Geez whata beautiful coin tho! This is a tough world to buy in? Man, the more books I read, the less I know! What clues make you believe its been Turtle waxed?
I think one of the tip offs is that if those coins really were worth that much they would be in slabs and command a lot more money. No one would keep them out of a slab and loose thousands of dollars IF the coins could go in a slab. I imagine they are thinking PCGS would body bag them as cleaned or modified.
Without seeing it, isn't it possible to be mercury dipped business strikes? They just don't look right to me. If there was no question about them, they should be slabbed at least by NCS or ANACS.
<< <i>I think one of the tip offs is that if those coins really were worth that much they would be in slabs and command a lot more money. No one would keep them out of a slab and loose thousands of dollars IF the coins could go in a slab. I imagine they are thinking PCGS would body bag them as cleaned or modified. >>
To expand upon your "logic", one has to wonder why PCGS, NGC ANACS and ICG have staff and graders on the payroll. If there are no raw coins worthy of slabbing, why stay in business?
I wonder if anyone has a good picture of a truly "whizzed" coin? I'm almost certain that it would be impossible to whiz or polish an entire surface of a coin without there being obvious evidence in and around the fine details. I think whizzing would round over any details you got near and make it worn. This coin, in my opinion, exhibits extremely nice sharp details. How can that be if it's "severely whizzed and polished" ?
<< <i>If it were in a PCGS holder would you make the same references? >>
There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period.
<< <i>There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period. >>
None ??? Wow, i find that a little final sounding and hard to believe. There's always new discoveries of awesome coins in old collections. I think there's always a chance that occasionally someone will bring these coins to the market because of an inheritance or something like that. Coins that have been tucked away for many years. To just blatantly dismiss a coin because it looks "too good" seems a little closed minded in my opinion.
I agree that it should be in a reputable TPG to authenticate it, but not every coin in existance starts out in a TPG holder.
It's too rich for me to find out if it's as good as it looks, but i hope whoever gets it is not dissapointed.
They may not be disappointed right off the bat if they know nothing about coins. I will assume that's the case because if they did they wouldn't be paying that much for a whizzed and polished coin. But they'll be in for a rude surprise one of these days.
<< <i>with no return priveledge the winning bidder has balls. I would not buy a raw proof coin without a return priveledge. Would you? >>
Good point, and one that was slightly lost in this discussion. I personally wouldn't take the chance unless i was able to view the coin in hand before buying it.
Instead of saying too good to be true I think a more accurate description would be: That coin looks like no other proof I have seen therefore it's authenticity is in question. Or you could just say look at the guys track record. Did any of you read his feedback, wow, if it walks like a duck...... LINK
Look at the texture on Ms. Liberty's face... that was the first thing I noticed... it's bumpy and just doesn't look right to me... also look at the fields... in spots you can see the same kind of bumpy texture... would a proof or prooflike coin or even an MS coin, have a texture like that in the fields?
To me, the coin doesn't "look to good to be true" but rather, too unnatural looking to be good.
While the images might be a contributing factor, the surfaces do not seem to reflect light as they would/should if they were original. I firmly believe that the coin has been cleaned, whizzed or otherwise altered. And, while I have no way of knowing it, I believe that the seller suspects or knows such. He certainly knows enough to hype the listing with mention of a $19,000 figure for certain grade Proof Morgan dollars, which have nothing to do with the quality or value of his offering.
Here is a link to the Proof Barber quarter he is offering - it appears to be even more noticeably cleaned - look at how dark Liberty's face and neck are - that is a BAD sign!:
Finally, here is a link to the Proof Liberty nickel he has for sale, which looks badly cleaned, as well. Take a look at the dark upper-left obverse area and the central reverse - indications of cleaning or polishing.
<< <i> If the coin were not junk, it would be graded. >>
Again i'm having trouble with the finality of your statement. I have plenty of nice coins that aren't graded and i'm sure a lot of others can say the same thing. I don't see having a TPG coin as the ultimate in my collection.
Agreed, the guys feedback is pretty bad, and points to a history of over grading and possible coin switching, but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ?
I'm no expert, and i'm sure the knowledge here is infinately greater than what i could hope to attain, but i still have an opinion and will agree to disagree.
<< <i>but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ? >>
Mine wouldn't differ. The surfaces of the coin look obviously altered. The image is also manipulated, either by lighting or software. Even ignoring the seller's long history of less than sterling transactions, the image alone screams "ripoff".
The first thing that jumped out at me was that the sides don't match, and that's not from album or cabinet toning, so my guess is it was either cleaned on one side or dipped on both sides, but just more harshly on one side. Indeed, not all coins of high caliber are in slabs now, but the vast majority of $10,000+ coins are by now. The few that aren't come from grandchildren and greatgrandchildren who know nothing about coins and once they are sold, are immediately put into a holder by their new owner. If this seller knows as much about coins as he says or appears to, then we must assume he would have sent it to PCGS and/or NGC already and it got BB'd. The $13,800 price tag on the set made me laugh. Who in their right mind would post that in plain sight and also call attention to it if it wasn't a lie? He could have printed the tag up himself!
<< <i>but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ? >>
Mine wouldn't differ. The surfaces of the coin look obviously altered. The image is also manipulated, either by lighting or software. Even ignoring the seller's long history of less than sterling transactions, the image alone screams "ripoff".
Russ, NCNE >>
Time to throw in the towel Russ -
I think we are heading for a reprise of the debate about the 1931-s Lincoln in PCI 66 where logic and sound reasoning are ignored.
The only coin of the group that looks close to being natural is the cent. Listen, how many hundred year old proofs have you seen in PCGS or NGC holders that have absolutely NO TRACE OF COLOR at all? These coins have not only been waxed, they have been buffed up the wazoo. There is no way the Morgan is a proof. The reverse clearly looks like a business strike. Somebody is going to pay a grand or two for a coin that is virtually worthless. If D.E. can see this he's going to be pissed, not missed.
This seller has been the subject of at least one other thread I recall. He cleans coins, alters surfaces and is guilty of many crimes against numismatics.
Many, many winning bidders have left negative, neutral, or even positive feedback stating that they received cleaned coins. I've written him a couple of times about his auctions, asking the same questions each time: "Has this coin been cleaned or dipped? Have the surfaces been altered?" He's never answered.
Sellers like this are the reason for the term "Buyer beware."
I've seen some busness-strike Morgans that have been "worked". They polish the whole coin extensively. then apply artificial frosting to the high points. This coin has a similar look. The reverse looks much less like a real proof than the obverse.
I'm not sure that the hair detail over the ear is sharp enough for a real proof.
<< <i>There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period. >>
None ??? Wow, i find that a little final sounding and hard to believe. There's always new discoveries of awesome coins in old collections. I think there's always a chance that occasionally someone will bring these coins to the market because of an inheritance or something like that. Coins that have been tucked away for many years. To just blatantly dismiss a coin because it looks "too good" seems a little closed minded in my opinion.
I agree that it should be in a reputable TPG to authenticate it, but not every coin in existance starts out in a TPG holder.
It's too rich for me to find out if it's as good as it looks, but i hope whoever gets it is not dissapointed. >>
There's a saying that it if seems too good to be true, it probably is. This is one of those cases. You can tell by this guys advertising that it's all hype. I don't think anyone who really had an estate would talk like this:
"THE STUNNING 1900 PROOF MORGAN DOLLAR!! Do you realize this coin in 67 Cameo has sold for over $30,000.00?!?!?!"
" no returns will be offered or accepted because this is an estate sale and I will not accepted a return and break up the set."
"!! I can see a few hairlines on a few coins so a couple of them may have been whiped with a rag long ago to bring out that Stunning Luster but I am sure these coins are so outstanding"
<< <i>how do they get the mercury to stick to the coin? >>
Mercury, being a liquid metal, easily dissolves other metals into it forming an amalgam. Kind of an alloy that forms at room temperature. So when it is placed on the surface of the coin it combines with the metal leaving the coin with an outer coating of the silver-mercury alloy. It handles the "sticking" on its own.
This property of mercury made it very useful in gold mining. In placer mining the mercury would be placed in the baffles of the sluice. As water carrying placer gold, flakes and dust would flow down the sluice the gold would dissolve in to the mercury. in hard rock mining the ore would be crushed to a powder and mixed/stirred with mercury. Again the mercury would dissolve the gold and other metals. The amalgam would then be collected and heated to drive off the mercury leaving a "sponge" nugget of gold and/or other metals which could be further refined. In early mining, the mercury fumes would simply be allowed to escape into the atmosphere. In later times the fumes would be routed into a condenser which would allow the recovery of the mercury so that it could be used again.
byergo
Posts: 586 ✭
Comments
Oh, so you mean they've been cleaned.
<< <i>no returns will be offered or accepted because this is an estate sale >>
Of course.
Russ, NCNE
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
<< <i>
<< <i>no returns will be offered or accepted because this is an estate sale >>
Of course.
Russ, NCNE >>
Translation: I got stuck with these dogs, now here's your chance
Please check out my eBay auctions!
My WLH Short Set Registry Collection
The general opinion is that this is one to stay away from.
It does look like a beautiful coin. In seeing the reverse it looks like the described "rag rub" might have been a little more aggressive.
"Turtle Wax" , "P-U" , "NASCAR hat wearing hillbilly who sells used cars".
Come on people..... don't you think that's just a little on the childish side?
If it were in a PCGS holder would you make the same references? (buy the coin, not the holder?)
<< <i>I think one of the tip offs is that if those coins really were worth that much they would be in slabs and command a lot more money. No one would keep them out of a slab and loose thousands of dollars IF the coins could go in a slab. I imagine they are thinking PCGS would body bag them as cleaned or modified. >>
To expand upon your "logic", one has to wonder why PCGS, NGC ANACS and ICG have staff and graders on the payroll. If there are no raw coins worthy of slabbing, why stay in business?
<< <i>Come on people..... don't you think that's just a little on the childish side? >>
He started it with his Ebay handle..............
how do they get the mercury to stick to the coin?
<< <i>If it were in a PCGS holder would you make the same references? >>
There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period. >>
None ??? Wow, i find that a little final sounding and hard to believe. There's always new discoveries of awesome coins in old collections. I think there's always a chance that occasionally someone will bring these coins to the market because of an inheritance or something like that. Coins that have been tucked away for many years.
To just blatantly dismiss a coin because it looks "too good" seems a little closed minded in my opinion.
I agree that it should be in a reputable TPG to authenticate it, but not every coin in existance starts out in a TPG holder.
It's too rich for me to find out if it's as good as it looks, but i hope whoever gets it is not dissapointed.
<< <i>It's too rich for me to find out if it's as good as it looks, but i hope whoever gets it is not dissapointed. >>
with no return priveledge the winning bidder has balls. I would not buy a raw proof coin without a return priveledge. Would you?
They may not be disappointed right off the bat if they know nothing about coins. I will assume that's the case because if they did they wouldn't be paying that much for a whizzed and polished coin. But they'll be in for a rude surprise one of these days.
<< <i>with no return priveledge the winning bidder has balls. I would not buy a raw proof coin without a return priveledge. Would you? >>
Good point, and one that was slightly lost in this discussion. I personally wouldn't take the chance unless i was able to view the coin in hand before buying it.
"Estate" sales are always a risk.
Did you read this guy's feedback? This seller has been around a long time. If the coin were not junk, it would be graded.
Russ, NCNE
42/92
While the images might be a contributing factor, the surfaces do not seem to reflect light as they would/should if they were original. I firmly believe that the coin has been cleaned, whizzed or otherwise altered. And, while I have no way of knowing it, I believe that the seller suspects or knows such. He certainly knows enough to hype the listing with mention of a $19,000 figure for certain grade Proof Morgan dollars, which have nothing to do with the quality or value of his offering.
Here is a link to the Proof Barber quarter he is offering - it appears to be even more noticeably cleaned - look at how dark Liberty's face and neck are - that is a BAD sign!:
Link to quarter
Finally, here is a link to the Proof Liberty nickel he has for sale, which looks badly cleaned, as well. Take a look at the dark upper-left obverse area and the central reverse - indications of cleaning or polishing.
Link to nickel
<< <i> If the coin were not junk, it would be graded. >>
Again i'm having trouble with the finality of your statement. I have plenty of nice coins that aren't graded and i'm sure a lot of others can say the same thing. I don't see having a TPG coin as the ultimate in my collection.
Agreed, the guys feedback is pretty bad, and points to a history of over grading and possible coin switching, but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ?
I'm no expert, and i'm sure the knowledge here is infinately greater than what i could hope to attain, but i still have an opinion and will agree to disagree.
<< <i>but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ? >>
ss350camaro, I am looking at the (image of the) coin and not other considerations/factors - please see my above post.
<< <i>but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ? >>
Mine wouldn't differ. The surfaces of the coin look obviously altered. The image is also manipulated, either by lighting or software. Even ignoring the seller's long history of less than sterling transactions, the image alone screams "ripoff".
Russ, NCNE
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>he coverd the word COPY on all of these supposed 1900 set coins in photoshop...shame someone stupid will fall for this crap >>
Err, Im not sure that I understand. Where is/was the word "copy" located and how do you know that it was "coverd" [sic]?
<< <i>he coverd the word COPY on all of these supposed 1900 set coins in photoshop...shame someone stupid will fall for this crap >>
What are you smokin' ?
Looks like a fishwife to me though.
<< <i>
<< <i>but if a person was to separate themselves from the auction and just look at THE coin i think opinions would differ. ? >>
Mine wouldn't differ. The surfaces of the coin look obviously altered. The image is also manipulated, either by lighting or software. Even ignoring the seller's long history of less than sterling transactions, the image alone screams "ripoff".
Russ, NCNE >>
Time to throw in the towel Russ -
I think we are heading for a reprise of the debate about the 1931-s Lincoln in PCI 66 where logic and sound reasoning are ignored.
Many, many winning bidders have left negative, neutral, or even positive feedback stating that they received cleaned coins. I've written him a couple of times about his auctions, asking the same questions each time: "Has this coin been cleaned or dipped? Have the surfaces been altered?" He's never answered.
Sellers like this are the reason for the term "Buyer beware."
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
A BIG Thanks to those of you who took the time to calmly inform (us) me as to certain characteristics, and such, to look out and watch for.
I'm learning quite a bit here and hope it continues.
Hey keets, Were my latest thread responses bumpy enough ?
Oh well........ No one ever said it was gonna be easy.
I've seen some busness-strike Morgans that have been "worked". They polish the whole coin extensively. then apply artificial frosting to the high points. This coin has a similar look. The reverse looks much less like a real proof than the obverse.
I'm not sure that the hair detail over the ear is sharp enough for a real proof.
<< <i>
<< <i>There's a reason it isn't. It would be bodybagged for altered surfaces. Outside of very high end graded ultra cameo coins, no proof Morgan looks that good, period. >>
None ??? Wow, i find that a little final sounding and hard to believe. There's always new discoveries of awesome coins in old collections. I think there's always a chance that occasionally someone will bring these coins to the market because of an inheritance or something like that. Coins that have been tucked away for many years.
To just blatantly dismiss a coin because it looks "too good" seems a little closed minded in my opinion.
I agree that it should be in a reputable TPG to authenticate it, but not every coin in existance starts out in a TPG holder.
It's too rich for me to find out if it's as good as it looks, but i hope whoever gets it is not dissapointed. >>
There's a saying that it if seems too good to be true, it probably is. This is one of those cases. You can tell by this guys advertising that it's all hype. I don't think anyone who really had an estate would talk like this:
"THE STUNNING 1900 PROOF MORGAN DOLLAR!! Do you realize this coin in 67 Cameo has sold for over $30,000.00?!?!?!"
" no returns will be offered or accepted because this is an estate sale and I will not accepted a return and break up the set."
"!! I can see a few hairlines on a few coins so a couple of them may have been whiped with a rag long ago to bring out that Stunning Luster but I am sure these coins are so outstanding"
--------> It seems suspsicious to me.
<< <i>how do they get the mercury to stick to the coin? >>
Mercury, being a liquid metal, easily dissolves other metals into it forming an amalgam. Kind of an alloy that forms at room temperature. So when it is placed on the surface of the coin it combines with the metal leaving the coin with an outer coating of the silver-mercury alloy. It handles the "sticking" on its own.
This property of mercury made it very useful in gold mining. In placer mining the mercury would be placed in the baffles of the sluice. As water carrying placer gold, flakes and dust would flow down the sluice the gold would dissolve in to the mercury. in hard rock mining the ore would be crushed to a powder and mixed/stirred with mercury. Again the mercury would dissolve the gold and other metals. The amalgam would then be collected and heated to drive off the mercury leaving a "sponge" nugget of gold and/or other metals which could be further refined. In early mining, the mercury fumes would simply be allowed to escape into the atmosphere. In later times the fumes would be routed into a condenser which would allow the recovery of the mercury so that it could be used again.
<< <i>Without seeing it, isn't it possible to be mercury dipped business strikes? >>
ever seen what mercury does to a silver coin??? try it some time
K S