| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 3,188 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
7234 Posts |
I wouldn't touch that coin with that Mint Mark - black on a silver coin means heat and it's filled in - applied MM?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1095 Posts |
NGC shows it as legit and has a little better photo of the D. I think its just some crud.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2627 Posts |
I'm also concerned about the mint mark, even with it being slabbed. While it's certainly possible that it's dirt or crud, it's suspicious that the only noticeable area of crud is immediately around the mint mark. There also appears to be an indentation either around or underneath the "D," not the mention that it's filled. I would grade it AU-55, but with some red flags. I'm curious to hear further opinions.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
900 Posts |
XF45
If NGC says is genuine, who am I to argue.
Edited by scurry64
02/24/2018 04:31 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
AU53.
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1963 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15476 Posts |
I agree with the mintmark appearance concerns. Base coin appears to be AU.
Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art |
|
Valued Member
Russian Federation
417 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
AU-53, sharper pics would be nice.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3402 Posts |
I don't give a rats .ss what NGC says...I'm saying a soldered on "D" MM. I wouldn't care how many coffins you put that coin in, I would't have bought it. Too suspect and I would have to try to explain it when I tried to sell it. Not worth the issue. Overall an EF.
KK
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
The other MM diagnostics (serifs, fill, relative size and position) are correct for a 1932-D, as is the depressed area below the mintmark. Because the mintmark was in a depressed area of metal on this issue, it tended to collect dirt, debris, and grime. It's not automatically evidence of tampering, but rather, a common occurrence. NGC sees quite a few counterfeits of this date and MM (see the most recent ANA Numismatist for one egregious example.) Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1095 Posts |
Thanks all for your thoughts on this one.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Congrats!  |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 17 / Views: 3,188 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 02/23/2018 7:41 pm
