"Just Having Fun" MS68 PCGS Slab! 0

[brg5658]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

Well, they also claim to know the difference between a coin toned by "natural" means and one with some "artificial" process involved. There must be a lot of crystal balls in the grading rooms.

[Afterword]

The TPGs could put MINT ERROR FREE on the labels of perfect coins (I wonder how many would qualify?) and QUESTIONABLE TONING on the labels of any coin with toning and EYE APPEAL - JUDGE FOR YOURSELF on every label.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Afterword

[coinman_23885]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

You don't' think graders (or for that matters, non-graders familiar with such coins) can tell the difference between mint-made marks and post-mint flaws? I think in most cases they can. That said, while I might be in the minority, I don't think either type of flaws should get free passes with respect to grading.

 

So do you think the marks on the dime in the OP are mint-made marks or post-mint flaws? Do you agree with myself and others that think the green residue is PVC? I understand fully if you choose not to answer.

[MarkFeld]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

You don't' think graders (or for that matters, non-graders familiar with such coins) can tell the difference between mint-made marks and post-mint flaws? I think in most cases they can. That said, while I might be in the minority, I don't think either type of flaws should get free passes with respect to grading.

 

So do you think the marks on the dime in the OP are mint-made marks or post-mint flaws? Do you agree with myself and others that think the green residue is PVC? I understand fully if you choose not to answer.

 

Sorry, I don't feel that I can tell the answer to either question from the images. If I were relatively certain of either or both, I would feel free to opine.

[mumu]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

You don't' think graders (or for that matters, non-graders familiar with such coins) can tell the difference between mint-made marks and post-mint flaws? I think in most cases they can. That said, while I might be in the minority, I don't think either type of flaws should get free passes with respect to grading.

 

So do you think the marks on the dime in the OP are mint-made marks or post-mint flaws? Do you agree with myself and others that think the green residue is PVC? I understand fully if you choose not to answer.

 

Sorry, I don't feel that I can tell the answer to either question from the images. If I were relatively certain of either or both, I would feel free to opine.

 

What about the maybe-proof kennedy? Is that shipped out already?

[jom]

To me the coin is just overpriced (due to the grade obviously). I don't even care if the coin WAS an MS68...I won't pay premiums like that. I'd be satisfied with a $100 MS66. Since there are a gazillon of them I'm sure I could find one I like better even if in a lower grade.

 

In the 24 years I've been doing this I've always it baffling why people pay those huge premiums for such a small difference in grade ...and this was before Registry Sets. To each their own I guess.

 

jom

[Hard Times]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

You don't' think graders (or for that matters, non-graders familiar with such coins) can tell the difference between mint-made marks and post-mint flaws? I think in most cases they can. That said, while I might be in the minority, I don't think either type of flaws should get free passes with respect to grading.

 

Mark,

Probably most of the time the best graders in the grading room are right about how marks are made that they are observing. But we can't possibly know how each mark is obtained, no chance. It might look like something made by some kind of process, but we weren't there to witness the creation - just like toning as Brandon notes above. So it is simply subjective opinion, like anything to do with grading. I think it comes down to whether one believes marks like that are something they would like on a 68 or not. But like jom says, and I was trying to say, $10K for a common coin when one almost as good is $100? I think that is why we are all discussin' this.....

 

Best, HT

 

[MarkFeld]

 

 

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

You don't' think graders (or for that matters, non-graders familiar with such coins) can tell the difference between mint-made marks and post-mint flaws? I think in most cases they can. That said, while I might be in the minority, I don't think either type of flaws should get free passes with respect to grading.

 

Mark,

Probably most of the time the best graders in the grading room are right about how marks are made that they are observing. But we can't possibly know how each mark is obtained, no chance. It might look like something made by some kind of process, but we weren't there to witness the creation - just like toning as Brandon notes above. So it is simply subjective opinion, like anything to do with grading. I think it comes down to whether one believes marks like that are something they would like on a 68 or not. But like jom says, and I was trying to say, $10K for a common coin when one almost as good is $100? I think that is why we are all discussin' this.....

 

Best, HT

 

Fair enough and thanks for the reply.

[leeg]

Wow.

 

Do we really need to beat a dead horse like this?

 

 

 

[coinman1794]

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

 

First, tumbling marks are not damage, they are an integral part of the coin and have flow lines running through them, imparted at the moment of striking. The graders will have no trouble distinguishing them from abrasions.

 

Second, while the presence of mint-made flaws might not affect the technical grade in many cases, it typically does affect the value.

 

As an analogy, take the ancient coin market. If you have two slabbed anchient coins of the same type and in the same grade, but one is off-center and one is not, the coin that is off-center will sell for much less than that which is properly centered.

[Hard Times]

Interesting, so are the marks on the torch for the Roosevelt dime we are discussing tumbling marks? Are there flow lines that one can observe? Do such flow lines show up on devices? If not tumbling marks if there is an absence of flow lines, then what would be the origin of these marks?

 

Best, HT

Edited May 13, 2016 by Hard Times

[AHFreak]

Yes there are flow lines on devices. Not sure about anyone else but I need a loupe to see flow lines. Luster is another thing alltogether. That's where the difference is on pre mint marks versus post mint marks. The luster seems to cover up/flow right through pre mint marks. (Because of flow lines). Post mint marks are distracting, they jump out at you when viewing said coin under light, they take away from luster because luster goes around it marks, is broken because of the marks versus flowing through them effortlessly and in a sense, (when grading under light) covers them up/minimizes them in a way.

 

That is an artsy way of explaining that, but hopefully I don't get ringed for that, and readers can allow there minds eye to follow what I'm saying.

[AHFreak]

Interesting, so are the marks on the torch for the Roosevelt dime we are discussing tumbling marks? Is there flow lines that one can observe? Do such flow lines show up on devices? If not tumbling marks if there is an absence of flow lines, then what would be the origin of these marks?

 

Best, HT

 

This is IMO the reason this photo became such a heated discussion because in a photo these marks look beyond ugly/distracting/ annoying/etc...they look similar to true dings/hits/post mint marks.... I get that.

What I've been trying to explain is that they look no where near as dramatic or noticeable under light, when rolling and tilting the coin during a grading process.. reason for that is because the luster flows through them, and cruises right over top of them opposed to actual hits where luster actually highlights and points out said flaws (that is why we roll and tilt under light in the first place). To find flaws. These types of marks are virtually unnoticeable under light, unless u r looking for and trying to find them.

 

 

[Afterword]

"Second, while the presence of mint-made flaws might not affect the technical grade in many cases, it typically does affect the value.

 

As an analogy, take the ancient coin market. If you have two slabbed anchient coins of the same type and in the same grade, but one is off-center and one is not, the coin that is off-center will sell for much less than that which is properly centered."

 

 

 

I agree.

 

This is why I believe eye appeal should play no part in the grading process. It just adds another layer of subjectivity to the process that is not needed. The buyers will preform that service for themselves, just as they do in the analogy presented above.

[coinman_23885]

"Second, while the presence of mint-made flaws might not affect the technical grade in many cases, it typically does affect the value.

 

As an analogy, take the ancient coin market. If you have two slabbed anchient coins of the same type and in the same grade, but one is off-center and one is not, the coin that is off-center will sell for much less than that which is properly centered."

 

 

 

I agree.

 

This is why I believe eye appeal should play no part in the grading process. It just adds another layer of subjectivity to the process that is not needed. The buyers will preform that service for themselves, just as they do in the analogy presented above.

 

If those were mint made flaws and we were placing coins in TPG slabs based on technical grading, I might be inclined to agree; however, the TPGs market grade. Regardless of the cause, does anyone think this coin is worth 68FB money with the gashes, tumbling marks, voids, or whatever other term we want to use? If not, then the coin shouldn't be in a 68 FB holder. Individual coins shouldn't have special rules - we either market grade everything or we technically grade everything and should not force buyers to make guesses as to which technique/standard the TPG is using. A distraction is a distraction, no?

Edited May 13, 2016 by coinman_23885

[Afterword]

"A distraction is a distraction, no?"

 

 

 

What is and is not a distraction is subjective. Make the determination for yourself. The grade on a slab is nothing more than a from of price guide. If you treat it as such, as a guide and not the gospel, you buy the coins you like for the prices you are willing to pay.

 

The grade on a slab will never be anything more than a form of price guide. You cannot improve upon subjectivity.

[Hard Times]

Interesting, so are the marks on the torch for the Roosevelt dime we are discussing tumbling marks? Is there flow lines that one can observe? Do such flow lines show up on devices? If not tumbling marks if there is an absence of flow lines, then what would be the origin of these marks?

 

Best, HT

 

This is IMO the reason this photo became such a heated discussion because in a photo these marks look beyond ugly/distracting/ annoying/etc...they look similar to true dings/hits/post mint marks.... I get that.

What I've been trying to explain is that they look no where near as dramatic or noticeable under light, when rolling and tilting the coin during a grading process.. reason for that is because the luster flows through them, and cruises right over top of them opposed to actual hits where luster actually highlights and points out said flaws (that is why we roll and tilt under light in the first place). To find flaws. These types of marks are virtually unnoticeable under light, unless u r looking for and trying to find them.

 

 

Those are some good points. To credit them further, I have noticed that some types of blemishes (for example dark spots, some types of surface dings), come out to be much more worse in images compared to viewing them in hand. I guess that is why the old adage - see the coin in hand to judge it, still is crucial. Perhaps in this case for this 64-D dime, such is the case.

 

Best, HT

[EleMint Man]

"A distraction is a distraction, no?

 

What is and is not a distraction is subjective. Make the determination for yourself. The grade on a slab is nothing more than a from of price guide. If you treat it as such, as a guide and not the gospel, you buy the coins you like for the prices you are willing to pay.

 

The grade on a slab will never be anything more than a form of price guide. You cannot improve upon subjectivity.

 

Absolutely! The same principle applies to raw coins though unless money is of

no concern, like that's not a problem for most folks! Some research

should be done and if you don't know how to grade well, have someone who can, grade it.

 

On a light note, I spotted some mighty large coin like objects orbiting this planet

while grading a Apollo 11 medal.....

 

Enjoy!

 

 

 

[Wondercoin]

Hi everyone. A few minutes ago, my good friend, Nick Cascio sent me an email informing me there was a thread involving me and a dime I am selling for JHF that already has 130 replies (and I need to check it out)! Wow ... I sure missed a great deal already, but I have the weekend fairly free, so hopefully by Monday I can answer any questions surrounding the 64-D Dime. I also believe you will find the history behind this dime and the entire JHF collection of Roosies to be fascinating. And, I will enjoy discussing them with you all.

 

And thank you Bochiman, Mark Feld, etc. for the kind words in this thread.

 

I'll begin with a little history of Roosevelt Dime registry (starting in 1999 when PCGS had a thin paperback book of registry sets (nothing on line of course) and I am not sure NGC had even started their registry up yet at that time. That post will come a little later, and perhaps in a few parts

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 13, 2016 by Wondercoin

[coinman_23885]

Hi everyone. A few minutes ago, my good friend, Nick Cascio sent me an email informing me there was a thread involving me and a dime I am selling for JHF that already has 130 replies (and I need to check it out)!

 

Thanks for stopping in. Since you have actually seen the coin in hand, I look forward to you joining the discussion.

[Wondercoin]

Beginning in or about 1983, I started attending the Long Beach coin shows and focused on Mint and proof sets from 1947- date. My goal was to assemble spectacular collections of cents through Half Dollars with "monster" toning, as well as top quality collections of Ike Dollars and SBA's. The silver and clad MS Washington quarters I uncovered through these searches (spanning the past roughly -33- years) make up a decent portion of my "Hall of Fame" 1932-date Quarter Registry sets over at PCGS. Many of the quarters in my set I have had for 25 and 30 years from these "hunts". But, this thread is not about Washington quarters, so enough said about those.

 

The dimes I located in my never ending hunt for monster toned or super high grade silver Roosies (searches starting from 1983-1999 and thereafter) formed the nucleus of my #1 Silver MS Roosevelt Dime Registry set in the 1999 PCGS Set Registry. At that time, PCGS literally did not have the funds allocated to even produce the (250) paperback copies of the 1999 Winners of the Registry many of us requested be produced so collectors could see (in writing) who was winning each registry set in the Registry! There was no serious internet presence for the Registry back in 1998-1999.

 

Rick Montgomery was the PCGS President at the time and I spoke with him about the importance of producing a physical book so collectors could see where they ranked in the registry. The collector in 3rd place at the time in MS Silver Roosies (his rank only discovered after the book came out) volunteered to pay all the money to produce the 250 copies of the Registry book. That collector was "Steve Heller" who would later become PCGS' very first collector to ever earn a "Hall of Fame" Registry set award for his 144 pc. Classic Silver Commem collection. I informed Rick that Steve Heller had agreed to pay out of his pocket for all of the registry books (and Rick saw it was that important to the collectors) and Rick generously agreed to have PCGS produce the 250 copies of the books that showed the Registry winners and where each collector's set placed in the Registry. With this action, "registry" was essentially on the map at PCGS!

 

More to follow .....

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

In 1998 (after about 15 years of serious collecting), I saw where my collection of MS Silver Roosies was at and where it needed to go. Obviously, I was not about to "score" a super toned MS67 or MS68 Roosie from 1959-1964 from the govt. Mint sets I was buying (as virtually all the coins in those sets at that time were blast white to off white). And, one still cant.

 

So, I had an idea. I would propose to "bulk" grade these Roosies over at PCGS submitting them (100) at a time and getting PCGS to agree to a min grade of MS66. I figured if I was lucky enough to even grade a single MS67 1961-P or 1963-P from my bulk submissions, I would deal with selling off the -99- MS66's that could possibly come with it.

 

I was a bankruptcy attorney at the time (representing creditors in major Chapter 11 reorganizations in LA) and these coins had been my hobby since the time I was a kid. I am 57 years old today and have been collecting coins for the past 50 years. I set up a meeting with Rick Montgomery and Miles Standish to present my idea of bulk grading Roosies.

 

Now, keep in mind, to this point "bulk grading" was a relatively new concept at PCGS and essentially limited to bags of Walkers and Morgans. I was essentially offering to pay the same bulk grading price as the "big dogs" were paying to grade their valuable Morgans for PCGS to grade my MS66 silver Roosie Dimes (not even FB as there was no such thing at the time). While I was in my business suit and presenting a serious proposal to Rick and Miles, they literally could not hold back their laughter at my proposal! They made me repeat several times that I was comfortable paying $1,000 (it may have dropped to $800 early on) to grade (100) MS66 Roosie dimes and to do it for nearly each date in the series! I said "yep" and the bulk grading of modern "pocket change" was underway!!

 

Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

Shortly after the 1999 Registry Book was released (probably in early 2000), I had the #1 PCGS Silver Roosie Dime set in the land and Steve Heller had the #3 set. I got to know Steve and found him to be a very thoughtful and serious collector of the Roosies. I wanted to concentrate more seriously on my MS Silver Washington quarter collection, so I entered into a private treaty to sell Steve my #1 set and combine it with his #3 set. Steve appointed me the "curator" of the new #1 collection so even though I sold my prized dimes to Steve, I could always enjoy them while working with Steve in building out his new #1 set.

 

Around this time, Nick Cascio was also working towards assembling what would be later become a World Class set of MS silver Roosies. Steve and myself continued to acquire dimes to continue to improve the #1 PCGS set and Nick worked feverishly to "catch us" and at some point overtake us as the top #1 PCGS Silver Roosie Dime set holder.

 

By this time, I had been working with the great collector who goes by the name "Justhavingfun" in assisting him with building out the finest set of MS Jefferson Nickels, MS & Proof Liberty Nickels, MS and PR Shield Nickels, etc., etc. and mentioned to him the 'Spivack-Heller" collection as well as the "Cascio" collection of silver Dimes. There was also a wonderful accumulation of super toned high end Mint State Roosies owned by Craig Harries at the time.

 

The bottom line ... I arranged for JHF to buy EVERYONE'S sets of Roosies and to create the greatest set of PCGS MS Silver Roosies ever formed at that time (Nick was also nice enough to "toss in" his wonderful clad dime collection that he had built for a super price at the time). JHF now had my coins from my 15 years of searching for them (beginning in 1983), Steve Heller's coin collection, Nick Cascio's incredible collection and Craig Harries super coins. From all of these incredible sets as well as strategic purchases thereafter to improve the set wherever possible, JHF had one helluva collection of MS Silver Roosies! Without question, the greatest PCGS collection ever assembled in the 20th Century! And, I stopped at saying the greatest collection in the World as "RainbowRoosies" was quietly also building a world class collection of toned dimes at the time.

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[mumu]

Myles Standish? The pilgrim?

[Wondercoin]

Mumu ...

 

Miles Standish.... who had remained with PCGS through 2015 as their VP, a Chief grader and the head of the bulk dept. (save a brief interlude with ANACS) until finally rejoining his good friend Rick Montgomery at NGC just about 6 months ago.

 

Wondercoin

[mumu]

Oh. There was a Myles Standish on the Mayflower in the 17th century.

Edited May 14, 2016 by mumu

[Walkerfan]

 

I'm really enjoying this story so far..

[Wondercoin]

By 1999, JHF had made a decision to streamline his large collection and sell off significant portions of it while seriously increasing the focus on other portions. This resulted in JHF building the finest collection of PCGS SLQ's ever assembled (up to the time of his sale of that set a couple years ago), building out the finest collections of USPI (1903-1947) Philippine coins ever seen (these coins will be auctioned off at some point in the next 12-18 months), acquiring the finest known 1894-S Barber Dime, etc. The collection of MS Silver Roosevelt Dimes was selected as a set that was to be sold off to fund these other endeavors.

 

The landmark sale took place on January 4, 2009 with Superior Galleries presenting the "JHF Collection of Finest Roosevelt Dimes" as part of its Orlando Elite Coin Auction. A 56 page Stand Alone catalog of the collection was put together by Superior as part of the deal for that auction house to get the right to sell JHF's Roosie Dime set. I worked very hard (along with Nick who I asked for help) to try to pedigree each and every dime in JHF's incredible Silver Dime collection. Many of these coins are now in upgraded holders at both PCGS and NGC, but this catalog gives credit where credit is due to the great "early hunters" who tracked down and successfully graded the coins that were part of JHF's set.

 

That evening in 2009 (and including some post-auction purchases) if memory serves me right in excess of "six figures" of MS Silver Roosies traded hands at a public auction. The Grey Sheet reported on the sale if anyone has a copy of the Sheet from 1/09 hanging around. It was (in my opinion) a hugely successful sale for JHF even though only roughly 50% of the reserved coins sold. We suspected that it was highly unlikely that silver Roosie collectors (not the "deepest pocket" group of collectors out there) would spend close to a quarter million dollars in a single evening on Roosie Dimes back in 1999. So, of course, reserves needed to be placed on the set coins. Selling "six figures" of the coins in that auction was a "Home Run". And, now 6 or 7 years later, just a handful or so of the coolest pieces (or in the case of the 1964-D - a PCGS pop 1) remain to be sold off.

 

Just a few weeks ago, I tried to upgrade (unsuccessfully) Lots 670 and 671 which went unsold in the Superior 2009 auction as MS67FB coins from MS68FB (where they reside today already upgraded one point each) to MS68+FB coins (which I believe one of the coins has a decent chance to achieve). At the time of the sale, these coins were in the Price Guide at "$175" as I recall and we reserved the better of the 2 coins in the sale at $4,000 ($4,600 with the BP) due to its lovely color (the front cover coin of the catalog). The coin got bid up to $3,750 hammer at the auction ($4,312,50) and came within $250 of meeting the reserve. That bidder after the sale found me and asked me to ask JHF if he would sell the coin in a private treaty for the $4,312.50. JHF politely passed figuring the coin had a great shot of grading 68FB or higher (which is exactly what that professional upgrader who made the offer also hoped for).

 

So, it is (7) years later and I am still trying this particular coin for the "holy grail" grade of MS68+FB. Likewise, I still have the pop 1 1964-D Roosie MS68FB (reserved in the 1999 auction for $11,500 with BP and the subject of this thread) which if memory serves me right JHF passed on an offer of either $8000 or $8,500 a few years ago.

 

Mark Feld has always been such a good (business) friend to JHF (as well as to myself) that after seeing his participation on this thread, I may just consign the 64-D to Heritage for an auction later this year with no reserve. Enough time has passed that I am sure JHF can "live with" whatever the coin fetches at such an auction.

 

Wondercoin

 

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

Now, as far as the 1964-D dime goes in PCGS-MS68FB, bear in mind that around the time we were pricing the coin at $11,500 as the pop 1 coin, the MS68 1964-D Half Dollar had already traded ABOVE that price privately as far as I knew (now resold in a Legend Auction this year for closer to $22,000 with BP if memory serves me!)

 

That 64-D Half Dollar came up to a dealer's table for $300 in an older PCGS MS66 holder and he quickly bought it (with me standing right there). He offered it to me at $3,000 on the spot. What an fool I was - I should have written the check on the spot as I graded the coin MS67 all day long with monster color! Instead, I was just thinking about the 10x markup the dealer was offering me the coin at and why that was "too much" in my mind (I was younger then and less experienced). In any event, the coin quickly upgraded to MS67 for that dealer and then to MS68 and just resold for a third time for about $22,000 at a major auction. No one talks about the marks on the reverse of the coin, but just the super color. Likewise, the obverse of the 64-D dime is amazing and you seldom see great color on a 64-D dime as you see on this coin. Which is why this is the ONLY business strike dime from 1964 PCGS has ever awarded an MS68FB grade to.

 

And, just like the MS68 64-D half dollar, one can marvel at the color of the coin (and incredible eye appeal) or one can find fault with the "mark here and the mark there". I am not going to argue that the MS68FB dime is near flawless, but what I will say is that I have never seen an obverse of a 1964 dime that looks that nice (with the possible exception of the 1964 SMS dime grading MS68 in my personal "Top 100 Moderns" collection), or even close to it and we all know that the obverse accounts for more than 50% of the grade in most cases.

 

As with every post I posted tonight, just my two cents.

 

Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

http://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/25030174_1522075_2200.jpg

 

 

And, speaking of lovely 1964 dated silver coins, here is the 1964-P Washington Quarter in my personal quarter set, which PCGS originally priced at $15,000 as the pop 1/0 MS67+ coin. It is now pop 3 today and the $15,000 price still shows (but I believe the Guide might be too high now as a pop 3 coin).

 

That said, my coin was graded many years ago and in my opinion is an MS68 quality specimen. I would not sell the coin for $15,000.

 

So, we have a pop 1 half dollar at $22,000 now (real auction price), at least one 1964 quarter at $15,000 guide (and that coin is only an MS67+ grade, not MS68) .... is the "lowly" pop 1 dime from 1964 in MS68FB not worth $8,000 - $10,000? OK, should it be a $5,000 coin? $3,000? Obviously, JHF has the right to ask any price he wants for his pop 1 coin.

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 14, 2016 by Wondercoin