This one I regretted 11 minutes after buying

Singapore

I bought this one a few years ago in a PCGS XF45 holder:



It actually looks better in the photo than it is, as there are a whole series of intentional (ie man-made) scratches and linear depressions on the obverse covering most of the field to the right of the figure. But I thought it was super rare (wrong) and I'd not see a better one anytime soon (wrong).

Shortly after buying it I found on the interent that it was from a Superior auction a year earlier at which time it was sold raw and called 'VF-30, scratched' and sold for about half what I had paid.

I ended up selling the coin to Bowers when I bought the Eliasberg coin a while later and actually got more than I paid - which is astonishing, given their normal buying MO. I suspect they valued the coin higher as it has a full date which is not common on these.

I will never buy another coin with a 'problem' like this one as everytime I looked at it during my brief ownership tenure I got depressed - and who needs a hobby that depresses them?

The other moral of this story was to do the research first (obviously) - so I pretty much don't buy anything anymore unless I know its 'history'.

UncleJoe

I don't understand.

First off that is one nice coin, problems and all.

Next you only became depressed after finding out what someone bought/sold it for but you had to like something to have purchased it.

Then you eventually sold it for more than you paid.

What's the problem again?

Joe.

BillJones

I don't get it either. It's nice coin for that type.

And as I dealer I have sold to Bowers on several occasions (not Bowers himself, but one of their buyers), and I always found them to be very fair payers.

Singapore

1) Trust me - its worse than the photo. The scrathes and 'ruts' in the surface were done by someone and are just a little bit less bad than if that same guy had carved his initials into the coin.

2) I became depressed because the scratches and ruts lept out at me shouting 'look at us!' every time I went near the coin, and the previous grade and price realized only confirmed to me that others had a similar view.

3) Call me crazy, but it does matter to me that the same coin was panned in its last catalog appearance and sold for squat. Keep in mind that a room full of dealers and collectors (and those participating at home) analyzed the coin and determined it to be a troubled piece worth far less than XF Redbook. A year later and PCGS calls it an XF45 and its value doubled? In my opinion no. If you think so, then many, many coins on the market are available to you with a similarly negative history.

4) Getting out of this one without taking a loss was a very fortunate experience I'll not try to repeat.

Troubled coins are to be avoided.

Gilbert

Singapore,

I think I understood your sentiments in the first post. You stated why you bought it in the first place, why you were disappointed with and that it wasn't as rare as you thought. It's refreshing to know that just because you didn't realize a financial loss you were still able to appreciate what was wrong with the purchase in the first place.

MrLee

<< <i>you didn't realize a financial loss you were still able to appreciate what was wrong with the purchase in the first place. >>


Now there's something rare.

BTW. What is it?

abuell

One of the reasons why slabbing colonials is such a laughable idea. In order to reach XF 45 a coin has to have some original surfaces left and obvious multiple scratches are truly out. It's still a nice coin, but in colonials color and surfaces rule over grade.

ARCO

The moral of the story is never buy a problem coin..knowing it is a problem coin, regardless of scarcity or price because it is an eyesore to look upon.

Don't I know it!

Tyler