This Beauty Of Mine Has Virtually Zero Attention While My

I was never really into top condition coins, although I clearly recognise the extra desirability of them.

With the way I collect, which is coins from all cultures and centuries, you just have to be satisfied with what ever comes along.

At that price point a lot of people will demand it to be slabbed. I for one am not comfortable buying a coin at that price level without additional assurance.

I agree with superdave, this coin is not MS and therefore would be way over-priced. I know you have a best offer option, but in my experience that thing doesn't work. I believe people automatically think that only values close to BIN will get excepted and don't bother. This coin probably wouldn't sell above $200.

The other problem is the market. I'm sure there are some, but I don't personally know a single person who collects Seated quarters as a set. If they would, they wouldn't want to pay for a higher quality piece when much of their other coins are well circulated. There are the people looking to fill their 7070 slot. This coin wouldn't likely get chosen though. It's not nice enough for the connoisseurs and it has a poor color and difficult grade for the hole fillers.

Lastly, it's also a buyer's market in general right now on most series.

I'm just afraid the coin misses on all counts and is one of those pieces that's just not gonna sell unless you accept a moral loss on it's price. I have a few of those right now that I'm selling for about half to 2/3 its fmv price.

edit..to say that the other 3 Seated quarters are going to have some of the same problems and are also overpriced. One is corroded and all three are overgraded by tiny little bit and in their grade range there are huge jumps in value. Each is worth approx 25% less than your BIN price and like I mentioned earlier, I wouldn't count on someone making a good offer, people ignore that thing.

I said all 4 Seated quarters were overgraded by a "tiny" bit. I don't think the pics are that bad, but they don't wow me at all. I just think Seated quarters in general area tough sells and all 4 of the ones you have up unfortunately fall in between "I want a nice one" or "I want one to fill me hole". With my belief of slight overgrading, I also believe they are overpriced. The one with the corrosion (or something) needs a (times .7) deduction because of the obverse damage. The other 2 are just not nice enough for the price. You can't compare to slabs because slabbed coins just sell for so much more naturally.

Besides, you know ebay is crazy. I've been looking at 13-S type 2 buffalos because I'm about to sell one and saw a G-4 just sell for $62. That's $264 on fmv and I'd "raw real life market value" it still at $150. One of Steve's restored one's is at $56 with time left. Most would consider his coin destroyed, and one could at the very least "destroy" the G-4 themselves to get one that looks like steve's and steve's will probably out-price it.

Added: Keep in mind, this is a narrow-focus coin, interesting to a very small subset of collectors. They tend to understand the issue well, and have particularly clear ideas of what their next coin should look like. This ain't a Morgan, which is pretty much "throw it all at the wall and see what sticks."

Yeah I've seen some ridiculous price differences, enough that a coin worth 1/10 of the next one sells for more for no good reason. A 1934-D Mercury dime in AU with a scratch worth $12 for $54...lol. Then a coin worth $100 sells for $36. I didn't mean to be defensive or anything, but I get what you mean more now. If they really don't look that great, I should probably try to re-photograph them since I had actually considered these some of my better Seated coins and I probably graded them a little higher because of a lot of shine present and what I perceived as good eye appeal. Purely detail-wise, I can see how they might seem a bit high.

Especially with the reality that these are one shot type coins, buyers either go for garbage hole fillers or high grade stuff, and with high grade they usually go nuts over PCGS coins since they aren't familiar with these series. That must be why I'll get a random bidding war on some random beat up Seated dime.

Which one do you believe is corroded hesgut? I didn't catch that on any of them and I'll take another look at it. If it isn't corroded but it looks that way, then that definitely means it needs new pictures since other buyers are probably thinking the same thing. If it is corroded, then I need to note that. The 1857 has a mark on it but it may have come out a lot more than it should've...I learned the hard way that what SuperDave said about being 'too accurate' is very true. Make a coin look all scuffed up when it only looks scuffed at a certain angle and pay dearly.

Yes, it is just toning...I might need to reconsider adjusting the contrast so much. I think I originally did it because the pictures turned out dull and weak, but I didn't think people would think it was ugly. The toning does stand out somewhat from the rest of the coin but its not as blatant as in the picture. The difference between the obverse and reverse may have been because I captured the reverse at a different angle, hence getting much more 'luster' but missing it on the other side. I think you have a point about making both sides look consistent though, which probably helps getting it sold and reassuring buyers that the coin isn't messed with or something.