15 years late to the party…. The thread predates my existence here. I believe that if this was truly a proof, It would be worth multiples of dealer asking price even in 2010. Also, it would be certified by independent experts and sent to auction. There are no mint records of ANY proofs being made in 1917. This coin belongs with the 1919 WLH Czech coin, imho.
PS-how can anyone even make a determination without, at least, a picture?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
you make a few million coins a few will be exceptionally made and a few will be poorly made and then everything else will be inside the spectrum of production. It doesn't make the few best made proofs. People are welcome to note and value their place on the spectrum but It makes me question a different spectrum when undocumented and void of evidence tales fueled by imagination are spun with the expectation that the impetus is on others disproving said tale.
When I was working at a coin shop in Laurel, Maryland we had an 1895 S Morgan come in that was flat out perfect but was darkly toned. The rims were strong all the way around and every detail was complete and there were no marks or cuts on the coins. Everyone that saw it swore it was a branch mint proof. We paid Walter Breen $250 to look at the coin. It took 3 weeks for him to send it back with a terse "proof like branch mint Morgan". He came in the shop later on and we discussed it but he would never come off that opinion. I felt it was money wasted but at the time (1978) there was no one else to send it to. The owner put the coin away and I have no idea what happened to it later on.
@Klif50 said:
When I was working at a coin shop in Laurel, Maryland we had an 1895 S Morgan come in that was flat out perfect but was darkly toned. The rims were strong all the way around and every detail was complete and there were no marks or cuts on the coins. Everyone that saw it swore it was a branch mint proof. We paid Walter Breen $250 to look at the coin. It took 3 weeks for him to send it back with a terse "proof like branch mint Morgan". He came in the shop later on and we discussed it but he would never come off that opinion. I felt it was money wasted but at the time (1978) there was no one else to send it to. The owner put the coin away and I have no idea what happened to it later on.
So the theory is the Philly mint made 1 1895s proof as a lark and it just ended up in your clients hands 85years later? Or is it more likely a hammered PL San Fran coin was set aside early (as nice) which caused its exposure, toning and protection being in collector channels for decades opposed to air restrictive bags that cause dings. The latter is "considerably" more likely
@Walkerfan said:
15 years late to the party…. The thread predates my existence here. I believe that if this was truly a proof, It would be worth multiples of dealer asking price even in 2010. Also, it would be certified by independent experts and sent to auction. There are no mint records of ANY proofs being made in 1917. This coin belongs with the 1919 WLH Czech coin, imho.
PS-how can anyone even make a determination without, at least, a picture?
The “Czech” coin was a 1933-S.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Walkerfan said:
15 years late to the party…. The thread predates my existence here. I believe that if this was truly a proof, It would be worth multiples of dealer asking price even in 2010. Also, it would be certified by independent experts and sent to auction. There are no mint records of ANY proofs being made in 1917. This coin belongs with the 1919 WLH Czech coin, imho.
PS-how can anyone even make a determination without, at least, a picture?
The “Czech” coin was a 1933-S.
Yes, you’re right! Thank you for the correction!!🙏
@lermish Thanks for the images. 👍 That definitely looks like a business strike (MS/non-proof) to me.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
Comments
if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it is probably a duck even though might not want to call it one!
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Feels like fifteen years of bitterness came flowing forth all at once.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
unecessary bump
Proud follower of Christ!
Sticking to your truth: The 1917 Walker was not a proof.
(Will you change your mind in the next 15 years?)
Dang, I read this whole thing hoping there would be some interesting new information, or at least pictures, added in 2025.
Collector, occasional seller
15 years late to the party…. The thread predates my existence here. I believe that if this was truly a proof, It would be worth multiples of dealer asking price even in 2010. Also, it would be certified by independent experts and sent to auction. There are no mint records of ANY proofs being made in 1917. This coin belongs with the 1919 WLH Czech coin, imho.
PS-how can anyone even make a determination without, at least, a picture?
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
you make a few million coins a few will be exceptionally made and a few will be poorly made and then everything else will be inside the spectrum of production. It doesn't make the few best made proofs. People are welcome to note and value their place on the spectrum but It makes me question a different spectrum when undocumented and void of evidence tales fueled by imagination are spun with the expectation that the impetus is on others disproving said tale.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Here are the pics resurrected from photobucket
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Breen flat out made stuff up unfortunately.
When I was working at a coin shop in Laurel, Maryland we had an 1895 S Morgan come in that was flat out perfect but was darkly toned. The rims were strong all the way around and every detail was complete and there were no marks or cuts on the coins. Everyone that saw it swore it was a branch mint proof. We paid Walter Breen $250 to look at the coin. It took 3 weeks for him to send it back with a terse "proof like branch mint Morgan". He came in the shop later on and we discussed it but he would never come off that opinion. I felt it was money wasted but at the time (1978) there was no one else to send it to. The owner put the coin away and I have no idea what happened to it later on.
So the theory is the Philly mint made 1 1895s proof as a lark and it just ended up in your clients hands 85years later? Or is it more likely a hammered PL San Fran coin was set aside early (as nice) which caused its exposure, toning and protection being in collector channels for decades opposed to air restrictive bags that cause dings. The latter is "considerably" more likely
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
The “Czech” coin was a 1933-S.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Yes, you’re right! Thank you for the correction!!🙏
@lermish Thanks for the images. 👍 That definitely looks like a business strike (MS/non-proof) to me.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
the numistrust slab above does not look like anything special, but it is not the best pic of the coin.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"