What's your opinion of this 1854-O $3?

GoldenEyeNumismatics

link

This is a date that often doesn't come with much luster. This one looks like it has a good shot to cross to PCGS as at least AU50 (keep in mind that $3 gold is often graded quite liberally compared to $2.5 and $5). It appears to still have a nice skin to it too.

With ebay bucks and Bing, the price to me was $3328.

joebb21

looks solid in 50 and possibly 53.
I dont see anyhting that makes me think it wont grade.

if it does you definetly got a great deal

Longacre

I think it looks like a 50 in the picture. I can't comment on the price because I am not familiar with the prices of these coins, but (at least based on the picture) it appears to be a 50.

I will reserve the right to put a sticker on the coin until you receive it in hand and post a new picture.

MikeInFL

My first reaction was why is it in ANACS plastic. Expensive coin. Appears to have nice surfaces.

Could be quite a nice score....Mike

crypto79

He has some of the nicest freshest coins on Ebay. I have bought very nice coins from him before.

lunytune2

I plea the 5th .. Im not knowledgeable and may be embarassed by undergrading this

STONE

<< <i>He has some of the nicest freshest coins on Ebay. I have bought very nice coins from him before. >>

fc

if 3328 is "pcgs xf money", i think you did alright. i see it as an XF45 coin.

Not enough luster for the AU grade.

edited to add: i have no idea what you mean by this date/mint does not
come with much luster. just a quick glance at higher grade examples
shows luster in abundance. Or perhaps you meant that the tpgs liberally
grade these higher without the normal amount of luster one expects
on a low AU coin? After rereading your post i think that is what you meant. sorry.

and the more i look at the coin i can see how ANACS made their call
of AU50 considering the detail is excellent. I just call them as I see them
though based on the pics. My standards so to speak.

Either way, excellent coin. It does have a nice look. I am just bickering
on the grade.

fc

to demonstrate what i mean here is a pcgs AU50 i found by quickly googling. This coin seems to have a bit more luster and therefore a
low AU grade.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

fc, here's a PCGS AU53 with little or no luster and stripped surfaces. link

And a PCGS AU50 with little or no luster. link

This date rarely comes with much luster, and usually is graded based much more on detail.

BillJones

I'd have to see that one in hand. I don't trust the new ANACS one bit. Sure the luster can be and you would exect it to be subdued for an AU-50, but if it's deader than doornail in the luster department, it could be a white elephant.

joebb21

full refund if you dont like it- short the shipping to return

fc

<< <i>fc, here's a PCGS AU53 with little or no luster and stripped surfaces. link

And a PCGS AU50 with little or no luster. link

This date rarely comes with much luster, and usually is graded based much more on detail. >>



well i just browsed the heritage archives for a half an hour on this
date/mint.

my first thoughts is that inconsistency rules the day.
my second thought is that quite a few anacs net graded coins looked
just as nice as other tpg's regularly graded stuff.
next, a light cleaning does not stop this coin from grading.
next, it is a very very common coin to me. a boat load have sold at
auction at heritage alone.

all in all, it seems you are right. you have just as good a chance as
getting an xf45 as you do a au53!

but i still call it an xf45 and do not support the liberal policies of tpgs.