| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 2,594 |
|
Valued Member
Canada
311 Posts |
Edited by soccerdad
01/06/2011 11:27 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16677 Posts |
I cant see the obverse of the second one too well but am leaning in that direction. They both appear to have corrosion, but the second one looks to be less. I do like the bold date of the first one though.
Start off the bidding at the lowest you are willing to sell the coin for. Anything else is a plus.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1213 Posts |
I like the looks of the first one better, but not by much!
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
311 Posts |
The scan on the second one is a little dark and I am not sure how to lighten it. It shows better in person.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
367 Posts |
beauties  Roll finds? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
602 Posts |
I would keep the second one because it looks cleaner. Maybe a weak strike but cleaner than the first one and sell the first one to me for really cheap. WOLF
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
I like the first one, better date
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
880 Posts |
When you go to sell them on ebay, get better pictures. It will help a ton. If you can get access to a nice camera it will help your sale a lot. If I were in the market for an 1877 and saw these pictures on ebay I'd pass it up because I thought something was up with the coin. I'd start around $50 less than what you wanted to get for it, but I see nothing wrong with starting the auction at what you hope to get for it. I'm not big on copper, but if the corrosion can be removed without ill-effect I'd keep the first one. If not, I still might keep it. I like the bold date. |
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
How about waiting and selling here on CCF?
John1 [8D]
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
Yeah.. I agree, wait and sell it here..  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1510 Posts |
where did you get those from?
Retired USAF 1983-2003
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1081 Posts |
I would probably keep the first one as it has better details. The second does appear to have fewer issues though, but I think the details would win out for me, unless the second one was problem free.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
I like the second one better..looks to have less problems than the first
|
|
Moderator
United States
187914 Posts |
I am with David on this, I like the details of the first one.
I am also wondering what a good conservation with VERDI-CARE would do for it.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
This is a really tough date. I'd send both of them in to ANACS or a TPG(or at least the one you dont want to keep) before selling. People will pay more knowing for sure that they are authentic. They both look VG-ish to me. I like the bottom one more. Even though the date may be weaker, it looks like part of the reason is the lighting and the fact that there isn't as much contrast between the color of the field and the date.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187914 Posts |
Quote:
The scan on the second one is a little dark... Oops, I missed this part and Johnny's comment made me go back to look for it. Scans are notoriously bad for contrast on coins. That being said, your saying "it shows better in person" is probably an accurate statement and I exercise my right to change my mind. |
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 2,594 |
Posted 01/06/2011 10:22 pm
