my first thought was unbelievable, followed closely by ridiculous and finalized with stupid.
I can understand some of the niche markets in the Hobby and how they're supported by collectors but "Holder Collecting" is one I just can't wrap my head around.
Keets is far from alone in this. We have heard similar and solid opinions about the "holder craze" even pre-dating my pumping up of the Doily here on the Boards. Certainly a fair thought. I also value his prescient comments in general and this one in particular.
I am sure there are some bidders on this piece who are in it for the 'flip'. Others for other reasons, but I DO believe a majority of those who might be interested in this NGC are there due to the history represented. We are in a unique position as collectors in a 40-70 (or thereabouts) age group. We have seen the advent of the TPG system, even recently highlighted in the RCMR from PCGS (nice mag by the way). A major change has happened in the "hobby of kings" with the coming (and in some cases going) of the TPG companies. As such, the early and rarer slabs represent not only a different period of grading, but also a very small sliver of what slabs are out there.
As history is one aspect of numismatics that many of us respect as collectors, this slab represents a part of that. Due to the fact that they were no where near common even back in the 1986-7 era (calculate slab rate x generation duration) , and added to the fact that so many have been cracked due to the (perceived) stiffer grading . . . the surviving examples that represent this history of the TPGs are now coveted by many, including those who appreciate the history of this part of our hobby.
Supply / Demand. It is simply that when I started the Doily 'thing', there were 108 known examples. Now look at the count. As the count rose, I hit 71% of all the known Doilies. Then the slab world learned. "Hey, this slab just isn't that rare!" But what is this one? This black slab? Those really simple looking white bricks? "Hey Ralph, you got any of these?"
Nope.
'Ralph' had a few Doilies . . . . but he had never seen a White NGC. Look at the pop reports for the 2.0 and 2.1 here in the search history. Now advance forward a decade and understand that there actually are a few more slab collectors than there are 2.1 / 2.0s. Bingo. Supply / Demand. One of our old hands here mentioned a hoard years ago. Never has appeared. Try to find one of these anywhere even at a major show. You can do a Box of 20 of 1893-S Morgans in 45 minutes at Long Beach . . . but let's see you do a "Box of 1" of the 2.1s. Why are they not worth tens of thousands? There are 3000 guys trying to build Morgan sets. There are 30-40 slab collectors (and two guys have got most of them). Supply / Demand.
I reiterate a previous point. This slab is a perfect storm. A common coin, in a sub-common grade, that actually doesn't have a lot of eye appeal. No PC58 1884-S Morgie that could 63 on a good day. No wowzer toning. No funkadelic pattern or obsolete denomination. Just a rinky-dink hunk 'o silver with some interesting plastic.
We are about to find out the new floor of the NGC White slabs . . . . . . . . . .
@keets said:
my first thought was unbelievable, followed closely by ridiculous and finalized with stupid.
I can understand some of the niche markets in the Hobby and how they're supported by collectors but "Holder Collecting" is one I just can't wrap my head around.
I understand your point of view.
Personally, I think it would be cool to have one, just for the historical value, but I'd stop after that.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
Walker . . . fully agreed. I have adjusted my acquisitions of slabs the same way. I have basically a 'Type Set' . . . and one or two of the older ones are just fine for me. History.
Although I 'like' keet's comments- he is based on sound reasoning- I think back on how collectors must have felt when a limited few collected their silver commemorative half dollars in original mint packaging: even the early 50's mint sets and such. Now we look back and enjoy not only original coins yet also the original packaging they were in.
It is not such a large leap to see how the "original" pcgs and ngc slabs may strike a fancy to collectors. After all, we are a strange breed, and we do enjoy coins (and slab!) that make us feel good. The late eighties era of collecting was an enjoyable time, and this slab reminds me of that.
just to be clear, I do in fact understand the historical nature of these various slabs and can see the interest in them. as DRUNNER said, since this example is really almost totally about the holder we'll know how they are valued. I just don't understand or appreciate the speculation in them. that's what I perceive a lot of this to be about, collectors who have discovered that they may be able to re-sell, but who aren't really collecting the history.
to that history, I only see a few aspects that would cause me to see the holders as collectible. I think the collectors of them tend to think the same, but what I believe really drives this "market" is what holder generation has the lowest extant number available. a change, no mater how subtle or bold, of the insert really doesn't seem like anything at all. what is the big deal about the PCGS 108****** holders simply because they are white?? why does everyone consider that historical?? it's a freakin' change in paper, that's it. however, moving from the rattler to the two-piece shell to the one piece larger shell is an innovative advancement, something historical in holder design.
the tricky thing is all about marketing, there aren't many white label 108******* holders but the two-piece shells are common by comparison.
I can understand the fondness for the NGC black holders and see them as sort of historical, also, but it doesn't represent anything historical past the fact that it was the first NGC shell type. in that regard I see them as the same as the next white ones, just a different color. what really makes them valuable is only that there are so few of them. a historically relevant NGC holder, from my perspective, is when NGC started to separate the insert from the coin capsule with a change in the holder, the "line" that still exists today. at the same time NGC made the holder thinner, but that isn't much of an innovation
there are other TPG "holders" that everyone sees as collectible but they only seem historical to me in terms of what they were trying to do, authenticate a coin and place it in some type of tamper-proof holder. in that regard I sort of like what ANACS did with photos, but the holders weren't really tamper-proof, being in a flip. ACG(Accugrade), for all the negative association, was sort of a historic thing that gets no respect. I mean, if we want to talk history and innovation then ACG should be at the forefront. that company(or more accurately, Alan Hagar) was a few years ahead of PCGS and NGC, maybe pioneered the tamper-proof, plastic encapsulation, and the holder had information and an image of the coin.
to me, these "collectible holders" only have value because there are such low numbers and collectors by nature chase after that sort of thing. are they historic?? I think most of them aren't.
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
I’ll dig it out sometime today and post pics. If I remember correctly it’s a nice looking coin. I believe the imprint is on the outside, whichever one that is.
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
The lack of a CAC sticker on the coin OP posted, combined with the 62 grade, and thus an elevated chance at gold CAC, gives that one some extra appeal.
Is yours a 2.1 or a 2.0?
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
I’ll dig it out sometime today and post pics. If I remember correctly it’s a nice looking coin. I believe the imprint is on the outside, whichever one that is.
Thanks. That's the 2.0, which is a little less scarce than the 2.1.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
It was fun to watch that auction and read the discussion here. I'm glad I have my own example from years ago, I'd hate to pay up for an ugly ol' 62 in this market today.
Well . . . . it is over. Just got back from taking a doggie for a ride . . . thought this was going to close tonight, but I never really looked.
I appreciated and studied Keets' discussion above. To be fair, I am much more of a numismatist than I am a plastic guy. I do enjoy subtleties of grading, revel in acquiring a true key date, and had quivering knees when I held Lakesammman's Stella years ago. (I think he enjoyed 'Bag Burn' in a totally different way.) The 'history' I discuss is in a broad context. Slab generations are certainly not in the same league as the Wright brothers, Tesla, or Alexander Bell in Boston telling Mr. Watson to "Come here." The slab 'historians', if I may be so bold, certainly do look at numbers extant as a function of perceived rarity and value DOES stem from this. An excellent point by Keets, and possibly the bulwark of the discussion. I see nothing I disagree with.
Yet the perception of 'history' is what I take from our posts. Just a matter of degree. I am a misplaced English teacher who should have taken roost in a history department . . . it is just that some aspects of the language came easier, and I was a wimp in challenging myself. I love the Mint discussions of release of the 1955 Lincoln Doubled Die . . . the lineage of the three 'types' of 1922 'No-D' Lincolns (yes, really only one) . . . the impact the San Francisco earthquake had on coinage and survival rates of "S" Mint examples (1901-S Quarters, 1904-S Halves, all dimes, etc.) . . . These (and many others) are all prime examples of how numismatics and historical events coincide and collide.
But the slab world has its own little interesting niches. The 108***** white slab was the first ever from our hosts (and yes Keets . . .I love the fact that Hagar pre-dated them. Had he been perhaps a bit more diplomatic or reasonable in business acumen, our slab world may have been much different today.) The first inserts, done on two dot-matrix printers in the PCGS office, represented a tumultuous time in what is now an enormous business. The initial inserts were supposed to be green, but the delivered ones on those first days were white by mistake. History. They lasted a day and a half (???).
The two-piece slab. I agree with Keets. A seminal moment. Why? R*****z got caught faking the (Rattler) slabs and PCGS burned the midnight oil trying to defeat the counterfeit possibilities. Hence, the Rattler inside an outer ring and a change of the insert patterned after US currency (thought to be harder to counterfeit) . . . the "Doily". History.
Pairing the slab generations with perceived grading at the time has launched countless threads here on our Boards. Again . . . historical in nature.
Looking at NGC and the original copper coins 'disappearing' into the void of blackness that was the NGC 1.0. Changing to the white and finding out that the original (2.1) was having to be redone 2-4 times each to prevent smearing of the hotstamp on the inside of the shell. They were actually so rare that the reason we still have to correct people every week here on 2.1 / 2.0 is due to the fact none were even KNOWN until after some of the seminal slab works had been published! The 2.1 is numerically "post-dated" to the 2.0 as there were none really KNOWN until after the 2.0 (hotstamp on the OUTSIDE) was acknowledged. History.
Too long a post, but for the 3-4 of you who actually get down this far and / or care . . . have fun. I have had a chance over the years to talk with three of the PCGS principals of the era, and frankly, they really don't remember that much or care about this niche market. They were bent on changing numismatic history, and those early days and what color insert arrived on the production floor didn't really matter much when they looked at the bottom line at 10:30 pm at night.
It is just the nutzos like me who spend time following up. Like Keets . . . I think I appreciate the larger things in history much more . . .
i probably own more of the these NGC 2.1 slabs than any other collector yet I did not pursue this auction because I did not see this thread as well as missed this ebay lot for sale.
I do not dispute the current pure fair market value of the NGC 2.1 slab as approximating the final sale price of this ebay lot ($427.77) but it is more than I am willing to pay for it only because I am not currently a motivated buyer as I already have numerous Morgan silver dollars in these slabs.
a scarce but equally inexpensive coin type not commonly found in the NGC 2.1 slab would be more attractive to me at even higher than the $427.77 amount.
I have no problem if someone can find a little pleasure in buying a piece of plastic for $427...I am certainly guilty of spending more and getting less on many occasions...
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
Tragic story!! I just remembered I forgot to take pictures of this coin. I went downstairs and grabbed it out of the safe and as I did it slipped out of my hands and hit the tile floor! 🤦🏽♂️😭 this is the resulting damage. I guess on the bright side, it wasn’t a NGC black insert. Guess I’ll have this in my collection for awhile. 😞
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
Tragic story!! I just remembered I forgot to take pictures of this coin. I went downstairs and grabbed it out of the safe and as I did it slipped out of my hands and hit the tile floor! 🤦🏽♂️😭 this is the resulting damage. I guess on the bright side, it wasn’t a NGC black insert. Guess I’ll have this in my collection for awhile. 😞
That’s terrible!! I was seriously considering buying it!! Was it a 2.1 or 2.0?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
@nk1nk said:
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
Tragic story!! I just remembered I forgot to take pictures of this coin. I went downstairs and grabbed it out of the safe and as I did it slipped out of my hands and hit the tile floor! 🤦🏽♂️😭 this is the resulting damage. I guess on the bright side, it wasn’t a NGC black insert. Guess I’ll have this in my collection for awhile. 😞
That’s terrible!! I was seriously considering buying it!! Was it a 2.1 or 2.0?
So after I dropped this slab I was so sick about it that I didn’t even put it back into the safe and it’s been sitting on my shelf in my closet ever since. I finally got sick of looking at it and I was contemplating what to do with it. I had purchased this coin from a seller on Instagram and paid $315 plus $8 shipping which at the time I felt was top dollar and seeing the one this post was originally about sell for $427 I figured that was the time to sell and a nice $100 profit would be nice since I own a couple other 2.0’s then the tragic drop happened 🤦🏽♂️
I almost just threw it up on the BST here with a $220 OBO and was hoping to settle between $180 and $220 and just lick my wounds and move forward but I decided to search eBay’s sold auctions and was surprised to see common date Morgan’s like mine going for over $700 and even $1,000 😳! I decided to take my chances with selling it on eBay in hopes of breaking even. I immediately got messages after the auction went live for a buy it now price and a few offers of around $300 but decided to let it ride. Final auction price $960! Unbelievable in my opinion, these slabs have gone to the moon and back. My auction had almost 40 watchers so there’s quite a few collectors out there looking for them.
Comments
Wouldn't be surprised to see it reach $400.........It's all about the plastic, from here on out.....
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
$350.00 with 18 hours to go.
peacockcoins
$350 with 19 hours left.
my first thought was unbelievable, followed closely by ridiculous and finalized with stupid.
I can understand some of the niche markets in the Hobby and how they're supported by collectors but "Holder Collecting" is one I just can't wrap my head around.
Keets is far from alone in this. We have heard similar and solid opinions about the "holder craze" even pre-dating my pumping up of the Doily here on the Boards. Certainly a fair thought. I also value his prescient comments in general and this one in particular.
I am sure there are some bidders on this piece who are in it for the 'flip'. Others for other reasons, but I DO believe a majority of those who might be interested in this NGC are there due to the history represented. We are in a unique position as collectors in a 40-70 (or thereabouts) age group. We have seen the advent of the TPG system, even recently highlighted in the RCMR from PCGS (nice mag by the way). A major change has happened in the "hobby of kings" with the coming (and in some cases going) of the TPG companies. As such, the early and rarer slabs represent not only a different period of grading, but also a very small sliver of what slabs are out there.
As history is one aspect of numismatics that many of us respect as collectors, this slab represents a part of that. Due to the fact that they were no where near common even back in the 1986-7 era (calculate slab rate x generation duration) , and added to the fact that so many have been cracked due to the (perceived) stiffer grading . . . the surviving examples that represent this history of the TPGs are now coveted by many, including those who appreciate the history of this part of our hobby.
Supply / Demand. It is simply that when I started the Doily 'thing', there were 108 known examples. Now look at the count. As the count rose, I hit 71% of all the known Doilies. Then the slab world learned. "Hey, this slab just isn't that rare!" But what is this one? This black slab? Those really simple looking white bricks? "Hey Ralph, you got any of these?"
Nope.
'Ralph' had a few Doilies . . . . but he had never seen a White NGC. Look at the pop reports for the 2.0 and 2.1 here in the search history. Now advance forward a decade and understand that there actually are a few more slab collectors than there are 2.1 / 2.0s. Bingo. Supply / Demand. One of our old hands here mentioned a hoard years ago. Never has appeared. Try to find one of these anywhere even at a major show. You can do a Box of 20 of 1893-S Morgans in 45 minutes at Long Beach . . . but let's see you do a "Box of 1" of the 2.1s. Why are they not worth tens of thousands? There are 3000 guys trying to build Morgan sets. There are 30-40 slab collectors (and two guys have got most of them). Supply / Demand.
I reiterate a previous point. This slab is a perfect storm. A common coin, in a sub-common grade, that actually doesn't have a lot of eye appeal. No PC58 1884-S Morgie that could 63 on a good day. No wowzer toning. No funkadelic pattern or obsolete denomination. Just a rinky-dink hunk 'o silver with some interesting plastic.
We are about to find out the new floor of the NGC White slabs . . . . . . . . . .
Drunner
I understand your point of view.
Personally, I think it would be cool to have one, just for the historical value, but I'd stop after that.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Walker . . . fully agreed. I have adjusted my acquisitions of slabs the same way. I have basically a 'Type Set' . . . and one or two of the older ones are just fine for me. History.
Drunner
Although I 'like' keet's comments- he is based on sound reasoning- I think back on how collectors must have felt when a limited few collected their silver commemorative half dollars in original mint packaging: even the early 50's mint sets and such. Now we look back and enjoy not only original coins yet also the original packaging they were in.
It is not such a large leap to see how the "original" pcgs and ngc slabs may strike a fancy to collectors. After all, we are a strange breed, and we do enjoy coins (and slab!) that make us feel good. The late eighties era of collecting was an enjoyable time, and this slab reminds me of that.
peacockcoins
just to be clear, I do in fact understand the historical nature of these various slabs and can see the interest in them. as DRUNNER said, since this example is really almost totally about the holder we'll know how they are valued. I just don't understand or appreciate the speculation in them. that's what I perceive a lot of this to be about, collectors who have discovered that they may be able to re-sell, but who aren't really collecting the history.
to that history, I only see a few aspects that would cause me to see the holders as collectible. I think the collectors of them tend to think the same, but what I believe really drives this "market" is what holder generation has the lowest extant number available. a change, no mater how subtle or bold, of the insert really doesn't seem like anything at all. what is the big deal about the PCGS 108****** holders simply because they are white?? why does everyone consider that historical?? it's a freakin' change in paper, that's it. however, moving from the rattler to the two-piece shell to the one piece larger shell is an innovative advancement, something historical in holder design.
the tricky thing is all about marketing, there aren't many white label 108******* holders but the two-piece shells are common by comparison.
I can understand the fondness for the NGC black holders and see them as sort of historical, also, but it doesn't represent anything historical past the fact that it was the first NGC shell type. in that regard I see them as the same as the next white ones, just a different color. what really makes them valuable is only that there are so few of them. a historically relevant NGC holder, from my perspective, is when NGC started to separate the insert from the coin capsule with a change in the holder, the "line" that still exists today. at the same time NGC made the holder thinner, but that isn't much of an innovation
there are other TPG "holders" that everyone sees as collectible but they only seem historical to me in terms of what they were trying to do, authenticate a coin and place it in some type of tamper-proof holder. in that regard I sort of like what ANACS did with photos, but the holders weren't really tamper-proof, being in a flip. ACG(Accugrade), for all the negative association, was sort of a historic thing that gets no respect. I mean, if we want to talk history and innovation then ACG should be at the forefront. that company(or more accurately, Alan Hagar) was a few years ahead of PCGS and NGC, maybe pioneered the tamper-proof, plastic encapsulation, and the holder had information and an image of the coin.
to me, these "collectible holders" only have value because there are such low numbers and collectors by nature chase after that sort of thing. are they historic?? I think most of them aren't.
Hammered at $427.77!!!!
Not bad, at all!!
I'll bet the seller is HAPPY!!
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I have a NGC white label common date Morgan MS63 cac sticker I’ll let go for $425 if you missed out on this one.
Images?
Date/MM?
2.0 or 2.1?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Sold. Wondering how much over melt that is?
Plastic melt not silver melt.
I’ll dig it out sometime today and post pics. If I remember correctly it’s a nice looking coin. I believe the imprint is on the outside, whichever one that is.
The lack of a CAC sticker on the coin OP posted, combined with the 62 grade, and thus an elevated chance at gold CAC, gives that one some extra appeal.
Is yours a 2.1 or a 2.0?
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
Thanks. That's the 2.0, which is a little less scarce than the 2.1.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
It was fun to watch that auction and read the discussion here. I'm glad I have my own example from years ago, I'd hate to pay up for an ugly ol' 62 in this market today.
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
Well . . . . it is over. Just got back from taking a doggie for a ride . . . thought this was going to close tonight, but I never really looked.
I appreciated and studied Keets' discussion above. To be fair, I am much more of a numismatist than I am a plastic guy. I do enjoy subtleties of grading, revel in acquiring a true key date, and had quivering knees when I held Lakesammman's Stella years ago. (I think he enjoyed 'Bag Burn' in a totally different way.) The 'history' I discuss is in a broad context. Slab generations are certainly not in the same league as the Wright brothers, Tesla, or Alexander Bell in Boston telling Mr. Watson to "Come here." The slab 'historians', if I may be so bold, certainly do look at numbers extant as a function of perceived rarity and value DOES stem from this. An excellent point by Keets, and possibly the bulwark of the discussion. I see nothing I disagree with.
Yet the perception of 'history' is what I take from our posts. Just a matter of degree. I am a misplaced English teacher who should have taken roost in a history department . . . it is just that some aspects of the language came easier, and I was a wimp in challenging myself. I love the Mint discussions of release of the 1955 Lincoln Doubled Die . . . the lineage of the three 'types' of 1922 'No-D' Lincolns (yes, really only one) . . . the impact the San Francisco earthquake had on coinage and survival rates of "S" Mint examples (1901-S Quarters, 1904-S Halves, all dimes, etc.) . . . These (and many others) are all prime examples of how numismatics and historical events coincide and collide.
But the slab world has its own little interesting niches. The 108***** white slab was the first ever from our hosts (and yes Keets . . .I love the fact that Hagar pre-dated them. Had he been perhaps a bit more diplomatic or reasonable in business acumen, our slab world may have been much different today.) The first inserts, done on two dot-matrix printers in the PCGS office, represented a tumultuous time in what is now an enormous business. The initial inserts were supposed to be green, but the delivered ones on those first days were white by mistake. History. They lasted a day and a half (???).
The two-piece slab. I agree with Keets. A seminal moment. Why? R*****z got caught faking the (Rattler) slabs and PCGS burned the midnight oil trying to defeat the counterfeit possibilities. Hence, the Rattler inside an outer ring and a change of the insert patterned after US currency (thought to be harder to counterfeit) . . . the "Doily". History.
Pairing the slab generations with perceived grading at the time has launched countless threads here on our Boards. Again . . . historical in nature.
Looking at NGC and the original copper coins 'disappearing' into the void of blackness that was the NGC 1.0. Changing to the white and finding out that the original (2.1) was having to be redone 2-4 times each to prevent smearing of the hotstamp on the inside of the shell. They were actually so rare that the reason we still have to correct people every week here on 2.1 / 2.0 is due to the fact none were even KNOWN until after some of the seminal slab works had been published! The 2.1 is numerically "post-dated" to the 2.0 as there were none really KNOWN until after the 2.0 (hotstamp on the OUTSIDE) was acknowledged. History.
Too long a post, but for the 3-4 of you who actually get down this far and / or care . . . have fun. I have had a chance over the years to talk with three of the PCGS principals of the era, and frankly, they really don't remember that much or care about this niche market. They were bent on changing numismatic history, and those early days and what color insert arrived on the production floor didn't really matter much when they looked at the bottom line at 10:30 pm at night.
It is just the nutzos like me who spend time following up. Like Keets . . . I think I appreciate the larger things in history much more . . .
Drunner
Back when we were building up a Census of these, I bought every one I have from $190 to $220. But that was 10 years ago.
Drunner
Ridiculous IMHO but to each their own. 🤦♂️
As an exonumist a lot of people think I’m crazy, so I guess we’re even haha.
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
i probably own more of the these NGC 2.1 slabs than any other collector yet I did not pursue this auction because I did not see this thread as well as missed this ebay lot for sale.
I do not dispute the current pure fair market value of the NGC 2.1 slab as approximating the final sale price of this ebay lot ($427.77) but it is more than I am willing to pay for it only because I am not currently a motivated buyer as I already have numerous Morgan silver dollars in these slabs.
Added comment:
a scarce but equally inexpensive coin type not commonly found in the NGC 2.1 slab would be more attractive to me at even higher than the $427.77 amount.
I have no problem if someone can find a little pleasure in buying a piece of plastic for $427...I am certainly guilty of spending more and getting less on many occasions...
Tragic story!! I just remembered I forgot to take pictures of this coin. I went downstairs and grabbed it out of the safe and as I did it slipped out of my hands and hit the tile floor! 🤦🏽♂️😭 this is the resulting damage. I guess on the bright side, it wasn’t a NGC black insert. Guess I’ll have this in my collection for awhile. 😞
That’s terrible!! I was seriously considering buying it!! Was it a 2.1 or 2.0?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I can’t even believe that happened. It’s a 2.0
So after I dropped this slab I was so sick about it that I didn’t even put it back into the safe and it’s been sitting on my shelf in my closet ever since. I finally got sick of looking at it and I was contemplating what to do with it. I had purchased this coin from a seller on Instagram and paid $315 plus $8 shipping which at the time I felt was top dollar and seeing the one this post was originally about sell for $427 I figured that was the time to sell and a nice $100 profit would be nice since I own a couple other 2.0’s then the tragic drop happened 🤦🏽♂️
I almost just threw it up on the BST here with a $220 OBO and was hoping to settle between $180 and $220 and just lick my wounds and move forward but I decided to search eBay’s sold auctions and was surprised to see common date Morgan’s like mine going for over $700 and even $1,000 😳! I decided to take my chances with selling it on eBay in hopes of breaking even. I immediately got messages after the auction went live for a buy it now price and a few offers of around $300 but decided to let it ride. Final auction price $960! Unbelievable in my opinion, these slabs have gone to the moon and back. My auction had almost 40 watchers so there’s quite a few collectors out there looking for them.
Wow! I can’t believe it still went close to 1000 after it was damaged! Glad to see you didn’t take a loss. Incredible
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Wow.
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
There’s one on eBay currently at $960 with 3 days left. 😳