Stephen Parton

Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series. Or more particularly, ones that don't yet have their own SP tier in any database but are obviously unique. And if something like that is submitted to NGC, should the submitter apply "Variety plus" for closer inspection or would the general graders take some kind of special action? With the amount of evidence that gets habitually destroyed by the US Mint in just the last 100 years, there would surely be pieces floating around today that don't necessarily have evidence to prove their existence.

This comment is also "market acceptable".

Well if it's like you say it is, then I'm all in. That's how I've always collected and exactly the way grading should be imho; with as little subjective nuance as possible. Imagine being color-blind and getting your coins back undergraded because they lack 'pretty toning'... there's gotta be some kind of lawsuit in that. But you guys put my confidence in the system back in place! Thanks for your replies

I see what you mean World Colonial, and I apologize for taking a tone with you because it's not you! I have a lot of coins that I've been wanting to submit somewhere, so I have many questions but receive multiple answers and from people that are well established in the field. Even today, I had a long discussion with an ANA certified member / dealer that told me a 65 grade is basically perfect in terms of wear, and that anything beyond that (66-70) is purely subjective. "Good eye appeal". Is that true?? Because the PCGS website mentions nothing about eye appeal but only the amount of dings/wear on a coin in determining an MS grade. I'm just ready to get these things sent out and put in God's hands, but it's not as simple as that because a value should be determined on each coin before I do so, as you well know. But thank you for your lengthy messages. I can tell that you put a lot of thought into this and I appreciate it!

And don't worry about this Morgan.. We have other 1890cc's in much better condition. Also, Mark / Roger gave a wonderful explanation as to the dings on it: this coin was on the bottom, and clearly just beaten on from those at the top. Let's hope that assessment doesn't become more figurative than it needs to be.

Now that caught my attention. What an elitist way to determine a grade.. Not only is it highly unethical (the companies don't state anything like this in their Terms of Service).. but it would create a short-term bubble that leaves future generations clueless in terms of how to grade properly, which is by the Sheldon Scale ー i.e. the way in which these companies currently advertise they DO grade a coin. Suffice it to say, the FTC certainly wouldn't approve of such behavior.

How about this piece. The fields are flatter and everything has a brighter shine. It kind of looks like stainless steel. I can't imagine just some tone will increase the grade by 2-3 points...

Well I'm still trying to figure out what does add value! Do the surfaces need to be smoother...? I don't know how a coin with so many dings can be a 67 and mine's a 65:

I'm not even being selective here. This poor bird looks like he's been hit by a bus and framed for ultimate humiliation

More like slip through the floodgates. If what I'm posting below are $700 coins, I should have thrown away the Sheldon Scale years ago and focused on groovy toners:

Well, I can't fool you guys. MS65! And Roger, it took me way too long to figure that out...

And honestly bsshog40, if I judged from the pictures on CoinFacts what's considered MS-67 by PCGS, it didn't seem like the competition was too fierce from a technical standpoint. While they do have pretty colors, don't get me wrong, they show massive amounts of scratching, dings, weak strikes, weak luster..