@BryceM said:
Ah, the old grading from photos thing......
I'm pretty sure you could take a photo of this coin that made it look solidly MS. It looks much better in the slab shots. What people are seeing as wear is probably some mix of die erosion and poor strike. If those areas show unbroken luster, it isn't wear. The toning gives it a bit of a rough planchet / ED look. I would have guessed MS, but something lower than 65.
Most of us only have the photos to go on.
Have you seen this in hand? Or are you also grading from photos?
Perhaps that is die erosion and a poor strike, but if so, under market grading, I could see that as a MS55
Certainly an opinion can change once seen in hand but the OP Buffalo, based on the photo, is not AU. So your thoughts about poor strike (die detail probably) or erosion is certainly likely. However, the first thing one looks for when determining wear is the upper hip of the buffalo (look for a plateau). That's usually the first place Buffs show wear....usually. I don't see that in the photo. And given the grade and the sticker and the fact it's a 13P Type one (many were saved) there's a reasonable chance the coin was not circulated. JMO.
@BUFFNIXX said:
And I don’t think anyone has mentioned the beautiful label that ngc has put on the inside of the reverse of the slab.
Kind of says it all I think! -- “umismatic uarantee corporation of america”.
You are joking right? After all this time do you not realize that the reverse label on these holders is on the OUTSIDE of the slab and is very frequently damaged by dealer and auction house stickers?
I would like Bill Fivaz to grade this coin. For my money, he is the best Buffalo nickel grader alive. BTW, I was at 63 on this coin. We teach that the grading companies rarely go above 63 when there is a weak strike or worn die. I guess there are always exceptions.
@Zoins said:
My first guess was AU55 due to wear before seeing the slab. Looking it it more, I would grade it lower as it has a scratches on the reverse.
Here's PCGS MS65 to compare:
That is an exceptional looking 65 IMO, and I think a bit unfair to compare the OP coin to. I would bet the coin pictured here would bring at least 66 price for the strike and color combination(based on this trueview), the only thing I would net against it is the clash through EPU, and that's pretty minor.
For the record, no, I would not be willing to pay 65 money for the coin in the OP, at least based on those pictures.
@Zoins said:
My first guess was AU55 due to wear before seeing the slab. Looking it it more, I would grade it lower as it has a scratches on the reverse.
Here's PCGS MS65 to compare:
That is an exceptional looking 65 IMO, and I think a bit unfair to compare the OP coin to. I would bet the coin pictured here would bring at least 66 price for the strike and color combination, the only thing I would net against it is the clash through EPU, and that's pretty minor.
It should be fair, especially from strike perspective. I was looking to show the details in the Indian's hair and the buffalo's shoulder. This also used to be in the ANACS MS63-64 grade range according to the owner.
Additionally, the OP coin is CAC. This one hasn't been sent in, but do you think this would get a gold bean?
Nope, haven't seen it, but I've played around with coin photography enough to understand how things can look much worse, or much better than they actually are. Luster and hairlines - two things crucial to grading that are at times impossible to evaluate from a photo.
If a number of professional graders see it as a gem and CAC agrees, the most likely answer is that the photo doesn't do it justice.
Many really, really nice coins aren't photogenic, and they're at a disadvantage on the Internet. Some are more photogenic than they really deserve, and they often do well at auction and on dealers' websites.
@Zoins said:
My first guess was AU55 due to wear before seeing the slab. Looking it it more, I would grade it lower as it has a scratches on the reverse.
Here's PCGS MS65 to compare:
That is an exceptional looking 65 IMO, and I think a bit unfair to compare the OP coin to. I would bet the coin pictured here would bring at least 66 price for the strike and color combination, the only thing I would net against it is the clash through EPU, and that's pretty minor.
It should be fair, especially from strike perspective. I was looking to show the details in the Indian's hair and the buffalo's shoulder. This also used to be in the ANACS MS63-64 grade range according to the owner.
Additionally, the OP coin is CAC. This one hasn't been sent in, but do you think this would get a gold bean?
To me, bean or not doesn't matter, that coin is excellent
@tradedollarnut said:
Back in 1989, before a certain former forum member started bragging about what he could do to Buffalo nickels, this was exceptional color....
You weren't there.
I was.
The Forum wasn't even a gleam in @homerunhall's eye.
This has not been, at any time since I started collecting again in 1972, considered "exceptional" color.
If you mistyped and intended 1999, I was there and you weren't,
Neither of the two best nickel doctors around (BM and NC) would have let that out the door. Not to mention that no one would waste their time on working with such poor quality raw material with so little value if successful.
@tradedollarnut said:
Back in 1989, before a certain former forum member started bragging about what he could do to Buffalo nickels, this was exceptional color....
You weren't there.
I was.
The Forum wasn't even a gleam in @homerunhall's eye.
This has not been, at any time since I started collecting again in 1972, considered "exceptional" color.
If you mistyped and intended 1999, I was there and you weren't,
Neither of the two best nickel doctors around (BM and NC) would have let that out the door. Not to mention that no one would waste their time on working with such poor quality raw material with so little value if successful.
@tradedollarnut said:
Back in 1989, before a certain former forum member started bragging about what he could do to Buffalo nickels, this was exceptional color....
You weren't there.
I was.
The Forum wasn't even a gleam in @homerunhall's eye.
This has not been, at any time since I started collecting again in 1972, considered "exceptional" color.
If you mistyped and intended 1999, I was there and you weren't,
Neither of the two best nickel doctors around (BM and NC) would have let that out the door. Not to mention that no one would waste their time on working with such poor quality raw material with so little value if successful.
Poetic license to get my real point across....
Sorry, I'm a bit past "dramatic hyperbole". Since I've never heard an iota of knowledge or interest about this series from you before, I had assumed you were just ignorant.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@Zoins
Always nice to find MS62s like that which look gem in the photos, but a quick look through a loupe can reveal why it is a 62. (in most cases - sometimes you just scratch your head)
Here is one such case - also did not sticker.
Comments
Certainly an opinion can change once seen in hand but the OP Buffalo, based on the photo, is not AU. So your thoughts about poor strike (die detail probably) or erosion is certainly likely. However, the first thing one looks for when determining wear is the upper hip of the buffalo (look for a plateau). That's usually the first place Buffs show wear....usually. I don't see that in the photo. And given the grade and the sticker and the fact it's a 13P Type one (many were saved) there's a reasonable chance the coin was not circulated. JMO.
jom
You are joking right? After all this time do you not realize that the reverse label on these holders is on the OUTSIDE of the slab and is very frequently damaged by dealer and auction house stickers?
Collector, occasional seller
I would like Bill Fivaz to grade this coin. For my money, he is the best Buffalo nickel grader alive. BTW, I was at 63 on this coin. We teach that the grading companies rarely go above 63 when there is a weak strike or worn die. I guess there are always exceptions.
That is an exceptional looking 65 IMO, and I think a bit unfair to compare the OP coin to. I would bet the coin pictured here would bring at least 66 price for the strike and color combination(based on this trueview), the only thing I would net against it is the clash through EPU, and that's pretty minor.
For the record, no, I would not be willing to pay 65 money for the coin in the OP, at least based on those pictures.
Collector, occasional seller
It should be fair, especially from strike perspective. I was looking to show the details in the Indian's hair and the buffalo's shoulder. This also used to be in the ANACS MS63-64 grade range according to the owner.
Additionally, the OP coin is CAC. This one hasn't been sent in, but do you think this would get a gold bean?
@Zoins
Nope, haven't seen it, but I've played around with coin photography enough to understand how things can look much worse, or much better than they actually are. Luster and hairlines - two things crucial to grading that are at times impossible to evaluate from a photo.
If a number of professional graders see it as a gem and CAC agrees, the most likely answer is that the photo doesn't do it justice.
Many really, really nice coins aren't photogenic, and they're at a disadvantage on the Internet. Some are more photogenic than they really deserve, and they often do well at auction and on dealers' websites.
To me, bean or not doesn't matter, that coin is excellent
Collector, occasional seller
I really think this is a cool looking slab holder just like this, what say you
UMISMATIC UARANTY CORPORATION OF AMERICA
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
That is one gorgeous 1913 Var 1 Jeremy!
Scary stuff those nickel doctors. Pretty sure I know who NC is and he used arsenic!
I think the OP's coin is uncirculated. Just not anywhere near a 65 based on that image.
It's a no-line fatty CAC. I don't think it's getting replaced any time soon.
…I see an Indian and a Buffalo…I also see an ashtray with a freshly rolled joint…gotta go fellas, have fun
Poetic license to get my real point across....
The torn holo is a shame but why would you want to get it replaced right away?? A nice chunk of my collection is in these holders and I LOVE them.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
amwldcoin, you remind me of this story ambro51 posted about coin collector dying from cleaning coins with cyanide.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/726955/june-23-1922-former-ans-vice-president-j-sanford-saltus-dies-from-cyanide-poisoning-post-a-d
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Well that was a nice bedtime story! I think I’ll use tequila next time I’m dipping coins, that way there’s less confusion.
Nice Peace Lance!
Sorry, I'm a bit past "dramatic hyperbole". Since I've never heard an iota of knowledge or interest about this series from you before, I had assumed you were just ignorant.
Here's a MS62 for comparison.
The Type 1's are really nice coins.
If this isn't wear on Black Diamonds hip and Iron Tails cheek I'm a Buffalos Uncle.
Well, I admit I am anyway............................
Pete
@Zoins
Always nice to find MS62s like that which look gem in the photos, but a quick look through a loupe can reveal why it is a 62. (in most cases - sometimes you just scratch your head)
Here is one such case - also did not sticker.
69.
ANACS.
@Zoins
That's a real nice coin, Zoins.
Go figure.
Pete