| Author |
 Replies: 25 / Views: 3,456 |
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
Hello all: I have a hole in my set for this date, but the surfaces of this coin concern me, especially the reverse. It is graded PCGS 40. I would appreciate any comments on the originality and eye appeal of this half. Thanks for taking the time to read. KK   |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I think this coin has a very attractive and original finish on both sides.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
Looks original to me.
Edited by SilverDollar2017
10/26/2018 7:42 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
166 Posts |
Thank you for your responses Coinfrog and SilverDollar2017. I like the coin, just was unsure about the toning.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
So do I, 100%. Super clean example for the grade.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
Thanks Coinfrog, I went ahead and purchased it! Your advice is much appreciated.
KK
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8516 Posts |
I like that coin Krusti !
Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
|
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
Buy the coin, not the slab.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
Yes, a slab confirms authenticity, but I rely on it for little else. There are so many coins that have been wrongly graded, or over-graded. That is why a forum like this is so important. I recently was burned on an expensive coin graded by NGC because I relied on the label.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
There are so many coins that have been wrongly graded, or over-graded. The internet makes that seem far more common than in reality. Just because someone doesn't like a grade or disagrees with it doesn't mean the grade was wrong. A coin can have multiple correct grades depending on the subjective weighing of aspects. There isn't a person or company on the fact of the each that has never made a mistake at anything, but their actual mistakes are far fewer than the internet makes it out to be. Too many people fall into the trap of thinking that because they don't like the grade the TPG must be wrong. If you really want to be cautious and sure for high end coins like that stick to CAC ones |
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
In the case I refer to, an 1862 Seated dollar that was graded NGC AU 58, was in fact a circulated proof. This was brought to my attention when Dick Osburn and Brian Cushing recently published their new reference work. As such, my circulated proof, which was purchased as a business strike, was worth a third of what a business strike brings in the marketplace. Buy the coin, not the slab. |
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
And you are correct, above a certain price, I only buy CAC coins.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:In the case I refer to, an 1862 Seated dollar that was graded NGC AU 58, was in fact a circulated proof. This was brought to my attention when Dick Osburn and Brian Cushing recently published their new reference work. Brought to your attention how and by who |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1261 Posts |
I agree that the subject coin looks very attractive and I don't see any areas of concern.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
166 Posts |
I researched it myself after I became aware of the new reference work on Seated dollars. I did so because I suspected the surfaces after I bought the coin years ago, but I relied on the TPG. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
The dark halos around the devices can be an indicator of problems, but I see no sign of issues that would keep this coin out of a problem-free holder. I would much rather pay $1,000 for that coin than this one that does look cleaned but it also in a PCGS XF40 holder: https://coins.ha.com/itm/seated-hal...ption-071515 |
| |
Replies: 25 / Views: 3,456 |
Posted 10/26/2018 7:42 pm
