Let's have a coin, same coin thread.

LincolnsRule

I'll start...

coin
same coin

tjkillian

Wow, that is scary. To imagine that PCGS has that much influence on the value a coin. Now, which is the coin, a MS-64 or MS-66? Neither? Both?

Tom

paigowjohnny

How could it ever be a 66 with that divot in the cheek ??

64 on a good day

ColonialCoinUnion

Thats a good sized cheek nick for a 6, isn't it?

solid

That looks like an expensive gash under the eye on Abe.

ziggy29

<< <i>Wow, that is scary. To imagine that PCGS has that much influence on the value a coin. Now, which is the coin, a MS-64 or MS-66? Neither? Both >>

That mark below the eye is too much for 6, IMO.

rhedden

I'd like to know who submitted that overpriced penny and got the "6" on it.

curly

amazing! Who is sicker...the one who had it as a 64 or the one who bought it as a 66?

Makes you wonder if the TPGs really know what they are doing over there.

BECOKA

In the end PCGS decided it was worth the risk since they will have to cough up the dough when they re-grade it as a 65 or 64.

LincolnsRule

Here's another of a different sort...

coin
same coin

LindeDad

That first one is crazy $700 to $23,000 with a change of holder and grade of the same coin. And too think when it was issused about all it was worth was a piece of candy.

michael

this must be done with pre 1933 red lincolns

as the collectors need red high grade lincolns for their registry sets

michael

if the guy that bought the red 66 sees this thread will he be pleased??

IrishMike

Demand for coins always in general raises the grade, its econ 101 supply and demand.

dizzyfoxx

Here's one!

and
and another one! ...The difference between a couple grade points and a pedigree. ...And the MS66 example looks very

ColonialCoinUnion

Same coin, first appearance in Goldberg's Benson Collection Sale in 2001:


1787 Connecticut Copper. Draped bust facing left. PCGS graded AU-58. This one has several die cracks on the obverse and decent surfaces for a copper coin of this era. Examination will note a few minor patches of surface roughness. Obviously a coin which scarcely circulated, and one for the advanced Connecticut specialist. Well struck for these, with good definition throughout.


And then later, on Joe O'Connor's Website (note I believe Joe bought this in its new holder):

1787 Connecticut Copper
Mint State-62 BN (PCGS)
Draped Bust Left, "CONNFC"
Miller 33.3-W.1 (Rarity 4): Draped Bust facing left. First N punched too low then corrected, E from an F punch, die break from milling to back of neck, legend misspelled CONNFC. Reverse with B corrected from an R, and a pronounced die break from the second cinquefoil toward the inside elbow.

Lustrous chocolate brown with some areas of lighter tan. The surfaces are frosty and not oiled, and are free from corrosion or discoloration. Struck on a better than average flan, with minor planchet roughness on the neck obverse, and a small flan lamination in Liberty's upper drapery on the reverse the only significant problems.

From a type collector's perspective, the Pre-Federal issues, particularly the issues of the Confederation period, are a logical extension backward from the regular issues of the early U.S. Mint. The Articles of Confederation left the right to coin money in the hands of the states, concurrent with the Continental Congress. However, upon adoption of the United States Constitution, coinage rights were reserved for the federal government only, and one of the most numismatically interesting periods in American history came to a close.

Population figures are even more meaningless for Pre-Federal coinage than for Early Federal Copper, as specialists in this area tend not to have their coins certified. Nonetheless, this solidly uncirculated example is certainly one of the finest known of the relatively few survivors for this "Redbook" variety, and the only example reported in Mint State by PCGS.