• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

1950 50c GTG

Started by Danye West,

23 posts in this topic

physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted

That is an overlit, over-saturated, juiced glamour shot. I cannot grade from that picture.

 

It could be anywhere from 63-68, and may or may not be FBL. 1950 is a tough date in FBL, but the lines look full.... who knows with these pictures?

 

It is very pretty, of course, but you can't grade from those pics at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PocketArt

PocketArt

Posted
Posted

Obverse-few hits on neck, nick on head at 10 o'clock from ear, faint scratches on cheek, and looks like a scratch on shoulder if not a die crack. Reverse- few faint scratches near bell lines and diagonal scratch left side of clapper.

 

MS65+ FBL

 

Awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

I won't post the grade (it is your thread not mine), but having now seen the PCGS grade, I can tell you that one of the following must be true : 1) your images are hiding marks, 2) your coin is undergraded, or 3) I am overlooking something. If the grade does not fit, you should resubmit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
MS64+FBL sounds about right to me. The marks on the shoulder and neck area really stand out to me.

 

Interestingly, the marks at the base of the bust did not jump out at first glance on my other monitor. The marks do stand out more on my current device. Had I saw those initially, I think my guess would have been MS65 FBL.

 

Regardless, it is a pretty coin, and this is the type of toning where PCGS is more likely to color bump. It is an interesting piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
Marks were previously stated before your initial assessment coinman_23885.

 

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here, but I don't read through every post before responding to GTG threads. My initial assessment (the first reply post to this thread) was that the coin was MS66 FBL. Upon further reflection, I missed the marks at the bottom of the bust that at least two posters noted. (shrug)

 

For whatever it is worth, I still disagree with the assigned grade and still maintain that it has upgrade potential. If it was mine, I would crack it out and resubmit it. This is the type of toning that commands a premium and may even result in a color bump.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PocketArt

PocketArt

Posted
Posted

No, your right, I was the one who missed first post. I just caught the respond to Silver hunter that you made- I detailed what marks I saw before you stated a reversal in your grade, and that was what I was referring to when I mentioned initial assessment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
PCGS was a little tough on this one. The grade assigned was MS64FBL

 

Like I said, I would resubmit this piece in a heart beat. I have no problem with the coin in a gem FBL holder. With the way that PCGS color bumps, you never know what might happen. Although the toning is the predominant factor in determining the value of attractive rainbow toners, there does appear to be much more interest (and more spirited bidding) once the coin hits gem status (assuming that you ever sell it). There is really no downside on a coin like this even if it takes a couple of submissions. Just my 2c . I have a coin in a MS64 holder (not a Franklin) that I will be taking my own advice on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
PCGS was a little tough on this one. The grade assigned was MS64FBL

 

Like I said, I would resubmit this piece in a heart beat. I have no problem with the coin in a gem FBL holder. With the way that PCGS color bumps, you never know what might happen. Although the toning is the predominant factor in determining the value of attractive rainbow toners, there does appear to be much more interest (and more spirited bidding) once the coin hits gem status (assuming that you ever sell it). There is really no downside on a coin like this even if it takes a couple of submissions. Just my 2c . I have a coin in a MS64 holder (not a Franklin) that I will be taking my own advice on.

 

I would like to see pictures that accurately show the surfaces before I suggest resubmitting. Yes, the color is very attractive and the type that PCGS will often bump a grade up for - but, without seeing the surfaces properly, how do we know that it isn't a 63 that they already bumped up to a 64? I haven't seen the coin in hand (have you, coinman? you seem to be familiar with the coin), but maybe in hand it is actually undergraded - just no way to tell with these pictures.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
PCGS was a little tough on this one. The grade assigned was MS64FBL

 

Like I said, I would resubmit this piece in a heart beat. I have no problem with the coin in a gem FBL holder. With the way that PCGS color bumps, you never know what might happen. Although the toning is the predominant factor in determining the value of attractive rainbow toners, there does appear to be much more interest (and more spirited bidding) once the coin hits gem status (assuming that you ever sell it). There is really no downside on a coin like this even if it takes a couple of submissions. Just my 2c . I have a coin in a MS64 holder (not a Franklin) that I will be taking my own advice on.

 

I would like to see pictures that accurately show the surfaces before I suggest resubmitting. Yes, the color is very attractive and the type that PCGS will often bump a grade up for - but, without seeing the surfaces properly, how do we know that it isn't a 63 that they already bumped up to a 64? I haven't seen the coin in hand (have you, coinman? you seem to be familiar with the coin), but maybe in hand it is actually undergraded - just no way to tell with these pictures.

 

If it is the same piece I am thinking of, the piece sold publicly at auction and there is a thread around here discussing the piece without the glamour shots. Obviously, I am basing my comments on images (which is all we have to go on) and you are absolutely right that I may feel differently in hand.

 

With this said, I am zealous (and perhaps some would argue overzealous) about resubmitting coins with toning like this in many cases because I do not want to see others make the same mistake that I made recently. I sold a coin in a MS66 holder about a year ago for about $1300, which was strong money. The coin should never have upgraded IMHO. The value for a generic in MS66 was about $100, and about $3000 in MS67. Guess what? PCGS color bumped it to MS67 and it sold for about $3000 at Heritage. In recent years, PCGS has taken color bumping to an extreme at times.

 

PCGS is inconsistent with its grading of toned coins, and upgrades from other PCGS coins or crossovers are not uncommon. The grades can vary wildly (even more so than with generics), and astute buyers can take advantage of this. In my experience (and your mileage may vary), the liquidity and value of rainbow toned coins increases sharply at the gem level. You would think toned collectors would be focused on toning and not TPG labels, but experience has taught me that there are many notable exceptions. Given the minimal difference in value for generics between MS64 FBL and MS65 FBL (and even MS63 FBL to MS65 FBL), I don't think a color bump to a gem grade would be out of the question unless the coin is a dog in hand. Based on the images in this post (which may or may not show everything as I have admitted), a gem grade isn't unreasonable even discounting color bumping if marks aren't hidden.

 

Ultimately, as long as the OP makes large submissions or piggy backs to save TPG handling fees, etc., the cost of an economy submission or two is insignificant compared to upside potential. Given the OP's recent sales threads of his other Franklins, I suspect this coin will be sold at some point in the not so distant future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
there is a thread around here discussing the piece without the glamour shots.

 

Do you (or anyone else) have a link to the thread you mention?

 

I don't disagree with you on the PCGS grading vagaries, and I also don't disagree that this coin will probably be up for sale in the very near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
there is a thread around here discussing the piece without the glamour shots.

 

Do you (or anyone else) have a link to the thread you mention?

 

I don't disagree with you on the PCGS grading vagaries, and I also don't disagree that this coin will probably be up for sale in the very near future.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=402548&Number=9192769#Post9192769

 

I remembered the obverse pattern of peripheral rainbow toning, and did not glance back at the linked thread prior to now (relying on memory instead). You are right that the images of the initial post of this thread are definitely more juiced than I remembered. Moreover, there is a scratch that does not show here at all, and that I did not remember. My thought is that the coin is otherwise a gem but was net graded because of the mark that is obscured in the OP's new photos.

 

With that said, depending on how conspicuous the scratch is in hand, I still think the coin may have upgrade potential. The toning is less spectacular on the reverse, but the coin is overall still attractive enough that a color bump is possible. I have seen more than a couple scratched toners that were bumped nevertheless. My expectation for a large increase in grade is lowered, but I wouldn't rule anything out ATS. I do think a higher grade would help the coin's value and that it would be worth trying as an economy submission as a reconsideration or crack out (depending on how much money/risk the OP has here).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
there is a thread around here discussing the piece without the glamour shots.

 

Do you (or anyone else) have a link to the thread you mention?

 

I don't disagree with you on the PCGS grading vagaries, and I also don't disagree that this coin will probably be up for sale in the very near future.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=402548&Number=9192769#Post9192769

 

I remembered the obverse pattern of peripheral rainbow toning, and did not glance back at the linked thread prior to now (relying on memory instead). You are right that the images of the initial post of this thread are definitely more juiced than I remembered. Moreover, there is a scratch that does not show here at all, and that I did not remember. My thought is that the coin is otherwise a gem but was net graded because of the mark that is obscured in the OP's new photos.

 

With that said, depending on how conspicuous the scratch is in hand, I still think the coin may have upgrade potential. The toning is less spectacular on the reverse, but the coin is overall still attractive enough that a color bump is possible. I have seen more than a couple scratched toners that were bumped nevertheless. My expectation for a large increase in grade is lowered, but I wouldn't rule anything out ATS. I do think a higher grade would help the coin's value and that it would be worth trying as an economy submission as a reconsideration or crack out (depending on how much money/risk the OP has here).

 

Wow, those are two *very* different photos.

 

I'll bet the coin looks much more like the photos in the other thread!

 

And yes, with these new/old pics, it is clear why it is 64. I wouldn't like it as a 65 (and, if I bought it from the pics in this thread and got it and saw that big scrape across his face, I would be really unhappy).

 

The toning is still very attractive, but I think 64 is the right grade for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing