Opinions on this PC45 1869 Seated Liberty Quarter on Heritage...
mercurydimeguy
Posts: 4,625 ✭✭✭✭
Hi Gang, first a disclaimer: I'm not bidding on this coin.
Link to 1869 25C on Heritage
Now on to the question...
The coins appears to have less wear than the suggested XF45 grade, so do you think that the XF45 grade was netted down due to the dark nature of the coin, plus the eye sore stain on the shield?
Without the eye appeal distraction do you think the coin is better than an XF45 in terms of wear? Is that why CAC beaned it, the technical grade, even though the stain/eye appeal distraction is there? I can't think of why else it would have CAC approval...
Your thoughts would be interesting.
Thanks!
Link to 1869 25C on Heritage
Now on to the question...
The coins appears to have less wear than the suggested XF45 grade, so do you think that the XF45 grade was netted down due to the dark nature of the coin, plus the eye sore stain on the shield?
Without the eye appeal distraction do you think the coin is better than an XF45 in terms of wear? Is that why CAC beaned it, the technical grade, even though the stain/eye appeal distraction is there? I can't think of why else it would have CAC approval...
Your thoughts would be interesting.
Thanks!
0
Comments
IMHO this should have details graded...
But being CAC'd it has a full bill of good health and will be looked upon as a PQ acquisition by some
From the photo, which obviously has its limitations, the coin appears have totally original surfaces and is properly graded from the sharpness perspective.
I don't care for the black spot on the shield on the obverse from the esthetic perspective. I would also like to take a close look at the toning on the reverse to make sure than it has not reached the "environmental damage" level. In other words, has it eaten into the surfaces to the point where it might seem like it's causing damage? If it's just dark, that's not a problem if the look is okay for you.
I'd have to see this one.
Reverse looks like it's progressed to the borderline corrosive area-but could just be the flat photo/scan.
The several light scratches or "plowing" in the upper left obv field is more of a concern to me. Sadly, from the forum inputs, it appears this coin is someday going to get dipped out. That would remove the stain and make the plow lines less noticeable. Hard to believe that a coin like this is considered nearly ED today.
It's CAC-approved because JA liked it for the grade....simple as that. I do too. It has AU details imo. The luster may not be there. 30-40 years ago, a large percentage of seated quarters were dark like this one. Not so much these days. While I like the rarity of the 1866 and 1869 business strike quarters, I've never liked the fact that they made hundreds of proofs as well. So I prefer these dates with a mint mark on the back. I wonder how many people would kick this one aside if it were a 60-s or 72-s? I sure wouldn't. Those would both be near "gems" in that condition.
If anyone wonders why the coin market is weak, one reason could be that the majority of upper-end collectors think this coin is an over-graded problem piece. As a group we've become pretty fussy where only the upper 5-20% of any coins are worth buying today. What does that do when the other 80% of them over-hang the market? The 80% invariably drags down the pricing of the other 20%.
Regardless of it's assigned grade and sticker, the coin is ugly, stained, and appears to have PMD.
Me thinks you just wanted to slam me like others do that like/have blatant fingerprints on their coins. And I don't go out of my way to point out prints, if someone asks I will reply sometimes. BTW, I couldn't care less you directly slammed the coin, the reason seemed odd compared to quite frankly what you just wrote in this thread.
I don't see any fingerprints on the 1869 quarter, just carbon/dirt on the shield.
Perhaps, but who said any different? Now you are going to something else. BTW, the CAC company that you always say on here how tough they are on gold, stickered this piece in the OGH. You were comparing crud to fingerprints is what I'm saying.
I don't believe I have given my opinion on how original I feel it is Actually, I rarely do anymore. But who knows why you bring that up. Better check my spelling as well
I'm sorry but when I did PM you after your statement to tell you I have accepted partial lines etc. when I wanted to, I didn't get a reply from you. So as far as I'm concerned you took your shot and ran.
So no, I'm not going to link anything to you via PM. You provide a great deal of knowledge on here, more than me as I'm sure you will point out. You just ain't right all the time. Let people like what they like.
I personally totally dig this coin and the overall appeal for the grade and date.
peacockcoins
In my view, you were criticizing coins with fingerprints, which seems to be a hot topic around here. I merely pointed out that your icon coin with all the high point oxidation, especially on the cheek area, wasn't much different than the distraction from a fingerprint. Isn't that a fair comment? Why is further discussion needed?
In many cases, I'd rather have the fingerprint. Many attractively toned seated/bust/Barber (ie 19th century silver) coins do have a fingerprint buried in there somewhere. Fwiw, I'd have no problem being a buyer of this 1869 25c or the 1880 $20. They are both fine to me for what they are. That doesn't meant they have no shortcomings.
Wasn't it just last week where an XF seated dollar was hung out to dry because it was "too original." And it wasn't even dark. That coin was showing multiple high point wear light spots that apparently were a major distraction to many....a disjointed "cameo" effect that few appreciated. I thing we've gone overboard on coins with "distractions." I'm with Braddick.
So I'm not so sure coins you've owned for yourself are not without their shortcomings. Not talking about all the finest knowns, or coins back in 1986 or when you were a dealer (don't know if you still are) most of us collectors here are just regular collectors. Glad we had this chat. All done now.
And my apology to the board and the OP.
I bought my XF example from Brian Greer many years ago. I was too picky the first time around and passed when he had it raw. I remember because it was the *one* time he ever got upset about a transaction we did (ie. "how could you possibly NOT like this coin - do you have ANY idea how hard these are to find like this?") He put it into a PC45 holder & then I bought it. Just some chatter in the right field, nothing unusual for the grade, and quite nice otherwise. I didn't know any better at the time, thank goodness he was steering me into good coins.
Well, all is good. Just one thing..... I know you have been to auctions and on the bourse with the big boys. I also am sure you've owned some darn fine coins. I've just never seen you post one. I think you linked to an auction one years ago, not positive and it didn't appeal to me whatsoever.
So I'm not so sure coins you've owned for yourself are not without their shortcomings. Not talking about all the finest knowns, or coins back in 1986 or when you were a dealer (don't know if you still are) most of us collectors here are just regular collectors. Glad we had this chat. All done now.
And my apology to the board and the OP.
You should apologize to RR. Nobody else. We all have a learning curve.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
And I'm not bidding on the Heritage one, I'm not a coin snob but we all have our tastes and preferences and the big stain just doesn't do it for me...
Well, all is good. Just one thing..... I know you have been to auctions and on the bourse with the big boys. I also am sure you've owned some darn fine coins. I've just never seen you post one. I think you linked to an auction one years ago, not positive and it didn't appeal to me whatsoever.
You can check the 2014-2015 Gardner sale for some coins. They were all owned by me before Gene got them. The 3 with sale dates are coins I consigned and Gene was the very next owner. Good enough for him. 2 of the 3 probably finest knowns. I linked these lot numbers several times when Gardner was going off....you could have viewed them and critiqued them at that time. I made a number of very detailed posts on Gardner lots during 2014-2015.
1867-s 25c MS67 (bought in 1986, sold in 2004)
1856-0 25c MS65
1858-0 25c MS64+
1858-0 10c MS66+ (bought in 1982, sold in 2004)
1838 1/2 dime NGC MS68 (bought in 1993, sold in 2009).
I've never bothered to photograph my own coins and then link them here. Never got the urge, and probably never will. There are plenty of auction photos left behind.
The Heritage auction info lists the retail problem-free price of an XF45 at $951. Can you really find one at that price? I always thought this date commanded a lot more.
In looking at this 1869 quarter, what are your expectations for such a coin in contrast to the ultimate grade on the holder and surviving population? Are those expectations realistic given the surviving population in this state of preservation?
This is a very attractive example for what it is. It is great to have expectations but sometime reality gets in the way.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Mercurydimeguy's VF35 1869 quarter probably had the same darkness of the XF45 example some time in its life. It might have had an offending spot too. No one can say one way or the other now. I think the VF35 has as many overall marks as the XF45. I think both grades are accurate and realistic. I prefer the uniform "look" of the XF45 over the VF35 even if that places me in the minority.
The Heritage auction info lists the retail problem-free price of an XF45 at $951. Can you really find one at that price? I always thought this date commanded a lot more.
An ugly example will sell for about $1k, while a PQ example might sell for $1.5k or more in this grade.
I know where there is an NGC 64 example that's really like a 62-63 but original and has some eye appeal but dealer wants $6.5k...he has had it for a LONG time. Almost to the point where he is collecting it instead of trying to sell it. I'd pay $4.5k for it and cross it to PC2-63 but he won't budge.
Anyhow ... this is a bit of a unicorn coin for me so I search for it every day online.