Buy the Coin and not the Slab

[hbarbee]

I have always tried to adhere to this rule, but I may have slipped here. My 1918-D was one of the raw members of the collection that needed to be upgraded because I think it would get details if submitted. I have been looking for quite a while but nothing with appeal seemed to come up. So I went for this one even though it does not have the eye appeal that I usually look for. But it was listed at only 60% of PCGS valuation for some odd reason. I have not received it yet and there is no TrueView, but the attached are the seller's pictures. What are you opinions?

[kloccwork419]

Looks like a great coin. Lots of detail. Only thing is I don't think it would grade red again if resubmitted, but it could just be the pictures. Saying that, I think it's under graded

[WaterSport]

Is that a chunk of material missing between the wheat ears?? If so, I think that could be a bigger issue than getting full red again.

Bob

[hbarbee]

I will let you know what that spot is when I get the coin. Sometimes I am baffled by the grades that some coins draw.

[eaxtellcoin]

That looks like about the right grade to me from a group of coins I sent to them last year. I would agree with Bob though on the defect between the wheat ears. I think that may have been missed for a normal - high level customer of PCGS. To someone who only sends a few coins... Ehhh not sure.

[kloccwork419]

Looks like a strike through to me

[duck620]

I have always tried to adhere to this rule, but I may have slipped here. My 1918-D was one of the raw members of the collection that needed to be upgraded because I think it would get details if submitted. I have been looking for quite a while but nothing with appeal seemed to come up. So I went for this one even though it does not have the eye appeal that I usually look for. But it was listed at only 60% of PCGS valuation for some odd reason. I have not received it yet and there is no TrueView, but the attached are the seller's pictures. What are you opinions?

My 1918-D I thought would return a better grade than AU maybe 62/63 bn.

[kloccwork419]

That looks like an AU coin.

[willbrooks]

I would be way too worried to resubmit that one. Good luck.

[WaterSport]

I think they were a bit harsh for a 53. But a 58 would have been spot on. JMHO

Bob

[kloccwork419]

I think they were a bit harsh for a 53. But a 58 would have been spot on. JMHO

Bob

Yikes. Just looked it up when you said that. Yes, very harsh. I can see AU, but 53 is really low for that coin..

[BadThad]

Nice 18-D, hardly any hits on it, only the spots pulling it down, I agree with 64.

[Petespockets55]

I'm with Jason about that possibly being a struckthrough.

[hbarbee]

Received the coin today. Attached are my updated images. These represent the color closely. I have also included a closeup of the mint defect.

The grading could be a 65 lowered to a 64 due to the defect or a 64 and the defect ignored?? The RD grade is certainly marginal. What do you folks think? Also, what is the correct name for the defect?

In any case, as I said initially, I feel $760 was very fair for this coin in "64RD".

[Petespockets55]

Is the anomaly incuse or raised?
(Hard to tell in the images.)