Options
1802 Dollar Graded VF25? No way, even with a little graffiti.
DNADave
Posts: 7,302 ✭✭✭✭✭
0
Comments
you think it is under-graded or should have not been graded?
.
In any case I can't judge the tradeoff between a scrubbing and graffiti vs. some VF30-35 details w/o seeing it in hand. Lacks a bean for what is being called a high end coin.
But a net VF doesn't seem that far of a stretch. Wish the obv still had the coloration of the reverse.
Lance.
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
-Paul
<< <i>Dipped and retoned, with graffiti. Thanks, but I'll pass.
Lance. >>
I agree. And it shouldn't have made it into a problem-free holder, in my opinion.
8 Reales Madness Collection
<< <i>From my persepective the toning is similar on both sides, both have light centers and toning nea rthe devcies on the perheries only difference being the obv appears lighter due to the differences in basic design. I am also havin trouble calling th so-called "x" graffitt, imho it is more random in nature albeit unortunately a main focal point. >>
OMG I agree with Realone. Just because there are 2 short intersecting lines, does not mean that there is graffiti. Usually field graffiti is more elaborate. Xs usually are on the device.
It's over 200 years old for crying out loud!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>From my persepective the toning is similar on both sides, both have light centers and toning nea rthe devcies on the perheries only difference being the obv appears lighter due to the differences in basic design. I am also havin trouble calling th so-called "x" graffitt, imho it is more random in nature albeit unortunately a main focal point. >>
OMG I agree with Realone. Just because there are 2 short intersecting lines, does not mean that there is graffiti. Usually field graffiti is more elaborate. Xs usually are on the device. >>
I disagree, I feel that two lines of similar length in proximity to each other has little possibility of being a chance occurrence. That said, it appears to be done a long time ago and thus is MA.
<< <i>too bad about the graffitti! >>
Agree. I'm surprised it was graded with that X carved into the obverse field. Doubt it'll ever be CACed.
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>
<< <i>From my persepective the toning is similar on both sides, both have light centers and toning nea rthe devcies on the perheries only difference being the obv appears lighter due to the differences in basic design. I am also havin trouble calling th so-called "x" graffitt, imho it is more random in nature albeit unortunately a main focal point. >>
OMG I agree with Realone. Just because there are 2 short intersecting lines, does not mean that there is graffiti. Usually field graffiti is more elaborate. Xs usually are on the device. >>
I disagree, I feel that two lines of similar length in proximity to each other has little possibility of being a chance occurrence. That said, it appears to be done a long time ago and thus is MA. >>
Looks like someone took a knife and cut an X to test the coin so "test mark" would be a more proper term. Lets not forget that coins back then were made of precious metals and had considerable purchasing power so base metal circulating counterfeits weren't that unusual.
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
"VF35/EF40, X-scratch on obverse"
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>From my persepective the toning is similar on both sides, both have light centers and toning nea rthe devcies on the perheries only difference being the obv appears lighter due to the differences in basic design. I am also havin trouble calling th so-called "x" graffitt, imho it is more random in nature albeit unortunately a main focal point. >>
OMG I agree with Realone. Just because there are 2 short intersecting lines, does not mean that there is graffiti. Usually field graffiti is more elaborate. Xs usually are on the device. >>
I disagree, I feel that two lines of similar length in proximity to each other has little possibility of being a chance occurrence. That said, it appears to be done a long time ago and thus is MA. >>
Looks like someone took a knife and cut an X to test the coin so "test mark" would be a more proper term. Lets not forget that coins back then were made of precious metals and had considerable purchasing power so base metal circulating counterfeits weren't that unusual. >>
That is just an asuumption, it could be just plain ole toning lines, haphazard minor scratches coincidentally coming together in a x like manner too. We have a blow up of a tiny area and you are asuming a big ole knife was used to make a test mark which imho is a flawed assumption. >>
I never said "a big ole knife". More likely a small pen knife that most men would carry at that time. From the pics that's definitely not toning lines. Also, from the pics, they appear to be cut marks rather than mere scratches. It's very unlikely that two random scratches would form a near perfect X but if you want to believe that, go right ahead.
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
Another coin that may of been net graded before Genuine holders came into being.
<< <i>Definitely net graded......but a nice coin.
It's over 200 years old for crying out loud!!! >>
I agree
<< <i>Don't know how you can detect that the two marks to be cuts into the surfaces for testing purposes
I was speculating why someone would cut a X into a coin. Perhaps he was illiterate and put his name in on the 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>
<< <i>Don't know how you can detect that the two marks to be cuts into the surfaces for testing purposes
I was speculating why someone would cut a X into a coin. Perhaps he was illiterate and put his name in on the coin. >>
We can't prove they aren't cut marks either. Maybe the guy's name was Xavier or Xander? Considering how few X's I see on 18th and 19th century silver coins,
I'd suspect the odds of them being random is probably under 10%. The first seated quarter I ever owned was a VG 1843-0 with the deepest and widest "X's" gouged
into both obv fields. What was I thinking?
<< <i>I was speculating why someone would cut a X into a coin. Perhaps he was illiterate and put his name in on the coin. >>
I've always been under the impression that sometimes this was done when money was being passed, where the merchant accepting payment wants to make sure it's not a "plated" fake made in base metal. It's like the current machines that scan $20 bills to make sure they are legitimate, except more destructive.
<< <i>Dipped and retoned, with graffiti. Thanks, but I'll pass.
Lance. >>
That sums it up for me. I don't think that this coin should have been graded; it should be in a genuine holder. The "X" in the obverse field above Ms. Liberty's bust is much too obvious.
Believe or not CAC approved a early coin that had problems similar to this, an 1807 dime. The piece generated a lot of controversy ATS. As specialist collector of coins from this era, I don't care about that fact that this piece is 200 years old. Age is not an excuse to give it a grade that provides the impression that it is a "no problem" piece. Most collectors would prefer a "no problem" VF-25 to this piece which has been net graded to the level from the EF-40 sharpness grade. That's why collectors pay big premiums for "no problem" circulated early coins and less money for problem pieces.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>
<< <i>Dipped and retoned, with graffiti. Thanks, but I'll pass.
Lance. >>
That sums it up for me. I don't think that this coin should have been graded; it should be in a genuine holder. The "X" in the obverse field above Ms. Liberty's bust is much too obvious.
Believe or not CAC approved a early coin that had problems similar to this, an 1807 dime. The piece generated a lot of controversy ATS. As specialist collector of coins from this era, I don't care about that fact that this piece is 200 years old. Age is not an excuse to give it a grade that provides the impression that it is a "no problem" piece. Most collectors would prefer a "no problem" VF-25 to this piece which has been net graded to the level from the EF-40 sharpness grade. That's why collectors pay big premiums for "no problem" circulated early coins and less money for problem pieces. >>
Well said.
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