Not for me but possibly of interest to toning hobbyist. For CAC the premium in bid value $50 so send in see what happens if that’s your game.
Irregardless you will need find a buyer who wants it and will pay asking price.
CPG for CAC 67 $650, bid $500. If you shop it around bourse offers prob range from 300-450 assuming interest. The dark toning would deter many or result in them bidding in low range.
I would offer $35 for a nice 65 and $60 for a nice 66 of this issue. No dark toning or spots seeking pieces PQ, brilliant with nice luster, lite toning may be ok.
I would call your 67 piece average quality. It is not a PQ coin in my view. I would not put a sticker on it.
Yuck.... That looks absolutely horrible....As to the question about CAC.... well, based on the quality of the coin, possibly.... as to the tarnish.....I would say that is AT, and depends on how CAC interprets it...Cheers, RickO
@ricko said:
Yuck.... That looks absolutely horrible....As to the question about CAC.... well, based on the quality of the coin, possibly.... as to the tarnish.....I would say that is AT, and depends on how CAC interprets it...Cheers, RickO
@ricko said:
Yuck.... That looks absolutely horrible....As to the question about CAC.... well, based on the quality of the coin, possibly.... as to the tarnish.....I would say that is AT, and depends on how CAC interprets it...Cheers, RickO
Shhh….it can't be AT, it slabbed.
The toning looks natural to me. It’s not a super-rare event to find some of the classic silver commemoratives with fairly similar hues. I like to describe that look as “jewel tones”, a term that I think I picked up from Kathleen Duncan at Pinnacle Rarities, many years ago.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@ricko said:
Yuck.... That looks absolutely horrible....As to the question about CAC.... well, based on the quality of the coin, possibly.... as to the tarnish.....I would say that is AT, and depends on how CAC interprets it...Cheers, RickO
Shhh….it can't be AT, it slabbed.
The toning looks natural to me. It’s not a super-rare event to find some of the classic silver commemoratives with fairly similar hues. I like to describe that look as “jewel tones”, a term that I think I picked up from Kathleen Duncan at Pinnacle Rarities, many years ago.
I agree. But so many people here jump at AT for coins like that one.
It's not. But my point was more that coins like that get everyone screaming AT around here. But that coin straight-graded and CAC'ed. So people don't have to like it, but they should be a little less certain about yelling AT.
I dislike the overall look and it’s not something that I’d be tempted to buy. Despite that, there’s a few characteristics of the toning pattern that make me think it’s more likely to be natural than AT (which, according to @ricko stands for artificial tarnish).
@cameonut2011 said:
It's hideous, original, and it looks to have solid MS67 surfaces, which means that it probably will sticker.
I hope it would sticker, I like the toning, definitely original and natural and high high grade........my kind of coin.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and reasonable minds can certainly disagree.
Agree. FWIW I’m firmly in the NT camp.
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm wondering how dark this is hand. Phil is usually good about getting A LOT of light on some darkly toned coins, so I'm thinking it is probably darker.
@cameonut2011 said:
I'm wondering how dark this is hand. Phil is usually good about getting A LOT of light on some darkly toned coins, so I'm thinking it is probably darker.
The auction photos at Stacks look darker, but their photos sets sometimes too dark.
@cameonut2011 said:
I'm wondering how dark this is hand. Phil is usually good about getting A LOT of light on some darkly toned coins, so I'm thinking it is probably darker.
The auction photos at Stacks look darker, but their photos sets sometimes too dark. > @washingtonrainbows said:
Way too much damage on face, cabin. Scrapes, digs and scratches, heavy carbonate, weak details are all there on this coin. Overgraded by 2, 3 points IMO and that's being generous.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I said likely as a troll.
Unhesitatingly NT. I've never seen toning like that made on purpose or by accident.
Maybe heating some Vaseline on a stove to about 130 degrees, tossing in any compound of sulfur around, and putting both that and the coin in a blender. Then, rinse in acetone, then muriatic acid and repeat...... Nah....
The toning, whatever the shades, is in a very natural pattern for the storage these issues sat around in for decades.
OTOH, I was sincere about it being ugly. Being pooped on in technicolor is the same as...
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Comments
If the question is would an astute dealer make an offer on this coin - probably yes. Would I, individually, buy this coin. Nope. Too ugly for words.
Agreed. Too ugly for me.
Now that is a unique coin
Might very well CAC as it's so original mother nature after a rough "girls night out" vomited all over it and forgot to clean up
My YouTube Channel
Maybe it's a technical 68, exceptionally strong lustre and a point subtracted for eye-appeal?
edited to add: I hope not, but it's likely original
As I said, you can make a case that they are all unique. Especially toned coins. I've never seen two identical toning patterns.
Not for me but possibly of interest to toning hobbyist. For CAC the premium in bid value $50 so send in see what happens if that’s your game.
Irregardless you will need find a buyer who wants it and will pay asking price.
CPG for CAC 67 $650, bid $500. If you shop it around bourse offers prob range from 300-450 assuming interest. The dark toning would deter many or result in them bidding in low range.
I would offer $35 for a nice 65 and $60 for a nice 66 of this issue. No dark toning or spots seeking pieces PQ, brilliant with nice luster, lite toning may be ok.
I would call your 67 piece average quality. It is not a PQ coin in my view. I would not put a sticker on it.
It's hideous, original, and it looks to have solid MS67 surfaces, which means that it probably will sticker.
Yuck.... That looks absolutely horrible....As to the question about CAC.... well, based on the quality of the coin, possibly.... as to the tarnish.....I would say that is AT, and depends on how CAC interprets it...Cheers, RickO
Shhh….it can't be AT, it slabbed.
It sorta looks like a supernova.
Colorful and interesting.......striking and eye-catching. Too many BTW's are drab, mottled brown and silver hues.
Do not see it as hideous, horrible, ugly, or vomitous (HHUV).
The toning looks natural to me. It’s not a super-rare event to find some of the classic silver commemoratives with fairly similar hues. I like to describe that look as “jewel tones”, a term that I think I picked up from Kathleen Duncan at Pinnacle Rarities, many years ago.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree. But so many people here jump at AT for coins like that one.
Yep... it could be NT... but it could be AT.... and that is what I think it is.... Cheers, RickO
Thats what I was thinking, but want going to bring that up.
For the record, it DID CAC
Good...next
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
CCE and the Blue Sheet don't indicate a big score
I just threw up in my mouth!! Agghh
🤮
BST transactions - mach1ne - Ronyahski - pitboss (x2) - Bigbuck1975 (x2) - jimineez1 - nk1nk - bidask - WaterSport - logger7 - SurfinxHI (x2) - Smittys - Bennybravo - Proofcollector
It's not. But my point was more that coins like that get everyone screaming AT around here. But that coin straight-graded and CAC'ed. So people don't have to like it, but they should be a little less certain about yelling AT.
I dislike the overall look and it’s not something that I’d be tempted to buy. Despite that, there’s a few characteristics of the toning pattern that make me think it’s more likely to be natural than AT (which, according to @ricko stands for artificial tarnish).
The people at CAC might like it but I don't. I see some nice colors but also looks dark, to the point of terminal, in other areas.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and reasonable minds can certainly disagree.
@BryceM... AT can also stand for 'accelerated tarnish'....Tarnish is a natural process, it can, however, be artificially induced... Cheers, RickO
I don't mind the obverse too much. It's the reverse that's ugly
My YouTube Channel
My Instagram Gallery
Gotta have the pix in the thread.
Lance.
Das bringt mich zum kotzen
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Agree. FWIW I’m firmly in the NT camp.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm wondering how dark this is hand. Phil is usually good about getting A LOT of light on some darkly toned coins, so I'm thinking it is probably darker.
The auction photos at Stacks look darker, but their photos sets sometimes too dark.
The auction photos at Stacks look darker, but their photos sets sometimes too dark. > @washingtonrainbows said:
It already is CAC'ed.
Way too much damage on face, cabin. Scrapes, digs and scratches, heavy carbonate, weak details are all there on this coin. Overgraded by 2, 3 points IMO and that's being generous.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Whoa ...... that's a crazy toning! I am not sure if CAC is really up to the extreme
Only one way to find out...
I said likely as a troll.
Unhesitatingly NT. I've never seen toning like that made on purpose or by accident.
Maybe heating some Vaseline on a stove to about 130 degrees, tossing in any compound of sulfur around, and putting both that and the coin in a blender. Then, rinse in acetone, then muriatic acid and repeat...... Nah....
The toning, whatever the shades, is in a very natural pattern for the storage these issues sat around in for decades.
OTOH, I was sincere about it being ugly. Being pooped on in technicolor is the same as...