I agree. Looks AG3 at best for the grade, but then add on to that the nasty rim damage and the cleaning. Net down to PO1.5 to FA2 at best. I sold several 1916 WLHs on eBay late last year for about $25 each.
What a POS - I'm tempted to see what else he has listed just for kicks....hopefully it was a mistake and not representive of his business model. I wouldn't pay $55 if it had an "S" under the motto.
<< <i>FR-2 with rim damage. But . . . at least this is all visible to any potential buyer. >>
Don't all sellers, no matter what they're selling, have at least a moral and ethical responsibility to fairly and accurately represent the condition of their merchandise, especially when they use precise industry terms to describe it (VG), if not also a legal responsibility? We on these boards who know coins may instantly recognize that this one is a POS and the title horribly overstates its condition, as does the failure to state the flaws it has that render it all but bullion worthless. Was that omission intentional?
But what about people who aren't as knowledgeable as we are, especially those who find Collectors Corner because it is the first quick link listed above through the PCGS website? Is it entirely their responsibility to know grading if/when they buy coins? What about the legal term known as "factual misrepresentation" that exists to protect consumers from fraudulent sales practices? Advertising a coin as VG when it's close to G is one thing that can perhaps be justified as "a matter of opinion", but the turd that is the subject of this post is light years worse than that. Are we supposed to alert the PCGS mods about blatant overgrading of raw coins on Collectors Corner? Does anyone know? I've never seen any discussion of this sort about Collectors Corner before.
I'd say FR-02 is more like it. The reverse is AG, but the obverse is more than 50% of the grade, and that side is no better than Fair.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I don't see what everyone is getting worked up about. Knowing Collectors Corner the coin is probably sold or the dealer won't respond to your e-mails anyway....
Maybe "VG" is a typo. Before reading the comments, I, too, thought "genuine not gradable," or "Fair, details: damaged rim" if you're an NGC or ANACS fan. Either way, a skilled pocket piece courier might be able to wear it down to a gradable PO1.
Improperly Cleaned, Our passion for numismatics is Genuine! Now featuring correct spelling.
Comments
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
FR02 with problems... $20 coin IMO
It appears to be some sort of half dollar to me, missing some of its silver.
Edit: Just saw the VG in the title. He has it NG in the description.
Russ, NCNE
Drunner
<< <i>FR-2 with rim damage. But . . . at least this is all visible to any potential buyer. >>
Don't all sellers, no matter what they're selling, have at least a moral and ethical responsibility to fairly and accurately represent the condition of their merchandise, especially when they use precise industry terms to describe it (VG), if not also a legal responsibility? We on these boards who know coins may instantly recognize that this one is a POS and the title horribly overstates its condition, as does the failure to state the flaws it has that render it all but bullion worthless. Was that omission intentional?
But what about people who aren't as knowledgeable as we are, especially those who find Collectors Corner because it is the first quick link listed above through the PCGS website? Is it entirely their responsibility to know grading if/when they buy coins? What about the legal term known as "factual misrepresentation" that exists to protect consumers from fraudulent sales practices? Advertising a coin as VG when it's close to G is one thing that can perhaps be justified as "a matter of opinion", but the turd that is the subject of this post is light years worse than that. Are we supposed to alert the PCGS mods about blatant overgrading of raw coins on Collectors Corner? Does anyone know? I've never seen any discussion of this sort about Collectors Corner before.
<< <i>Seller didn't grade it VG. He assigned it NG, which is No Grade.
Edit: Just saw the VG in the title. He has it NG in the description.
Russ, NCNE >>
A simple typo isn't as interesting though, so I expect that this will be ignored by most respondents.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
lower they say NG probably from the rim/edge damage
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Looks like that one was thrown off the Empire State bldg observatory deck, on multiple occasions.
roadrunner
<< <i>Yikes! Looks like a Fair-2 to me! >>
Agreed. With damage.