Options
Part 2 of "Why did this sell so low"
kenriles012
Posts: 170 ✭✭
I cannot say I follow half dimes all that much but a uncirculated (albeit cleaned) of what is still listed as an R.7 seems odd. I know the half dime remarriages can be a bit weird so was this maybe not a "true" 6.1 hence its low bid?
0
Comments
If that were an "normal" 1829 half dime, $ 345 seems like a lot of money for that piece given the cleaning problem. The Gray Sheet bid is only $200.
So far as the rarity goes, the Logan McCloskey book says it's an R-5, not an R-7. Rarity ratings tend to drop over time after collectors start to check out previously unattributed pieces. I'm not a half dime die variety collector, but my opinion is this do not sell that "cheap."
what should it have sold for?
I think the reason why it sold so low is that there is what appears to be a die chip in the N in UNITED. A die chip in the N of UNITED means to me (per the Logan-McCloskey book, Federal Half Dimes 1792-1837) that the coin is actually an 1829 LM-6.2.
Had it been an 1829 LM-6.1, as NGC thought it was, then $345 would indeed have been way too low, even for a cleaned coin. As far as I know, there is just one bona fide example known, which is the plate coin from the book. I have had a few people hand me alleged 1829 LM-6.1 half dimes, but every time I handed them back a for-sure 6.2. I even bought a specialist-sold 1829 LM-6.1 off of ebay that I later returned. That pesky die chip in the N made them all LM-6.2.
When the JRCS called it an R-7 in the 2015 census, that was a conservative estimate of rarity. Based on KNOWN examples, it is R-8.
Anyone got a real 6.1? I'd like to see it (and buy it!)
I agree with Barndog. Had same conclusion but figured I would let him post first.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.