sooo how does a guy go about .......

seatedcollector

Text

telling a seller that his dime is misrepresented ?
i cant believe that PCGS makes mistakes like this.
this is a clear case of "buy the coin not the holder"

commoncents05

What are yOu talking abOut?

-Paul

TennesseeDave

Is it not an 1866 dime?

seatedcollector

anyone in here that knows seated dimes ??

AUandAG

Is that an 1860?

Dang lousy pics.

bob

droopyd

cert # checks out -- what's the issue with this coin?

MsMorrisine

I'm guessing he thinks it's more in the G range instead of F, esp the reverse.


but misrepresented it is not. it is a pcgs f12 slab... buy the coin not the holder.

TennesseeDave

I blew up the picture and it appears to be an 1860.

seatedcollector

MsMorrisine

your guess is the worst one yet

adamlaneus

Looks like 1866 to me. I don't see how someone could think that is a zero.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, for I do not collect seated dimes.

19Lyds

From the PCGS CoinFacts.com page, here's the exact coin:



Whats the problem?

BTW, the picture on PCGSCoinfact.com is labeled 15828021 and is in fact an 1866 Type 5 Seated Liberty Dime.


CoinFact Link for those that subscribe.

seatedcollector

ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd. 1. the date on an 1866 P dime slopes UP (like the one in my avatar) 2. the mintmark on MOST 1866-S dimes is VERY weak 3. the date on MOST 1866-S dimes slopes DOWN. that date sure looks like its sloping down to me

MsMorrisine

thanks!


must be the date then...

hard to read... could be 1860... and that is easy to tell to a seller in posession of the slab.

19Lyds

<< <i>ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd. 1. the date on an 1866 P dime slopes UP (like the one in my avatar) 2. the mintmark on MOST 1866-S dimes is VERY weak 3. the date on MOST 1866-S dimes slopes DOWN. that date sure looks like its sloping down to me >>



READ MY POST.

Goldbully

<< <i>MsMorrisine

your guess is the worst one yet >>



Play nice Mr. Thread starter!!!

seatedcollector

thanks 19Lyds for the better pic ! that is the most common die pair for the 1866-S dime, so "the problem with the coin" is that its an S mint and thus misrepresented, not by the seller but by PCGS

19Lyds

How about a bigger pic? I'm just not seeing an "S" mm.

pheh

Interesting... I'd tell PCGS and let them tell the seller.

Here is an enlargement of the MM area:

notwilight

<< <i>thanks 19Lyds for the better pic ! that is the most common die pair for the 1866-S dime, so "the problem with the coin" is that its an S mint and thus misrepresented, not by the seller but by PCGS >>



So do you think the mint mark is just weak (grease filled?) or removed? --Jerry

PS Anybody got a photo of a real 1866?

seatedcollector

anyone that is familiar with 1866 dimes doesnt have to look at the reverse to know what mint it is from. that is an S no doubt about it. the most common die pair of the 1866-S dime. because of the difference in value in the P from the S it is surprising that PCGS isnt more familiar with the two.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>

<< <i>MsMorrisine

your guess is the worst one yet >>



Play nice Mr. Thread starter!!! >>




it was a fair comment

seatedcollector

notwilight
not grease filled, not removed, the S was stamped into the die VERY weakly, the most common die pair of the 66-s dimes, so obviously these dies were responsible for the majority of the striking, which leads to die wear, which means the S is just going to get weaker as more coins are struck, add a decade or two of wear to the coin, and the mintmark is just a memory

19Lyds

1865-S


1867-S


There is no 1866-S on PCGSCoinFacts.com

seatedcollector

MsMorrisine

my comment was in fun, i wasnt being mean, i never "disagree" with anyone's grading, the coin could have been graded an AU, not likely anyone will bid AU money for a VG coin however, someone will end up paying "P mint" money for an S mint coin. not a $10 or $20 price difference.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>notwilight
not grease filled, not removed, the S was stamped into the die VERY weakly, the most common die pair of the 66-s dimes, so obviously these dies were responsible for the majority of the striking, which leads to die wear, which means the S is just going to get weaker as more coins are struck, add a decade or two of wear to the coin, and the mintmark is just a memory >>



time to pull teeth... "most" was used in a previous post... are there any other die markers?

seatedcollector

19Lyds,
see how weak the mintmark is on the 65-s you pictured ? that exact same die was used again for the 66-s dimes, notice how the top half of the S is already gone on the 65-s ? see how the denticles are just about merging with the rim ? imagine how much was left after say 30K 66-s dimes.

seatedcollector

MsMorrisine

the most reliable die marker is the date,
19Lyds
posted a nice clear pic of the con from coinfacts, it is DEFINATELY sloping down, here is what a 66 P looks like. notice how the date slopes UP, it may be easier to compare the 1 in the date of both coins, see how the 1 in the date on mine is much closer to the denticles than the last 6 ? on the ebay coin the 6 is MUCH closer to the denticles than the 1

jesbroken

Sharp eye, seatedcollector. Were I interested I would contact both the seller and PCGS--I'm sure they both deserve to know. You are absolutely correct in your opinion.
Jim

seatedcollector

its not really my opinion, its fact. i didnt come up with it, im just sharing what i know. hopefully someone here knows the players that are trying to outdo one another in order to pay dearly for something that isnt what the holder says it is. ive contacted the seller, i have no idea how to contact PCGS

19Lyds

<< <i>its not really my opinion, its fact. i didnt come up with it, im just sharing what i know. hopefully someone here knows the players that are trying to outdo one another in order to pay dearly for something that isnt what the holder says it is. ive contacted the seller, i have no idea how to contact PCGS >>



Try DWillis@collectors.com and dh@collectors.com

InternetJunky

I must say you have a sharp eye and truly know your area of expertise. At first I was just like "what is this guy talking about?"

I'm sure not only the seller but PCGS would be interested to hear about this.

lkeigwin

Good stuff! Thanks for sharing, seatedcollector. This is one of those threads that keeps me coming back here.

Funny, we all assume the seller doesn't know it's a $200 coin, not a $700 one. Could it be the reason the coin is up for auction? It will be interesting to see what it goes for. My bet is the auction will not be ended early.
Lance.

P. S. Some of the posts in this thread are a little snide. Smug attitude. Too bad.

lathmach

There is the possibilty that PCGS will call this a "mechanical error", and disclaim responsibility.
If the seller were to send it in for review and that happens, he's SOL.
It's smarter for him to dump it onto someone else.

Ray

BillJones

<< <i>ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd. 1. the date on an 1866 P dime slopes UP (like the one in my avatar) 2. the mintmark on MOST 1866-S dimes is VERY weak 3. the date on MOST 1866-S dimes slopes DOWN. that date sure looks like its sloping down to me >>



You really shouldn't be putting people down because you have more expertise in one area than the rest of us. I've never collected Seated Dimes by date so all I know would come from the catalog listings and comparing photos. When you have a huge set like Liberty Seated dimes expecting others to know as much you do is not reasonable.

As for the grading company, well that’s a mistake they should not have made. But I’ve seen a number of misattributions in slabs where they got a Red Book variety wrong in places where it did have a material effect upon the value of the coin. When it comes to certified coins, one can’t assume that they always get it right.

kranky

<< <i>There is the possibilty that PCGS will call this a "mechanical error", and disclaim responsibility.
If the seller were to send it in for review and that happens, he's SOL.
It's smarter for him to dump it onto someone else.

Ray >>



I think it's more likely that PCGS will make it right.

dizzyfoxx

<< <i>ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd. 1. the date on an 1866 P dime slopes UP (like the one in my avatar) 2. the mintmark on MOST 1866-S dimes is VERY weak 3. the date on MOST 1866-S dimes slopes DOWN. that date sure looks like its sloping down to me >>



It must be a one-of-a-kind Mint Error, and worth big bucks!!!

messydesk

<< <i>

<< <i>its not really my opinion, its fact. i didnt come up with it, im just sharing what i know. hopefully someone here knows the players that are trying to outdo one another in order to pay dearly for something that isnt what the holder says it is. ive contacted the seller, i have no idea how to contact PCGS >>



Try DWillis@collectors.com and dh@collectors.com >>


Or change the title of the thread to include your assertion that PCGS mistook an 1866-S for an 1866. That should attract attention. It looks like the hits in the mintmarkal area are a little too strategically placed, but it's probably just a corollary of Murphy's Law of bagmarks.

CaptHenway

<< <i>anyone that is familiar with 1866 dimes doesnt have to look at the reverse to know what mint it is from. that is an S no doubt about it. the most common die pair of the 1866-S dime. because of the difference in value in the P from the S it is surprising that PCGS isnt more familiar with the two. >>



I yield to your expertise in the field, but you might have avoided a lot of sturm und drang by mentioning this in the first place.
TD

shorecoll

I personally don't mind "smug" when someone is imparting cool info. I heard Socrates was a real SOB. Smug for smug's sake as in some other posts should get capital punishment.

Walmann

And I was going to guess it really is a seated half.

seatedcollector

You really shouldn't be putting people down because you have more expertise in one area than the rest of us. I've never collected Seated Dimes by date so all I know would come from the catalog listings and comparing photos. When you have a huge set like Liberty Seated dimes expecting others to know as much you do is not reasonable.

i wasnt "putting anyone down" and i remained quiet until the responses became pointed at me not knowing how to grade, not knowing what i was talking about etc. heres some advice for you, if you want to tell people what they should and shouldnt do, get some kids.

GrumpyEd

<< <i>sooo how does a guy go about ....... >>



You could send him a link to this thread.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>You really shouldn't be putting people down because you have more expertise in one area than the rest of us. I've never collected Seated Dimes by date so all I know would come from the catalog listings and comparing photos. When you have a huge set like Liberty Seated dimes expecting others to know as much you do is not reasonable.

i wasnt "putting anyone down" and i remained quiet until the responses became pointed at me not knowing how to grade, not knowing what i was talking about etc. heres some advice for you, if you want to tell people what they should and shouldnt do, get some kids. >>



I never said you didn't know how to grade.

this is spiraling out of control needlessly.

I was reaching for anything and my redbook is temporarily indisposed...

that was an expert level "what's wrong with this picture" question.

seatedcollector

MsMorrisine

i was using your response as a general reason why i decided to bark back, it didnt offend me, as i stated, i dont care what the grade is on that holder, or any holder, or any 2x2. grading is an opinion, everyone has thiers. but where a coin was struck is not a matter of opinion, that information can be proven. date placement, die markers, the number of reeds on the edge of the coin, all can be used to positively identify the mint of origin

rgCoinGuy

<< <i>MsMorrisine

i was using your response as a general reason why i decided to bark back, it didnt offend me, as i stated, i dont care what the grade is on that holder, or any holder, or any 2x2. grading is an opinion, everyone has thiers. but where a coin was struck is not a matter of opinion, that information can be proven. date placement, die markers, the number of reeds on the edge of the coin, all can be used to positively identify the mint of origin >>



Interesting, what are the die markers on a 1874 proof?

seatedcollector

an 1874 proof what ? dime ? should be a little defect on the chest of ms liberty, almost like a small flame coming up from her gown thing that shes wearing, and the "8" in the date should be almost perfectly centered over a denticle below it, this is the proof die for the '74 BUT ! after the proofs were struck, the same obverse die was put into service for business strikes, so early business strikes could be mistaken for proofs. this is the only obverse die indentified for the 1874 proofs.

Justacommeman

I'll take Seated Dime mintmarks for $800 Alex.....................MJ

seatedcollector

this is not the first 1866-s dime listed on ebay as an 1866 P but its is the first one ive seen in a PCGS holder. i know of one AU 66-s that is in an NGC holder as a 66 P and the S is visible ! to me it is disheartening, if they can make mistakes like this, then is it that far fetched that some fake coins are getting holdered as well ??

19Lyds

<< <i>You really shouldn't be putting people down because you have more expertise in one area than the rest of us. I've never collected Seated Dimes by date so all I know would come from the catalog listings and comparing photos. When you have a huge set like Liberty Seated dimes expecting others to know as much you do is not reasonable.

i wasnt "putting anyone down" and i remained quiet until the responses became pointed at me not knowing how to grade, not knowing what i was talking about etc. heres some advice for you, if you want to tell people what they should and shouldnt do, get some kids. >>



Hmmm. I personally do not think that

"telling a seller that his dime is misrepresented ?
i cant believe that PCGS makes mistakes like this.
this is a clear case of "buy the coin not the holder"

Is very informative since you made no mention of why YOU felt the coin was "misrepresented".
Follow that with

"MsMorrisine

your guess is the worst one yet"

where you still did not metion what the heck you were referring to and then you follow up with

"ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd." followed by what should have been in YOUR first post.

And now you're gonna get all defensive because you think folks are picking on you?

Nobody had a clue as to what you were referring to friend and I'm thinking that "Posting to Forums 101" is in order.

BXBOY143

<< <i>this is not the first 1866-s dime listed on ebay as an 1866 P but its is the first one ive seen in a PCGS holder. i know of one AU 66-s that is in an NGC holder as a 66 P and the S is visible ! to me it is disheartening, if they can make mistakes like this, then is it that far fetched that some fake coins are getting holdered as well ?? >>




GOOD POINT....

BXBOY143

<< <i>

<< <i>You really shouldn't be putting people down because you have more expertise in one area than the rest of us. I've never collected Seated Dimes by date so all I know would come from the catalog listings and comparing photos. When you have a huge set like Liberty Seated dimes expecting others to know as much you do is not reasonable.

i wasnt "putting anyone down" and i remained quiet until the responses became pointed at me not knowing how to grade, not knowing what i was talking about etc. heres some advice for you, if you want to tell people what they should and shouldnt do, get some kids. >>



Hmmm. I personally do not think that

"telling a seller that his dime is misrepresented ?
i cant believe that PCGS makes mistakes like this.
this is a clear case of "buy the coin not the holder"

Is very informative since you made no mention of why YOU felt the coin was "misrepresented".
Follow that with

"MsMorrisine

your guess is the worst one yet"

where you still did not metion what the heck you were referring to and then you follow up with

"ok, im feeling sorry for this crowd." followed by what should have been in YOUR first post.

And now you're gonna get all defensive because you think folks are picking on you?

Nobody had a clue as to what you were referring to friend and I'm thinking that "Posting to Forums 101" is in order. >>






ANOTHER GOOD POINT....