Should I Buy A Rare Coin With Details?

Golly, Froggie, it seems that you'd find my collection to be most regrettable, then, many holed, some plugged, and a few thousand counterstamps ....

OP ... From the humble perspective of a longtime collector of "damaged" coins, I suggest that you hold out for a decent condition 1870-CC ... That is, if you want a coin that you will appreciate revisiting, showing to others and keeping for years to come. It seems that the damage is what precipitated this posting, and buyer's remorse would forever be a concern were you to make this purchase.

One more thing ... There are a great many U.S. coins, errors, tokens and the like that are rare. Consider owning a condition rare coin ... How about a Full Horn, 1921-S Buffalo in XF for one?

Upon once proudly showing my 1797 NC-2 flea market find to a notable EAC dealer at a show, he informed me that many of yesterday's "NC's" - short for Not Collectible - have become Now Collectible. Rarity, it seems, amounts to more than simple numbers ... It's more often to be a mindset.

A collector is far more apt to locate a 1797 NC-2 than he is to locate say a less common or "rare" L. POMEROY counterstamp like my avatar. Yet, that 1797 will command a much higher price. Demand tends to govern rarity where price matters. The demand for damaged coins is understandably lower among most collectors. Many collectors have difficulty looking past the damage. If cost is at all a consideration, anyone considering buying a "rare" but damaged coin, like our OP, needs to factor this reality into his equation, his thought to make such an investment. Counterstamp collectors typically do this ... excepting those who spend millions of dollars for those "damaged" Brasher Doubloons, of course!

BTW ... The OP's coin reminded me of this one:

http://www.coinworld.com/insights/s...o-fakes.html