1855-S Seated Half

cameron12x

Thoughts on a technical grade?



Die breaks, damage, or tooling on the reverse? (Or all three?)

coolest

My thought is, I dont see this coin very often.

RedHerring

Are these your in-hand pics? They sure look better than the auction images!

VF30 for sure. Are the reverse marks raised? If so, they're die breaks. The smaller mark that's higher on the piece looks raised to me.

Tough date too.

cameron12x

<< <i>Are these your in-hand pics? They sure look better than the auction images!

VF30 for sure. Are the reverse marks raised? If so, they're die breaks. The smaller mark that's higher on the piece looks raised to me.

Tough date too. >>

Yes, these photos are in-hand. I'll probably need to post larger photos to determine what is happening on the reverse.

Moldnut

I agree, looks much better than the auction pictures.

cameron12x

I'm concerned about the reverse.

Die breaks, damage, or tooling on the reverse? (Or all three?)

Moldnut

Good question. As Ive said, I dont collect Seated Halfs but I just looked at more than 10 on Heritage and I found none with any breaks in the areas where yours looks to have breaks. This may or may not mean a thing though.

keyman64

Can you read "LIBERTY"? What letters are weak and what letters are NOT there? On these coins, LIBERTY is frequently a weakness. Besides that....I think you did well. I can't comment on the damage/tooling/die breaks without larger photos but I think PCGS would grade it VF25....assuming it is "PROBLEM-FREE".

Are those scratches across the eagles legs?

I know what holder it's in and that was a gutsy gamble that very well may have paid off. Congrats!

Barndog

nice coin. Looks to have mostly toned over (old) marks, save for around 11 o'clock on the reverse where it is a bit lighter than the rest of the surfaces. It would be interesting to see where a top TPG would grade it. Tough issue, better than usual condition, choice VF maybe?

cameron12x

Quoted from this link:

"Finding a problem free VF-XF 55-s quarter may take a few days, weeks, or months but you'll get one. But trying to find the right 55-s half in that grade could take you years."

It looks like my journey has just begun:



Thoughts? Comments?

TomB

Those look to be fairly extensive post-mint damage scratches on the reverse. If your plan is to cross the coin then you may have to allow a genuine holder option.

Moldnut

<< <i>Quoted from this link:

"Finding a problem free VF-XF 55-s quarter may take a few days, weeks, or months but you'll get one. But trying to find the right 55-s half in that grade could take you years."

It looks like my journey has just begun:



Thoughts? Comments? >>



PMD

TexasNationals

See PM

Edit: there does appear to be a die crack in between the H and A of HALF.

dcarr

Knife attack.

The coin still has an overall nice look to it.
Too bad about the scratches.

Barberian

<< <i>Quoted from this link:

"Finding a problem free VF-XF 55-s quarter may take a few days, weeks, or months but you'll get one. But trying to find the right 55-s half in that grade could take you years."

It looks like my journey has just begun:



Thoughts? Comments? >>



Amen to the quote! rhedden's OP is absolutely dead-on from my experience. That is one of the nicer 55-S's that I've seen. I've seen perhaps one or two without some sort of damage such as harsh cleaning, heavy scratching, or corrosion. Otherwise, I've probably seen 30-40 that are in worse shape than that coin. 55-S halves are the most multilated single date/mint in all of the seated halves. It's incredible how they have taken a beating through the years.

Edited to add comments about rhedden's post.

Barberian

Here is the 55-S I bit on several years ago. The seller badly mosrepresented the coin (as a "beautiful, problem-free EF48"and with very slightly blurred pictures) and had a no return policy. The coin is corroded and polished. Then the dealer waited 6 days before shipping it registered mail, which took another 17 days (23 days total to travel one state away!). When I picked it up and complained to the dealer, he refused a refund because he said I waited too long to reply. An expensive mistake.

TexasNationals

Jeff after seeing those reverse close up's I just puked in my hat, send it back, send it back fast! Hold out, one will show up.

Barberian

After hunting the auction down on Ebay, I'd say don't crack it out. Your specimen is in much better shape than mine and should get a better price than what you paid for it if you provide decent pictures. I paid about $80 less for mine, so that should make you feel better.

cameron12x

Many thanks for all of the feedback so far for this example!

I specifically asked the seller about the marks on the reverse, whether they were scratches, before I bid. I received no response. There will be many who will categorically suggest that I return the coin and dismiss this example out-of-hand, due to the issues noted. This is understandable.

I had previously read Ron's 1855-S thread on how tough this coin is find problem-free. So, I was willing to take a chance on this one. I could be wrong, but I too believe that I can get at least what I paid for this coin from a "knowledgeable buyer" (one who is familiar with the series and issue) -- with better photos. The original seller's photos were HORRIBLE! (Ebay Auction)

In addition to simply "wanting this issue," a large part of my strategy for bidding on this coin was that I was banking on the seller's poor photos actually driving other bidders away, thereby reducing the final hammer price and overall risk to me--within limits.

I haven't made a final decision (I'm still on the fence and have a few days to play with) whether to return the coin or keep it. I have to admit that I have ZERO experience looking for this coin; all that I've read is that it's VERY, VERY tough.

One alternative is to keep the coin, simply spend more money on a problem-free example (IF one ever becomes available within my budget), and then sell this one for a small profit or a small loss. There will likely ALWAYS be a market for this issue.

"Finding a problem free VF-XF 55-s quarter may take a few days, weeks, or months but you'll get one. But trying to find the right 55-s half in that grade could take you years."

Calling Ron Hedden! Calling Ron Hedden! Calling Ron Hedden!

roadrunner

VF25/30 details. Much of that large flat area on her right leg/knee is from strike and not just wear. Surfaces and color are pretty pleasing other than the deep
reverse scratches. One has to net the coin down to at least a Fine grade since this coin is so scarce/coveted in Very Fine...but that doesn't necessarily mean the coin
is then worth problem free "fine" money. When I followed this date extensively in the 1970's my goal was a full XF piece which at the time ran about $300-$500. I ran
into several problem free VF's along the way but no full XF's at the price I wanted to pay. While the date is tough in problem free VF, there are specimens out there but
they will probably cost you. Finding a solid specimen in an ANACS holder would save considerable money.

If one just looks at surviving coins in all grades the 55-s half is scarce but nothing special due to all the lower grade and damaged pieces available. Even thought the mintage
is low for the time period, it was apparently saved in greater numbers than one would expect. WB lists the coin as having 200-300 pcs known. I'd say it's possibly even more
than that. In WB they reference a hoard from Louisiana viewed in 1986 which had 87 pcs. Of those, 17 were fine, 14 VF, 9 XF, and 4 AU's. The 55-s in all grades as well
as grades above Fine is not tougher than the 42-0 SD. That date comes on the market quite regularly in F-XF, but with a hefty price tag. The 55-s in VF/XF has been slowly rising
over the years but shouldn't ever overtake the 42-0 SD. Other dates with similar rarity to the 55-s in all grades would be 41, 42 sd, 46-0 TD, 50, 51, 72-s, 78-cc to name a few,
but not all. For clues to its value in VF I'd compare it to dates like 1842-0 sd, 1851, 52-0, 66-s nm, 74-cc, 78-cc to help bracket it. In the 1992 survey of responding LSCC members, 35
pieces were reported with more than half being VF or better. Surprisingly, 10 were in XF and 5 in AU, only 3 in VF. That's a lot more than I would have expected. But it hints that
most members building sets were looking for higher grade pieces and found them. PCGS/NGC combined have more than 80 specimens listed in VF or better. Seems like there are
enough specimens available to satisfy all the set collectors with room to spare. I was surprised at the number of VF-AU specimens in the Heritage auction archives. With this date
tripling or even quadrupling in price over the past 10 yrs, it's not exactly the deal it was back then. No doubt many of these better pieces are now in strong hands. But I think over
the next few years a number of these will become available again.

I don't think the 55-s in VF is such a monumental date that I'd settle for a scratched one like this. Most set collectors thinking of buying this in VF or better would probably pass on it.
The fact that it won't end up in anything but a genuine holder will reduce the field considerably. It seems that over time buyers only get fussier. A future buyer of the coin will have
to be impatient and tired of looking for one....or expect a bargain price to move on it. That's a choice only the OP can make. A nicer coin will eventually come along, hopefully before
the price guides get adjusted upward another time.

roadrunner

cameron12x

Many, many thanks for all of the insightful responses... much appreciated!

I am not a Seated Half series collector. My ONLY interest in this coin is the "first-year-of-silver issue" qualification for the San Francisco mint. Thus, the issue's "toughness" relative to other coins in the series is of no particular relevance to me. But the information Brian shared is very, very interesting! Thanks so much for it.

I've still not made a final decision, but I'm leaning towards holding on to it and selling it AFTER I've found a suitable replacement. I don't believe there is much downside to the price I paid, given the issue's relative condition scarcity.

IF I keep the coin I also believe that the best strategy is to leave it in the ICG holder (it will not cross) and simply provide historical data confirming the scarcity, relative toughness, and any other interesting anecdotes about this particular issue to help market it in the appropriate venue. Even though it's not problem-free, there should be buyers out there when the time comes to sell.

I have the coin in-hand. The "pride of ownership" dynamic is a powerful emotion. Right now I need to spend some time with the coin to see if I can live with its looks and include that in my decision-making whether to return it to the seller. I don't often look at my coins under a loupe and without some magnification the scratches on the reverse are actually pretty well hidden in and around the devices.

At the end of the day, like everyone else, I'd like to have a problem-free example over a damaged one. And this begs the question: where is the problem-free inventory for this issue? When and where can one obtain a problem-free example without breaking the bank? Are there dealers or specialists who can be recommended?

Any other information about this issue, its relative pricing, or advice whether to hold or to return the coin to the seller, is greatly appreciated!

roadrunner

The problem free specimens are probably in pretty strong hands. The date has been sought after in VF-AU since the early 1970's. There are probably some mini-hoards of this date
as well residing in very strong hands that probably won't be seen until the owners decide to retire or pass on.

As most around will attest, if one is "thinking" about a coin getting better as they ponder some obvious distractions.....they never do improve. If anything that distraction grows in one's mind until it becomes sort of unbearable, even if the distraction is really not all that significant. And down the road the vast majority of those who decided to keep the coin regretted it months or years later. In my own experiences, I can't think of too many times where I was thankful that I decided to purchase a banged up example of a tough coin. The only two I recall that turned out well was a corroded VG-Fine 1870-cc quarter and a multi-pock marked VF 1804 dime. But I can think of dozens of problem coins I did keep that only cost me money down the road.

roadrunner

cameron12x

Unfortunately, I've learned that the seller does not accept returns on slabbed coins:

"We do not offer a return policy on slabbed and certified coins. I believe ICG is a very accurate at grading and so do the other dealers I deal with. That is why they are a sucessful company and are an authorized dealer with Ebay. Our return policy is clearly stated that it covers raw and uncertified coins, thanks."

Here is a query I sent to ICG and their response:

===================
Dear Sirs,

I recently won at auction the following ICG # slabbed coin: 2494230101

Is there any way I can tell if this is a real ICG number?

And what year the coin was certified?

Thanks!
===================
We show that serial number tied to an 1855-S 50C graded VF30. This coin was certified in December of 2001.
===================

So, that would imply that ICG couldn't grade very well prior to the generally thought fall-off period beginning around 2003? Or it may just be an aberration tied to this piece?

TomB

The seller will be forced by ebay to accept a return on the coin because there is no where within the listing that it states that slabbed coins cannot be returned. The auction states that there is a seven day return period and that the buyer pays return shipping and when one clicks the "read details" hyperlink it also states a seven day return period for your money back with no exception made for certified coins. The seller has added text within the body of the description also offering a seven day return policy specifically on uncertified coins, but never makes mention that certified coins cannot be returned for refund. In my opinion, the seller is attempting to make you keep a bad coin.

Moldnut

Does the seller open himself up to a forced return by not answering a direct question about the scratches?

cameron12x

Anyone else have an example to share?



At a personal level, in retrospect, this would be one of the very (few) damaged coins that I would be willing to pay good money for.

cameron12x

Any examples from the "day crew" to share?

1946Hamm

Here is one I have. It is in an old PCI green holder. I've had it over 10 years.

cameron12x

<< <i>My thought is, I dont see this coin very often. >>

You seem to be profoundly correct, sir!

Where are they?

LoveMyLiberty

PCGS AU-53

cameron12x

==========================================

<< <i>Here is one I have. It is in an old PCI green holder. I've had it over 10 years. >>

That's a very nice example... thanks for sharing!

==========================================

<< <i>PCGS AU-53 >>

Now that's a beautiful one! Thanks for sharing!

==========================================

It looks like the issue often suffered from weak obverse strikes?

LoveMyLiberty

Wiley & Bugert state a mintage of 129,950 for the 1855-S, using 4 head dies
and 2 tail dies.

Their comments include: "All dies for 1855-S coinage appear to have been drastically
abraded and polished unnecessarily, considering the mintage. Three of four head dies
identified have very little or no drapery remaining below the elbow. The fourth head has
about 2/3 drapery. Both tails identified have incomplete vertical stripes in the shield.
One tail has weak or missing stripes at the bottoms of the left side of the three set of stripes.
The second tail is not as bad with only the third set of stripes from the left weak. Because
all head dies were heavily polished, no "halo" phenomenon is present around the stars and date.

cameron12x

<< <i>Wiley & Bugert state a mintage of 129,950 for the 1855-S, using 4 head dies
and 2 tail dies.

Their comments include: "All dies for 1855-S coinage appear to have been drastically
abraded and polished unnecessarily, considering the mintage. Three of four head dies
identified have very little or no drapery remaining below the elbow. The fourth head has
about 2/3 drapery. Both tails identified have incomplete vertical stripes in the shield.
One tail has weak or missing stripes at the bottoms of the left side of the three set of stripes.
The second tail is not as bad with only the third set of stripes from the left weak. Because
all head dies were heavily polished, no "halo" phenomenon is present around the stars and date. >>

Thanks for this information!

From the photos which I have posted, can you tell which die pair that I have and how common it might be?

Billet7

I like the coin, too bad about the scratches. They aren't terrible, but they're still there. Luckily they are in a less obvious location on the coin.

Baley

VF+ details, nets Fine, imo

lordmarcovan

VF35 to almost EF40 details.

A pretty decent coin, despite the old scratches.