1794 H10 PCGS MS65
keyman64
Posts: 15,521 ✭✭✭✭✭
Not mine. Anyone here able to claim it as theirs?
"If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
0
Comments
siliconvalleycoins.com
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
How many of those in a roll?
Lots of Bechtler, Mormon and California Gold posted up in the last few days as well. Wow.
will you post a link to that page again please, unless it is a social media thing.
.
Lots of Bechtler, Mormon and California Gold posted up in the last few days as well. Wow.
will you post a link to that page again please, unless it is a social media thing.
.
LINKY
A ton of monster/near monster toned Morgans in the month of February as well!!!
Some really nice toned Barber proofs as well.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
Still a very respectable coin, but the coin posted by the OP is a 1794, generically a rarer and more valuable coin in all grades. That's as nice a Flowing Hair half dime as I have ever seen. Wow! Oh, and it's not mine.
"No, my 1795 half dime is 7 points below that one."
Still a very respectable coin, but the coin posted by the OP is a 1794, generically a rarer and more valuable coin in all grades. That's as nice a Flowing Hair half dime as I have ever seen. Wow! Oh, and it's not mine.
Opps!
My 1794 half dime is 15 points below that one, although it might grade higher if it were to re-submitted today.
Don't know whose coin it is. But it has an interesting
history.
It now is in a PCGS MS-65 slab 38582.65/33520480
and PCGS lists it as V-2, LM-2 R.5 H10c.
In April 2015 it sold at HA as a V-2, LM-2 R.5
in a PCGS MS-65 slab 4250.65/16399266
for $56,400.
In March 2011 it sold at HA as a V-1, LM-1 R.6
in a PCGS MS-65 slab 4250.65/16399266
for $63.250.
In July 2005 it sold at HA as a V-1, LM-1 R.6
in a PCGS MS-65 slab, but no number shown,
for $69,000 in lot #10145.
It is a beautiful & desireable coin. The image now
associated with it does not represent the coin very
well, as the real look of the coin is somewhat dark
and a bit drab, but still a very sought after piece.
R.I.P. Bear
Don't know whose coin it is. But it has an interesting
history.
It now is in a PCGS MS-65 slab 38582.65/33520480
and PCGS lists it as V-2, LM-2 R.5 H10c.
In April 2015 it sold at HA as a V-2, LM-2 R.5
in a PCGS MS-65 slab 4250.65/16399266
for $56,400.
In March 2011 it sold at HA as a V-1, LM-1 R.6
in a PCGS MS-65 slab 4250.65/16399266
for $63.250.
In July 2005 it sold at HA as a V-1, LM-1 R.6
in a PCGS MS-65 slab, but no number shown,
for $69,000 in lot #10145.
It is a beautiful & desireable coin. The image now
associated with it does not represent the coin very
well, as the real look of the coin is somewhat dark
and a bit drab, but still a very sought after piece.
Thanks for hunting down the history, good job!
I was afraid these might be fantasy photos.
I hope these photos aren't as fantasy as the
1894-S dime that just sold. Do you have a link
to any slab photos of the coin? Thanks.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
R.I.P. Bear
It just looks like an 18th century should look.
I imagine the photo in the first post must have been shot through gamma rays.....
The 2005 Heritage photo makes it look like a metal detector find......
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Many photos seem to have their contrast (or perhaps other attributes) cranked up to better show whatever attributes is necessary for that particular display. That is why making purchasing decisions based on images alone is not a recommended approach.
Here is an example of how the angle of the photo can change everything. Both of these sets of pictures are of the same coin, and both are accurate depending upon the angle you view the coin in person.
Ahh so what?
WOW!
The coin is Proof, and NGC graded PR-66.
Tom
It still looks like a 65 in either photo. I'm guessing someone tried to upgrade it. Bill's coin does have a slightly better strike, and looks undergraded as well. I wish all my 50s looked like that.
I bought that 1794 half dime back in the early 1990s. It was originally in a green label PCGS holder, but I had it re-holdered because the reverse of the slab was scratched. If I had known then what I know now about headlight polish and slabs, it would still be in the OGH. (Old Green Holder)
From what I've seen recently, the AU-50 grade has been "grade-flated." What used to be EF-40 or 45 is now AU-50. You need to buy at least an AU-53 to get a AU-50.
LINKY
tyvm!
remembered to bookmark this time.
.
pictures...Cheers, RickO