Options
Sad tale of the demise of an 1877 GOLD proof set
Sunnywood
Posts: 2,683 ✭
I spent four years assembling an 1877 proof set, from 1c to $20. I ended up doing one silver and minor set (Indian cent through trade dollar) in white cameo coins, and one in beautifully toned original coins.
I also completed the gold set, six coins each of which had an original mintage of TWENTY pieces. I favored original pedigreed coins that had never been messed with. In some cases, it is likely that fewer than ten pieces survive in unimpaired condition. One complete gold proof set resides in the Smithsonian, while another resides in the ANS collection ex Brock, J.P. Morgan. The gold set looked like this:
$1.00 NGC PF65 CAM pedigree could not be confirmed, but had to be either ex Garrett or Eliasberg (due to certain die diagnostics, and the condition).
$2.50 NGC PF67 CAM the only coin that HAD probably been "remade" ... I could not trace it to any of the great collections, but given its condition, it had to have been in a landmark collection.
$3.00 PCGS PR64 DCAM ex Dallas Bank Collection - extremely fresh & original
$5.00 PCGS PR64 ex Bass - same comment as $3.00 (PCGS had not yet begun putting CAM designations on their coins)
$10.00 NGC PF64 CAM ex Garrett, Trompeter - so rare, it was the ONLY 1877 proof $10 on the NGC Census. Totally original.
$20.00 NGC PF64 UCAM ex Garrett, Trompeter. Oddly, the NGC pop in PR64 was 10, and the PCGS pop was also 10 in PR64. But only 7 or 8 of these exist, so there were MANY resubmissions. No coins ever graded 65 or higher at either service. ORIGINAL and FABULOUS.
I sold the set this past spring, to a major dealer. Not surprisingly, as I was walking around the bourse floor at ANA, I saw my set on display at another major gold dealer. There aren't too many 1877 proof gold sets around, so the coins most likely had to be mine. But something AWFUL had occurred ... all the coins had been "CONSERVED" ... they all looked like widgets. The originality was GONE. The pedigrees were GONE off the holders. The history was GONE. In cases like this, "conservation" is more like "dehistoricization" or even "lobotomization." I looked at the coins carefully, and confirmed without any question that they were my coins, but that they had been dipped & "conserved."
Why would anyone do this? Answer: to score upgrades. The $3.00 was now NGC PF65 UCAM, the $5.00 was now NGC PF65 CAM, and the $20 was now NGC PF65 UCAM finsest known. I didn't need to dip and resubmit the coins to know their worth. Needless to say, the coins are now asking far more than I sold the set for. The sad reality is, the market DOES value the conserved "widget" coins in 65 holders HIGHER than the beautiful original & historically pedigreed 64's that I owned.
I would NEVER EVER have considered sending them to NCS for conservation. I am really appalled that this was done. I am not sour graping about the value of the coins & the upgrades. I sold them, and that was my decision. But I ask you this: how can the SAME coins be worth MORE after they are dipped & stripped, and robbed of their pedigree & history???? This makes the coins worth MORE ????? And why were the grading services more likely to grade the coins PR64 in their beautiful original state, but PR65 after dipping???
I put so much time & work into researching these issues, tracing the known specimens, and compiling census data. Now it is all irrelevant. Nobody values history. They just want bright shiny widgets. I thought this was AWFUL. What do you think ???
Sunnywood
I also completed the gold set, six coins each of which had an original mintage of TWENTY pieces. I favored original pedigreed coins that had never been messed with. In some cases, it is likely that fewer than ten pieces survive in unimpaired condition. One complete gold proof set resides in the Smithsonian, while another resides in the ANS collection ex Brock, J.P. Morgan. The gold set looked like this:
$1.00 NGC PF65 CAM pedigree could not be confirmed, but had to be either ex Garrett or Eliasberg (due to certain die diagnostics, and the condition).
$2.50 NGC PF67 CAM the only coin that HAD probably been "remade" ... I could not trace it to any of the great collections, but given its condition, it had to have been in a landmark collection.
$3.00 PCGS PR64 DCAM ex Dallas Bank Collection - extremely fresh & original
$5.00 PCGS PR64 ex Bass - same comment as $3.00 (PCGS had not yet begun putting CAM designations on their coins)
$10.00 NGC PF64 CAM ex Garrett, Trompeter - so rare, it was the ONLY 1877 proof $10 on the NGC Census. Totally original.
$20.00 NGC PF64 UCAM ex Garrett, Trompeter. Oddly, the NGC pop in PR64 was 10, and the PCGS pop was also 10 in PR64. But only 7 or 8 of these exist, so there were MANY resubmissions. No coins ever graded 65 or higher at either service. ORIGINAL and FABULOUS.
I sold the set this past spring, to a major dealer. Not surprisingly, as I was walking around the bourse floor at ANA, I saw my set on display at another major gold dealer. There aren't too many 1877 proof gold sets around, so the coins most likely had to be mine. But something AWFUL had occurred ... all the coins had been "CONSERVED" ... they all looked like widgets. The originality was GONE. The pedigrees were GONE off the holders. The history was GONE. In cases like this, "conservation" is more like "dehistoricization" or even "lobotomization." I looked at the coins carefully, and confirmed without any question that they were my coins, but that they had been dipped & "conserved."
Why would anyone do this? Answer: to score upgrades. The $3.00 was now NGC PF65 UCAM, the $5.00 was now NGC PF65 CAM, and the $20 was now NGC PF65 UCAM finsest known. I didn't need to dip and resubmit the coins to know their worth. Needless to say, the coins are now asking far more than I sold the set for. The sad reality is, the market DOES value the conserved "widget" coins in 65 holders HIGHER than the beautiful original & historically pedigreed 64's that I owned.
I would NEVER EVER have considered sending them to NCS for conservation. I am really appalled that this was done. I am not sour graping about the value of the coins & the upgrades. I sold them, and that was my decision. But I ask you this: how can the SAME coins be worth MORE after they are dipped & stripped, and robbed of their pedigree & history???? This makes the coins worth MORE ????? And why were the grading services more likely to grade the coins PR64 in their beautiful original state, but PR65 after dipping???
I put so much time & work into researching these issues, tracing the known specimens, and compiling census data. Now it is all irrelevant. Nobody values history. They just want bright shiny widgets. I thought this was AWFUL. What do you think ???
Sunnywood
0
Comments
Maybe it's because it's easier to sell shiny homogeneous coins? There's less to explain. Remember, few buyers are as knowledgable as you are, but there are millions of numismatically ignorant people with lots of money.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Russ, NCNE
How so? I didn't want to own bright shiny artificially CLEANED widgets. I like the set that I owned. I don't think I missed the boat at all. Oh yes, I suppose I would have scored a higher price on sale if I had sent the coins to NCS myself. But I'm not in it for that. I would never have done it anyway, even if I knew the coins would sell for more. I don't care to take that "boat."
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
That is a very sad story and all too common. One can only hope that folks will get more educated with time and original/historical coins will receive their due. I've hoped that in vain for years. Andy is right. K
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
The grading services also sometimes prefer 'enchanced' coins with more luster than original coins. An original SLQ I submitted for upgrade 2 years ago got slammed because of this.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Tragic ending to a world class set. I am so sorry that you sold the coins.
Would you be willing to post the names of the dealers involved?
To me who I sell the coins to and how I hope and expect they will care for the coins long after I am gone is MORE important than getting the best $ I can get when I sell the coins.
To me pedigreed should be sacred. To do what that dealer did, in my opinion, is disgusting.
I remember holding those 1877 Trompeter big proof gold pieces at FUN in January 1999. Heck, I even dropped one of them on the floor!! If I recall correctly, Heritage did the sale at FUN.
I am quite frankly shocked. Those $10 and $20 proof coins you bought were already maxed out in the NGC holders. I simply cannopt imagine them going one grade higher!!!!!!!
What a crying shame.
What to do???? Simply tell us who bought the proof set from you and if it is still the same dealer that has the coins, I promise you that I will never ever sell my pedigreed coins to them!!!!!!!
Jay
Doesn't matter. They didn't do anything wrong. They just decided that the money was more important to them than keeping the coins original. Like it or not, we all have our price.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Make sure that whomever buys your coins is contractually obligated to never resell the coins. Otherwise, you know where the coins will end up!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Truly a sad day...........
Sunnywood.....would you be breaking some sacred trust in disclosing the selling price? Maybe any potential buyers of this set would be interested in knowing just how much they are getting "hit over the head"!
<< <i>Would you be willing to post the names of the dealers involved?
Doesn't matter. They didn't do anything wrong. They just decided that the money was more important to them than keeping the coins original. Like it or not, we all have our price. >>
Once again resides with Legend, the original purchaser "raw" at live Eliasberg auction. Laura and i "love" the same lady!
Man, let me be the first to say, I am SO sorry.... It really bums me out to hear such tales. Originality is fast becoming obsolete. I really feel like writing a longer thread but i am just too upset to do so. All collectors like us out there can do is continue to educate ourselves and place value on the collector/dealers out there that value originality as much as we do. Unfortunately, the dollar is what drives the numismatic marketplace and many collectors out there dont value originality. I have a name for those types out there that value the "bling bling" over history. I will share it here on the boards and maybe it will stick and become a PCGS forums word.
I call them crows. Came up with it myself, but thought it fitting and clever. They, like their black feathered counterparts, love all things bright and shiny. Crows are attracted to any shiny metallic /crystaline object. Anyone who has grown up on a farm or in the country knows that real crows will steal and put in their nests anything that catches their eye. Crows take it back to their nests and leave it. They dont know why they like it. They dont really care. It can be a diamond, gold or tin foil. If it shines, it is for them.
Numismatic crows are the same way. Shiny coins make them smile. They are the types that cringe when I show them my original Barber half collection. "Why are they so dark and dull?" they ask. Show them a nice polished Seated Half and they will give you their first born!!
These people dont value untouched. They dont value originality! They dont appreciate virginity and they cant appreciate what only time can make. They are not amazed that you can say something that is 200 years old has never seen a human touch anywhere but its rims.
Shame on them.
And even more shame to the crow feeders!! ; those of you that know better, that started out with that awe and reverence for originality and let $$ signs cloud your vision.
Now I say that tongue in cheek to an extent... I dont want every dealer sending their wrath upon my head. Many coins need to be saved. They are corroding or pvc'd to death. Some are already cleaned and that doesnt meant that they should be thrown away. But, for someone, anyone to do that knowingly to a rarity like sunnywood's, you should know better and be a better representative of the hobby, the art and the science.
I have a close dealer friend who purchased the absolutely stunning proof trime that I have. He thought it was a DCAM, would have been a pop 1 coin. He cracked it out and sent it in. Came back the same, Proof 66 CAM. I loved the coin. He told me he was going to dip it and send it in to get his DCAM!!! This coin is toned RED, crimson red!! Original. Hard mirrors, untouched. I bought that coin to save it. It seriously made my stomach turn to think that it would be ruined, just so he could get 67 money for a 66 coin. 4100$ for a PCGS proof 66 trime!! Yeah, I'm a bit crazy, but you know what? I felt like I did my good deed for the day. I always try and figure out what people are going to do with coins that I sell. I actually try and place coins in what I consider "good homes". I sell to people like Casey and ARCO. People that appreciate what I appreciate. And they sell to me.
So once again, all we can do is try and make sure that originality is preserved. Once it is gone, it can never be returned.
Very respectfully,
John
siliconvalleycoins.com
Sunnywood- What do I think? I think it sucks! I agree that that is a very sad story. It's like sandblasting an antique
and repainting it. Sorry you sold the set, I'm sure it was great!
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
........"Coin whores"!
.....nuff said!
Once again resides with Legend, the original purchaser "raw" at live Eliasberg auction. Laura and i "love" the same lady!
<< <i>Sunnywood- What do I think? I think it sucks! I agree that that is a very sad story. It's like sandblasting an antique
and repainting it. Sorry you sold the set, I'm sure it was great! >>
I don't think many people have a problem with conserving art. In fact, many famous paintings have been conserved. Some would say the originality was destroyed, others would say they removed accumulated problems. But most people think it's a good thing.
That's not fair to attornies (sic) and car salesmen! I've never heard of a single one of them EVER dipping a gold coin!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
The best examples I can remember were a couple of -O Seated Halves in 65. They looked nice and shiny, but the luster on them ran every which way, just like the pictures on display in the example book at the NCS table. I guess you could say they did look like Widgets. Wouldn't want to be the owner of these coins in a few years after the winds change direction.
If it is any consolation, your 1877 Sunnywood-Vermuelle original matched toned silver set in my possession will stay that way for a long, long time.
I sold a nicely toned high grade type coin at the ANA and was told it doesn't sell as fast as a dipped out white one. In other words my coin was less saleable and that was a reason for offering me less for the coin. Curiously, that coin in now marked up significantly higher than the other "similar" coins in the dealer's inventory. Much more so than all the blast white dipped out ones.
So sorry to hear of the fate of that proof gold set. There are enough of us around here that appreciate originality. The winds will change.....just wait. You can bet that at some point down the road the backlash against white junk will be severe.
Here's a nice little story from the '88 ANA when I offered Mr. Eureka a pair of rare date seated quarters in gem condition. Andy liked the one that was a full crusty near white original, he passed on the other one because it was headlight bright from an old dipping. But fabulous nontheless. Today, that bright white one probably would be oohed and aahed over. But in another 10 years someone will offer up that coin once again...and another dealer similar to Andy will once again pass because it's too white.
roadrunner
We destroy history every day when he recklessly remodel, tear down or "revitalize" {i hate that word} structures. There are fewer and fewer real historical sites worth seeing in the US as almost everything has been changed.
How many downtown areas across the US have been left in ruin by the malls? The malls now are being destroyed by "big box" superstores like Walmart. How many mom and pop coffee shops has Starbucks buried? I could go on but you get the picture.
Europeans for many years did not have this mentality but they too have been infected with many American icons.
What does this have to do with coins? Plenty. When there is a dollar to be made we will make it and worry about the consequences later or ignorantly believe it will have no effect on us personally, not my problem. Dealers are in business to make money not collect pretty coins, they have to appeal to whomever has the deep pockets. It's sad but very American.
The present day carnage will most likely make interesting reading.....50 years from now.
When I first started collecting classic proofs I was drawn to this myself. I wanted the blast white cameos with as much contrast as possible.
Having been around the block a time or two, I've realized that it isn't the curated black and whites that are the true rarities; it is now the totally original proofs with outstanding eye appeal. I now collect exclusively these coins. They will never as long as I'm alive see even a drop of jewel luster or MS70.
As far as gold is concerned, I've heard that orangeish brown and greenish brown skin shows originality.
The death of "original skin" . . . it started in the Garden of Eden, if you will, and it continues to this day. It has different mediums, but it all derives from greed.
We can wish these dealers away, as well their ignorant 'know-nothing', rich clients, but it will do no good.
In so many other "financial" arenas these same dealers would be tried and convicted for fraud (admit it, this is really akin to rolling the odometer back), but alas, these numismatic "flim-flammers" derive their livelihoods from the old truth, "a fool and his money are soon parted".
And the saddest fact to all of this is, these dealers DON'T CARE!!
When I first saw this coin, it was an NGC AU-50. I loved it. It was absolutely original with none of the copper spots that can sometimes plague these early gold pieces.
I wish that I had had the $90,000 that it would have taken care of so that I could have saved it from its ultimate fate. Now it's a PCGS AU-58. Now it's shined up like a brass button ready to be sold to a crass, ignorant, very wealthy psudo collector who thinks that shiny is better.
I suspect the coin that BillJones posted would have gone from 50 to 58 just as it was, as under current grading standards the AU early gold seems to get pretty lenient treatment. It didn't need to be helped.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
Some guys are pretty sure that they can turn coins like this into MS-61 or MS-62 and come out on the deal. Some guys can afford to set the $90,000 aside all at one time. I would have loved to have put this coin in my collection. Unfortunately it was beyond my risk comfort and financial limits.
But you are right. The grading standards for early gold are much lower than they were less than a decade ago.
A few months ago I had an 1806 half eagle graded, which I purchased back in 1980. I graded it as an AU-50. It came back AU-58. The dealer who sent it in for me said, "Aren't you pleased?" My answer was only partially because I'd seen very similar coins in MS-62 holders.
Today if you think that you are going to get a nice early gold coin in an AU holder, you will probably be disappointed. Most of the AUs have had their surfaces stripped, and the eye appeal to a collector who knows what he is doing is pretty disappointing.
I think that is a great idea. A tough one to sell, but still a great idea.
I would love to see the top grading services add a point or two for originality while lowering grades for dipped, "conserved" coins. Sign me up!!
nwcs
Conserving art is not only done to restore "the look" but to protect the artwork from further environmental damage. That's not the case with coins. The toning acts as a protective layer and if the coins are stored in a non-reactive environment the toning process is halted. But even in the case of artwork when you conserve you compromise (IMHO) originality to restore "the look."
When it comes to 100+ year old coins in the vast majority of cases "the look" involves some measure of toning that is a testament to the coin's passage through a time period that didn't know modern climate control.
It took me years to find a nice, original, au58 early eagle. I could not believe all the over dipped junk that I saw while looking. It is truly a shame as most collectors will have to settle for one of those over dipped coins. I had to PAY big time to get an original one.
"luster back." What a crock. Every dipping strips away a layer of luster that cannot be restored. I'd rather have 100% of the luster under somewhat deep toning than 75% of it left as a "blast" (uhh....dipped) white. Once the coin turns uglier again in a few years, a redip will be in order. Sheesh.
roadrunner
If people paid more for originality than dipped coins they would not get dipped. PCGS is part of the problem as they grade dipped coins higher. For example I have two well toned proof coins that would at least get a cameo designation if dipped. People would pay more for the "better" number on the plastic.
It seems clear that people want the best and will pay up for it. As long as they and the grading companies value the number on the slab more than the coin itself this will continue. It doesn't matter if what we all say, only what we do.
09/07/2006
You can always put the Watt coins back in the capsules, but how do you undip a coin?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
09/07/2006
Rest assured that I saved mine.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I sold the set to Spectrum, along with the white silver & minor set. The coins were on display at ANA at the bourse table of "Rare Coin Alliance," a major market maker in proof gold. I do not know which dealer dipped the coins out. The six-coin set was paired with my white cameo 1877 silver & minor set ... and of course, the gold coins now match that set. A gilt pattern 1877 half union ($50) had also been added to the set, something which I had also thought about doing. The display was pretty cool, and if you didn't know what had just been done to those super-rare & important gold coins, you would think it was an awesome set. And the market truth is, the set was apparently much more salable after dipping.
I started out buying beautifully toned 1877 silver proofs. But one dipped NGC PF66 UCAM 3CN really caught my eye. Once I owned that coin, it didn't fit with my other coins, so I started building two sets in parallel. When it came time to sell, the beautifully toned 1877 silver and minor coins easily found new homes. I was left with the white cameo set and the gold set. How ironic that my assembling the dipped white cameo set of silver & minor coins perhaps led to the dipping of the gold set, which is a numismatic crime. Perhaps I should never have bought the dipped 3CN in the first place !!!
Here are my observations: (1) all the original coins are going to DISAPPEAR over the next five years. In conversations with two very respected dealers on the bourse floor, I found that they shared the same fear. Everything will get "conserved" except for the most beautifully toned coins, which will be all but unavailable. (2) The grading services are partly to blame for having the tendency to grade dipped white coins higher than original coins. There is NO WAY that three of those six coins should have scored upgrades JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE DIPPED. The quality of the surfaces and fields was just as evident before dipping, if any bothered to look for more than a few seconds.
For those who were not at ANA, there were two extraordinary sets of dipped white CAM/UCAM proofs Morgan dollars on display. One was at Ron Iskowitz's table, the other (the "Divo" collection) was at Benchmark Ventures (bvcoins.com), which is the retail branch of Rare Coin Wholesalers (not to be confused with Rare Coin Alliance mentioned above). Benchmark/RCW is the Contursi, Griffiths, Briggs, and David Hunt clan. Anyway, the "Divo" set was basically all white ultra-proofs, EXCEPT for the 1893, which stood out like a sore thumb. The 1893 was NGC PF69 (I think) with FABULOUS gorgeous multi-color toning. All the rest of the coins were white white white. So I walked over to the guys at the booth and said, "What's the matter with you guys? You missed one!! You forgot to dip out the 1893." Nobody in their right mind would dip that 1893. I hope the sarcasm wasn't totally lost on them.
I thought the "black and white" "ultimate" "spotlight" dipped UCAM proof Morgan sets were stupid looking. They looked totally artificial, at least to me. One had to wonder if they had been enhanced somehow. (I'm NOT saying this was the case, I'm just saying you had to wonder because the coins were SO cameo and SO white and SO mirrored.) Obviously I am not with the program, and my tastes are obsolete !!
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
But what on earth are the grading services thinking ... NCS is a good service for certain coins, but to grade dipped proof gold consistently higher encourages a lot of dipping of coins that shouldn't be messed with. So blame NGC for a policy that encouraged the dipping by scoring those upgrades.
As far as PCGS, it is no secret that dipped white coins do better at PCGS. My own experience with many dozens of shield and Lib nickel submissions proved that. And PCGS even accords extra points in the Registry competition to "CAM" and "DCAM" coins ... this encourages fierce demand for dipped white coins at the highest grade levels ... meaning that some of the BEST coins are getting dipped (for example, high-end proof Barbers, proof Morgans, etc). Why doesn't PCGS accord extra value for BEAUTIFUL coins, such as those that are original and magnificently toned? At least NGC does have a way of donig that, with their "star" designation.
Anyway my point is, the services are encouraging this dipping, and are helping to create the demand for these coins. How unfortunate.
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
Ever since R&I and other disciples of the "CAM clan" started pushing cameos, it has gotten way out of control. If it's not bad enough that you've had to watch out for AT coins over the past 20 years, now you have add "laser altered" to your vocabulary. I have seen some very serious works created by today's laser art technicians. The coins look too good with unfathonably deep mirrors and perfect frosted features.
roadrunner
<< <i>I thought the "black and white" "ultimate" "spotlight" dipped UCAM proof Morgan sets were stupid looking. They looked totally artificial. One had to wonder if they had been enhanced in any other inappropriate ways (laser treatment, etc). I'm not saying I think this was the case, I'm just saying you had to wonder because the coins were SO cameo and SO white and SO mirrored. Obviously I am not with the program, and my tastes are obsolete !! >>
I was putting together a Registry Set of Barber quarters with the same look as the Morgan set you are describing. Every coin was a headlight set on bright. Each coin was as cameo contrasted as it came for the date. I was 54% completed with the collection when I realized that these are really not the type of coin that I want to collect and that the real rarities will be the original coins with outstanding eye appeal.
I have since sold the collection. Thank goodness there are multitudes of collectors who will pay the big bucks for headlights. I made out very well on most of my coins. I don't mean to bash these coins, because they did have their own beautiful qualities. Every collector has the right to have his own taste in coins. My taste just took a 180.
I was collecting the numbers. The numbers are wrong. The true rarities are classic proof coins with original skins that have outstanding eye appeal. These can still be obtained for fractions above sheet, not many multiples above sheet. I am going to gobble up as many as I can before they are all gone or before prices adjust to levels that are beyond reach.
I will no longer dump copious amounts of money into headlights. There are plenty of collectors out there that will drive that market for a long time. I will only collect the absolute best in original coins, with the look that I know is difficult to come by. I only will collect coins where the obverse and reverse are extraordinary on the same coin. I ignore the numbers because the numbers have nothing to do with these coins.
I only post this one because coinLt. likes it so much. I did pay a little stronger money for this one but it is was worth it.
<< <i>I did pay a little stronger money for this one but it is was worth it. >>
I'd get the rope on whoever sold that Barber to you.
BTW... I'll bet you paid really strong money for the "Headlight" pop tops as well.