FOUND 3rd!! Dateless 1916 Type 1 Standing Liberty Quarter

johnny54321

This isn't much of a picture to work with, but would you say this has a shot of being a 1916? From what I can see, all of the diagnostics match. I will have better pictures in a few days.

MFH

I believe you have a 1916 - the head looks like it breaks into the beading at top.

savoyspecial

link

rld14

Here's the pickup points you want to use.

This coin below IS a 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter. The quickest check, for me, is the drapery that's below Liberty's right arm (Left side of the obverse).

BuffaloIronTail

Looks like a 16 to me.

Congrats to you!

johnny54321

Yeah, the picture is all I have since this was 1 coin in an ebay lot. RLD, that sure looks like the drapery line in the original picture to me. I'll keep my fingers crossed till I receive the lot.

Bear

Seems right. Way to go.

rld14

You bought that in a junk lot? Nice! That's a $1,000 coin I would think.

If it turns out to be a 16... you suck

johnny54321

<< <i>You bought that in a junk lot? Nice! That's a $1,000 coin I would think.

If it turns out to be a 16... you suck
>>



Well, not quite. It was in a larger lot and almost went for melt, but another person also must have thought it was a 1916 and bid it up, so I am a couple hundred dollars into it(which means a great deal if it is a 1916, but a lousy deal if not). I'll admit I took a risk on this purchase, and I don't really advise it; but I do have a no questions asked return policy that I can use if needed. From the pictures I'm fairly confident that it is a 1916, or a counterfeit made to look like one. I will get it examined by multiple sources(including this forum) as soon as I get it in hand.

On another note, I was reviewing the Heritage archives, and this raw dateless slq popped up that Heritage deemed a 1916. Are they flat out wrong?? This looks nothing like a 1916 to me.

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=256&Lot_No=7171#Photo

johnny54321

Alas, my fair maiden has cometh. I am quite certain this is a 1916 now that i have it in hand. All of the diagnostics match, and there is even enough detail to make out the broken beads above her head. There are a few wispy scratches that look worse in the photos than they do in hand. I'd assume those would be allowed at the FR-02 grade level, but I could be wrong. Regardless, I'm in it a couple of hundred dollars, and am DEFINITELY keeping it for that. Opinions?

johnny54321

Thanks for all of the additional eyes!

Connecticoin

Nice score, congrats!

johnny54321

Thanks! Any opinion on what it would grade? I'm thinking a Fair-2, but it does have a full obverse rim and some of the beading is still intact. Certainly not enough detail for AG, but might it warrant a FR-2+??? :-)

BigE

Too bad you couldn't get it into a new holder-----------BigE

Connecticoin

Yeah looks like a 2. It should grade easily.

lordmarcovan

pocketpiececommems

Does anyone have a dateless 1916 in a holder to show?

johnny54321

Here is an ANACS FR-2 that sold for $1495 2 years ago. Very similar to mine detail wise:
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=1947

and here is an ANACS PR-01 that ALSO sold for $1495 5 years ago!! I think the buyer got ripped off on this one.
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=360&Lot_No=6558

veryfine

You have a 1916 for sure.
If one is familiar with this series, one doesn't even need to examine the drapery connection to identity a 1916 slq. Even in the lowest grades, "the look" of a 16 is clearly different from a comparably graded 17 T1.
Congratulations!

johnny54321

Thanks veryfine! The 1916 slq has been my dream coin for a while now, and I was considering saving up for a G/VG when I stumbled upon this lot. So this will be an adequate filler since I'm trying to complete an SLQ set, and I will probably sell it someday to put money towards a higher grade 1916.

johnny54321

Here is the lot that I purchased the 1916 in:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130374943181&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT

First column second row(she is upside down even, what a disgrace). The only problem with buying these lots is that the coins all just get tossed in a bag and shipped. I guess at FR-02 a little extra beating doesnt matter too much ...but oh well. I guess this proves though that these coins still exist undiscovered in junk lots.

123cents

Congrats! Nice catch.

johnny54321

update:

I sent this into ANACS for authentication, and they agreed with diagnostics and slabbed it FR-2 problem free!! WOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOO!!!! I mean, I felt pretty confident that it was the real deal, but it still blows my mind that I found something like this in an ebay junk lot...so having the experts confirm it was a great sanity check. This should extinguish all of the doubters, and I will post the coin in slab when I receive it.

Bochiman

Congratulations!
That's really cool!

Connecticoin

Excellent!

PCcoins

Cograts!

I could definitely see this happen, and I'm sure it's not the first or last time it will happen again. A lot of dealers won't even mess with SL quarters when they are dateless, you got lucky!

Happy Cherry-pickin'

Bochiman

btw.....now that you are certain it is 1916, I would likely try for a PCGS crossover......the registry value alone should prop up the value a bit

johnny54321

Thanks! Yeah, I may consider a PCGS crossover sometime, but I don't have a membership. This is actually the first coin I have ever sent to any TPG. I was really impressed with ANACS customer service and speed.

johnny54321

Here she is, in all of her ANACS certified fairness. :-)

sparky64

Good for you johnny54321! I'm happy for you.

zap1111

Congrats - you have a detective's eye

TWQG

Very educational thread, thank you. Perfect timing after looking at Cline's 62FH at Long Beach.

Snowman24

Nice find !

SoCalBigMark

I think if it had not been one, it would have been wrong of you to send the lot back under the return policy.

johnny54321

junk lot expedition round 2! :-)



This one looks more like a PR-1 from these, but I will have it in hand in a couple of days and there may be enough detail not shown to boost it to a FR-02. Either way, I'm fine with it. Opinionate away.

WaterSport

OK, Here is my opinion. Cherry picking a 1916 off the bay, - You Suck!

Getting your second one...Now you REALLY suck!

Congrats!!

WS

crypto79

you are only driving up the number of people who will now be looking at those lots on EBay but well picked

wilskyy

Yes the 1916 is a pretty one

johnny54321

Thanks for the comments. Once again, I didn't fully get the lot for melt, so it was a "semi-cherry pick".
Link

I'm about $150.00 into it as a gamble that I'm fairly confident in. But yeah, I don't mind sharing the fact that there are goodies in these lots. I don't need to be a hog. There still are truly unsearched lots out there ripe for cherrypicking, though 99% of the "unsearched" stuff on ebay is total crap. I have found 3 1921 quarters in these lots(all of them I got for melt), and one of them was a VF example that I resold for $375.

Anyways, do you think it has a shot at FR02 from ANACS, or is it lock for PO1?

crypto79

<< <i>Thanks for the comments. Once again, I didn't fully get the lot for melt, so it was a "semi-cherry pick".
Link

I'm about $150.00 into it as a gamble that I'm fairly confident in. But yeah, I don't mind sharing the fact that there are goodies in these lots. I don't need to be a hog. There still are truly unsearched lots out there ripe for cherrypicking, though 99% of the "unsearched" stuff on ebay is total crap. I have found 3 1921 quarters in these lots(all of them I got for melt), and one of them was a VF example that I resold for $375.

Anyways, do you think it has a shot at FR02 from ANACS, or is it lock for PO1? >>



Stop wasting your time and send them through a dealer to PCGS. Yes I think the new one stands a good shot at PO1

mojorizn

Been following this since the beginning, and though i can't officially present a You Suck award, on the occasion of your SECOND score, for the record, YOU SUCK!

Mojo

johnny9434

nice pick up, wtg

lordmarcovan

Note to self- start looking carefully @ dateless Ty1 SLQs.

commoncents05

<< <i>Stop wasting your time and send them through a dealer to PCGS. Yes I think the new one stands a good shot at PO1 >>





-Paul

johnny54321

For most coins I agree, I'd go for PCGS. However, I prefer ANACS in regards to correct attribution of dateless 1916 quarters. If you've read some of my other threads, you'd understand why.. (I know I'm really asking for it writing that in a PCGS forum...lol).

johnny54321

RESULTS ARE IN!!





I'm pretty certain this is a 1916. However, I'm quite stuck on the grade. It is stronger than any PO-1s I've seen, and weaker than 4 out of 5 FR02s I've seen. It's significantly stronger than this FR02 on Heritage Link, but I also think that one was overgraded. I think it could go either way, and it's definitely problem free. Also in that lot, I got an AU 1918-s and a VG 1927-D; so I almost would have broken even if it hadn't been a 1916. Needless to say...I'm grinning from ear to ear right now!!!!!!!!!

johnny54321

any grade opinions with the new pictures?

coindeuce

You can have all of the dateless '16 SLQ's you can find. I'd rather have your avatar coin.

Connecticoin

Looks like a 2 to me.

I have bought several other coins from that seller, but don't have the patience to search through all those SLQ lots, so hats off to you!! You have possibly saved 2 1916 SLQs from being melted some day!

Tdec1000

Well, not quite. It was in a larger lot and almost went for melt, but another person also must have thought it was a 1916 and bid it up, so I am a couple hundred dollars into it(which means a great deal if it is a 1916, but a lousy deal if not). I'll admit I took a risk on this purchase, and I don't really advise it; but I do have a no questions asked return policy that I can use if needed. From the pictures I'm fairly confident that it is a 1916, or a counterfeit made to look like one. I will get it examined by multiple sources(including this forum) as soon as I get it in hand.



So if it wasn't the 1916 you would have sent the lot back to the seller. That is jacked up especially since they were selling junk silver. I wouldn't accept a return period on junk silver.

johnny54321

<< <i>So if it wasn't the 1916 you would have sent the lot back to the seller. That is jacked up especially since they were selling junk silver. I wouldn't accept a return period on junk silver. >>



Let me clarify. I have the return policy if needed in case that coin got switched or they sent me a different lot. In one sense they are sold as junk silver, but the seller is VERY specific and tells you to "look closely at the pictures, you will receive exactly what is pictured". Both of the lots had sold for double melt based on what was in the pictures. If I was simply wrong on my diagnostics, I would have kept it as a lesson learned; but if the coins pictured weren't what was sent, I have every right to return them. My initial fear 5 months ago when I started this thread was a potential "bait and switch"....but this seller has proved to be the real deal so I'm no longer worried.