So my coin dealer buddy asks can you submit these to PCGS for me... (BIG PICS)..

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 3:22AM

Hands me 6 Kraft Envelopes, tells me he bought them in the 80s and they have been in the Bank Box for 25 years. So for your viewing (drooling) pleasure, and feel free to guess what PCGS will do with them....

TomB · February 28, 2010 3:28AM

I see some genuine holders in your friend's future.

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 3:41AM

And on some of those dates a Genuine holder would be OK.

dizzyfoxx · February 28, 2010 3:45AM

<< 

<< I see some genuine holders in your friend's future. >>

>>

If he's lucky.

TigerGirl1398 · February 28, 2010 3:48AM

<< I see some genuine holders in your friend's future. >>

I don't.

bestmr · February 28, 2010 3:57AM

I will say the 1895 made me go OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

JJM · February 28, 2010 3:57AM

looks like they ran into some water or liquid chemicals at some point
interesting look to them.

I dont see PCGS liking them very much tho

ps.is that first 93 a CC?, if so whats up with the mintmark?

nankraut · February 28, 2010 4:01AM

They're all recently AT'd, imho. A waste of money to submit them.

edited to add: Go ahead and send in the '93-S. But it looks like it has the "s" glued on?? I won't even guess on the CC's.

crazyhounddog · February 28, 2010 4:03AM

<< I see some genuine holders in your friend's future. >>

blu62vette · February 28, 2010 4:04AM

is that 96-s PL under the tone?

Amigo · February 28, 2010 4:09AM

I see some genuine holders in your friend's future.

That may not be possible for the 1893 S ..... what's up with the Mint Mark ! was it added?

The 1895 O is fantastic ... no opinion though rather PCGS will grade it.

icsoccer · February 28, 2010 4:09AM

Your buddy knew how to pick good dates!
I like the 93-cc..I believe it will grade in those tones.
Looks like the 79-cc will grade.
The rest....well when you get um back post the grades.
Good luck!

BAJJERFAN · February 28, 2010 4:13AM

I don't see any drool quality toners outside of the 95-0 and there is a better chance of getting a glass of ice water in hell than there is of getting that into a PCGS holder.

notwilight · February 28, 2010 4:13AM

Story sounds a little made up to me. Do you know this guy well? --Jerry

AUandAG · February 28, 2010 4:21AM

Nice choice of coins to collect. I think they will all grade at PCGS. All look completely original to my eye.

79 will AU53
84 will AU55
93 will EF40
93s will VF35 Do you see the diagnostics? I see the die scratch in the leaf but not the one in the T
95 will EF45
96 will MS63

very nice,
bob

coinguy1 · February 28, 2010 4:26AM

<< 

<< 

<< I see some genuine holders in your friend's future. >>

>>

If he's lucky. >>

Do you think some of the coins are counterfeit or have added mint-marks? If not, your remark doesn't make any sense to me. And if so, I think you are mistaken.

Moldnut · February 28, 2010 4:30AM

Mark
Could #1 & 5 be a NT 2nd toning?

DoubleEagle59 · February 28, 2010 4:32AM

all genuine except perhaps the 93-cc.

Robb · February 28, 2010 4:51AM

I think the obvious question is: Why isn't the "dealer" buddy submitting the coins himself?

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 5:06AM

<< I think the obvious question is: Why isn't the "dealer" buddy submitting the coins himself? >>

Simple, I'm a PCGS dealer and he isn't...

soapguy · February 28, 2010 5:13AM

that 95 o should be
confiscated and given
to a toner nut wow O wow.

coinguy1 · February 28, 2010 5:26AM

<< Mark
Could #1 & 5 be a NT 2nd toning? >>

Based on the toning/color considerations, I think # 1, 3 and 4 have the best chances of receiving grades.

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 5:31AM

Something else to consider, if they come back QT from PCGS, do you send them to NCS and say strip the toning?

ColonialCoinUnion · February 28, 2010 5:33AM

If you submit them as one big group, the chances are that even the most believable ones will be GENUINE'ed by association.

itsnotjustme · February 28, 2010 5:37AM

Wear and toning don't go together well for me.

I see genuine holders with artificial color/altered surfaces as the best outcome. No comment on authenticity of them all.

IrishMikey · February 28, 2010 5:38AM

All of the coins appear to be genuine. The date position on the 1893-S is correct, and I am pretty sure I am seeing the die polish line in the 'T'. As for any given grading service accepting the toning as original, I really do not have a good guess, although the 1884-S and the 1895-O are the most questionable to me. Even if PCGS does not grade any of them, I believe each coin will find a collector happy to own them.

Blackborder · February 28, 2010 5:42AM

<< They're all recently AT'd, imho. A waste of money to submit them. >>

Agreed. Doesn't always mean they won't grade though, but some of these are particularly bad.

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 5:52AM

<< 

<< They're all recently AT'd, imho. A waste of money to submit them. >>

Agreed. Doesn't always mean they won't grade though, but some of these are particularly bad. >>

OK, look up a 1884-S in MS grade. QT or not that coin should be in a holder.

originalisbest · February 28, 2010 5:55AM

All look rather icky. Good luck; some will come back graded, some will come back gennie.

lkeigwin · February 28, 2010 6:08AM

<< I will say the 1895 made me go OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

>>

The 1895 will be the first to BB.
Lance.

TomB · February 28, 2010 6:18AM

<< 

<< 

<< They're all recently AT'd, imho. A waste of money to submit them. >>

Agreed. Doesn't always mean they won't grade though, but some of these are particularly bad. >>

OK, look up a 1884-S in MS grade. QT or not that coin should be in a holder. >>

Even if you believe the 1884-S to be MS, which I do not, the coin would not receive a grade opinion if it were placed in a genuine holder. Additionally, in the AU level and below it is a common coin despite its $200+ AU Greysheet value.

sweetwilliet · February 28, 2010 6:32AM

This looks like fun, so I'll take a stab at each coin.

1879 cc - ms60- will grade
1884 s - au 58 details- questionable toning (Is it just me, or does the neck on the eagle look a little skinny?)
1893-cc- xf45- will grade
1893-s - vf30 details- cleaned and retoned
1895-o - au53 details- questionable toning
1896-s- ms63- will grade- this coin looks really nice in the pics

Let us know the results!!

MsMorrisine · February 28, 2010 6:50AM

ask for all the fees and to and from postage up front.

djdilliodon · February 28, 2010 6:54AM

IMO the 84s and 95o will get details gradings. The 96s looks NT but certain spots of it look AT so ima say 50/50 shot. The rest should holder.

crypto79 · February 28, 2010 6:58AM

Not one of the coins looks remotely NT but one or two of them might stick to the ceiling if you submit them one at a time enough times. Although keydates that people will be looking as gap fillers for a cheep price they are kind of junky. I do not believe that envelope 25 year nonsense for one second.

GAT · February 28, 2010 7:06AM

Some of the Morgans have clear shadows around the stars which indicate natural toning.

Flatwoods · February 28, 2010 7:07AM

I believe they should all grade. Whether they will or not is highly questionable.

The 1895 would be the first casualty.

Flatwoods · February 28, 2010 7:09AM

After re-reading this thread I have to ask.
Would some of the posters that seem so sure these are AT'd please explain they're reasoning.

No offense intended, as it does not matter to me either way.
Just trying to learn.

shorecoll · February 28, 2010 7:15AM

It doesn't matter if they're AT if the services are currently exceptionally tight on toning, they might bag/"genny" regardless.

tahoe98 · February 28, 2010 7:18AM

<< I see some genuine holders in your friend's future. >>

....ditto.

lkenefic · February 28, 2010 7:21AM

FWIW... I think the 93-S has the proper diagnostics ("1" centered over the dentil and I think I see the die chip at "T" in Liberty). I'm not a huge fan of the splotchy toning, but I've seen worse holder... L

SFBayArea · February 28, 2010 8:10AM

I think they look ok (the 1895-O is the most questionable).. some might have accelerated toning.. you never know until you submit.. I wouldn't submit the 1895-O, it might give them the wrong idea but I've seen a lot of worse ones in holders.. anyone care to post pics of NT ones (ones they knew for sure) that were slabbed as genuine?

lcoopie · February 28, 2010 8:21AM

drool

any more in the box?

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 8:24AM

In a few weeks

PerryHall · February 28, 2010 8:25AM

Why doesn't your coin dealer buddy submit his own coins? Is he on their "dealers to watch out for" list?

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 8:25AM

<< Why doesn't your coin dealer buddy submit his own coins? Is he on their "dealers to watch out for" list?

>>

I answered that question last page.

keets · February 28, 2010 8:28AM

1879-CC-----MS61.
1884-S-----MS63.
1893-CC-----Genuine, Questionable Color.
1893-S-----VF35.
1895-O-----AU55.
1896-S-----Genuine, Environmental Damage.

PerryHall · February 28, 2010 8:35AM

<< 

<< Why doesn't your coin dealer buddy submit his own coins? Is he on their "dealers to watch out for" list?

>>

I answered that question last page. >>

Whoops. I missed that. If your buddy is a coin dealer, why isn't he also a PCGS member? Er....never mind.

MadMarty · February 28, 2010 8:37AM

Not all coin dealers are PCGS dealers you know....

Connecticoin · February 28, 2010 8:52AM

<< They're all recently AT'd, imho. A waste of money to submit them. . >>

Just because the coins are funky looking does not necessarily mean they are AT's. I think they most likely got that way from the Kraft envelopes, so probably "NT" but not "MA". However, if coins 1 and 3 were submitted separately, they might grade.

It might be worth looking to having NCS "conserve" the ones that get the "QT" tag.

TwoSides2aCoin · February 28, 2010 9:51AM

<< 

<< I think the obvious question is: Why isn't the "dealer" buddy submitting the coins himself? >>

Simple, I'm a PCGS dealer and he isn't... >>

This famous quote is one of my favorites:

"brevity is the soul of wit".

From Shakespeare's Hamlet, 1602:

LORD POLONIUS
This business is well ended.
My liege, and madam, to expostulate
What majesty should be, what duty is,
Why day is day, night night, and time is time,
Were nothing but to waste night, day and time.
Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief: your noble son is mad:
Mad call I it; for, to define true madness,
What is't but to be nothing else but mad?
But let that go.

So my coin dealer buddy asks can you submit these to PCGS for me... (BIG PICS)..

Comments

Leave a Comment