anyone see this? _ added a photo

seateddime

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=7877

oxy8890

I did not. It looks very nice but this is not my series. Is there something unusual about this coin?

Thank you for any additional information you may provide and please excuse my ignorance regarding this series.

lordmarcovan

<< <i>anyone see this? >>



I have now.

coindeuce

$300+ for a harshly cleaned and retoned example of the more common variety of the date.

COALPORTER

Other than overpaying, is something wrong with the coin?

RYK

I keep confusing ANACS and ICG. Maybe they should merge and be called ICGNACS.

seateddime

hint:

not what it seems to be

SUMORADA

small stars ?

commoncents05

Proof?

-Paul

seateddime

19Lyds

<< <i> >>




AND??

TomB

It doesn't look like the large stars variety to me.

DIMEMAN

As far as the variety, the large star is the common one. This coins does not look right to me. The design is not all correct.

AUandAG

OK, so now we know that Heritage looks at the plastic and not the coin. So, is this a counterfeit slab as well as
a counterfeit coin or did ICG blow the whole deal?
bob

cheezhed

Not scratched?

ldhair

It looks like the small star to me and the doubling on the reverse seem right.
I can't see the die crack through the stars. Is it there? Just the image? I'm lost.

coindeuce

<< <i>hint:

not what it seems to be >>

Uhhh...the three is an altered 5??

AUandAG

OK, so it's not counterfeit? Just altered??? ICG missed that???? My question still stands, is this
a counterfeit slab? What is with Miss Libs nose on the ICG coin? Nice hump. I say the whole
coin is a sham from china.

bob

BlackBeard

<< <i>Proof?

-Paul >>

COALPORTER

no, you can't just change the date because the shield design changed too.

CaptHenway

<< <i>http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=7877 >>



If you have a specific question, ask it. Life is too short to play 20 questions.
TD

Unknown

This content has been removed.

BlueCole

hehe. . .

worse than a d@mn woman.

B.

seateddime

the whole thing is different,

the stars are small but lacking any cracks which means it is a very early die state, the date just looks wrong but that could be the photos too. The reverse is clearly the DD reverse but I can not get a deep enough resolution to detirmine some of the cracks that may or may not be there.

This is a interesting coin to say the least. The photo quality is poor but the price realized reflects 2 people saw the coin otherwise it would be $125 tops.

The date in thin and the 3 very opened.

My guess ( and I did buy the coin) is it could be the earliest state I have seen of a small stars ever and need to research this coin further. I am interested to see how reflective the coin is in hand, I suspect it was not cleaned but the dies polished. It clearly has the same look and tone of the large star coin in the sale from the same collection. There is going to be more to this story.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

seateddime

the small stars is not nearly as rare as the estimate mintage would suggest. Just the die states alone would show far more than 30,000 coin. I would guess it is more like 250,000 but still in high grades it is not common.

The photos on the dimes were way off this sale. I know this because I saw a coin that did not sell and was a former lot. The earlier picture was much, much better and I am guessing that is why iy dod not sell. The lighting is off.

I am guessing this coin has some problem as any coin Heritage sends to ANACS or IGC is sent there because they don't think NGC or PCGS would holder it.

It is making buy coins based on images very hard these days. If I don't see it or have someone look at it for me I will just assume a grade or 2 below unless it is PCGS graded or CAC.