Interesting Bust Dollar I saw today.

ajaan

I was at the Niagara Falls coin club show today and saw this Bust Dollar for sale. I've never seen on like this before.

Morgan13

I'm surprised the US mint let that circulate without it being pulled. In today's world an error like that might be sent back to the mint and destroyed. Fortunately this one was allowed to find its way into collectors hands.

AUandAG

@150K said:
I'm surprised the US mint let that circulate without it being pulled. In today's world an error like that might be sent back to the mint and destroyed. Fortunately this one was allowed to find its way into collectors hands.

From the looks of it, it saw a lot of hands before any collector got his hands on it!

bob
vegas baby!

johnny9434

I'm happy it made this far. Nice error, I like 👍

What was the ball park price of it, just curios

ajaan

@johnny9434 said:
I'm happy it made this far. Nice error, I like 👍

What was the ball park price of it, just curios

Way above what I could afford.

CaptHenway

I love it

alefzero

As a variety, this (BB-241) is among the top few most commonly encountered Bust dollars. It's very cool and all, but I have seen more impressive and coveted Bust dollar errors languish in inventories. Seems they are routinely priced far above a reasonable market, waiting for the irrational buyer.

291fifth

That one stayed in circulation for a long time. Apparently early 19th century folks did not care about errors.

CaptHenway

@291fifth said:
That one stayed in circulation for a long time. Apparently early 19th century folks did not care about errors.

Nor did it get exported. I wonder if bullion brokers of the early 190th century would have automatically rejected an off center coin because it looked clipped, rather than just checking the weight.

gumby1234

Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

telephoto1

@291fifth said:
That one stayed in circulation for a long time. Apparently early 19th century folks did not care about errors.

They likely couldn't afford to hold on to it. $1 was righteous money in 1802... might have been a week's pay for some.

braddick

@telephoto1 said:

@291fifth said:
That one stayed in circulation for a long time. Apparently early 19th century folks did not care about errors.

They likely couldn't afford to hold on to it. $1 was righteous money in 1802... might have been a week's pay for some.

What is interesting about your statement is it is still- as far as its numismatic value- might be a week's pay for some now.

291fifth

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

It should have been details graded. Inconsistent standards don't help a grading company's reputation.

OAKSTAR

@291fifth said:
That one stayed in circulation for a long time. Apparently early 19th century folks did not care about errors.

It sure past thru a lot of hands and pockets, during its commerce years. If it could only talk.

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

Old scratches? Market acceptable?

gumby1234

@OAKSTAR they look like very old scratches, but they are deep and they look intentionally done like graffiti. Details should still be details. Somebody would still buy the coin in a details holder.

telephoto1

@291fifth said:

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

It should have been details graded. Inconsistent standards don't help a grading company's reputation.

In my experience it seems that early US type quite often gets a pass on things that would get more recent issues into a details holder.

gumby1234

@telephoto1 said:

@291fifth said:

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

It should have been details graded. Inconsistent standards don't help a grading company's reputation.

In my experience it seems that early US type quite often gets a pass on things that would get more recent issues into a details holder.

I could see a light cleaning on a 200 year old coin getting a pass, but deep scratches, holes, graffiti should not.

braddick

@gumby1234 said:

@telephoto1 said:

@291fifth said:

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

It should have been details graded. Inconsistent standards don't help a grading company's reputation.

In my experience it seems that early US type quite often gets a pass on things that would get more recent issues into a details holder.

I could see a light cleaning on a 200 year old coin getting a pass, but deep scratches, holes, graffiti should not.

I've yet to see a hole or graffiti get a pass. Perhaps there are PCGS problem-free slabbed coins out there with such- I just haven't come across one yet.
As far as the OP's coin I can see where members may have an issue with it as it sits.
It personally doesn't bother me too much- I think the error status of this one reaches a cool factor and I forgive the mishandling transgressions it has suffered.

telephoto1

@gumby1234 said:

@telephoto1 said:

@291fifth said:

@gumby1234 said:
Wonder how it straight graded with those large scratches?

It should have been details graded. Inconsistent standards don't help a grading company's reputation.

In my experience it seems that early US type quite often gets a pass on things that would get more recent issues into a details holder.

I could see a light cleaning on a 200 year old coin getting a pass, but deep scratches, holes, graffiti should not.

I totally agree. The OP coin in question should be in a details holder with those scratches. Cleaning... to be honest a LOT of circ coinage of that vintage has at least been wiped if not cleaned at some point. Some of them retone naturally over time and hide it well enough to make the coin market acceptable at a straight grade. Holes, graffiti- those are totally different and should be an instant details grade.

telephoto1

@braddick said:

I've yet to see a hole or graffiti get a pass. Perhaps there are PCGS problem-free slabbed coins out there with such- I just haven't come across one yet.
As far as the OP's coin I can see where members may have an issue with it as it sits.
It personally doesn't bother me too much- I think the error status of this one reaches a cool factor and I forgive the mishandling transgressions it has suffered.

Agreed. It's still a cool error. And I think you may have touched on the reason it got a pass for the scratches.

alefzero

It is funny that the grade is splitting hairs between G4 and G6, but ignored the scratches. I know the services can be a bit liberal in pretty low grades and I am not sure if E (error) coins are registry admissible. Nonetheless, the market probably would value it the same as a G graded coin anyway.

Sure wish my 1797 BB-72 had the one scratch (lower reverse away from prime time) overlooked and straight-graded XF.

jacrispies

I am a sucker for early errors.

This example is coming up in a Stack's auction:

jayPem

Prefer op coin to the 58 above...

HiBucky

Price is under 9 K .. Send me a text if your interested I can put you in touch with the owner...

jim