deleted
JeffersonFrog
Posts: 1,085 ✭✭✭✭✭
deleted
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
0
Comments
And it won't be me that bids on the second one. You go first.
There's a huge difference between a near-gem Jefferson and an MS-66, of course.
TTT
Hoard the keys.
A $150 coin selling for $800+
The name is LEE!
<< <i>WTH is happening at Teletrade??
A $150 coin selling for $800+
To me it's a 10 cent coin selling for $800. You could never get me excited about a 1962-D nickel no matter how nice it was. This coin is from the height of the roll and bag boom. I'm sure many unopened mint bags are still out there.
<< <i>
<< <i>WTH is happening at Teletrade??
A $150 coin selling for $800+
To me it's a 10 cent coin selling for $800. You could never get me excited about a 1962-D nickel no matter how nice it was. This coin is from the height of the roll and bag boom. I'm sure many unopened mint bags are still out there. >>
This, and I would add that condition rarities separated by almost undetectable differences that are inconsistently applied also do little for me. I don't personally have faith in the market.
<< <i>I bought it and was also the underbidder the first time. This is the last date/mm of any denomination to be graded in ms66 since 1927. A year ago I would have bid $2000+ and would have been ecstatic to buy it even for that much, BUT now things have changed big time and lots of low pops are coming out of pcgs. I am actually very uneasy with the purchase, even with hedging my bids to only $800. I could see it being pop 10+ a year from now which would be really sad, but I had to at least take a chance at a potentially irreplaceable coin, and key to an all ms66 and better collection. We'll have to see if it makes my ms66 standards when I have it in hand, but I've owned 3 or 4 pcgs ms65's, looked through countless rolls, and all I ever see for 62-d is junk, junk, and more junk. These were just not made with the luster or lack of marks you see on these TT ones. We'll just have to see if the strike is adequate. Can anybody now find me an ms66 58-p, 61-d or 63-d? >>
A lot of people think this is just a pointless push for perfection but those of us seeking these
coins know that nice examples can be difficult and Gems can be almost impossible. Why shouldn't
common coins be desired in Gem? Would they be happy with a cull indian set or Morgans with
bad strikes and rubs?
When Barber dimes came out of the press most were very attractive. It mattered much less
if you had a poor or a choice example because choice coins were almost typical. When 1962-D
nickels came out of the press most of them had multiple problems. People don't seem to under-
stand this except for those who want to collect the coins in Unc. They don't realize that even if
you were alive and collecting in 1962 seeking such coins that you won't have anything even close
to this specific example unless you sought the coin methodically and had a huge amount of luck.
Less than a thousand dollars for what could be one of the best sounds like an absolute steal to
me. But then I've worn out $1000 worth of shoe leather looking for such coins so I know how
tough they can be.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>If I could get a PCGS example for $150 I'd probably pee my pants with joy. >>
Send Jaime the listings proving your point so that the price guide can get changed.
Oh wait, that's wondercoins job.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I bought it and was also the underbidder the first time. This is the last date/mm of any denomination to be graded in ms66 since 1927. A year ago I would have bid $2000+ and would have been ecstatic to buy it even for that much, BUT now things have changed big time and lots of low pops are coming out of pcgs. I am actually very uneasy with the purchase, even with hedging my bids to only $800. I could see it being pop 10+ a year from now which would be really sad, but I had to at least take a chance at a potentially irreplaceable coin, and key to an all ms66 and better collection. We'll have to see if it makes my ms66 standards when I have it in hand, but I've owned 3 or 4 pcgs ms65's, looked through countless rolls, and all I ever see for 62-d is junk, junk, and more junk. These were just not made with the luster or lack of marks you see on these TT ones. We'll just have to see if the strike is adequate. Can anybody now find me an ms66 58-p, 61-d or 63-d? >>
I learned, a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away, that
Population for moderns does not a rare coin make.
As for the scale which you've pointed out (uhhhh $2,000 down to $800) what more needs to be said.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>I bought it and was also the underbidder the first time. This is the last date/mm of any denomination to be graded in ms66 since 1927. A year ago I would have bid $2000+ and would have been ecstatic to buy it even for that much, BUT now things have changed big time and lots of low pops are coming out of pcgs. I am actually very uneasy with the purchase, even with hedging my bids to only $800. I could see it being pop 10+ a year from now which would be really sad, but I had to at least take a chance at a potentially irreplaceable coin, and key to an all ms66 and better collection. We'll have to see if it makes my ms66 standards when I have it in hand, but I've owned 3 or 4 pcgs ms65's, looked through countless rolls, and all I ever see for 62-d is junk, junk, and more junk. These were just not made with the luster or lack of marks you see on these TT ones. We'll just have to see if the strike is adequate. Can anybody now find me an ms66 58-p, 61-d or 63-d? >>
A lot of people think this is just a pointless push for perfection but those of us seeking these
coins know that nice examples can be difficult and Gems can be almost impossible. Why shouldn't
common coins be desired in Gem? Would they be happy with a cull indian set or Morgans with
bad strikes and rubs?
When Barber dimes came out of the press most were very attractive. It mattered much less
if you had a poor or a choice example because choice coins were almost typical. When 1962-D
nickels came out of the press most of them had multiple problems. People don't seem to under-
stand this except for those who want to collect the coins in Unc. They don't realize that even if
you were alive and collecting in 1962 seeking such coins that you won't have anything even close
to this specific example unless you sought the coin methodically and had a huge amount of luck.
Less than a thousand dollars for what could be one of the best sounds like an absolute steal to
me. But then I've worn out $1000 worth of shoe leather looking for such coins so I know how
tough they can be. >>
Sam, looking at the first one which came up, I don't know about you, but I would not call that one a gem. Now the second one.
What I'd call them lucky for the grade.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>... looking at the first one which came up, I don't know about you, but I would not call that one a gem. Now the second one.
What I'd call them lucky for the grade. >>
Either way it would seem to prove the point of just how difficult it really is to find nice moderns.
Yes, they were made in huge numbers and the coins up until 1965 were saved in huge numbers
but this doesn't mean Gems are easy to get.
Nickels are really tough and finding two sided Gems with good strikes is improbable in most dates
after the mid-50's, and not easy for most of the earlier dates.
Even nice attractive sets of post-'65 coins (post-'55 nickels) can be very difficult to assemble. I
believe when people learn to appreciate this scarcity of attractive coins the values of the Gems
could go far higher. Just a few thousand people trying to put together a nice set would cause the
prices of many seemingly common coins to sky-rocket.
People shouldn't buy any coin for investment and this might even apply especially to these coins
but they sure are a lot of fun to collect. If there's ever any competition for them there will be
lots of surprises.
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
<< <i>
<< <i>... looking at the first one which came up, I don't know about you, but I would not call that one a gem. Now the second one.
What I'd call them lucky for the grade. >>
Either way it would seem to prove the point of just how difficult it really is to find nice moderns.
Yes, they were made in huge numbers and the coins up until 1965 were saved in huge numbers
but this doesn't mean Gems are easy to get.
Nickels are really tough and finding two sided Gems with good strikes is improbable in most dates
after the mid-50's, and not easy for most of the earlier dates.
Even nice attractive sets of post-'65 coins (post-'55 nickels) can be very difficult to assemble. I
believe when people learn to appreciate this scarcity of attractive coins the values of the Gems
could go far higher. Just a few thousand people trying to put together a nice set would cause the
prices of many seemingly common coins to sky-rocket.
People shouldn't buy any coin for investment and this might even apply especially to these coins
but they sure are a lot of fun to collect. If there's ever any competition for them there will be
lots of surprises. >>
I don't question what you are saying with regard to Moderns in the least bit Sam.
I just have a problem with the MS66 grades for the aforementioned coins and the ridiculous prices paid for them.
Shall I put up my Prototype IKE again for say, $55,000?
Or maybe my TopPop 1970-D Washington DDO for say $2,500?
The name is LEE!
Cheers!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection