Home› U.S. Coin Forum
Options

My final purchase...ever

Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
in U.S. Coin Forum
...for 2011 that is...how's that for sensationalism! image

In this case, I bought the plastic, not the coin!

image

Comments

  • derrybderryb Posts: 37,610 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This kinda plastic should be over in the Precious Metals forum. image

    Nice score.

    No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left

  • ProofCoinsProofCoins Posts: 42
    plastic with a litte bit of silver
  • SeattleSlammerSeattleSlammer Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Looks better than a 3!
  • etexmikeetexmike Posts: 6,852 ✭✭✭
    Very nice final (of the year) purchase. image


    Mike
  • TWQGTWQG Posts: 3,145 ✭✭
    A must have in any plastic collection.
    My eBay store
  • coinman420coinman420 Posts: 4,666 ✭
    nice. image
    my ebay items BST transactions/swaps/giveaways with: Tiny, raycyca,mrpaseo, Dollar2007,Whatafind, Boom, packers88, DBSTrader2, 19Lyds, Mar327, pontiacinf, ElmerFusterpuck.
  • NewParadigmNewParadigm Posts: 1,322
    Looks better than a 63 IMHO image
  • coinkid855coinkid855 Posts: 5,012 ✭✭✭
    Nice NGC 2.0! image



    -Paul
    NGC 2.1 Census! PM me yours!
  • RYKRYK Posts: 35,799 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Looks better than a 63 IMHO image >>


    I agree. It's flashy.
    My Box of 20: https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/box-20/ryks-gold-box-20/17132
  • RayboRaybo Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Coin deffinetly looks better than a 63, the plastic looks to be 66ish. image
  • UNLVinoUNLVino Posts: 416 ✭
    That does not suck! Happy New Year! Nice score.
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
    It is actually quite nice, if not for the cheek I think it would be in a very high grade holder. It's probably a 64 pushing 65 by today's standards. I love the look, just dripping with luster. If the cheek were cleaner, I would think 67...honestly.
  • lordmarcovanlordmarcovan Posts: 43,760 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I bought the plastic, not the coin! >>

    I like both. The coin is nice and cartwheely, and I like the subtle toning.

    Explore collections of lordmarcovan on CollecOnline, management, safe-keeping, sharing and valuation solution for art piece and collectibles.
  • mkman123mkman123 Posts: 6,849 ✭✭✭✭
    Very cool, I wanna start getting some of those old ngc holders
    Successful Buying and Selling transactions with:

    Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
  • DorkGirlDorkGirl Posts: 9,994 ✭✭✭
    image
    Becky
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
    Does anyone know which one is more rare, the NGC 2.0 (the holder in the OP) or the 2.5? (the same one, but has the logo embossed on the inside of the plastic) I've always wondered. I don't see either one with any regularity.

  • DRUNNERDRUNNER Posts: 3,897 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Great score and certainly a nice coin . . . . . both of them (2.0/2.1) could be rarer than the Doily as Orevile has commented in the past.

    The 2.1 is substantially rarer than the 2.0. NGC had problems with the hotstamp on the inside of the slab and it only lasted a few days before they moved the hotstamp to the outside. The 2.0 then continued in production for a while with the white core and insert.

    Were you comparing the NGC 2.0 and the PCGS 2.5? The 'same one' is the NGC 2.1 (with the hotstamp on the inside).

    I just sent 5 2.0/2.1s in to CAC along with 7 Doilies to start the process of finding out how grading was from 1987 to 1989. Results will be posted later . . . after I get all the Doilies fired off and back.

    Drunner
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Great score and certainly a nice coin . . . . . both of them (2.0/2.1) could be rarer than the Doily as Orevile has commented in the past.

    The 2.1 is substantially rarer than the 2.0. NGC had problems with the hotstamp on the inside of the slab and it only lasted a few days before they moved the hotstamp to the outside. The 2.0 then continued in production for a while with the white core and insert.

    Were you comparing the NGC 2.0 and the PCGS 2.5? The 'same one' is the NGC 2.1 (with the hotstamp on the inside).

    I just sent 5 2.0/2.1s in to CAC along with 7 Doilies to start the process of finding out how grading was from 1987 to 1989. Results will be posted later . . . after I get all the Doilies fired off and back.

    Drunner >>



    Sorry, yes I was talking about the 2.1, not the 2.5 (which does not exist.)

  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
    I would think that they are both more rare than the doily, but that's just my take on it.

  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I would think that they are both more rare than the doily, but that's just my take on it. >>



    image



    My final purchase...ever Care to explain the "ever" part image
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I would think that they are both more rare than the doily, but that's just my take on it. >>



    image



    My final purchase...ever Care to explain the "ever" part image >>





    You must have missed the "...of 2011" part. image

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...