Here are both examples of a Pop 2/0 coin. Which do you prefer?

SmallEagle

Here are photos of both of the PCGS MS67 1826 half dollars. Which do you prefer?

The first is the Eliasberg coin and has a CAC sticker. It is currently for sale by Legend and I am a previous owner.



The second is one of the original 7 or 8 first PCGS 67 bust halfs to be graded before the Eliasberg sale and currently has no CAC sticker. It is part of my type set.

blu62vette

for me the different lighting makes it impossible to tell.

Paultjuno

My new car isn't worth what either of those is worth! But I would take either one
Although, I do tend to like the first one a bit more, a little more character from the looks of it.

lkeigwin

They are both remarkable! I would love either.

The second appears to have a superior strike, particularly the obverse. The reverse appears to be a later die state. But as Todd said, it's hard to make a call with two different types of photos.

Most of my CBH collection is toned. The first would fit better. But the second is truly wonderful.

Congrats.
Lance.

doh

Based on the pics, #1

cape

I like them both but PREFER the 1st

divecchia

Both are great looking coins, but if I had to choose I prefer # 2...

Donato

relicsncoins

They both have their plusses. The first seems to be a bit more original with the toning, yet the second appears to have less marks.

Justacommeman

Based by the OP's past coins posted I'll stick with him and choose #2

Based be purely the pics I would choose #1

MJ

Broadstruck

I like coin #2 as the sharpness of curl and wing details is far superior.

SmallEagle

Here is another (but poor) picture of coin #1:

Steve27

I don't see any luster in the first one, so I would go with number 2.

soty27

I prefer my coins original so based on the images I would go with #1. #1 also clearly has the better pedigree and due to the value of that coin I believe number 1 would sell for more if a time came to sell so I think my money would be better invested in number 1

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Bochiman

I think coin 1 has some luster but, from the pictures, for what they are, I think coin 2 has better luster, better surfaces, and a nicer strike.
I am not a "pedigree" person, nor a dealer/flipper/investor, so I would prefer coin 2.

As wtih all such things, I would need to have both in hand to really make the call, and, at the levels these coins are, I think that is almost mandatory in order to make a decision like this.

jhdfla

Pics are so dissimilar it is really difficult to tell. Forced to make a choice based on what's presented here, I'd have to go with #1.

soty27

<< <i>I think coin 1 has some luster but, from the pictures, for what they are, I think coin 2 has better luster, better surfaces, and a nicer strike.
I am not a "pedigree" person, nor a dealer/flipper/investor, so I would prefer coin 2.

As wtih all such things, I would need to have both in hand to really make the call, and, at the levels these coins are, I think that is almost mandatory in order to make a decision like this. >>




I think that when spending 50k plus on a coin you need to look at it from all sides and not just the collector aspect so IMO the pedigree would come into play. With the current economy I think it would be wise to view the coin from an investment standpoint. Over the past year I have purchased several collections from pure collectors who vowed never to sell there cherished collections but due to job loss, medical issues they had to sell. Most if not all the eliasberg coins have sold and continue to sell for much more then there counter parts in the same grade and holder so I think that ignoring the pedigree in this case would be unwise.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Bochiman

1) Read what I wrote about needing to really see both coins in hand

2) If I were to pay what these cost, I don't think I would be affected by medical costs/bills/etc. I use discretionary funds for coins. Something like this wouldn't be purchased unless I had a lot more money elsewhere. So, I would honestly say I would buy whichever I LIKED better and could care less about a pedigree "adding to the value". I'm ok with others that NEED to have a pedigree to like a coin. I'm not one of those. If the price is right, I will buy a coin. If it has a sticker, a plus, or a pedigree, I am ok with it...if the price is right

The strikes could be the same. They could be different. Again, I would want to see both in hand. Or, at a minimum, have an agent who has seen both in hand and gives me their professional opinion.

$50k for a coin is a lot to me, and to many, but it's nothing to many folks as well. So, I don't see an issue with someone buying a coin because they like it and they aren't as concerned about their future selling of it based on a pedigree. That sounds more like a dealer talking than a collector of means. Again though, each person, and situation, is different, so there will be some on either side of the discussion. I gave MY opinion and know that others have their own and I won't try to change them....though, it is funny when others don't agree and try to change my opinion

Unknown

This content has been removed.

ChrisRx

#2

soty27

I was not trying to change your opinion bochiman simply just presenting the other side of the fence. See things any way you choose to, fortunes change hands quickly so while 50k may seem llike alot in one case, it may mean little if anything in another case until something happens and the first thing to go is the coin collection. I dont see anywhere in anything I wrote that I was trying to change your opinion, I simply presented some other things that may come into play when purchasing such a coin. Keep on trying to take little jabs at me with your dealer/flipper/investor comments if that is what floats your boat.

joebb21

<<<<I think that when spending 50k plus on a coin you need to look at it from all sides and not just the collector aspect so IMO the pedigree would come into play. With the current economy I think it would be wise to view the coin from an investment standpoint. Over the past year I have purchased several collections from pure collectors who vowed never to sell there cherished collections but due to job loss, medical issues they had to sell. Most if not all the eliasberg coins have sold and continue to sell for much more then there counter parts in the same grade and holder so I think that ignoring the pedigree in this case would be unwise.>>>>>>


Sorty; while obviously the point is not to throw away money, just because coin 2 does not have a pedigree does not mean it does not have its own merits.
Eliasberg was a huge person and is currently the only known person to have completed a full us by date/type/mm/ and all the works.

However- Eliasberg's coins were not always top pop coins. Just because eliasberg owned it doesnt mean that it was the FINEST out there.

I can almost guarantee that when coins like these go to auction the eliasberg name wont bring any premium over what the collector is going to pay for wanting the top pop pieces.

A pedigree is just a name and a way to recognize who owned the coin before you. Coins like these have THEIR OWN NAMES and SPEAK FOR THEMSELvES.

RWB

Bottom - better detail

soty27

<< <i><<<<I think that when spending 50k plus on a coin you need to look at it from all sides and not just the collector aspect so IMO the pedigree would come into play. With the current economy I think it would be wise to view the coin from an investment standpoint. Over the past year I have purchased several collections from pure collectors who vowed never to sell there cherished collections but due to job loss, medical issues they had to sell. Most if not all the eliasberg coins have sold and continue to sell for much more then there counter parts in the same grade and holder so I think that ignoring the pedigree in this case would be unwise.>>>>>>


Sorty; while obviously the point is not to throw away money, just because coin 2 does not have a pedigree does not mean it does not have its own merits.
Eliasberg was a huge person and is currently the only known person to have completed a full us by date/type/mm/ and all the works.

However- Eliasberg's coins were not always top pop coins. Just because eliasberg owned it doesnt mean that it was the FINEST out there.

I can almost guarantee that when coins like these go to auction the eliasberg name wont bring any premium over what the collector is going to pay for wanting the top pop pieces.

A pedigree is just a name and a way to recognize who owned the coin before you. Coins like these have THEIR OWN NAMES and SPEAK FOR THEMSELvES. >>




I think both coins are fantastic, I just think that in this case the eliasberg pedigree may infact add some value. Several of eliasbergs coins were no where near top pop coins and if someone was going for a top pop coin they would have to pass on an eliasberg coin if it was not top pop but if the two coins in question were both top pop coins one being an eliasberg and the other not being an eliasberg the eliasberg may indeed pull more.

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>I can almost guarantee that when coins like these go to auction the eliasberg name wont bring any premium over what the collector is going to pay for wanting the top pop pieces. >>



Sorry - I totally disagree with that.

LoveMyLiberty

It's funny how a simple question like "which do you prefer" can become a
huge personality discussion. Glad we're not deciding where to go for dinner!

Coin #1 is a nice coin as a O-109 ( I think ) and is an R-1 with nice toning & eye appeal.

Coin # 2 is a nice coin as a O-119 ( I think ) and is an R-4 with nice strike & looks, although
hard to see with such a small image & I doubt it actually looks like that. Probably more silver
looking and shiny with no tone.

Both are MS-67 and most likely have sufficient luster to have achieved that grade. The presence
of a pedigree is not important to me. The issue of cost should not be a consideration in stating
which one prefers.

Just for the look of the coins I prefer coin # 1, but would take either one, or both, if offered.

Bochiman

<< <i>I was not trying to change your opinion bochiman simply just presenting the other side of the fence. See things any way you choose to, fortunes change hands quickly so while 50k may seem llike alot in one case, it may mean little if anything in another case until something happens and the first thing to go is the coin collection. I dont see anywhere in anything I wrote that I was trying to change your opinion, I simply presented some other things that may come into play when purchasing such a coin. Keep on trying to take little jabs at me with your dealer/flipper/investor comments if that is what floats your boat. >>



Jabs? Actually not. I put that as a distinction rather than a jab. If you take it as a jab, then that's your choice.
There IS a big distinction between someone buying a coin like that for a collection vs resale (near term/known). I took your musings as someone with a sale of the coin in mind vs someone who wanted to hold the coin indefinitely.

You seem to have more than a few issues lately.....hope things get better for you.

soty27

<< <i>

<< <i>

You seem to have more than a few issues lately.....hope things get better for you. >>




Oh jab number 5, Good one

Placid

Both seem about the same to me. I would like to have either one

cupronik

From what I see, coin #2 is easily my choice.

Teva

They are night and day and both are PQ coins but I prefer the first example.

08HALA20

<< <i>Based by the OP's past coins posted I'll stick with him and choose #2

Based be purely the pics I would choose #1

MJ >>





Also since the OP once owned #1, I would venture to guess # 2 is better.
From the pics #2 looks to have a much better strike and my choice.

Joe

coincollector2007

I'd buy example number one all day.....assuming the images are true to both

STONE

Neither.

I know of MS-64 examples with WAYYYY more eye appeal than either of those.

The first coin has typical album toning, dulled luster, a moderate strike (not unusual for this date, but for the grade it doesn't help), and has too many tics for me to consider it a true 67. 66 is the highest grade I would give it.

The second coin is, I believe, from Joe O'Connor. Knowing this man's eye for generally only the best I can vouge for its appeal without ever seeing the coin. But then as I look at the coin nothing really appeals to me except for the great strike.

SmallEagle, if you are just going for the Top Pop grade, then I would hold out until another 67 CBH comes along with more eye appeal. The two coins above are generic CBH's which are maxed out for their grade.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

grip

SmallEagle, if you are just going for the Top Pop grade, then I would hold out until another 67 CBH comes along with more eye appeal. The two coins above are generic CBH's which are maxed out for their grade.

-------------------------

adamlaneus

It's impossible to compare coins based on totally different pictures.
So i'm torn between two answers:


1) I like the look of coin number 2 better.

or

2) Neither coin is made of gold.

SoCalBigMark

In the second photo of coin #1 is that a gigantic thumbprint in the left obverse field?

GFourDriver

Wow tough choice, the first has the better toning, but I like the second best. Excellent strike, it is hammered!

DennisH

<< <i>for me the different lighting makes it impossible to tell. >>

I agree.

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>In the second photo of coin #1 is that a gigantic thumbprint in the left obverse field? >>


I was going to ask the same quesrtion...

Broadstruck

<< <i>SmallEagle, if you are just going for the Top Pop grade, then I would hold out until another 67 CBH comes along with more eye appeal. The two coins above are generic CBH's which are maxed out for their grade. >>



The OP's question was which of the 2 examples posted do you prefer.

speety

<< <i>

<< <i>SmallEagle, if you are just going for the Top Pop grade, then I would hold out until another 67 CBH comes along with more eye appeal. The two coins above are generic CBH's which are maxed out for their grade. >>



The OP's question was which of the 2 examples posted do you prefer. >>



Don't worry, i'm sure all who've agreed with this have held both coins in hand before...

Personally I think I'd go for number 1, but this is based purely on the images in the OP. Without having both in hand I think any comparison is useless.

crypto79

#2 not even close

pursuitofliberty

Do I have to choose just one?!?!



Oh my, my ... both are fantastic!!



I think #2 is the finer coin and would probably be my choice if I was allowed to make one, but I would have to view both in hand
to really make such a determiantion (of course)

Constantine

Impossible for me to tell which I like better considering that there are two pictures of coin 1 and they look so entirely different. I understand we are on a computer and we all communicate and share our coins through images. But I think this proves that one really needs to take comments/opinions of coins on this forum very lightly considering we are not looking at them in hand.

TwoSides2aCoin

#1 has a look that appeals to me not because I'm a wooed by toning, as much as originality.

illini420

From the pics, #1 looks more dull and the spotting near the "50" draw the eye a little.

#2 just pops a bit more and seems to have better luster.

I'm with #2 based on the photos

Twincam

Based on those photos...#2

bfjohnson

I like the originality of #1 (wonder about thumbprint) and detail of #2 ( I know it's different dies.)
Had to pick one, #2.