| Author |
 Replies: 63 / Views: 13,887 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Russian Federation
417 Posts |
Agree, 1904
Also I cant think what such rare coin could walk into folk pockets soooo long time to get into this condition
|
|
New Member
 United States
13 Posts |
Your leaf theory is bogus go grab any coin in America and sand it down with sandpaper and I guarantee the entire imprint gets bigger the more wear. If this was not the case the coin would have absolutely no imprint to identify. There are at least 8 identical markings that are the same on the front alone.Posistioning of a worn leaf off by 1:1thousands don't buy it. You can see the 8 plainly in person 1904 is not possible the second number is an 8.Regardless what you want to be live this exact coin has been in circulation two other times well noted in history and is unaccounted for at this time!
|
|
Valued Member
Russian Federation
417 Posts |
Your mind is blurred by the price of 1894s so why you see 1894.
Third digit is 0 for sure, the part of it that wasnt erased is too much stretcher out, its not 9.
Dunno if anyone can convince you it is 1904.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
If I was as confident as the OP about the authenticity, I would have no hesitation about sending it in to a TPG for verification and certification. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2189 Posts |
Quote:
Your mind is blurred by the price of 1894s Third digit is 0 for sure, the part of it that wasn't erased is too much stretched out, its not 9.Dunno if anyone can convince you it is 1904. 100% in agreement, but if you feel that strongly about it send it in to be authenticated. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
perhaps the coin dealer who originally agreed with you , could arrange to have it authenticated.. and if they agreed it was the rare coin, I assume there must have been some type of offer made on it?.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3733 Posts |
just to follow up. looking again at the photos provided, even if you could nail down the date with 100% accuracy I don't believe a mint mark could ever be ascertained with 100% certainty..just my honest opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1261 Posts |
Wait, you're saying the first very worn coin is the same coin as the second less worn coin which is an 1894-S? I'm sorry but I agree with the others that they are not the same coin. I understand you've looked at diagnostics that make you think the mark's are similar on both coins but there are more diagnostics to indicate they are completely different coins.
For example, if you look at the headdress wreath point on the obverse under the letter S at the very top, you'll see that the point is much sharper and closer to the letter S on your coin than the less worn coin from the Bowers auction. In fact the points on the wreath are completely different.
I think it's great that you're looking so closely and trying to find rarities on your coins but, unfortunately, this is not one of them. Good luck in your quest!!
Edited by chesterb
12/10/2017 09:45 am
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
We've spent decades studying coins. If you had a 94-S, or even the chance of one, we would all be dancing around Singing your praises. Together, we are offering centuries of opinion. It all points to absolutely not the same coin. It's worth about $1.20. Waste money on a TPG if you must. I certainly wouldn't recommend doing so. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
I too think it would be a waste of money to attempt to have it authenticated by a TPGS.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Below is the story of the Ice Cream Dime in Coin Week by Greg Reynolds: "This 1894-S dime is traditionally referred to as the “Ice Cream Specimen.” It is #9 in David Lawrence Feigenbaum's list, and he refers to it as grading Good-04. I grade it as Good-06, and I like it a lot. It was in Steve Ivy's 1980 ANA auction, Bowers & Ruddy's 1981 Sieck sale, and the Bowers & Merena (NH) March 1989 auction. I vaguely remember seeing it again someplace else. It has even wear and pleasant, natural, light, battleship gray toning. The few marks and scratches are not distracting. Besides, the surfaces of a circulated Proof are much more sensitive than the surfaces of business strikes. It is an appealing coin". As noted the OP coin and the Ice Cream Dime are not the same. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7621 Posts |
OP...
Welcome to the Community!
Your eyes and your mind are playing tricks on you. We have all experienced this as collectors and searchers. You are not the first one and you won't be the last.
I am sorry your family business is struggling but this particular coin is not a 94-S and it is not going to solve the problem.
You need to put this to bed once and for all and send this coin to either ANACS, PCGS or NGC for a quick authentication. Until you do this you will not be satisfied. Even with what they will most likely tell you you may still not be satisfied!
On the outside chance we are all wrong and it is a genuine 94-S I will be glad to eat my share of Crow Pie and offer up my congratulations on a huge score!
Good luck with your coin and even more good luck getting your family business turned around!
|
|
New Member
United States
34 Posts |
Would be a great find if possible!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1657 Posts |
Where did you get the information that the pictured 1894-s is now missing? I have been searching and can't find that info, not saying you are wrong but I would be interested in the information. I just can't see any possibility that this is the same coin, but if you are that convinced just have it authenticated.
|
|
New Member
United States
13 Posts |
I'm telling you guys I've studied this dime for 7 months the second number is an 8.  |
| |
Replies: 63 / Views: 13,887 |
First Page
Posted 12/10/2017 08:34 am
