"Just Having Fun" MS68 PCGS Slab! 0

[Wondercoin]

Hi guys. Back from a lovely brunch with my Mother in San Juan Capistrano!

 

As I have said on numerous occasions, before I send the coin off to Heritage (assuming it does not sell in the next few weeks privately before I fetch it and ship it off), I plan to closely examine the reverse. Anyone interested in the coin can send me a private message and ask my opinion. Shortly thereafter, anyone can also ask Mark's opinion as well. We already have one (former) top auction house's write up on the coin and we will also soon have a second as well.

 

I truly have an excellent memory for coins, but please keep in mind that just the JHF Roosie collection alone consisted of about (150) - (200) Roosie dimes (mostly) in top grade that I sold off in 2009-date or set aside for the past (7) years other than possibly a minute here and a minute there with any specific coin. And, they were part of nearly 4,000 coins in the collection consigned to me that I have sold off or continue to sell (and I remember a great deal of all of these coins in my mind). But, I believe it would be somewhat reckless of me to simply say "yes, every mark each board member believes is on the coin is indeed a post striking mark and, more importantly, is not consistent with the grade assigned to the coin by PCGS". Sorry, I won't do it even if pitch forks are pulled out next by some board members here.

 

Many inexperienced graders simply count marks to try to come up with a grade on a coin. And, even though I have said many times that I am comfortable with the grade assigned to my customer's coin (yes, self serving as I warned it would be and repeatedly ignored by those demanding more information from me), I get the sense that if some of those "marks" on the reverse are indeed post strike that a number of board members here would simply conclude (erroneously in my view) that the coin should not be in the holder assigned by PCGS. So, I already see the "slippery slope" potentially ahead, especially because my prior comments about the obverse of this dime being perhaps the nicest I have personally seen in (33) years of hunting for them has fallen on deaf ears. I even mentioned that one of the greatest Roosie collectors out there (both NGC and PCGS sets) also loved at the time the obverse of this coin as the greatest (or safely in the top 2 or 3) obverses of any 1964 dime he had ever seen and graded it a solid MS68. Again, all on deaf ears.

 

I also invited those wanting to better learn how coins like this are assigned the grade they are to pull up pics of the recently sold 1964-D Half Dollar in MS68 for about $25,000! This is the same grade, same year and same mint mark as the dime. I would think it might be very instructive to this discussion. Also, lets take a look at how one of the most reputable coin sellers in the industry described the half dollar in their auction description (did they count marks on the reverse or not?) That would also be very instructive. Again, regrettably on deaf ears.

 

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 16, 2016 by Wondercoin

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I agree with Mark and Mark.

 

Plus, I have to wonder why Mitch even bothered to comment in this thread. I think it's pretty clear that no one who has posted in this thread has any interest in buying on the coin. Instead, the only interest seems to be in criticizing the coin and criticizing Mitch because he 1) Doesn't remember the coin from years ago, and 2) Is unwilling to comment on what are two marks on a coin from a picture.

 

If I were Mitch, I'd have looked at the posts and the posters, shrugged my shoulders and moved onto other endeavors. That said, I am glad Mitch did post because I thought some of the history he posted was fascinating.

 

Mark

 

Interest or not in buying the coin is immaterial to the discussion. IMHO it is slightly disingenuous to describe the questions and comments directed to the gentleman as personal criticism. The questions and comments were fair and honorable and in the spirit of courteous numismatic discussion. He was not criticized for not remembering the coin or being unwilling to explain the marks. He did not grade the coin, nor is he the present owner. What he did do was list the coin, describe it, including the notation that the bands are fine. The coin is designated FB. A photo taken by a family member, and that he describes as a fine job, is part of the listing. It has questionable marks. Do you expect there would not be questioning or commentary by the experienced numismatists on the board? It is not personal. It should not have been avoided, IMHO.

[Wondercoin]

MJ: Thanks for the words of encouragement! Yes, I started focusing heavily on "moderns" in 1983, so I have been at it now for about (33) straight years. Do just about anything long enough and you get good at it. I am proud to say that NGC selected me when they launched their Registry way back when to create all the Registry point values for most US coins dated 1932-date in every grade. I still remember sitting on a cruise ship while the family went ashore for the day trying to figure out exactly how many registry points to assign to a 1953-P Jefferson nickel in MS68 (no steps) when the coin virtually is never found even in true MS67 quality!

 

I'm glad I could help out though.

 

Wondercoin

[MJ]

You assumed right. He is probably the leading expert on moderns

 

mark

 

And?

 

You assumed he was knowledgable. You were right

 

You are welcome

 

mark

Edited May 16, 2016 by MJ

[Wondercoin]

"A photo taken by a family member, and that he describes as a fine job, is part of the listing."

 

With that, can I give a shout out to Justin, my 24 year old son who I am very proud of.

 

Justin graduated last year from UCLA with a Biology/Chemistry degree and decided before considering grad school (probably business school) to launch his own coin business.

 

He has studied coins since the time he was 5 or 6. He was PCGS' Young Numismatist of the Year in 2009 at the age of 17 for his efforts in building a top Mint State Presidential Dollar collection "homemade" (i.e. hunting for and submitting each and every coin in his collection). He built the #1 MS Presidential Dollar collection over at PCGS by the time he was 19. He had ever Mint State dollar coin from 2007-2010 up until Lincoln in pop top grade including many pop 1/0 coins. A great accomplishment for a 17-19 year old young man these days. He was mentioned in Eric Jordan's Book on Modern Coins in the chapter on Presidential Dollars.

 

The President of Stacks/Bowers who has known Justin since he was a teenager generously allowed Justin to train under SB's top photographer in order to work towards perfecting his coin photography. He is getting better at it every day as far as I can see. Justin launched his ebay store about 2 months ago ("monstercoinmart") and his ultimate focus will be on "monster toned" 20th century coins and moderns as well as "monster" deep cameo coins from the 1950's to date (please don't ask me to define "monster" toned). He will also have many of the mint's new products. Ebay is happy with him so far as they have granted him top seller status and he has had about 200 positive feedbacks in his first 60 days out there.

 

So, that's my "family member" who I am very proud of

 

Wondercoin

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Hi guys. Back from a lovely brunch with my Mother in San Juan Capistrano!

 

As I have said on numerous occasions, before I send the coin off to Heritage (assuming it does not sell in the next few weeks privately before I fetch it and ship it off), I plan to closely examine the reverse. Anyone interested in the coin can send me a private message and ask my opinion. Shortly thereafter, anyone can also ask Mark's opinion as well. We already have one (former) top auction house's write up on the coin and we will also soon have a second as well.

 

I truly have an excellent memory for coins, but please keep in mind that just the JHF Roosie collection alone consisted of about (150) - (200) Roosie dimes (mostly) in top grade that I sold off in 2009-date or set aside for the past (7) years other than possibly a minute here and a minute there with any specific coin. And, they were part of nearly 4,000 coins in the collection consigned to me that I have sold off or continue to sell (and I remember a great deal of all of these coins in my mind). But, I believe it would be somewhat reckless of me to simply say "yes, every mark each board member believes is on the coin is indeed a post striking mark and, more importantly, is not consistent with the grade assigned to the coin by PCGS". Sorry, I won't do it even if pitch forks are pulled out next by some board members here.

 

Many inexperienced graders simply count marks to try to come up with a grade on a coin. And, even though I have said many times that I am comfortable with the grade assigned to my customer's coin (yes, self serving as I warned it would be and repeatedly ignored by those demanding more information from me), I get the sense that if some of those "marks" on the reverse are indeed post strike that a number of board members here would simply conclude (erroneously in my view) that the coin should not be in the holder assigned by PCGS. So, I already see the "slippery slope" potentially ahead, especially because my prior comments about the obverse of this dime being perhaps the nicest I have personally seen in (33) years of hunting for them has fallen on deaf ears. I even mentioned that one of the greatest Roosie collectors out there (both NGC and PCGS sets) also loved at the time the obverse of this coin as the greatest (or safely in the top 2 or 3) obverses of any 1964 dime he had ever seen and graded it a solid MS68. Again, all on deaf ears.

 

I also invited those wanting to better learn how coins like this are assigned the grade they are to pull up pics of the recently sold 1964-D Half Dollar in MS68 for about $25,000! This is the same grade, same year and same mint mark as the dime. I would think it might be very instructive to this discussion. Also, lets take a look at how one of the most reputable coin sellers in the industry described the half dollar in their auction description (did they count marks on the reverse or not?) That would also be very instructive. Again, regrettably on deaf ears.

 

 

Wondercoin

 

Why continue to misdirect and obfuscate? The question is not about the obverse. The question is your designation in the Ebay listing that the bands are fine. Why mention it? The TPG describes what a FB designation and definition is, or isn't. The photo you used in the listing, a photo you described as a fine job, indicates marks.

 

You continue to misdirect and repeat the superiority of the obverse, and the opinion of others about the obverse. Nobody is asking you to state the marks are post mint or not. There are marks. There is a FB designation. There is genuine interest in the coin as designated by the TPG. Whether you think persons questioning the grade would be erroneous is of no consequence. That is a slightly condescending remark.

 

You continue to opine on the half dollar. That is not of importance. The coin in question is not a half dollar. Is the half dollar a FB designation that is equal to the TPG designation and description of what a FB designation on the dime is? Of course not.

 

IMHO, you and the owner would be better served by editing the EBay description, specifically the bands are fine comment. That is your choice. I certainly understand if you disagree.

 

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

You assumed right. He is probably the leading expert on moderns

 

mark

 

And?

 

You assumed he was knowledgable. You were right

 

You are welcome

 

mark

 

Childish and unnecessary.

[Afterword]

My only interest in Wondercoin's comments was the fact that he did not directly answer Physics-fan question. He either knew the answer or he did not. He declined to say either way.

 

While fairly early on he stated that he had viewed the coin only once or twice for a couple seconds each time, this still did not answer the question or tell us whether or not he knew the answer. I found this curious.

 

As for the dime in the OP, I have no problem with the assigned grade. Graders obviously have a lot of leeway when determining a grade. They can use eye appeal to override marks if they so desire.

 

Eye appeal is an unusual and relatively flexible grading mechanism, unlike marks, wear, and damage and the like, it is completely undefined. You only know it when you see it and someone else may not see it at all, as they would with the other grading mechanisms I mentioned.

 

While more than one grader is involved in the grading process, I wonder how likely it would be, if the eye appeal for a coin were reasonably present, for it to become a subject of dispute among the graders, considering its highly subjective nature?

 

Edited May 16, 2016 by Afterword

[Wondercoin]

Mr. McKnowitall... I believe it is prudent to not address any further points of yours on this thread as we obviously can't seem to have a meeting of the minds. And, by no means am I suggesting that is your fault (or mine).

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 16, 2016 by Wondercoin

[MJ]

You assumed right. He is probably the leading expert on moderns

 

mark

 

And?

 

You assumed he was knowledgable. You were right

 

You are welcome

 

mark

 

Childish and unnecessary.

 

I anticipated you thanking me. My bad. I jumped the gun.

 

mark

[Wondercoin]

It was a very enjoyable weekend here. Thank you all for putting up with my long-drawn out stories.

 

Wondercoin

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Mr. McKnowitall... I believe it is prudent to not address any further points of yours on this thread as we obviously can't seem to have a meeting of the minds. And, by no means am I suggesting that is your fault (or mine).

 

Wondercoin

 

I understand. A goal of a meeting of the minds in a discussion requires at the minimum that the issues/questions that form the basis of the discussion be addressed. You chose not to answer or address certain questions and chose to obfuscate and misdirect. It may have been prudent for you to do so for reasons that are known only to you and may involve a financial or contractual or private legal matter. There is certainly nothing wrong with such a position.

 

What you describe as "points" are questions arising from the discussion that remain unanswered. Prudence is not required for a "meeting of the minds". Questions, which you choose to describe as points, were asked by many individuals.

 

My questions are and remain simple:

 

Why in the listing would you choose to write the bands are fine?

 

What is the numismatic definition and description of fine bands?

 

What is the TPG definition and description of fine bands?

 

What is your definition and description of fine bands?

 

Is there a meeting of the minds between you and the TPG that graded the coin in the listing, as to the definition and description of fine bands, and if so, is the definition and description the criteria for a FB designation?

 

I do agree that without answers to, or explanations that address these questions, there can not be a discussion that achieves the goal of a meeting of the minds.

[jom]

Fascinating thread here....I'm glad it has been mostly civil.

 

As I stated above these kind of premiums I tend to avoid since I'd probably be happy with an MS65.

 

HOWEVER, what most seem to ignore is seeing the coin IN HAND. Maybe it's got some super duper luster that renders the marks insignificant? Until one sees it you don't really know.

 

Wondercoin has given a great story about the series that if fun to read. But whether or not people on a forum who've never seen the coin think it's actually an MS68 is rather irrelevant. The one person who matters is the one who is going to upfront the $10K to buy the coin.

 

I can only assume anyone with that kind of money to spend on a coin would know what they are doing. If not, well that's their own fault for not doing their due diligence. I mean, if they don't know the series well they really have no business paying that money in the first place.

 

jom

[bochiman]

not worth it.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Bochiman

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Mr. McKnowitall... I believe it is prudent to not address any further points of yours on this thread as we obviously can't seem to have a meeting of the minds. And, by no means am I suggesting that is your fault (or mine).

 

Wondercoin

 

I understand. A goal of a meeting of the minds in a discussion requires at the minimum that the issues/questions that form the basis of the discussion be addressed. You chose not to answer or address certain questions and chose to obfuscate and misdirect. It may have been prudent for you to do so for reasons that are known only to you and may involve a financial or contractual or private legal matter. There is certainly nothing wrong with such a position.

 

What you describe as "points" are questions arising from the discussion that remain unanswered. Prudence is not required for a "meeting of the minds". Questions, which you choose to describe as points, were asked by many individuals.

 

My questions are and remain simple:

 

Why in the listing would you choose to write the bands are fine?

 

What is the numismatic definition and description of fine bands?

 

What is the TPG definition and description of fine bands?

 

What is your definition and description of fine bands?

 

Is there a meeting of the minds between you and the TPG that graded the coin in the listing, as to the definition and description of fine bands, and if so, is the definition and description the criteria for a FB designation?

 

I do agree that without answers to, or explanations that address these questions, there can not be a discussion that achieves the goal of a meeting of the minds.

 

Again, I'm not Mitch, but the list you give there has me shaking my head. HE shouldn't be the one having to answer, for you...or anyone else, the "numismatic definition of fine bands", nor the TPG definition of same.

(btw...you do know that FB means "full bands" and not "fine bands", right? I have to ask as you keep stating "fine bands".

 

If you collect these coins, you already understand.

If you don't, then you are likely just injecting yourself into the conversation to inject yourself and not for any truly valid reason about the coin or relevant classification itself.

 

Many times, NGC and PCGS will be different on how they define FB/FSB and FBL (Franklins). Since this coin is in a PCGS holder, it is defined by how THEY define it. I am sure if you go to the PCGS site, and search, you will find THEIR definition.

From the established definition of FB for PCGS, I would say that I, too, see it making the FB designation.

 

 

Like many things here, this thread had some valid points and then some that just go on and on and on about a little pet peeve.

 

Time to move on to something different as this one has been well beaten (though, I look forward to see how it ends, pricewise, when it is finally sold)

 

Thank you.

 

Setting aside the touch of condescension here and there in the post, I think that you might better understand the reason for the fine bands reference, if you have the time to go back and read my posts a little more carefully. I would then recommend you read the description that accompanied the Ebay listing. I have a suspicion that you are under the impression I am interpreting FB as fine bands. I think your condescension will be assuaged with the post review and Ebay listing review I suggested.

 

I do appreciate your sharing thoughts on the matter, although the thoughts shared are based on false premises. We all do that sometimes, when we read quickly and misinterpret intent. The rest of your observation is opinion based, and is neither good or bad. It just is. You have every right to have an opinion and voice same.

 

I will concede to your superiority of knowledge in the matter, for the simple reason that I don't have any interest or ability to grade from a picture. Apparently you have the ability, so I can understand your confidence in your opinion.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

not worth it.

 

The editing timing is just a little bit off. That happens. Having second thoughts is always a good thing, if it leads to improvement.

 

It is always worth it to have an opinion. It is just matter of the cost to self, if the opinion is based on false premise and has to be modified. Sometimes that is difficult for people.

 

I don't think it was very expensive for you this time. No harm, no foul.

[bochiman]

[

 

Thank you.

 

Setting aside the touch of condescension here and there in the post, I think that you might better understand the reason for the fine bands reference, if you have the time to go back and read my posts a little more carefully. I would then recommend you read the description that accompanied the Ebay listing. I have a suspicion that you are under the impression I am interpreting FB as fine bands. I think your condescension will be assuaged with the post review and Ebay listing review I suggested.

 

I do appreciate your sharing thoughts on the matter, although the thoughts shared are based on false premises. We all do that sometimes, when we read quickly and misinterpret intent. The rest of your observation is opinion based, and is neither good or bad. It just is. You have every right to have an opinion and voice same.

 

I will concede to your superiority of knowledge in the matter, for the simple reason that I don't have any interest or ability to grade from a picture. Apparently you have the ability, so I can understand your confidence in your opinion.

 

Condescension? Look in the mirror at what YOU wrote....

I never stated a grade, though you are claiming that I have that ability....

 

I know the listing, and HOW it was worded....doesn't/didn't state "fine bands". You did. Not the listing. You.

 

Easy mistake made by me thinking that "the bands are fine" is different from someone asking about a MS68FB coin and stating "fine bands". Yep. Totally my bad on that interpretation. Clear as mud

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

[

 

Thank you.

 

Setting aside the touch of condescension here and there in the post, I think that you might better understand the reason for the fine bands reference, if you have the time to go back and read my posts a little more carefully. I would then recommend you read the description that accompanied the Ebay listing. I have a suspicion that you are under the impression I am interpreting FB as fine bands. I think your condescension will be assuaged with the post review and Ebay listing review I suggested.

 

I do appreciate your sharing thoughts on the matter, although the thoughts shared are based on false premises. We all do that sometimes, when we read quickly and misinterpret intent. The rest of your observation is opinion based, and is neither good or bad. It just is. You have every right to have an opinion and voice same.

 

I will concede to your superiority of knowledge in the matter, for the simple reason that I don't have any interest or ability to grade from a picture. Apparently you have the ability, so I can understand your confidence in your opinion.

 

Condescension? Look in the mirror at what YOU wrote....

I never stated a grade, though you are claiming that I have that ability....

 

I know the listing, and HOW it was worded....doesn't/didn't state "fine bands". You did. Not the listing. You.

 

Easy mistake made by me thinking that "the bands are fine" is different from someone asking about a MS68FB coin and stating "fine bands". Yep. Totally my bad on that interpretation. Clear as mud

 

Thank you. A little bit of false premise still, but as I previously mentioned, it is sometimes difficult for a person that interprets based on a false premise. Again, no harm no foul. It is what it is.

[mark]

I have two suggestions:

 

1) One poster ought to change his or her name here to Mrlastword. I won't mention who it is because I sure don't want to get into a posting match with him or her.

 

2) Rather than calling this place "Sleepy Hollow" as it has been sometimes described ATS, perhaps "Nasty Hollow" would be more appropriate.

 

Mark

[coinman_23885]

I have two suggestions:

 

1) One poster ought to change his or her name here to Mrlastword. I won't mention who it is because I sure don't want to get into a posting match with him or her.

 

2) Rather than calling this place "Sleepy Hollow" as it has been sometimes described ATS, perhaps "Nasty Hollow" would be more appropriate.

 

Mark

 

This is tame. You should see the Dan Carr threads.

[MJ]

I have two suggestions:

 

1) One poster ought to change his or her name here to Mrlastword. I won't mention who it is because I sure don't want to get into a posting match with him or her.

 

2) Rather than calling this place "Sleepy Hollow" as it has been sometimes described ATS, perhaps "Nasty Hollow" would be more appropriate.

 

Mark

 

This is tame. You should see the Dan Carr threads.

 

[Nutmeg Coin]

I was impressed by the enthusiasm of "Wondercoin" in his specialty, which changes my opinion somewhat of the registry/modern phenomenon.

[numisport]

There is still time to resubmit coin for downgrade. Problem is PCGS has too much to lose if they reconsider the grade honestly. Crack it out and send it raw. Maybe then it will grade real.

[coinman_23885]

There is still time to resubmit coin for downgrade. Problem is PCGS has too much to lose if they reconsider the grade honestly. Crack it out and send it raw. Maybe then it will grade real.

 

That would be a very poor decision and would be the numismatic equivalent of Russian roulette with only one empty chamber.

[lehigh96]

While I understand the sentiment of some that the coin is overgraded because of the minor marks on the torch, I think that Wondercoin is basically in a no win situation. As you can see from his post count, he is not a regular poster on this forum, therefore nobody here can expect to know anything about his integrity as a grader or person unless they know him from some other venue. Given the fact that he has an obvious self declared bias, he has no expectation that we will believe that his efforts to defend the grade of the coin are anything more than an attempt to represent the interests of the owner of the coin.

 

That said, it was obvious from his first handful of posts in this thread that he has more knowledge of Roosevelt Dimes than just about anyone in the world. So he devised a solution to remedy the problem which was to have a professional grader and long time forum member with an impeccable reputation (Mark Feld) examine the coin and provide a less biased (understand that Mark now works for the auction house selling the coin) opinion of the grade of the coin.

 

He has provided a very good explanation as to why he thinks the grade of the coin is correct. It is apparent that many people in this thread view marks such as these as grade limiters that should automatically preclude the top pop grade of MS68. And while you are entitled to that opinion, that is not the standard which Wondercoin used to assign the MS68 grade and it is not the standard that PCGS used to grade the coin either. At the top pop ranges of coins, even Roosevelt Dimes, the TPGs will rank coins rather than grade them. So when Wondercoin says that this is the single highest quality 1964-D Roosevelt Dime that he has ever seen, that is his reason to justify the MS68 grade, despite the marks.

 

@MrMcknowitall, you continue to harp on a single line that Wondercoin used to describe the bands in his description of the coin on E-Bay. What in the hell does that have to do with the actual grade of the coin? You incessantly use the words misdirect & obfuscate to describe his posts. Don't those words have the same meaning? Are you using them in combination for emphasis? IMO, Wondercoin has been forthcoming and presented detailed background information about his experience and expertise as it relates registry quality coins, specifically Roosevelt Dimes. He has provided us with a logical reason for the MS68 grade of this coin, as well as a way to overcome his apparent bias and unknown reputation. I really have no idea what more you expect him to do. If you disagree with the grade of the coin, then make your case for why it should not grade MS68 instead of simply nitpicking Wondercoin's E-Bay description. Before you make your case though, it would be nice to know your experience with both registry quality coins and Roosevelt Dimes.

 

Personally, I'm not a big fan of top pop coins that have such obvious distractions. I once owned a 1944-P Jefferson Nickel PCGS MS67+ FS. It was a gorgeous coin with blazing luster and outstanding rainbow toning, but it had a very faint mark that traversed the steps. In my mind, it called the FS designation into question and just left a bad taste in my mouth. I had another registry collector after me to sell it and when he finally made an offer to replace my coin with the Compradore 1944-P PCGS MS67FS and extra cash, I jumped at the opportunity. But that is the great thing about this hobby, the only standards that really matter are your own.

 

Paul

[Wondercoin]

Paul. Thank you for that post.

 

First, you correctly pointed out that I intentionally selected THE finest representative of these NGC Boards (as far as I know) to assist Board Members here who truly wanted to understand the grade of this dime. " Impeccable reputation" could be a slight understatement in Mark's case. Mark was a tremendous resource over on the PCGS Boards and, I for one, greatly miss his posts over there (where I have personally racked up an embarrassing, according to one close family member, 15,000 posts myself since 2001). If that is misdirection and obfuscation, quite frankly I'm not doing a very good job of it in selecting Mark to the case!

 

Second, you are wise beyond your posts with your comment concerning "ranking" the coins. This is exactly the point. Obviously, the graders at PCGS (more than a decade ago when it was very tough to land an MS68FB grade across the street) must have loved the look of this particular dime to reward it with the MS68FB grade that they did. And, if they did, they simply enjoyed it as much as I did when I saw it. And, right or wrong, I have generally placed a stronger emphasis on the obverse of a coin than the reverse. In the case of Roosie dimes, I could live with a small hit or two somewhere on the reverse far more than a hit or two on the obverse. Again, that's just me. Perhaps another prefers reverses over obverses.

 

Remember, the Registry and grading in general (over time) is nothing more than a ratings game. In the long run, the best coins will make their way to the top. The task for serious collectors of a series is to learn and understand what the great coins should look like in the top grades, even if they are in the wrong holder at the time.

 

As always, just my 2 cents.

 

Wondercoin

Edited May 17, 2016 by Wondercoin

[Wondercoin]

Paul: Hi. And, yes, I do know a thing or two about Roosie Dimes. After all, I sold my #1 Collection to Steve Heller for a record price at the time. I then sold Steve's #1 Registry Set to JHF for a record price at the time. I then bought Nick Cascio's #1 Registry Set on behalf of JHF for a record price and I then sold JHF's #1 Registry Set through Superior Auctions for a record price. Not to mention all of the small purchases and acquisitions along the way. On top of that, I have been building a private collection of business strike "Proof Like" Silver Roosies for the past (3) decades and have put together a nice little group of them.

 

That said, there are at least two other guys out there with equal expertise in this highly specialized field and they have both posted to this thread. Namely, RainbowRoosie and OnlyRoosies. There is no one better out there that I know than these two (although I do know a world class upgrader/dealer that knows this series pretty darn well that I would toss in the group as well).

 

Edited May 17, 2016 by Wondercoin

[coinman_23885]

On top of that, I have been building a private collection of business strike "Proof Like" Silver Roosies for the past (3) decades and have put together a nice little group of them.

 

So that is where all the PL samples went.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

While I understand the sentiment of some that the coin is overgraded because of the minor marks on the torch, I think that Wondercoin is basically in a no win situation. As you can see from his post count, he is not a regular poster on this forum, therefore nobody here can expect to know anything about his integrity as a grader or person unless they know him from some other venue. Given the fact that he has an obvious self declared bias, he has no expectation that we will believe that his efforts to defend the grade of the coin are anything more than an attempt to represent the interests of the owner of the coin.

 

That said, it was obvious from his first handful of posts in this thread that he has more knowledge of Roosevelt Dimes than just about anyone in the world. So he devised a solution to remedy the problem which was to have a professional grader and long time forum member with an impeccable reputation (Mark Feld) examine the coin and provide a less biased (understand that Mark now works for the auction house selling the coin) opinion of the grade of the coin.

 

He has provided a very good explanation as to why he thinks the grade of the coin is correct. It is apparent that many people in this thread view marks such as these as grade limiters that should automatically preclude the top pop grade of MS68. And while you are entitled to that opinion, that is not the standard which Wondercoin used to assign the MS68 grade and it is not the standard that PCGS used to grade the coin either. At the top pop ranges of coins, even Roosevelt Dimes, the TPGs will rank coins rather than grade them. So when Wondercoin says that this is the single highest quality 1964-D Roosevelt Dime that he has ever seen, that is his reason to justify the MS68 grade, despite the marks.

 

@MrMcknowitall, you continue to harp on a single line that Wondercoin used to describe the bands in his description of the coin on E-Bay. What in the hell does that have to do with the actual grade of the coin? You incessantly use the words misdirect & obfuscate to describe his posts. Don't those words have the same meaning? Are you using them in combination for emphasis? IMO, Wondercoin has been forthcoming and presented detailed background information about his experience and expertise as it relates registry quality coins, specifically Roosevelt Dimes. He has provided us with a logical reason for the MS68 grade of this coin, as well as a way to overcome his apparent bias and unknown reputation. I really have no idea what more you expect him to do. If you disagree with the grade of the coin, then make your case for why it should not grade MS68 instead of simply nitpicking Wondercoin's E-Bay description. Before you make your case though, it would be nice to know your experience with both registry quality coins and Roosevelt Dimes.

 

Personally, I'm not a big fan of top pop coins that have such obvious distractions. I once owned a 1944-P Jefferson Nickel PCGS MS67+ FS. It was a gorgeous coin with blazing luster and outstanding rainbow toning, but it had a very faint mark that traversed the steps. In my mind, it called the FS designation into question and just left a bad taste in my mouth. I had another registry collector after me to sell it and when he finally made an offer to replace my coin with the Compradore 1944-P PCGS MS67FS and extra cash, I jumped at the opportunity. But that is the great thing about this hobby, the only standards that really matter are your own.

 

Paul

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

While I understand the sentiment of some that the coin is overgraded because of the minor marks on the torch, I think that Wondercoin is basically in a no win situation. As you can see from his post count, he is not a regular poster on this forum, therefore nobody here can expect to know anything about his integrity as a grader or person unless they know him from some other venue. Given the fact that he has an obvious self declared bias, he has no expectation that we will believe that his efforts to defend the grade of the coin are anything more than an attempt to represent the interests of the owner of the coin.

 

That said, it was obvious from his first handful of posts in this thread that he has more knowledge of Roosevelt Dimes than just about anyone in the world. So he devised a solution to remedy the problem which was to have a professional grader and long time forum member with an impeccable reputation (Mark Feld) examine the coin and provide a less biased (understand that Mark now works for the auction house selling the coin) opinion of the grade of the coin.

 

He has provided a very good explanation as to why he thinks the grade of the coin is correct. It is apparent that many people in this thread view marks such as these as grade limiters that should automatically preclude the top pop grade of MS68. And while you are entitled to that opinion, that is not the standard which Wondercoin used to assign the MS68 grade and it is not the standard that PCGS used to grade the coin either. At the top pop ranges of coins, even Roosevelt Dimes, the TPGs will rank coins rather than grade them. So when Wondercoin says that this is the single highest quality 1964-D Roosevelt Dime that he has ever seen, that is his reason to justify the MS68 grade, despite the marks.

 

@MrMcknowitall, you continue to harp on a single line that Wondercoin used to describe the bands in his description of the coin on E-Bay. What in the hell does that have to do with the actual grade of the coin? You incessantly use the words misdirect & obfuscate to describe his posts. Don't those words have the same meaning? Are you using them in combination for emphasis? IMO, Wondercoin has been forthcoming and presented detailed background information about his experience and expertise as it relates registry quality coins, specifically Roosevelt Dimes. He has provided us with a logical reason for the MS68 grade of this coin, as well as a way to overcome his apparent bias and unknown reputation. I really have no idea what more you expect him to do. If you disagree with the grade of the coin, then make your case for why it should not grade MS68 instead of simply nitpicking Wondercoin's E-Bay description. Before you make your case though, it would be nice to know your experience with both registry quality coins and Roosevelt Dimes.

 

Personally, I'm not a big fan of top pop coins that have such obvious distractions. I once owned a 1944-P Jefferson Nickel PCGS MS67+ FS. It was a gorgeous coin with blazing luster and outstanding rainbow toning, but it had a very faint mark that traversed the steps. In my mind, it called the FS designation into question and just left a bad taste in my mouth. I had another registry collector after me to sell it and when he finally made an offer to replace my coin with the Compradore 1944-P PCGS MS67FS and extra cash, I jumped at the opportunity. But that is the great thing about this hobby, the only standards that really matter are your own.

 

Paul

 

Thank you Mr. Lehigh. We have different opinions and a different path of discussion. I don't care about the grade, at all. If you are offended because of my posts, I can not remedy your irritation. I can only suggest you not read my posts. As to your English language question, no.