| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,508 |
|
|
Valued Member
Sweden
135 Posts |
Any considerations for this coin as well? Thank you for the earlier responses to my other threads.   |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
311 Posts |
Seen better days, but I love these old large cents
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3164 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3546 Posts |
Quote:
Fair details  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
Fair details. Strong date, and LIBERTY, I like it!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4932 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18712 Posts |
Over 200yrs seeing the insides of pockets
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
297 Posts |
Decent--clear enough to identify --enjoy a real time capsule in your hand--cool
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36880 Posts |
FR-2, I don't think at such a low grade "details" would apply.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3546 Posts |
Quote:
...at such a low grade "details" would 'NOT' apply. Not necessarily with just this coin only but on average beginning at what grade does the 'details' designation typically not apply? PS: I slightly modified your statement, IGE, to make it coincide more with my question... |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1005 Posts |
Details designation applies at all grades, even PO01. The amount of damage/corrosion that is acceptable tends to increase as grade goes down, but there still needs to be that stratification in effect for each grade; most would pay much more for an honest FR02 compared to one with severe corrosion/other problems.
I think I agree with IGE, though, that the corrosion/damage is acceptable here for a FR02 coin. If it were worse then you'd have FR02 details.
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,508 |
|
Posted 01/09/2016 10:38 am
