His attribution is accurate - it's S-289. The relationship of the S to the leaf on the reverse is diagnostic - none of the other 3 varieties come close. The date is clearly not the short fat digits of the Small Date. It's an "at a glance" error of attribution which any early Large Cent type should notice.
As far as the coin goes, it's smack in the Condition Census (maybe two or three finer) and a real looker but....rather overpriced, I think.
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited. Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use