000 for what? I am just a collector that wants to enjoy the coin, not have bragging rights or registry points or investment gains or losses."

 

I tend to agree, in general. If I was spending the 10K, I would not find the marks persuasive to me as a collector as an example of a clean surface, regardless of background stories or rarities or colors, or registry, etc., or what a specialist or expert presents.

 

He probably is. However, that point could also apply to many Proof coins, where a one point grade difference can result in a price difference of thousands of dollars and for which the grade can also be hotly debated.

 

Additionally, I said "apples to oranges" because many collectors prefer to pursue extremely well preserved business strikes, which, as opposed to Proofs, were not intended to be saved and can present a much greater challenge.

 

Of course. I did mention "uncontested" proof 69 UC, with the understanding that even such an contested designation would still be contested, because it always would and will be,, and is contested when there is a significant price spread. It is human nature. I think the present coin is an example of this, especially when there are unexplained marks, with not the slightest effort to acknowledge the marks. It is my opinion there should still be straightforward and direct acknowledgement of obvious questionable surface marks, when collectors have a question about same, and not avoidance by the person(s) offering the coin. The marks are there. Say so. It is not the end of the world to admit there are marks, instead of opining in a manner that suggests it does not matter.

 

As another example, we both have had a mutual interesting occurrence, in fact two occurrences, of even very knowledgeable professional graders and a somewhat able collector being left scratching their heads about value of a coin without marks and with superior surfaces and details, and a somewhat rare coin. But, there was not misdirection or avoidance involved.

 

For someone who has refused to answer my repeated questions about your experience and knowledge regarding registry quality coins, your accusations of misdirection and avoidance are incredibly hypocritical.

 

Since you have no problem in offering unending criticism of Wondercoin, including questioning his integrity as a businessperson, I think that your knowledge (or lack thereof) becomes very relevant to the entire conversation. Along those lines, I would like you to answer a few questions for me. Do you collect coins? If so, what do you collect? Can you prove that you collect coins by telling us about your last purchase (photos preferred)? Assuming you can prove that you are an actual coin collector and not just a professional forum troll, do you have any experience collecting registry quality coins? Have you ever sold coins over the internet? If so, when describing coins, do you ensure that you always point out the most negative aspect of each coin?

 

You have harassed Wondercoin basically from his very first post in this thread and then you accuse him of obfuscation because he won't answer your crazy question about "bands are fine." I guess you didn't notice that not one other person in this thread joined you in your "bands are fine" crusade. There is a reason for that. Everyone else participating in this thread is an experienced numismatist, not a forum troll. They knew that your question was insane and also knew that the explanation that I offered was something that a cub scout working on his coin collecting merit badge could have figured out. Perhaps Wondercoin doesn't view you as MrMcKnowitall. Perhaps he thinks that you are MrMcBatcrazy or MrMcDouchebag and was simply hoping that if he didn't fully engage your lunacy that you would simply go away.

 

Knowing more about internet trolls than Wondercoin, I enter the conversation a second time to give you the OBVIOUS answer, Wondercoin confirms his intentions and provides further clarity within his post, but instead of accepting the answer, you attack him again on the basis that he was simply using my explanation as an out and that his clarification was simply more misdirection. You have no idea how foolish you sound. The other members of this forum, being generally nice people, don't have the energy to tell you what a fool you are because they don't want your particular brand of lunacy pointed at them. Well guess what dude? I don't give a ! Bring it! I have dealt with trolls like RMA who make you look like a rank amateur.

[coinman_23885]

"I still think the comparison is way off."

 

I guess we'll let the Roosie collectors determine if the comparison is "way off" or not. If my customer's dime fetches $300 or $400 in the no reserve auction, then perhaps the comparison was on point. If the coin fetches thousands upon thousands of dollars, then we know the comparison was, indeed, "way off".

 

Wondercoin

 

The coin is going to fetch more than $300 to $400 even if one agrees with me that it is over graded. If it is over graded, then the coin should be covered under the PCGS guarantee to make a fair pay out. In this scenario, the auction plays out as nothing more than a numismatic lottery ticket.

[brg5658]

...Perhaps Wondercoin doesn't view you as MrMcKnowitall. Perhaps he thinks that you are MrMcBatcrazy or MrMcDouchebag and was simply hoping that if he didn't fully engage your lunacy that you would simply go away....

 

 

 

[mumu]

Someone find another overgraded coin. This was fun.

[Hard Times]

"I still think the comparison is way off."

 

I guess we'll let the Roosie collectors determine if the comparison is "way off" or not. If my customer's dime fetches $300 or $400 in the no reserve auction, then perhaps the comparison was on point. If the coin fetches thousands upon thousands of dollars, then we know the comparison was, indeed, "way off".

 

Wondercoin

 

I think that is way too low, I am thinking $7K in this current market. If you can get a green bean on it, then the ceiling is significantly higher. There is no question about the obverse being stellar and that makes the coin.

 

Best, HT

Edited May 19, 2016 by Hard Times

[Hard Times]

Someone find another overgraded coin. This was fun.

 

I don't know if this one is overgraded despite any posts I have made, in this market grading era it might be right on for the grade - we heard many opinions on this - but yes, discussing issues of grading, even when emotional as this thread sometimes was, is an excellent way to learn. I learned huge amounts about market grading moderns in this thread, and some of the history of high end graded Roosevelt's. I don't understand why folks want to take these things personally, but nevertheless I agree, this was fun, let's try another.

 

Best, HT

[EleMint Man]

 

You are a NGCIA guy I presume Mr.Macknowitall, no? This world has quite an abundance of "Knowitalls" with Rush Limbo being at the forefront...uh was at the

forefront, heh.

[Afterword]

When some people smell blood, they go for the jugular. Especially when accompanied by perceived weakness in their prey.

 

Works well in the animal kingdom.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

AHFreak - No one here thinks or has suggested that you are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person. We disagree and are trying to have an intellectual discussion (or at least I was despite some of the distractions that dilute the discussion). I do not claim to know everything, so I always ask detailed questions before making up my mind even if I think I am correct and the issue straightforward. My initial post was interrogatory in nature for a reason.

 

My point is that whatever we want to call the marks, I do not believe the coin falls within the grading criteria or eye appeal standards that the services have announced for the grade of MS68 FB. If there is a change in standards, then it is a topic worthwhile of discussion and one that I would think modern coin collectors would want to participate in. If I collected condition rarity modern coins, coins like this would terrify me.

 

Imagine that you have a coin with a population of 3 or 4, and it is tied numerically for finest known. Imagine that two have imperfections and appear at auction, and then a third example appears without the distractions. Given that the other examples that have sold at auction had defects and provide the only pricing records, do you not think that the defective coins would artificially lower the price expectation of the good coin(s)? Most collectors look at auction records superficially without looking at the substance of the coin that sold. To be sure this is not unique to modern coins, but the effects seem much more pronounced IMHO. The coin may have a price guide value of $10k in the plastic, but outside of the plastic, based on the images, I struggle to see someone paying more than a few bucks given what I perceive to be defects. If I had a PQ, pristine condition rarity, I would worry that the increasing populations (caused in part by grade inflation) would destroy my investment.

 

Edited to add: Of course I am basing my comments on the photo, which is all we have to go on, but I find it hard to believe that an expert would leave a photo like that up to sell a $10k if the coin looked substantially better in hand. I respect Mitch very much, and do think he is observant enough that he would not overlook how the coin would be perceived to the public and would acknowledge this in the description (e.g. "Coin looks better in hand; what appear to be hits are really XYZ phenomenon... etc.").

 

Last paragraph. I concur, with the entire paragraph.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

And lastly, regardless of whether those hits are made by damage or some part of the minting process, the question remains whether a coin with those marks should be deemed a 68. There are plenty of coins that are held back because of poor minting processes. Franklin proofs are one example, 1955D Washington quarters are another and plenty of bad quality P$. Just because a coin is as minted, doesn't make that minting high grade worthy.

 

And, let's not forget the active PVC on the reverse. With that it shouldn't be in a slab at all...

 

No matter what stories people create about the defects on the fasces on the reverse -- I don't need to see it in hand, the pictures tell me enough to know that the coin in the OP is not an MS68FB dime by any stretch of the imagination.

 

I'm done with this thread...

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Physics-fan... The impartial catalogers at Superior Auctions back in 2009 described the condition of the coin as follows:

 

"An abundant amount of deep reddish-golden toning decorates the lower portion of the obverse. The reverse displays a peripheral ring of olive-golden color. Sharply impressed and virtually without flaws. This represents a unique opportunity to own the very best!".

 

 

Catalogers are absolutely *NOT* impartial. Their duty is to maximize profits for the company, and profits for the consignor to generate continuing submissions. Auction catalogs are advertisements, and should be read with the same skepticism as any other advertisement.

 

For example, "virtually without flaws" completely ignores the large and obvious flaws on the torch which have been the subject of this thread.

 

What I want to hear is your opinions of these marks.

 

Last sentence.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Well, that was a non-answer. You also have a bias and conflict of interest, I understand that. When asked a direct question, a seller can answer the question honestly and still be fair to both the buyer and seller.

 

Heritage has a bias. Everyone has a bias.

 

Mark Feld also has a bias. I trust him to be honest - but everyone has a bias. There are things that, as an employee of Heritage, it would not be in his or his company's interest to say.

 

As a collector, I have to figure out what the bias is, and interpret it.

 

First sentence.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

"Which brings up a number of related questions if one was to personally determine how they might grade out the 1964-D dime in question:

 

1. What weight do you place on the obverse of the coin vs. the reverse with respect to the grade you intend to assign to the coin? This is obviously a critical question if it is common in the industry (is it?) to give the obverse of a coin a bit more weight than the reverse of the coin.

 

2. Do you (or do you not) give the coin a "bump up" at all due to its nice toning, especially for the date?

 

Summary: At a time when the services were grading far fewer MS68FB / MS68FT coins than we are seeing getting graded today, PCGS assigned a grade of MS68FB to the 64-D dime. Do we know what weight (e.g. 50%, 2/3, 3/4, 80%) they assigned to the very lovely obverse of this coin - No. Do we know what "bump", if any, they awarded the coin for its lovely color for the date in question - No.

 

Can one "tear apart" an MS68 graded coin by focusing on just one side of the coin, especially the reverse side? Of course. Look no further than the 1964-D (same date) Kennedy Half Dollar in PCGS-MS68 that just sold for around $25,000 at public auction (thank you AHfreak for corrrecting my $22,000 previous statement) and set the world record for a business strike Kennedy Half Dollar. Can anyone post pics of the obverse and reverse of that Kennedy here? We can ask the very same questions I just did about the dime of the same date.... namely, how much weight to the obverse and whether a "bump" is warranted for the color."

 

 

 

 

 

You make a good case for how the dime in question might warrant an MS-68 grade despite the two marks on the torch. However, you could have made an even more compelling case for your client if you had revealed the fact that the marks on the torch were mint made, and I see no reason why you would not do so - unless they are indeed post mint marks.

 

Unless, of course, you have never looked at the marks closely enough to make this determination. However, this seems unlikely given your stated experience with such coins.

 

Last 2 paragraphs.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

 

My eyes popped when I spotted this outrageous coin. When I saw the slab,

my jaws dropped in disbelief. Could this by the only slab in the world to have

a non sequitur written on it?

 

That adds a grand to the value of the dime!

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1964-D-ROOSEVELT-DIME-PCGS-MS68FB-POP-1-0-Pedigreed-to-World-Class-Set-/222100429072?hash=item33b6379910:g:HEMAAOSwHPlWf3Hj

[bochiman]

If you can get a green bean on it, then the ceiling is significantly higher.

 

Best, HT

 

Be very hard for that to happen as, if one knows CAC or bothers to look at their website...."Ten Cents (Dimes) 1796-1945 " is what they do.

 

No dimes after 1945 (ie...all Roosevelts)......

 

Now, one could go and try to QA it, but not sure what that would add....

[coinman_23885]

If you can get a green bean on it, then the ceiling is significantly higher.

 

Best, HT

 

Be very hard for that to happen as, if one knows CAC or bothers to look at their website...."Ten Cents (Dimes) 1796-1945 " is what they do.

 

No dimes after 1945 (ie...all Roosevelts)......

 

Now, one could go and try to QA it, but not sure what that would add....

 

I think HT's post was sarcasm.

[Wondercoin]

The coin is now off ebay and will be in the hands of Mark the next time he sits at his desk in Dallas.

 

One thing I wanted to mention .... many here repeatedly commented about whether the dime was worth $10,000 or was graded properly for a $10,000 coin, etc. The number "$10,000" continued to come up. But, keep in mind, I had a "best offer" on the coin on ebay. So, obviously, I was prepared to accept less for the coin (and on top of that pay ebay and paypal fees).

 

Indeed, I received a serious offer tonight for the coin from a very astute Roosie buyer - a private (off-ebay) offer that I would have likely countered, but would have hoped to reach a mutual agreement on following further negotiations. Instead, I told the interested party that the dime had already been shipped to Mark for auction and I welcomed his bid for the dime at the auction.

 

I did want to make this point, because if and when the coin sells for less than $10,000 at auction, I can already see and hear the posts in my mind that may be written that say essentially "I told you the coin was not worth "$10,000". Again, my ebay ad listed an asking price of $9,995 with the request for interested parties to make me a counter-offer (i.e. best offer). I will truly let you know if I was pleased or not with the auction result when it is completed.

 

Wondercoin

[MJ]

You are indeed correct. There will be price discovery amongst actual players in this field.

 

mark

[lehigh96]

The coin is now off ebay and will be in the hands of Mark the next time he sits at his desk in Dallas.

 

One thing I wanted to mention .... many here repeatedly commented about whether the dime was worth $10,000 or was graded properly for a $10,000 coin, etc. The number "$10,000" continued to come up. But, keep in mind, I had a "best offer" on the coin on ebay. So, obviously, I was prepared to accept less for the coin (and on top of that pay ebay and paypal fees).

 

Indeed, I received a serious offer tonight for the coin from a very astute Roosie buyer - a private (off-ebay) offer that I would have likely countered, but would have hoped to reach a mutual agreement on following further negotiations. Instead, I told the interested party that the dime had already been shipped to Mark for auction and I welcomed his bid for the dime at the auction.

 

I did want to make this point, because if and when the coin sells for less than $10,000 at auction, I can already see and hear the posts in my mind that may be written that say essentially "I told you the coin was not worth "$10,000". Again, my ebay ad listed an asking price of $9,995 with the request for interested parties to make me a counter-offer (i.e. best offer). I will truly let you know if I was pleased or not with the auction result when it is completed.

 

Wondercoin

 

After the way you have been treated in this thread, I can't believe you are giving a free lesson on how to sell coins.

[EleMint Man]

If you can get a green bean on it, then the ceiling is significantly higher.

 

Best, HT

 

Be very hard for that to happen as, if one knows CAC or bothers to look at their website...."Ten Cents (Dimes) 1796-1945 " is what they do.

 

No dimes after 1945 (ie...all Roosevelts)......

 

Now, one could go and try to QA it, but not sure what that would add....

 

I think HT's post was sarcasm.

 

The first time I saw a QA "Beaner", it looked somewhat impressive and I thought it

might be affiliated with CAC because a nice Eisenhower I was looking at had both stickers on it! I asked around and no one could tell me what the QA sticker was all about so I found this awhile back..... http://qacoins.com/. Well organized site with a complete listing of the coins they've evaluated. Combine a CAC and QA on a star holder and one would truly have a decorated slab that could be called a "Generals Holder"! After going back to the original listing of the illustrious "Rosie" that was the center piece of this thread, this gem appeared on the screen....

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1957-D-10C-Roosevelt-Dime-PCGS-MS68FB-/322105712636?hash=item4afeff1ffc:g:hKQAAOSw1KxXM6ZI

 

I don't think there will be any disputing this one!

 

 

 

Edited May 20, 2016 by EleMint Man

[david3142]

You'll always find someone to dispute a coin in that high of a grade.

That coin was in an NGC 68* FT holder and fetched less than $2K about 18 months ago at Heritage. I asked Mark to review it for me and he told me to pass. The die chip on the eyebrow, while absolutely mint made, is distracting (to both of us, at least). It was then crossed and offered by Larry Shapiro at $10K. Now it's $11K.

Both services obviously see it the same way as each other so the 5x jump in value is all plastic.

[Afterword]

The differences between the image of the 1957 D presented at Heritage and the image presented on Ebay are striking.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The differences between the image of the 1957 D presented at Heritage and the image presented on Ebay are striking.

 

"...unless they are indeed post mint marks...."