Will This make 70?

[Afterword]

Hello,

 

I am not a dealer - I collect for my enjoyment.

 

I am seeing grade upgrades by PCGS and NGC all over the place (PCGS more). Knowing that, does this coin have any potential to get a PF70 upgrade? If so - what is the chance with PCGS and NGC?

Any strategy on how do I go about trying to get an upgrade? If it might be fruitful, I do not mind spending the little extra $ for this process.

 

Sorry for the large image - hope it helps.

 

 

A 70 is literally a perfect coin. If you see ANYTHING disturbing the surface, it is not a 70. My guess would be that it is a 69, being that it has already been certified as such, and its a high-value issue.

 

While I very strongly doubt the coin would grade 70, the major grading companies do NOT require that a coin be literally perfect in order to obtain a grade of 70.

 

Mark,

 

They do require the coin to be as-minted, which is what I mean by "pefect." It is allowed to have mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots), but it is not allowed to have any post-mint damage.

 

Not based on what appears on their website:

 

"What is a 70?

NGC defines a Mint State or Proof 70 coin as having no post-production imperfections at 5x magnification."

 

That wording would allow for post production imperfections which can't be seen at 5X magnification, but which can be seen under greater magnification.

 

That aside, requiring that a coin be "literally perfect" can be a far cry from allowing "mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots)".

 

 

Yes, you have to establish a baseline; without one, people would be performing micro-grading with 10x loops, or pointing out flaws with microscopes and such. My comments are within the context of normal grading practices. Most grading is done without any magnification, so NGC's standard of perfect under 5x magnification for 70s is a strong standard.

 

Again, a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections.

 

Most grading might be done without magnification, but when looking at coins for a potential grade of 70, a good many collectors use magnification greater than 5X, sometimes including microscopes.

 

You stated that "a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections". A "perfect coin" cannot have mint-made imperfections. On the other hand, a coin that meets a grading company's published standards for the grade of 70, can.

 

If you think I'm being nit picky, so be it, but I feel that the distinction is an important one.

 

 

 

And it is.

 

I wonder how the TPGs would define 100 under a 100 point grading system?

[coinman1794]

Hello,

 

I am not a dealer - I collect for my enjoyment.

 

I am seeing grade upgrades by PCGS and NGC all over the place (PCGS more). Knowing that, does this coin have any potential to get a PF70 upgrade? If so - what is the chance with PCGS and NGC?

Any strategy on how do I go about trying to get an upgrade? If it might be fruitful, I do not mind spending the little extra $ for this process.

 

Sorry for the large image - hope it helps.

 

 

A 70 is literally a perfect coin. If you see ANYTHING disturbing the surface, it is not a 70. My guess would be that it is a 69, being that it has already been certified as such, and its a high-value issue.

 

While I very strongly doubt the coin would grade 70, the major grading companies do NOT require that a coin be literally perfect in order to obtain a grade of 70.

 

Mark,

 

They do require the coin to be as-minted, which is what I mean by "pefect." It is allowed to have mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots), but it is not allowed to have any post-mint damage.

 

Not based on what appears on their website:

 

"What is a 70?

NGC defines a Mint State or Proof 70 coin as having no post-production imperfections at 5x magnification."

 

That wording would allow for post production imperfections which can't be seen at 5X magnification, but which can be seen under greater magnification.

 

That aside, requiring that a coin be "literally perfect" can be a far cry from allowing "mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots)".

 

 

Yes, you have to establish a baseline; without one, people would be performing micro-grading with 10x loops, or pointing out flaws with microscopes and such. My comments are within the context of normal grading practices. Most grading is done without any magnification, so NGC's standard of perfect under 5x magnification for 70s is a strong standard.

 

Again, a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections.

 

Most grading might be done without magnification, but when looking at coins for a potential grade of 70, a good many collectors use magnification greater than 5X, sometimes including microscopes.

 

You stated that "a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections". A "perfect coin" cannot have mint-made imperfections. On the other hand, a coin that meets a grading company's published standards for the grade of 70, can.

 

If you think I'm being nit picky, so be it, but I feel that the distinction is an important one.

 

It is not a matter of being nit picky. It's a matter of: what is your definition of a perfect coin?

 

You and I are not talking about the same things. There is no such thing as a perfect coin, if you are referring a coin made as intended by the designer. The physical manifestation of the design concept is always going to result in mint-made imperfections. If a coin comes off the dies and is not damaged in any way, it will grade MS/PF70.

 

And, if a collector is grading with more than 5x magnification, he is doing himself/herself a great disservice; and my comments do not reflect that person, anyway, as micro-grading is not an accepted grading practice.

 

[MarkFeld]

Hello,

 

I am not a dealer - I collect for my enjoyment.

 

I am seeing grade upgrades by PCGS and NGC all over the place (PCGS more). Knowing that, does this coin have any potential to get a PF70 upgrade? If so - what is the chance with PCGS and NGC?

Any strategy on how do I go about trying to get an upgrade? If it might be fruitful, I do not mind spending the little extra $ for this process.

 

Sorry for the large image - hope it helps.

 

 

A 70 is literally a perfect coin. If you see ANYTHING disturbing the surface, it is not a 70. My guess would be that it is a 69, being that it has already been certified as such, and its a high-value issue.

 

While I very strongly doubt the coin would grade 70, the major grading companies do NOT require that a coin be literally perfect in order to obtain a grade of 70.

 

Mark,

 

They do require the coin to be as-minted, which is what I mean by "pefect." It is allowed to have mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots), but it is not allowed to have any post-mint damage.

 

Not based on what appears on their website:

 

"What is a 70?

NGC defines a Mint State or Proof 70 coin as having no post-production imperfections at 5x magnification."

 

That wording would allow for post production imperfections which can't be seen at 5X magnification, but which can be seen under greater magnification.

 

That aside, requiring that a coin be "literally perfect" can be a far cry from allowing "mint-made imperfections, such as strike-throughs and chips in the frosting (and for silver eagles, occasionally some minor milk spots)".

 

 

Yes, you have to establish a baseline; without one, people would be performing micro-grading with 10x loops, or pointing out flaws with microscopes and such. My comments are within the context of normal grading practices. Most grading is done without any magnification, so NGC's standard of perfect under 5x magnification for 70s is a strong standard.

 

Again, a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections.

 

Most grading might be done without magnification, but when looking at coins for a potential grade of 70, a good many collectors use magnification greater than 5X, sometimes including microscopes.

 

You stated that "a perfect coin can have mint-made imperfections". A "perfect coin" cannot have mint-made imperfections. On the other hand, a coin that meets a grading company's published standards for the grade of 70, can.

 

If you think I'm being nit picky, so be it, but I feel that the distinction is an important one.

 

It is not a matter of being nit picky. It's a matter of: what is your definition of a perfect coin?

 

You and I are not talking about the same things. There is no such thing as a perfect coin, if you are referring a coin made as intended by the designer. The physical manifestation of the design concept is always going to result in mint-made imperfections. If a coin comes off the dies and is not damaged in any way, it will grade MS/PF70.

 

And, if a collector is grading with more than 5x magnification, he is doing himself/herself a great disservice; and my comments do not reflect that person, anyway, as micro-grading is not an accepted grading practice.

 

My definition of a "perfect coin" is one without flaws. In other words, a coin that might exist, only in theory.. And I would not use the term "perfect coin" synonymously with one graded 70, because they are not by any means, the same thing.

 

Like it or not, many collectors use greater than 5X magnification. While I very rarely do so, myself, I wouldn't say it's not an accepted grading practice. In some instances, it makes a great deal of sense.

[Nutmeg Coin]

"I wonder how the TPGs would define 100 under a 100 point grading system?"

 

The spreads are too large between the key dates in 69 and 70 often with tiny differentiations. I'm not sure what a truly objective solution would be but 70 to 100 would not be a good transition especially in this hobby. Maybe a 10x change where you would then have 10 iterations between 69 and 70, then 690 and 700 with associated differences in pricing.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

"I wonder how the TPGs would define 100 under a 100 point grading system?"

 

The spreads are too large between the key dates in 69 and 70 often with tiny differentiations. I'm not sure what a truly objective solution would be but 70 to 100 would not be a good transition especially in this hobby. Maybe a 10x change where you would then have 10 iterations between 69 and 70, then 690 and 700 with associated differences in pricing.

 

Unless everyone has the same exact eyesight, color perception, depth perception, and knowledge, it is still an opinion and nothing more.

 

Are varieties that can not be observed with a 5X any less valid than being seen with a 10X, if 2 persons with different visual acuity need different magnification levels to identify a variety?

 

What is acceptable vision: 20/20 with or without correction and depth perception and color perception per medically accepted vision charts and tests?

 

Shouldn't all TPG graders be required to pass an annual ophthalmology exam by an MD and certify the vision ability (or lack thereof)? I have long opined that this should be a requirement. I have also long opined that every coin graded by a TPG should have an identifier of the grader(s) that baptized the coin into a birth holder, and that this identifier should follow the grader to any other TPG, should the grader switch employment. Sort of a coin grader birth certificate. It should be a requirement of all graders for all collectibles that involve a TPG where a monetary decision is being made, i.e. coins/stamps/comic books/toys, etc.

 

Over time the grader results can be tracked and their "opinion" record can be tracked and questioned.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Those are all good points but with humans you have evolving perceptions and standards. Have there been graders that have moved between the various grading services; Anacs, Icg, NGC, and PCGS? The business manager and finalizers give the marching orders and they make mistakes. But it makes no sense for coins to explode in value if they "get lucky". If that were done in smaller steps it would be more fair.Technological advances are inevitable and if they are truly objective as applied to grading, who could argue?

[numisport]

An interesting discussion for sure. While all these ideas make good discussion topic I can only see the price narrowing between Pf 69 and Pf 70 slots. Question is whether 69 prices increase or 70 prices drop.

[MarkFeld]

An interesting discussion for sure. While all these ideas make good discussion topic I can only see the price narrowing between Pf 69 and Pf 70 slots. Question is whether 69 prices increase or 70 prices drop.

 

Prices could drop (or rise) for both grades, too. But I think a drop is more likely.

[Treeman]

There are many coins in "70" slabs, from both services, that are not as nice as the posted coin. That is why collectors are usually much better off getting the "69". The registries are the only reason for anyone paying multiples for the elusive "70" on the slab. In most cases, there exists no recognizable difference, and, in some cases, the "69" is obviously nicer than some "70" coins. I know I'll get slammed for this post, but everyone knows it's true....

[MarkFeld]

There are many coins in "70" slabs, from both services, that are not as nice as the posted coin. That is why collectors are usually much better off getting the "69". The registries are the only reason for anyone paying multiples for the elusive "70" on the slab. In most cases, there exists no recognizable difference, and, in some cases, the "69" is obviously nicer than some "70" coins. I know I'll get slammed for this post, but everyone knows it's true....

 

If everyone knows it's true, why would you get slammed for the post?

 

But, since you haven't seen the coin in person, I don't think you're in a position to determine that

"There are many coins in "70" slabs, from both services, that are not as nice as the posted coin".

[Treeman]

There is some difference between knowing something is true, and admitting something is true. I stand corrected. I should have said, "from what I can see in the photo, there are many coins in "70" slabs, from both services, that are not as nice as the posted coin.