Originally posted by: ErrorsOnCoins Have it graded as a Mint Error and triple the price as the eye appeal is good.
Do you really think that will work? My experience is that coins like this with mint caused problems are worth less money than no problem coins simply because most collectors don't want the problem even if it is a mint error.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Bill eye appeal is king and this one is cool. I do not know the series or value of the series so this could be a white elephant or the eye appeal could add value.
I dont think it should be in a graded holder and am glad its not.
For the collector of "non problem" coins, such a coin would sell for half of bid in a major auction thereby giving the illusion the market is dropping on them.
Perhaps the error market will view it differently and sell for multiples, but it should be labeled as such as it is not a straight grader in my opinion
I have one of those in a 1809 over inverted 9 half cent. The gouge runs N to S and is deep. I like thinking, the fuzzy crud in there dates all the way back to the early 1800's. Sounds gross, don't it?
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Originally posted by: ErrorsOnCoins Bill eye appeal is king and this one is cool. I do not know the series or value of the series so this could be a white elephant or the eye appeal could add value.
That planchet defect on the Bust Half Dollar is "cool?" Not to my eye. It leaves me "cold." If I were collecting those by date or by variety, I'd avoid that one unless I couldn't find anything else.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Originally posted by: mach1ne I'm hijacking your thread to ask why this flaw (not damage?) is acceptable but yours is not.
Graded F15
That is piece of Mormon gold, and those coins are as scarce as hen's teeth. A collector would be happy to find any example of that at a half way reasonable price.
BUT
If I located two of those at the same show or in the same auction, one with the defect and one without, I'd take the "perfect" over that one and pay more for it. How much more would take some research on my part.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
The planchet flaw is definitely a Mint error, but would not yield significantly more money. You would be paying another $100 just to get it in a straight graded holder-$60 for the grading fee, $10 handling fee, plus shipping to and from. Not work it. I think you might break even, maybe plus five bucks. Not worth the hassle. It's a lovely coin as is.
Mint errors or better, older coins LOWER value; they don't increase it. They make it harder to sell a good coin from the 19th century and before.
The rules are different for modern coins. There the mint error enhances the value because collectors want those pieces. For the earlier material, it makes the coin less desirable.
I've posted this message a few times, but I'll do it again. When I purchased this 1795 lettered edge half cent it was raw. It has a very tiny planchet clip. The deal was if it came back as a "normal coin" NOT and error coin that I would pay the asking price for it. If it came back as an error coin the deal was off because that would have knocked a few thousand dollars off of the value. It came back normal so I own it. The PCGS grade on this is AU-58, and this piece is easily among the top ten known example for this variety, which is Cohen 1.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
That's a valid point, Bill. For the record, I would not pay a premium for the OPs coin. It is neat, but not one I would pay full freight for. It would definitely be for much less.
I find the planchet flaw distracting enough that I would pass on the coin if I were looking for an 1823 O-104 in Fine. PCGS in this case finds the flaw to make the coin market-unacceptable as a problem-free F12, and I would agree.
Originally posted by: ricko If looking for such a coin, I would avoid this one....personal preference.. planchet flaws detract from the appeal of a coin. Cheers, RickO
I could not agree with you, or Messydesk more. The only thing is : I don't pick and choose what "walks in" the shop. For fear of losing business, it's hard to turn away a "buy". The sell is tough, though
Comments
Have it graded as a Mint Error and triple the price as the eye appeal is good.
Thanks… excellent idea.
Have it graded as a Mint Error and triple the price as the eye appeal is good.
Do you really think that will work? My experience is that coins like this with mint caused problems are worth less money than no problem coins simply because most collectors don't want the problem even if it is a mint error.
For the collector of "non problem" coins, such a coin would sell for half of bid in a major auction thereby giving the illusion the market is dropping on them.
Perhaps the error market will view it differently and sell for multiples, but it should be labeled as such as it is not a straight grader in my opinion
Graded F15
Check out my iPhone app SlabReader!
I'm hijacking your thread to ask why this flaw (not damage?) is acceptable but yours is not.
The day of the week ....
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Bill eye appeal is king and this one is cool. I do not know the series or value of the series so this could be a white elephant or the eye appeal could add value.
That planchet defect on the Bust Half Dollar is "cool?" Not to my eye. It leaves me "cold." If I were collecting those by date or by variety, I'd avoid that one unless I couldn't find anything else.
I'm hijacking your thread to ask why this flaw (not damage?) is acceptable but yours is not.
Graded F15
That is piece of Mormon gold, and those coins are as scarce as hen's teeth. A collector would be happy to find any example of that at a half way reasonable price.
BUT
If I located two of those at the same show or in the same auction, one with the defect and one without, I'd take the "perfect" over that one and pay more for it. How much more would take some research on my part.
The rules are different for modern coins. There the mint error enhances the value because collectors want those pieces. For the earlier material, it makes the coin less desirable.
I've posted this message a few times, but I'll do it again. When I purchased this 1795 lettered edge half cent it was raw. It has a very tiny planchet clip. The deal was if it came back as a "normal coin" NOT and error coin that I would pay the asking price for it. If it came back as an error coin the deal was off because that would have knocked a few thousand dollars off of the value. It came back normal so I own it. The PCGS grade on this is AU-58, and this piece is easily among the top ten known example for this variety, which is Cohen 1.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
recognize that and call you about it before slabbing & returning it. I guess that wouldn't result in more fees.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
As far as value I feel you can add on the new associated grading/shipping fees.
There's a CBH lamination in a ANACS White Holder that's priced high on the same dealers site since 2005.
So if you triple your asking price for the error you might own it for a decade or more?
As mentioned it will grade as a Mint Error.
As far as value I feel you can add on the new associated grading/shipping fees.
There's a CBH lamination in a ANACS White Holder that's priced high on the same dealers site since 2005.
So if you triple your asking price for the error you might own for a decade or more?
I'd start the thing at $.99 on ebay. LOL @ holding for a decade.
I'd start the thing at $.99 on ebay. LOL @ holding for a decade.
In that case don't add anymore money to it.
Just list it under both Mint Error & CBH categories.
As the mint error collectors will know it details graded because you sent it in under the wrong service.
Shame it's not a UNC Details Off Center
from the appeal of a coin. Cheers, RickO
If looking for such a coin, I would avoid this one....personal preference.. planchet flaws detract
from the appeal of a coin. Cheers, RickO
I could not agree with you, or Messydesk more. The only thing is : I don't pick and choose what "walks in" the shop. For fear of losing business, it's hard to turn away a "buy". The sell is tough, though