Before looking here, you SHOULD be sitting down...

dizzyfoxx

...For toners, there are "Monster" coins and then there is the coveted "Moose"! I would classify this coin a notch above both and call it a "MAMMOTH".

Not a Moose, more like a MAMMOTH!!!

kryptonitecomics

Regardless of the price............I have to agree with you......... that quarter is simply amazing

segoja

Needs a bath!!!

Fletcher

Actually, I think that it is very ugly. However, I'm not a big fan of Pollock either and people seem to love his paint spills.

Manorcourtman

$6500.....what a pipe dream.

Myqqy

Sorry Dizzy, but I think you're too easily impressed. It's nice, but not that nice....

Garneteye

Sorry but I don't like the speckled look, it's not a "M"

Coin Finder

$6500.00 No freakin way!

dizzyfoxx

<< <i>Sorry Dizzy, but I think you're too easily impressed. It's nice, but not that nice.... >>



I'm easily impressed by a coin that has enough eye-appeal to fill the sky. I think this coin, as as it looks in the image, is probably 1000x prettier when viewing in-hand and under a nice light. I'll stand by my initial reaction...

Steve27

I like Jackson Pollock's work, but I get no thrill from that quarter.

CarlWohlforth

I love the quarter, but not the price.

MrHalfDime

It's just another ugly Washington quarter to me. I love toned coins, but the Washington quarter ranks right up there with the SBA or the Eunice Shriver commem. Sorry Dizzy.

techeff

For that price I would want something that's older than saintguru...

kryptonitecomics

Tough crowed Dizzy....maybe you should post a widget next time

saintguru

For that price I would want something that's older than saintguru...

I'm 1954, douchebag! It is older.

kryptonitecomics

<< <i>For that price I would want something that's older than saintguru...

I'm 1954, douchebag! It is older. >>

Bikingnut

It's nice, but not at that price. I wonder if it would cross to PCGS68.

ER

Don't know anyhting about Washington quarters. So, what's the fair price, without the color?

Smitty79

<< <i>Sorry Dizzy, but I think you're too easily impressed. It's nice, but not that nice.... >>



I agree, it ain't nothing to write home about.

techeff

I'm 1954, douchebag! It is older.



Whoa, my bad but you should be taking some antioxidants or something...

FatMan

<< <i>

<< <i>Sorry Dizzy, but I think you're too easily impressed. It's nice, but not that nice.... >>



I agree, it ain't nothing to write home about. >>

Tough crowd. That coin is beautiful. I can't speak for the price but beautiful toned coins bring big bucks.

MORGANHUNTER2

I hope this one is not like the Peace $ episode!

zenny

You need to get out more, my friend.........


it's a freakin washington quarter!


You also need to get these "M" words under control.


(IMHO)


z

jayboxx

It's nice, but it doesn't compare to a lot of your commemoratives that you have shared, IMO it just doesn't have that wow factor.

AZLARRY

Love the color, deserves the star designation.

poorguy

<< <i>$6500.00 No freakin way! >>



Well, it's apparently not too over the top considering PCGS's price guide lists at $6500 and it is generally 15%-30% over average example values. A 30% premium for a coin this stunning is not what I would consider outrageous. And since PCGS's world series of coin trading has supposedly initiated an overhaul in the price guide, this valuation should be somewhat accurate. $6500 is actually less than 10% over our original purchase price. And for those who say that it's not in a PCGS holder so the price guide doesn't matter, go and compare this coin to ANY PCGS graded MS68 example and analyze the technical differences and then tell me which coin you would rather have (not which plastic you would rather have, which coin you would rather have).

messydesk

That's the kind of coin that needs to be shown with both high lighting for the colors, and medium-high lighting for luster. The all-color glam shot doesn't show off the MS68-ness you'd see in hand.

Now to head to the gutter, the shot of the coin in the slab showing the reflection of the lights looks almost R-rated if you twist your mind a little.

techeff

Well, it's apparently not too over the top considering PCGS's price guide lists at $6500 and it is generally 15%-30% over average example values. A 30% premium for a coin this stunning is not what I would consider outrageous. And since PCGS's world series of coin trading has supposedly initiated an overhaul in the price guide, this valuation should be somewhat accurate. $6500 is actually less than 10% over our original purchase price.

Best rant I've heard since I went shopping for a used car....

poorguy

<< <i>Well, it's apparently not too over the top considering PCGS's price guide lists at $6500 and it is generally 15%-30% over average example values. A 30% premium for a coin this stunning is not what I would consider outrageous. And since PCGS's world series of coin trading has supposedly initiated an overhaul in the price guide, this valuation should be somewhat accurate. $6500 is actually less than 10% over our original purchase price.

Best rant I've heard since I went shopping for a used car.... >>



But I'm actually honest.

TomB

It's spectacular and completely original Mint Set toning. I love the coin, and since I'm not buying it, who cares about the price?

leothelyon

The strike, luster, toning and mark free! Too much toning will lower the luster and my view of a monster example. Not having seen the coin in hand (and it's unlikely I'll ever will...........not that it's really a monster), I can't say either way. But I could allude to what I like in the right amount of luster and toning but instead I'll just say that they are very difficult coins to photograph.

Very nice poorguy!

Leo

poorguy

<< <i>The strike, luster, toning and mark free! Too much toning will lower the luster and my view of a monster example. Not having seen the coin in hand (and it's unlikely I'll ever will...........not that it's really a monster), I can't say either way. But I could allude to what I like in the right amount of luster and toning but instead I'll just say that they are very difficult coins to photograph.

Very nice poorguy!

Leo >>



Thanks. What if I said that the toning has no affect on the spectacular luster?

I actually think that the photograph shows the luster well. I used a technique to image this coin that mimics the quality used on photographing raw coins. I've only told a couple of people about this technique but those who have tried it swear by it.

CTcollector

Dizzy - Nice coin. I actually like the look of this coin better than the barber half you were hyping earlier........

Coxe

It's been oxidized ..... in a rather trippy, groovy way.

uofa1285

Phenominal...World Class.

dizzyfoxx

<< <i>You need to get out more, my friend.........


it's a freakin washington quarter!


You also need to get these "M" words under control.


(IMHO)


z >>



Get out to where? Dippedville? I can understand those who may not think it's a "Mammoth", for "Mammoth" is in the eye of the beholder. But IMHO, to pass it off as just a plain old Washington, is being just a tad bit ignorant-(or something a little less harsh)

MikeKing

<< <i>

<< <i>$6500.00 No freakin way! >>



Well, it's apparently not too over the top considering PCGS's price guide lists at $6500 and it is generally 15%-30% over average example values. A 30% premium for a coin this stunning is not what I would consider outrageous. And since PCGS's world series of coin trading has supposedly initiated an overhaul in the price guide, this valuation should be somewhat accurate. $6500 is actually less than 10% over our original purchase price. And for those who say that it's not in a PCGS holder so the price guide doesn't matter, go and compare this coin to ANY PCGS graded MS68 example and analyze the technical differences and then tell me which coin you would rather have (not which plastic you would rather have, which coin you would rather have). >>



Now this is a man who stands behind his coins. I like that! You've also got an incredible eye because everytime I look at your site, I'm just so damn tempted....

great coin!

Fletcher

Hello ... I am Mr. Ignorant! And, I think that it is ugly

dizzyfoxx

<< <i>Hello ... I am Mr. Ignorant! And, I think that it is ugly >>



Is it Mr. Ig Norant, or Igno Rant? ...And I'm assuming in this case, ugly stands for Utterly Gorgeous Looking? Yes!

Fletcher

Lol

zenny

<< <i>
Get out to where? Dippedville? I can understand those who may not think it's a "Mammoth", for "Mammoth" is in the eye of the beholder. But IMHO, to pass it off as just a plain old Washington, is being just a tad bit ignorant-(or something a little less harsh) >>




I beg a million pardons for my obvious ignorance.


You're right.


IT"S FREAKIN A MAMMOTH COIN.


How could they possibly be letting this go for 6500 bucks? What are they nuts? Don't they know it's a MAMMOTH?


NGC even put a star on the label with the grade.


Let's notify Garrett and Guth, maybe they can find a place for it in the next edition of the 100 greatest U.S. coins!!!!!


FYI, i wasn't "passing it off as a plain old Washington," but (in my best Owen Wilson voice) C'MON - you've created a new class of super coin for a common date Washington with rainbow toning.

GET A GRIP, MAN.


z


ps. sorry, but it's not even a baby water buffalo, let alone a moose.


pps. anxiously awaiting your next link to the snake's inventory!

Fletcher

The only bad press is no press

Boothill40

Outstanding but way above my humble cival servant pay check

Myqqy

pps. anxiously awaiting your next link to the snake's inventory!

DIMEMAN

Like someone said. It's a washington quarter...get a grip.

Looks like a PCGS66.


If I had 6500 to spend on a coin.......it sure wouldn't be on a 49-D quarter.


Sorry, I have to pass like most of the rest of them!

northcoin

I thought The Bull Moose Party came at a later date in history than George Washington's presidency. Maybe you could term that Anaconda an elephant? Wasn't George a Whig as a precursor to the Republicans? One things for sure, that coin is no donkey.

Conder101

Yawn.

I like nicely toned coins. This one doesn't impress me.

Not a Mammoth, not a Moose, maybe a Mouse.

291fifth

$6500 for a 1949-D quarter? No thanks.

Barry

I don't like Pollock or this coin.

dizzyfoxx

< I beg a million pardons for my obvious ignorance.>
You're excused... this time!


< You're right.>
I know.


< IT"S FREAKIN A MAMMOTH COIN. >



< How could they possibly be letting this go for 6500 bucks? What are they nuts? Don't they know it's a MAMMOTH?>
$6500 is only what it's listed at in the PCGS pricing guide, and that price doesn't even account for it being a MOOSE!


<NGC even put a star on the label with the grade.>
Very observant, I noticed that too


<Let's notify Garrett and Guth, maybe they can find a place for it in the next edition of the 100 greatest U.S. coins!!!!!>


<FYI, i wasn't "passing it off as a plain old Washington," but (in my best Owen Wilson voice) C'MON - you've created a new class of super coin for a common date Washington with rainbow toning.>
Either way the coin lands when you flip it, I'd say it's a total keeper.


<GET A GRIP, MAN.>
I'd to get a "grip" on this quarter, and put it right into my collection.


<ps. sorry, but it's not even a baby water buffalo, let alone a moose.>
I know it's not a water buffalo or a moose, I called it a Mammoth... remember?


<pps. anxiously awaiting your next link to the snake's inventory! >
Just kick back and relax partner, It will only be a matter of moments before I see another amazing toner that just screams, "EYE APPEAL!!!


Any other silly remarks???...

Edited in format to make cents... I mean sense!

goose3

<< <i>Any other silly remarks??? >>



Sure,
are these paid endorsements?