Options
Tell me why you don't like this coin.
Raybo
Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭✭✭
https://www.davidlawrence.com/rare-coin/1311150#
Also sold last April at Heritage for $3760.
2
Comments
It's a double cent & it's misaligned in the slab
nothing at all. What are you getting at?
I like the coin but think DL images are lousy.....
Best, SH
Proof?
It's not a proof but the Heritage images sure make it look like one.
It is misaligned in the slab KK but that is not an issue.
Which images are the most accurate?
KK doesn't like 2 Cent Pieces.......next opinion!
Maybe nothing at all and that's why I'm asking.
I find no issues with it. I rather like it.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I don't see a problem with the coin.
I have no problem with it, but I could see where some collectors don't like the color/toning.
First problem is ...no one likes 2 Cent Pieces (except myself and DoughDeo)
Second problem is.....What is a good price for such a nice example?
Third problem is, there is no problem with the coin (AFAIC), I'm just trying to justify my purchase at the price I paid.
This will be my most expensive coin to date and I really like it, thanks for all the input.
Ray
Who would know by the image if it's good or not. The photos on that web site are the WORST. I figure they're doing good business so they don't care. Good for them. Bought from them a couple of times, but.... the images are so pathetic, forget it.
It's worth $6,500 according to PCGS so someone got a nice deal in April. CAC likes it too so that's a plus.
I'm not a fan of the coin rotation in the holder but that can be fixed. You can get a TrueView at the same time which would be nice.
As for the price and being your most expensive coin, my general suggestion is not to have others tell you it's worth the price. You should want it at that price. This is due to the high transaction cost of selling a coin.
DLRC or Heritage?
Strike looks excellent for the date from both of the crappy images,(and I know the series).
This will have to be an "in hand" final decision as I have a good grace period to finalize my decision.
I will let the throngs of 2 Cent collectors know how this works out after I receive her.
Thanks again,
Ray
David Lawrence images vs. HA slab images.
Lance.
Raybo, make that three of us, I search Two-Centers every day as I work on my collecting goal for the set.
when I first saw the Heritage pictures I thought it might be a Proof but the in-holder pictures don't look that way. I think it's a fine looking coin for the date and don't mind the color a bit. the hardest thing I have seen about slabbed coins is that quite often they have too much verdigris, unsightly carbon spots or even corrosion. this coin seems to be free of ALL those problems.
there are enough coins available in all grades that a patient collector should be able to find whatever they want.
I don't like it because of the grade. IF I collected UNC classics, that would be different story, I am working on my Everyman Set.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Thanks keets, your opinion means a lot to me.
The coin is purchased and on its way to me so i'll let all of you know how she looks in hand. (I'm hoping she's a keeper)
Thanks again,
Ray
I forgot to add keets as a 2 Center, that makes 3 of us?
Thanks for the images Lance!
I like it just fine (and like 2 centers anyway), it's sure a lot better than my VF20 of that date.
Pete
Louis Armstrong
Thanks Pete,
You are now the newest member of the very exclusive "2 Center Club", and grades don't matter here!
That makes 4 of us?
I Like it man...Nice even toning with a Natural look to my amateur eyes, but she has a pretty look to me. Congrats!
It looks speckerly to me.
Well here's my 2 cents...........tee hee hee................it's not mine
Steve
I like it a lot. The more colorful pics lead me to think it deserves a TrueView.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I don’t like the coin placement in the holder.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
If I'm the buyer I like to bid on coins that have shifted in their holders...an easy problem to fix...but it seems that many bidders are put off by it...and such coins often go for less than normal as a result...
I like Two Cent pieces... have some my self.... This one is technically nice, however, I do not care for the 'grungy' appearance...might be the picture. I like my two centers to be uniform chocolate brown...Cheers, RickO
Why, I like it just fine! Particularly as a business strike of the date. I would have to get the coin rotated, though ... welcome to the OCD club where everybody counts, everybody counts, everybody counts..
Kind regards,
George
I don’t want to sound too harsh, but I am not a fan of this coin, especially at the MS-65 grade level. The toning, especially on the reverse concerns me. It appears to black in some places and a bit uneven. I hope that it is stable. I would expect to see a more even blend brown and maybe faded red on a coin in this grade.
Here is an MS-64, Brown Two Cent Piece that used to be in my type set. Please note the luster and the “minty look” that this coin has.
And here is an 1864 Small Motto that NGC graded AU-55. This is an example of a deeply toned AU copper piece.
And for those who complain that I never post CAC approved coins, here is an 1864 Small Motto Two Cent in PCGS MS-64, R&B, CAC..
The 1872 Two Cent Piece is a bear of coin to find in Mint State. There are no very many of them around. I can understand the urge to fill the slot because the coin is tough, but I think that the grade is a bit too generous.
As a small-time collector of 2-cent pieces, the thing I dislike MOST about the coin is that it's NOT MINE!!!
One day, I hope to get one (probably the least rare date from the series) in fantastic condition to have as my "example/type" coin, to make up for the fact that my others are in relatively lower grades........
I like it. I see nothing that precludes the grade.
I don't see anything wrong with the coin either. My preference is not for woodgrained coins though. But that is just a matter of taste
Kind of a stretch to compare a key date 1872 in gem brown unc with RB common dates of 1864/1865. They don't have a ton in common except being 2c pieces. Very sharply struck 1872 too...which does look to have some proof characteristics. Being a low mintage date with a meager survival rate, I suspect a lot more of those coins are semi-PL than say common 1864's that were hoarded in frosty gem red from day 1. Compare it to your typical MS65 Brown 1864 and 1865's (which many would call dullish, drab, or only 63/64 quality) and you might be more impressed with this 1872.
The 1864's pictured here have some glaring strike weaknesses in the leaves and arrow heads...essentially flat. Not everyone would call the the MS64 Brown an unc coin with those features even with full field luster. There is no doubt the 1872 is sharp as a tack, with zero rub, and fully peaked/angled arrow heads. More a proof than an unc.
I love the coin. Anybody that would pass on a coin because it is rotated in the holder........well they are not much of a collector is all I can say. I mean really come on!
One of the problems with the 1872 Two Cent Piece is that it often had to differentiate between the Mint State and Proof pieces. The copper Proof coins were not well made in the early 1870s, and that complicates things. I had 1872 Two Cent in the early 1980s that was either a brown Proof or a brown Unc. It was hard to tell.
So far as the Mint State graded 1864 coins go, calling them something less that Mint State is ridiculous. That why I gave the comment a "disagree."
I would have to say that the BillJones vs. roadrunner debate goes to roadrunner. it can be tough to compare images taken by different people with different cameras and different lighting, but comparing these I see the 1872 as having a much better strike. I think that's why the coin sort of looks PL, the devices seem very high off the fields, almost like they're floating. I tend to also agree with RickO regarding tone quality, I much prefer an even dark brown color.
@DIMEMAN said : I love the coin. Anybody that would pass on a coin because it is rotated in the holder........well they are not much of a collector is all I can say. I mean really come on!
Commenting on the obvious rotation in the holder was a compliment to the coin. Who said they would pass. ??? I didn’t. In fact I like the coin a lot. The questions was to find something you don’t like in the thread. At least that’s what I read. Geez
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Why’s vs. wise. I think you’re the latter, and find the coin pleasing to look at. Can’t find any “why” to dislike it.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
I wasn't referring to you personally. Actually Zoins seemed more concerned about the rotation. Sorry if you were offended.....didn't mean to.
Haha. Something definitely gets lost in the Internet. Mentioning the rotation is a compliment as stated by Kkathyl because it's fixable as mentioned. The other thing I don't like is that it doesn't have a TrueView yet which I also mentioned is fixable. Saying all the problems are fixable doesn't mean I won't buy it, it means go ahead and buy it. It's different than saying a coin has PVC damage, carbon spots or other things that can detract and be unfixable. It's also different than saying a coin is overgraded because, although fixable, you will often pay for the privilege.
It's hard to tell the tone of a statement in type. I guess I needed a "wink" symbol to tell me you were kidding.
I apologize for taking you wrong.
no worry I was not the first to say it in the thread, that was @KollectorKing its funny how the sharks come out and then the pile on begins. I felt like a 3rd string QB on a Sunday afternoon.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
I think that most of the "sharks" have been after me. The placement of the coin in the holder is annoyance but not a reason to reject the coin. The parts I don’t like are the pictures that show red peeking out of the surfaces mixed with much darker areas around them. I also don’t care for the what appears to be residue around the letters of “In God We Trust,” especially the word "TRUST." There also appears to be residue even on the Heritage photos around the legend on the reverse. If those features are in fact on the coin, then I would question the MS-65 grade.
I posted pictures of my coins, but that’s how I think a Choice Mint State bronze coin should look. You are certainly free to disagree with that.
Now the sharks can come out and have their feast because the I’ve dumped the blood in the water, but that’s my observations concerning this coin. Rarity does not increase the grade. That was what the less than ethical dealers used to do before there was third party grading.
When I wrote one dealer many years ago, I asked what his standards were for an 1877 Indian Cent in Fine condition. His response was “date sharp and clear” with no mention of how many letters were needed in the word “LIBERTY.” The standard for Fine back then was “LIBERTY” readable, but not sharp with some letters outlined but still there.
Perhaps there is a way to differentiate proofs from business strikes? Location of the knob at the bottom of the shield relative to the numerals of the date?