| Author |
 Replies: 25 / Views: 3,713 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
I agree that it is overpriced. On the other hand as a dealer I think I understand what is going on. I THINK the seller is giving a perception of high value; while at the same time entertaining offers. If he can get an offer significantly above book, then it is a tactic that will have worked well, to very well. Depending on the final price.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
Normally I do not like toning on proofs... but I love this coin!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1247 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Must just be me but I'm not that impressed by either of them.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1373 Posts |
I agree with you Conder101 on the first (toned/tarnished) coin, but the second is ok. I bought mine for $2.25 so I'm not interested. I do have one question though.........The Red Book does NOT LIST ANY PROOFS for 1938 (just P, D, & S). How did these coins get the PR designation? |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
How did these coins get the PR designation? Because, regardless of what the Red Book thinks, 8728 Merc Proofs were minted in 1938. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5832 Posts |
Quote:
How did these coins get the PR designation? The finishing is distinguishable on the field very much like the proof ASE, plus the strikes is much sharper. Although there are few early business strikes that have close to proof finishing, the strikes aren't as pronounce. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
844 Posts |
Like mentioned earlier, it's hard telling what caused the toning. I have experimented some with toning. Some Aluminum foil and an oven can cause very similar toning.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
74 Posts |
Yea I'm not too impressed. They are indeed nice coins, but the OP is too shiny all over... not enough frost.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
I really don't like toning on a Proof coin of any kind.
Might be a nice coin but the toning turns me off. To me a proof should look like new.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1839 Posts |
Not to hijack this thread but a few comments got me thinking. For those that said they prefer proof coins with no toning I'm curious if that applies to 19th century proofs as well or is it only 20th and 21st century proofs where you feel that way? I'm asking because I've observed a number of times where there may be some kind of a psychological break point in the age of a coin and the acceptance of toning. In my own case I too prefer that Mercury dime proofs not have toning. It just seems odd to me if they are toned. In my mind they should be bright, frosty, and free of any spots or toning. However on proofs from the 19th century a lack of toning makes me feel the coin is sort of artificial looking. As if there is no way a coin that old could not have some kind of toning. Perhaps this is just my own perception but I'd be curious if others share similar experiences. For example, those that say they prefer proofs coins to be free from toning what are your thoughts on these two Barber dime proofs? Both are the same year and where graded the same by PCGS, PR65. Which do you prefer?     |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1432 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1839 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
"Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2˘ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 25 / Views: 3,713 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 01/02/2014 12:59 pm
