Somebody please tell me. Even the description acknowledges the crazy scratches on the reverse. I understand the scratches are old and toned over and it's a rare variety, but this seems far too extreme to me. Link
IMO many of the older series like trade, seated and bust dollars as well as old copper and old gold are graded using different standards than most everything else and given far more leeway as far as getting bagged for damage or problems.
Just try sending in a silver eagle or common date Morgan or walker or whatever with those pin scratches on the reverse and see what happens.
There sure are a lot of scratches on the reverse. Looks like someone took a needle and tried to remove something from that area of the coin. I would call that tooling.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I agree with what dragon said, that said the pin scratches are not that bad when you consider the chop marks are treated as acceptable. >>
The difference is that chopmarks were a function of circulation whereas pin scratches are not.
Overall it's just somewhat crazy PCGS wouldn't genuine that. Seems like a buyback all day long to me. >>
I figured I get this response but to me considering the scratches are just as toned over this could of be a result of mishandling during circulation or even a poor test of the metal substance in place of a chop when one could not find his chop marker or whatever they where called. My real point is chop marks are just a destructive and to me I don't buy coins with them, as of yet anyways because they are too distracting to my eyes. That being said I just think certain things are more acceptable on trade dollars especially considering how many where shipped overseas and chopped marked to death.
It's easy to see the scratches when the picture is blown up to the size of a truck tire, but the grader didn't have that option. The toning hides them too.
<< <i>I agree with what dragon said, that said the pin scratches are not that bad when you consider the chop marks are treated as acceptable. >>
The difference is that chopmarks were a function of circulation whereas pin scratches are not.
Overall it's just somewhat crazy PCGS wouldn't genuine that. Seems like a buyback all day long to me. >>
I figured I get this response but to me considering the scratches are just as toned over this could of be a result of mishandling during circulation or even a poor test of the metal substance in place of a chop when one could not find his chop marker or whatever they where called. My real point is chop marks are just a destructive and to me I don't buy coins with them, as of yet anyways because they are too distracting to my eyes. That being said I just think certain things are more acceptable on trade dollars especially considering how many where shipped overseas and chopped marked to death. >>
That could very well be a possibility, however, using a needle to scratch the surface of a coin is not and probably never will be recognized as a way Chinese businessmen assayed Trade Dollars that passed through their hands whereas chopmarks are. Chops are historical in many aspects and most of my great-uncles and my grandfather remember handling Trade dollars as children and seeing them with chops.
I have enormously better and older coins BB'd, a very. And precedent should be a problem - begins to bite at credibility of a TPG; say it ain't so PCGS and that it's not real.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
JCMhouston---Do you have a link to this counterfeit gold coin?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link >>
Spot on answer
That said this is the danger of buying a coin sight unseen. There scratches are too much for even me and PH nailed it, I would call that tooling too. Some one is going to think that they are getting a Cheap S/CC (if you can call 2k+ cheap) but they are going to have a coin no dealer would want to buy off of them.
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link >>
Spot on answer
That said this is the danger of buying a coin sight unseen. There scratches are too much for even me and PH nailed it, I would call that tooling too. Some one is going to think that they are getting a Cheap S/CC (if you can call 2k+ cheap) but they are going to have a coin no dealer would want to buy off of them. >>
Don't know if HA has a return policy, but I'd use it if I were the buyer!
I had the same thought when I saw this coin, otherwise I probably would have bid. Chop marks may be considered damage but as long as they are period and not obviously faked later on in the states (yes it has happened) then I see them as an acceptable part of trade dollar history. On the other hand these scratches are obviously made by a human, on purpose, possibly to clean gunk or some other unknown reason. It's a shame and it is puzzling why it was graded. It's a rare and old coin, but that shouldn't matter since this isn't a liner coin.
Not only are there obvious tooling marks on the reverse but also a couple of deep puncture marks on miss Liberties left knee (not the chop mark) along with a fairly deep scrape in the obverse fields.
Comments
PCGS has been grading chop mark Trade Dollars for years.
That is a pretty nice looking chop mark 75-CC on Heritage. As choppers go, that one has extremely nice surfaces. imho.
Just try sending in a silver eagle or common date Morgan or walker or whatever with those pin scratches on the reverse and see what happens.
Yes I have always had a impossible mission of finding the logic of grading Trade Dollars I'll admit it.
type2,CCHunter.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>PCGS has been grading chop mark Trade Dollars for years.
That is a pretty nice looking chop mark 75-CC on Heritage. As choppers go, that one has extremely nice surfaces. imho.
I'm referring to the scratches on the reverse under UNITED.
<< <i>I agree with what dragon said, that said the pin scratches are not that bad when you consider the chop marks are treated as acceptable. >>
The difference is that chopmarks were a function of circulation whereas pin scratches are not.
Overall it's just somewhat crazy PCGS wouldn't genuine that. Seems like a buyback all day long to me.
<< <i>I agree with what dragon said, that said the pin scratches are not that bad when you consider the chop marks are treated as acceptable. >>
The difference is that chopmarks were a function of circulation whereas pin scratches are not.
Overall it's just somewhat crazy PCGS wouldn't genuine that. Seems like a buyback all day long to me. >>
I figured I get this response but to me considering the scratches are just as toned over this could of be a result of mishandling during circulation or even a poor test of the metal substance in place of a chop when one could not find his chop marker or whatever they where called. My real point is chop marks are just a destructive and to me I don't buy coins with them, as of yet anyways because they are too distracting to my eyes. That being said I just think certain things are more acceptable on trade dollars especially considering how many where shipped overseas and chopped marked to death.
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>I'm referring to the scratches on the reverse under UNITED. >>
wow, that IS some rather intense graffiti !
.
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree with what dragon said, that said the pin scratches are not that bad when you consider the chop marks are treated as acceptable. >>
The difference is that chopmarks were a function of circulation whereas pin scratches are not.
Overall it's just somewhat crazy PCGS wouldn't genuine that. Seems like a buyback all day long to me. >>
I figured I get this response but to me considering the scratches are just as toned over this could of be a result of mishandling during circulation or even a poor test of the metal substance in place of a chop when one could not find his chop marker or whatever they where called. My real point is chop marks are just a destructive and to me I don't buy coins with them, as of yet anyways because they are too distracting to my eyes. That being said I just think certain things are more acceptable on trade dollars especially considering how many where shipped overseas and chopped marked to death. >>
That could very well be a possibility, however, using a needle to scratch the surface of a coin is not and probably never will be recognized as a way Chinese businessmen assayed Trade Dollars that passed through their hands whereas chopmarks are. Chops are historical in many aspects and most of my great-uncles and my grandfather remember handling Trade dollars as children and seeing them with chops.
JMO anyway
Well, just Love coins, period.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Eric
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link
<< <i>
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link >>
Spot on answer
That said this is the danger of buying a coin sight unseen. There scratches are too much for even me and PH nailed it, I would call that tooling too. Some one is going to think that they are getting a Cheap S/CC (if you can call 2k+ cheap) but they are going to have a coin no dealer would want to buy off of them.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Where's the CC? That's not the reverse die I normally see - the one with die cracks at the right >>
TDN, it's an EDS FS501. You can actually see the C to the right, it's just slightly obscured by the toning and scratches in the photo. Reverse is comparable to this one: Link >>
Spot on answer
That said this is the danger of buying a coin sight unseen. There scratches are too much for even me and PH nailed it, I would call that tooling too. Some one is going to think that they are getting a Cheap S/CC (if you can call 2k+ cheap) but they are going to have a coin no dealer would want to buy off of them. >>
Don't know if HA has a return policy, but I'd use it if I were the buyer!