| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 1,781 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
Just received these back and would like to open discussion on the grades these coins received. I thought the 1832 would come back cleaned and that the 1829 would be XF40. I thought the 1833 would be AU55 or 58 (a lot of luster remains and no hairlines or significant marks).    The 1832 was purchased originally in an old ANACS small holder that also had it at AU50. The 1833 was in an NGC AU50 holder previously and a person I consider an expert in the field thought it was way undergraded as such. Three other Half Cents were a part of this submission, but I agreed with the grades given for those. Edited by EFLargeCents
05/27/2015 3:10 pm
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
278 Posts |
Man, that's crazy. It's a shame the 1833 came back in a details holder. I don't have much to add here since I don't study this series.
I am curious though, why didn't you just send them in holdered? You could have had the ANACS Crossover and submitted the 1833 for a ReGrade.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1566 Posts |
Inconsistency all around another reason to avoid the TPGs.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
At least you can easily resubmit to TPG with coins. But you'd better be a pro if you're buying or selling raw high-value material |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1566 Posts |
You better be a pro buying ANY high dollar material. That is the whole idea behind the forum. Educating yourself to make informed desisions when buying or selling coins.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
The 1829 is plainly the least-worn of the bunch, when you factor in the age of the dies (the 1829 is as LDS as it gets; look how the stars are drawn and the date faded). AU53 doesn't surprise me with it. I have no clue why the 1832 and 33 weren't reverse for the Detaqils grades. Guessing the color in your images is pretty good (the contrast in colors between the coins makes me think you've got the color pretty close), I cannot buy the originality of the 1832.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1304 Posts |
What doesn't show up in the photo of the 1829 is the unnatural looking gloss like filminess of the surfaces. This look disappears in photos, but in hand its not attractive.
I did manage to get the colors correct, these images were all taken with the same settings, so they are relative to each other as well.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1566 Posts |
It truly amazes me that the 1829 came back as improperly cleaned but the 1832 did not.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
You mean the 1833 right Celtic? I can't either. I should post the other three I sent in with this group that I thought were alright.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I see a lot of odd finishes on Half Cents of this era, moreso than similar Large Cents. Many look lacquered, like the 1829 and 1832 here. Wonder if they received some different planchet prep at the Mint? What sort of use did Half Cents have in commerce during this period? Could they be an issue that collectors of the day expected to disappear from production, and were therefore pulled from circulation for preservation? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
I have read that 1832 in particular had planchets that produced very red coins (I believe this is mentioned in Breen's Half Cent book) so maybe that contributed to the odd color of my example. It's my understanding that the very early Half Cents saw circulation and commercial use, but by 1811 they were no longer in demand. 1809 was the last year of significant mintage quantities, after which the mintage numbers dropped comparatively to next to nothing (1,000,000 vs a few 10's of thousands). I would hazard a guess that this is why a lot of the post 1825 coins are available in very high grades, but 1811 and earlier are not, that people just kept them rather then spend them, and I bet some people never saw them in circulation or rarely so 1825 onward. I'm just guessing though, I would have to go back and re-read my literature. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1566 Posts |
By the 1820s demand for Half Cents had dwindled. I read somewhere that to get rid of them the government gave them out as change at post offices. People used to complain about that.  More great Half Cents!  The little sisters don't get the credit they deserve. Many have mintages below 50k. Edited by Celticsoul
05/28/2015 12:26 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Germany
1849 Posts |
That is a very nice selection of little half sisters you have there, EFlargeCents.
For some reason this is a series which is not as valued as the large cents,
In spite of the comparatively much lower mintage numbers.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
Thank you GERMANICVS. I'm actually two coins short of the complete Cohen set for the Classic Head series of Half Cents. Both varieties of 1811 are currently absent. It's a challenge finding a problem free one in my budget, or rather, it's a challenge for me to focus all my efforts (and budget) on just those coins and forgo my other sets in progress. 1811's aren't difficult to find, just difficult to find nice. It's much more difficult to find an 1809 C-1 in any condition, though the rarity of that coin has dropped from R5 to R4 of late. This series is definitely not valued or pursued to the same extent as large cents, and quite a few quality Half Cent collections have been and are in the process of being, sold off, which has me questioning the prudence of further pursuit of the series unless prices drop. Variety collecting as a hole is suffering as well, which also is influencing me to stop with just this series and perhaps pursue type sets of the remaining Half Cents. All in all though, this is a great little series and I've enjoyed the hunt. So much easier to put together than a Sheldon series of Classic Head large cents! |
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 1,781 |
|
Posted 05/27/2015 5:24 pm
