Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
Wow! What a terrific coin to own! I wonder what it would go for? I say $8-9 K if it has eye appeal and good contrast. A terrific rarity.
"The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."
Coooool! And unfortunately, not mine Some pictures would be great. Given a PR 66Cameo 1942 Type 1 Jefferson, pop 1/0, sold for $6,612.50 on Heritage recently, I'd guess that would be the low end estimate of its worth.
I agree, Randy. It could be the photo of the obverse (if so, for god's sake take another pic -- it could mean a grand or two), but if the obverse is fairly depicted, smoe of us may have a coin or two ripe for resubmitting. One-sided cams do occur with smoewhat greater frequency.
"The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."
judging from the pictures listed at Heritage the coin isn't worth the premium that'll go along with the CAM designation. i have seen some PR67's and PR68's with color that are much nicer in appearance. while CAM/DCAM is the ultimate goal and a true rarity in early proofs, CAM for the sake of the holder when the true appeearance is weak just makes me shake my head.
<< <i>If I were the consignor of that coin, I'd demand that I be allowed to provide my own images.
I've often wondered, and asked once or twice, if anyone has ever done this...
Anyone? >>
I don't think they would allow a consignor to provide their own images. The potential for liability to them for selling a coin using doctored images would be too great. They do need to get a professional coin photographer of their own, to get more realistic images, though.
................and how do we all know that the coin doesn't look like the pictures?????? if you're expecting a pre-1950 Jefferson to look like a post-1950 Cameo, you're hoping for more than you'll find. the best examples i've seen---and that isn't many---are all borderline and would look OK in a non-designated holder.
<< <i>................and how do we all know that the coin doesn't look like the pictures?????? if you're expecting a pre-1950 Jefferson to look like a post-1950 Cameo, you're hoping for more than you'll find. the best examples i've seen---and that isn't many---are all borderline and would look OK in a non-designated holder.
al h. >>
I have to agree with Keets on this one The photo likely is a typical Heritage photo (not great, but predictable) so the coin is a bit weak on the obverse compared to a 1950's cameo. That's about the best there is for 1936-1942 proofs, except for BNE's 1942 Type 2 DCam
Of course, if none of you are going to bid on it, then perhaps it will sell for a price I can afford
Well I am definately sending my '38 and '40 in for regrade. I think my '40 has a chance if the pre-'50 coins are judged to a looser standard. The image at Heritage shows a decent reverse but the obverse doesn't match. At least we get to see what it does at auction!
Comments
Ken
That must be a neat coin, I'd love to see it too.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
J&J Coins
website
Wild Ebay Toners for sale
The big O
<< <i>I'll bet wondercoin did it >>
How much do you want to bet?
Cameron Kiefer
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
MS Buffalo
MS 1951
What a coin to get graded that high after all these years.
Somebody must be really happy someplace.
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
<< <i>To see the coin, look at the upcoming Heritage Auction. Pics just posted. >>
Good work Badger.
1938 5C PR67 Cameo PCGS
Very nice, particularly the reverse
MS Buffalo
MS 1951
LITTLEJOHN
IF THAT CAM. THAN MY IS TO.!
The one in the Heritage auction has much deeper mirrors than yours in these photos.
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
Russ, NCNE
al h.
I've often wondered, and asked once or twice, if anyone has ever done this...
Anyone?
<< <i>If I were the consignor of that coin, I'd demand that I be allowed to provide my own images.
I've often wondered, and asked once or twice, if anyone has ever done this...
Anyone? >>
I don't think they would allow a consignor to provide their own images. The potential for liability to them for selling a coin using doctored images would be too great. They do need to get a professional coin photographer of their own, to get more realistic images, though.
al h.
<< <i>................and how do we all know that the coin doesn't look like the pictures?????? if you're expecting a pre-1950 Jefferson to look like a post-1950 Cameo, you're hoping for more than you'll find. the best examples i've seen---and that isn't many---are all borderline and would look OK in a non-designated holder.
al h. >>
I have to agree with Keets on this one The photo likely is a typical Heritage photo (not great, but predictable) so the coin is a bit weak on the obverse compared to a 1950's cameo. That's about the best there is for 1936-1942 proofs, except for BNE's 1942 Type 2 DCam
Of course, if none of you are going to bid on it, then perhaps it will sell for a price I can afford
MS Buffalo
MS 1951
LITTLEJOHN