| Author |
 Replies: 8 / Views: 2,242 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
I spotted the following item on ebay: # 220750612792I asked the seller if the token was damaged. He responded quickly, saying that the appearance of damage was due to a defective planchet having been used. Although the item was graded by NGC, there is no mention of either a defective planchet or any damage. Following the seller's reply, I revisited the listing and zoomed the page to 400%. I then noted that there are parallel marks on the lettering that seem to correspond with those on the planchet. Thus, I'm inclined to suspect that the seller's opinion is incorrect, and I suspect the token is damaged. Not being an error specialist, I thought that I might solicit input from those who are more knowledgeable about such matters than I. Of course, what better site to pose this question?  Kindly consider the following possibilities and weigh in ... 1) Is this token's damaged appearance due to a defective planchet? 2) Is the token quite simply damaged? 3) Or, does the token possess both damage and a defective planchet? Although this is a Civil War token, I refrained from posting this query in the token section as my question is perhaps better aimed at the error collectors among us. That said, any and all thoughts are gratefully appreciated! |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4416 Posts |
Here's a link to the ebay item in question: [eBayItem]220750612792 [/eBayItem] I'm just learning the workings of CCF ...  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
From what I see I would say the planchet was damaged. The lines flow into the lettering. There is no aburptness or signs of scraping. No sharp edges where they cross the letters which you would have if they occurred after the striking. And the coin is high grade so it isn't a case of wear smoothing or rounding the edges.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
The roughness of the planchet is caused by the graininess of a poor quality alloy. None of the roughness has a fresh appearance and there are no sharp edges, the patina is exactly what I would expect to see on a high AU/low MS token of this period. The strike is also very weak, this is just simply a very poorly made token. Quote:
I'm inclined to suspect that the seller's opinion is incorrect, and I suspect the token is damaged.
It is not just the seller's opinion, NGC has examined the coin as well and I have a very hard time believing that they would slab a severely damaged coin. Based on these pics alone, I have to agree that it is just pre-strike planchet damage. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
9104 Posts |
I vote planchet. never seen damage looking like that.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
Thanks for your opinions! I'll then defer to the consensus judgment that this token has a defective planchet.
You make a good point, Biochemist, in observing that NGC wouldn't slab a damaged coin. However, it surprises me that NGC didn't simply note it as possessing a defective planchet; this, lest they risk the appearance of certifying a damaged token. I much like the SEGS grading service which, brutal though their descriptions may sound at times, seems to better, more accurately describe submitted coins. NGC attributed the variety, cited the grade, so why not denote the nature of the defective planchet? I'm puzzled by this. Does one have to pay an additional fee to have a defect denoted?
On another note, the seller offered no telling description within his post. Furthermore, he has yet to post my question and his response ... No questions asked? It always makes me suspicious when a seller seemingly ducks or dodges questions. Perhaps, he'll eventually post my question and his reply? On the plus side, the starting bid seems modest.
The diesinker who made this token and others like it only produced them for a small number of Buffalo, NY merchants. His work was crude, and I label his tokens as "Buffalo primitives" - not to be confused with Indiana primitives produced by another, Civil War era diesinker. Notice that the date on this variety was engraved upside-down! His identity remains a mystery.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
I neglected to mention that the merchant who issued this token, Bieler, ran a saloon. I can't help but wonder if the unknown diesinker might have been a frequent customer of his? Maybe the diesinker did some of his engraving while under the influence? DUI might in this case mean Diesinking Under the Influence!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
I'm not real good on CWT's, especially the storecards, but is it possible that all of this issue tend to come on defective planchets? If that is the case then it would explain why NGC didn't mention it. It is what is normal for that coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
Quote:
... is it possible that all of this issue tend to come on defective planchets? I previously checked my UNC token of this variety for comparison and have seen others. Those planchets aren't faulty like this one. Good question though, Conder101. There are many CWT's that typically come with some sort of defect like clashed dies, doubling of letters, shattered dies or breaks, etc. I have to chuckle when I see some seller touting the defect, claiming in effect that the defect adds to the token's value. Indeed, there are some of these varieties which would fetch a premium price if they lacked that defect! |
| |
Replies: 8 / Views: 2,242 |
|
Posted 03/08/2011 10:32 am
