Why isn't this proof coin certified?

leothelyon

Accordingly, there are 5 PF66's, 39 PF67's and 5 PF68's cameo's with just 3 DCAM's certified for the 1957 proof Jefferson nickel. Only 53 1957 proofs have been certified as cameo and deep cameo. So why is this 1957 proof not certified? Link

Leo

merz2

leo
All I can say if it were mine,it would be on it's way already.WOW!!! This seller buys and sells a lot of proofs.He just purchased a NGC PR68 CAM Lincoln from me.He's also looking at a couple of others.

clevegreg

Probably because they would LIKE to use PCGS, but their grading has been so inconsistent that they would rather not suffer the heartburn associated with it.

MrKelso

That is a Beaut!!!!!

DCAMFranklin

Rest assured Leo that if Ol'Funderburke TRULY thought that coin would go in a PR-67 Cameo holder, then he would have sent it in for Certification. I've seen many an e-mail from Ol'Funderburke forwarded by unhappy buyers. He tells them something to the effect of, if that coin would have made Cameo at PCGS, do you think I would be selling it on Ebay? Yet his auction descriptions certainly do more than imply the coins will make a grade at a 3rd party grading service. Then, even though he is a life member of the ANA, he will refuse to accept a return!!

You should look at the thread entitled Pepperdoodles.

Russ

It's not certified because it will not look anywhere near that good in reality. This seller is an excellent photographer.

He also submits in high volume to both PCGS and NGC. So, ask yourself: If he already submits regularly, why is he selling this coin raw?

Russ, NCNE

osirisMMII

I've been looking for a nice '57 for a long time but.......... 100:1 this coin has been certified numerous times.......... and never to the sellers satisfaction This guy buys and sells and slabs more than enough coins to know what he has. The coin probably keeps coming back in a 67 slab and he figures he can get more for the "raw" coin. I'm guessing something is obviously wrong with the coin that keeps it from a higher grade......... and I'm not gonna spend $400 to find out what the problem is. When you supersize the pics you'll notice a lot of marks on Jeffs jaw - probably enough to be considered a "break" in the CAM and also a light spot on the Monticello (maybe just the pic due to lighting). Now with all that said it is still probably the best looking '57 I've seen *ugh*

bigt

The cameo devices are too shiny. If you hold a light cam. jeff at the proper angle and in the right light it will look DCAM.

Tim

au58

It looks to me like there is evidence of contact on the jaw just underneath the ear. In all three pictures, even as the light changes, the marks remain. This coin will not make 65.

bigt

TTT, this needs to be next to Russ's photo post

RGL

Agreed. A 57 CAM Jeff is a truly scarce coin, so I am not badmouthing this piece, for it is a desirable coin, but ... the mentioned hairline, the chatter on the jaw and the field spotting, particularly on the reverse, does not allow this coin to make 67. It might stretch to a 66, but could be a 65. If this was a 67, or likely even a 66, it would be holdered and worth much more than the asking price, in my opinion. By way of reference, Rick Tomaska currently has a PCGS PR-67 1957 CAM LINK up for bid with a $550 start and a $600 BIN, with no takers with 20 hours to go. The coin in question looks much better, but this one indeed is in a slab and Rick never has been known for his beautiful images...

coppercoins

What I see here is a bunch of skepticism over a coin simply because it's NOT in a slab. If it were my coin and I were offering it for sale, I would disclose anything I saw on the coin, but it certainly would NOT be in a slab. Is this what the numismatic hobby is coming to? A bunch of plastic collectors that wouldn't touch a coin with a ten foot pole because it's not entombed in a piece of expensive plastic?

I'd rather have my coins uncooked, thanks.

Dog97

The devices on the obv look brilliant rather than frosty. There is something weird about the pictures because the obv has a red tone and the rev is white. Hmmmmm.........
osirisMMII said there are "marks" on the jaw but it looks worn to the bone to me.

RGL

Copper:

The seller claims there "are no problems" with this coin, despite the spotting on the reverse and the obvious chatter on the jaw, a particularly sensitive spot on Jeff grading, even more so with proofs. A degree of skepticism is warranted with his claim it is PR-67. And, in a nod to Russ' coin doctoring that consisted of no more than angling of the coin he displayed, slight-CAM coins can indeed be made to appear CAM or even better with the right photography -- not that I am accusing this seller of same. I recently bought what appeared to be a couple of raw CAM 50s Jeffs ... a 55 was not a CAM and the 54 was indeed a CAM, but had lots of device hairlines that did not show in the photo and would have relegated it to 64 at best. Thankfully, this was a good seller with a return policy and I bought knowing the coins could be returned. As always, caveat emptor.

coppercoins

And playing devil's advocate, there could be a chance the problems you guys are talking about are in the lighting or in the photo and not on the coin...nobody knows for sure without seeing the coin.

Dog97

The marks I see are on the coin and not in the lights.

Placid

Could be a chance. Are you willing to take the chance at the bin price?
I know I wouldn't.

osirisMMII

<< <i> By way of reference, Rick Tomaska currently has a PCGS PR-67 1957 CAM <a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=804687150" target=blank>LINK</A> up for bid with a $550 start and a $600 BIN, with no takers with 20 hours to go. The coin in question looks much better, but this one indeed is in a slab and Rick never has been known for his beautiful images... >>




20 hours to go on the 5th or 6th listing I've watched the R&I coin for months now, but get this incredibly sharp pain in my hand when I go to place a bid

"Is this what the numismatic hobby is coming to? A bunch of plastic collectors that wouldn't touch a coin with a ten foot pole because it's not entombed in a piece of expensive plastic?" Well coppercoins when it comes to buying a raw coin from a person that sells high-quality slabbed coins shouldn't you scratch your head at least once? I'd buy the coin in a heartbeat at a price that seems to correspond with what I see and not with what the seller hypes!

leothelyon

Fortunately, I have this proof coin in PF67 Cam. Although in the green label PCGS holder, I was able to obtain this coin for $120 but that was 6-7 years ago. But is you were able to find out the percent growth
in relation to the grade, $550 -$600 may be a bargain. The PCGS price guide lists it at $700.

Leo

CarlWohlforth

All this seller's cameos look super deep cameo. The scan sure does look nice though.

Is it possible that the marks on the jaw are from the die? I see those on some very highly graded proof Jeffs...

I bought a raw super looking Lincoln a few years ago. I thought it might not DCAM because the frost on the wheat on the reverse was weak. Well it made DCAM, but I had overlooked some hairlines. It ended up a 64 DCAM.

If this coin made 64 DCAM it might be worth the price. If it makes 67 Cameo it might be worth the price. Somehow I suspect it wouldn't make either. Great looking image though!

I would never buy an expensive raw coin without extensive personal examination. I don't have the luxury or opportunity to personally examine many coins on a daily basis. So when buying coins by mail order or over the Internet I will only look seriously at slabbed coins, unless I have super trust in the seller.