The Anti-Michael Coin: 1895 Dollar PR-10

CalGold

I was browsing the net last night and came upon an unusual item being offered by David Lawrence. No, not the 1894-s dime. I mean something unusual!

An 1895 dollar PR-10. The vestiges of wire rim show that this is a circulated proof.

Here is the image. I hope the folks at David Lawrence don't mind my borrowing their photo for this educational purpose.


CG

shirohniichan

Too cool! I don't know if it's because I've been braddickized or just because I've been collecting well-circulated darkside stuff for so long, but I'm getting more interested in low grade coins rarely found that heavily circulated.

keithdagen

What's annoying is that they had this same coin in about a month ago, with high quality scans of the piece. Now, they have changed to including a full pic of the slab in the scan, so you don't get high-quality scans of the coin in question anymore.

leothelyon

In my opinion, because most of the proof qualities for this coin are gone or have been distroyed through heavy circuation, but withstanding the fact, it was originally struck as a proof. This coin is a damaged proof coin and should not have warranted a grade.

Leo

shirohniichan

This coin is a damaged proof coin and should not have warranted a grade.

Leftover proofs were released into circulation from time to time, so I don't see a problem with grading it as any other circulated coin. Calling it "damaged" seems odd to me, unless you beleive all circulation is damage.

keithdagen

Many issues reached circulation, or were used as pocket pieces, so all of the grading services will grade circulated proofs the same way they would circulated business strikes. A PR-06 Gobrecht was recently pointed out, and I have seen many gold pieces graded in the PR-50's.

BillJones

I know that there are diagnostic markers that delineate the known varieties of 1895 Proof dollars and this one probably has them. Still given the grade it’s impossible to determine if this piece really was struck as a Proof. After all Proof dies were used to make business strike at times in the 19th century. Tell me I’m daft.

And the really neat thing about this piece is that it has been graded right on the button. I’ve seen a few key date Morgans that looked like this that were in VF holders!

airplanenut

<< <i> Calling it "damaged" seems odd to me, unless you beleive all circulation is damage. >>

That's what PCI thought of Braddicks sac!

Placid

There was a pattern walking liberty half pulled from circulation in 1964.
It was stolen from someone in the 1930's.

tjkillian

Since Proof is a method of manufacture, not a grade, any grade from PO-01 through 70 should also apply to proofs. If coin is clearly a proof, such as a 1895 Morgan dollar, any grade that applies should apply.

Tom

lordmarcovan

Right. And circulation wear does not equal "damage".

shirohniichan

And circulation wear does not equal "damage".

Amen. That's what peeves me about those who say, "I only collect MS coins because I don't like ugly, circulated ones." I don't collect many ugly circulated coins-- mostly beautiful circulated coins.

leothelyon

This coin is a damaged proof coin and should not have warranted a grade.

This may have been an understatement not ever seeing the coin up front (only from the pic) but I guess if the fields are indicated as a proof...being somewhat reflective.......but if proofs are to be upheld to the highest standard in quality of U.S. workmanship nontheless, this coin fails miserably. Given the fact, this date and denomination received special treatment due to its rarity, if it is indeed a regular struck proof in light of BillJones assessment. It's difficult to imagine a proof of this quality fitting into a high grade Morgan dollar collection.

Leo

keithdagen

6,113 Morgan Proofs graded based on online reports, of which, 212 are graded as PR-58 or less, only 68 of which are the 1895 proof.

Maybe you need to reread the PCGS Guide To Grading?

Dog97

Hey that's a cool Proof 10. I like it.

airplanenut

Just think- when I wear down my Jeff to a nice... say PR20 or lower, the S mintmark will still have the grade be PR, even if it doesn't look PR... only if it cannot be identified will the coin not be labelled PR.

braddick

<< <i>

<< <i> Calling it "damaged" seems odd to me, unless you beleive all circulation is damage. >>

That's what PCI thought of Braddicks sac! >>



I hope a stranger reading this knows we're talking about COINS.

- I love this one! I'm on my way now to their site to check out the price.
(I'm prepared to be scared.)

Anyone who calles WEAR "damage" is getting personal (well, not really).

If that were the case I'd have the most damaged set of coins out there.

Beatlemen

Just curious what is the asking price of the coin? That is probably the cheapest 1895 Morgan proof you will ever seen..

braddick

<< <i>Just curious what is the asking price of the coin? That is probably the cheapest 1895 Morgan proof you will ever seen.. >>



I looked it up and was a bit taken back by the price: $14,500.00.

To make myself feel better I placed an order for an NCG "Binion" dollar. It has no grade on the insert but David Lawrence states it's about VF or so. Only $18.00.

Yes, I bought the Holder.

leothelyon

I guess the word "damaged" was not a good choice. Perhaps"ruined" would have been a better word for it.

In another thread, it was discussed that mint state isn't mint state once the coin in question shows wear from circulation. So why and when is a proof coin not a proof coin? When it turns into crap and fails (airplanenut's definition) to be identified as such? I realize I'm comparing oranges to apples here but rarity does play a role here and so does the market. And this standard has applied to other examples of rarities when it comes to proof coins.

Leo

keithdagen

Simple to me -- Proof is not a state of preservation, it is a minting process. Mint State is a state of preservation, business strike is the mintage process. A circulated proof has no more damage than a circulated business strike.

michael

i love that coin it is a rreally nice vg 10 and it would make a great addition in a set of morgans in circ!

i was wondering about the price and i saw it was 14500 wow

i can buy a really nice close to gem proof twenty cent piece and choice proof seated dollar for that with lots to spare!

sincerely michael

shirohniichan

Perhaps"ruined" would have been a better word for it.

No, "circulated" is the best word for it.

i can buy a really nice close to gem proof twenty cent piece and choice proof seated dollar for that with lots to spare!

Amen, Michael. Better yet, I'll take a gem BU 1876 20 cent piece and and a nice 1859-S or 1872-S seated dollar.

Higashiyama

I would really like to buy that coin, crack it out, and stuff it in my Whitman album. But the price seems a little bit steep -- it seems like
$ 11,000 - 12,000 is more plausible. I think you could get an OK PR62 for perhaps $ 17,000.

Outhaul

I always thought the term was "Impaired Proof". This term applies to any proof coin that has been mishandled, circulated, scratched, etc. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Cheers,

Bob

Higashiyama

I think impaired proof would refer to a coin that had some sort of numismatic abuse, poor care, scratches, etc, but would not refer to a coin that had been handled to the point of "normal" wear. As noted previously, there are some cases where proof really were released into circulation. 1836 Gobrecht dollars are a good example.

Another amusing example of a proof that made its way into circulation is the famous "ice cream cone" example of the 1894s dime.

BigE

I wonder how long that coin was passed around before it was plucked from circulation. 5-10-15 years? More? Does anyone have an idea of what it was worth say around 1915? Perhaps it was dipped or harshly cleaned in the 20's and the circulation of it removed all traces----kind of ironic that this would allow it to be PCGS slabbed if this occurred----------------------------------------------------BigE

shirohniichan

If only coins could talk...

I'm sure the circulated 1895 would have a much more interesting story to tell than the 1884-CC dollar I bought. Mine would have said, "I sat in a bag inside a vault for almost 100 years."

airplanenut

Look at the cameo contrast! !!!