1871 3c CN Opinion

erwindoc

Thoughts on this one? Anyone think it might be a touch undergraded?

JGnumismatics

I think so....when in doubt CAC it out lol

To me, that's the cheapest way to get some idea on upgrade possibility

291fifth

Very subdued luster - possible light handling. Not undergraded!

BustHalfBrian

Why bother? The difference in value from 63 to 64 is whopping $100.

You'd spend at least 1/3 that in grading fees.

lasvegasteddy

not my series to know for sure...this image could mute some luster needed to carry it to 65
surely worth a couple tries for 65 at that price bump..."if luster is there"

sweet clashing too...very-very clean and struck and too sexy for a 63

update us if you fight the fight

crypto79

Luster and strike spear to have held it back, while it wouldn't come back a 63 every time these days it is worth it to sell as is and let buyers upgrade it in their head in the old plastic.

NumisOxide

Looks better to me!

TommyType

Well.....speaking as the UNDERBIDDER in that auction..... (damn you!!)

I actually thought it was a squeaker to be a 63 based on the 10 or so MS-63's I own, and two MS-62's. (Although, I own no 64's....so what do I know). I think the sloppy strike around the rims may be a detriment, as well as the subdued luster.

But, that IS a tougher date than the price guides will lead you to believe. I've been looking for a 62/63 1871 for quite a while.

Congrats!

DeepCoin

It is a decent coin, but it does not "speak to me". Always tough when looking at a photo blown up so large. With the next grade not much more, perhaps seeking a bean. Depends on your plans for the coin.

Broadstruck

Looks like a nice example and it would be a shame to loose the OGH.

ricko

Nice coin...could go 64.... Cheers, RickO

TommyType

After making the "bold" claim that this is a tougher date than the price guides indicate, I thought I'd do a little research to either prove my claim....or see if my impression was wrong.

This chart kind of sums things up:

notes:
- I focused on MS-63 since the OP and I seem to be focused on that grade.
- I cut the top off at $1000 and 1000 certification, just to keep it readable.

The first thing that is obvious is that 3-Cent Nickel prices for most dates are NOT driven by rarity since there are few series collectors, and one nice example will suffice most people. Otherwise, the 1865 would be much less expensive than even the 1868! Both are "common dates", but the disparity in certification totals is quite plain. (Total 1865 certs is 2328...well off the chart). Yet the 1865 and 1868 are in the PCGS price guide at the same $185.

And I think there is some justification for my claim that the 1871 is tougher than the price guides indicate. It has one of the lowest MS-63 certification totals for the "common" dates, yet is only priced at $210, which is comparable to the 1881, with a much higher MS-63 count.

I think I should have continued bidding....

AMRC

The photo must be hiding something as I am having a hard time calling it a 63. Looks nicer.

TommyType

<< <i>The photo must be hiding something as I am having a hard time calling it a 63. Looks nicer. >>



One thing to keep in mind: 3-cent nickels will NEVER have the same handling marks that other similar sized coins have. Silver, copper, and gold are all much softer metals. So, while an Indian Head cent, or Seated dime with this few marks would get a big grade....it's pretty common in my experience for 3-cent nickels.

I think luster an strike are by far the biggest factors for 3CN mint state grading.

yosclimber

Is "PCGS all cert" for 64 and above only?
I believe that is the relevant quantity for price analysis.

TommyType

<< <i>Is "PCGS all cert" for 64 and above only?
I believe that is the relevant quantity for price analysis. >>



No..."all cert" is everything from AG through MS-70.

Guess that really, that's a less significant number for my purposes than the MS-63 number of certs, since that's the grade I was interested in. The data could probably be cut a dozen different ways....but I think the 1871 is listed in the PCGS price guide lower than the relative availability would otherwise indicate.....

SeattleSlammer

<< <i>Very subdued luster - possible light handling. Not undergraded! >>




Despite Mr. Optimistic's reply........yes it sure does appear to be undergraded.

COALPORTER

That is one coin where a strong die-clash can really improve the eye appeal.
I see many ms63 and 64 that are close, but the 64 has a die-clash?
it must be the way the light reflects off the surface.

Ajjohnson77

Yes. Crack that thing out.

IrishMikey

Leave it. I know that flash is hard to image, but from what I see, it is just a bit on the dull side.