The $500,000 fingerprint

Unknown · February 18, 2014 1:09AM

This content has been removed.

ColonelJessup · February 18, 2014 2:00AM

To quote Magic Mark, who "made" the MS68+ 1901-S 25c (dipped from MS66 in 1989 or so), "I love the smell of "Jewel-Luster" in the morning. It's the smell of Victory". .

Unknown · February 18, 2014 2:10AM

This content has been removed.

tradedollarnut · February 18, 2014 2:16AM

<< 

<< To quote Magic Mark, who "made" the MS68+ 1901-S 25c (dipped from MS66 in 1989 or so), "I love the smell of "Jewel-Luster" in the morning. It's the smell of Victory". .

>>

No worries I realize I am in the minority, but I am not as concerned with others in making money with my coins. Money isn't everything and I would be very happy owning this piece and continuing its preservation just as it is. It isn't just all about the flip and the score sometimes it is about the coin and caretaking its incredible history. I realize I am speaking to deaf ears, trus tme I know. >>

It will never be dipped on my watch. I can't imagine a better coin in my set and I intend to hold it for 25 years

Unknown · February 18, 2014 2:57AM

This content has been removed.

ColonelJessup · February 18, 2014 3:37AM

LOL, which is more predictable? My dipping taunts or the responses to them? . .

ebaybuyer · February 18, 2014 4:58AM

the bust dollars were NOT .900 fine.

Unknown · February 18, 2014 5:17AM

This content has been removed.

cardinal · February 18, 2014 5:31AM

<< the bust dollars were NOT .900 fine. >>

Are you referring to the Mint Act legal standard of 1485/1664 silver (0.89423 fineness), or the 374.75/416.00 silver (0.90084 fineness) actually used for production of bust dollars? Either way, they were really close to .900 fine.

Elcontador · February 18, 2014 5:37AM

Seen images of this coin before. Didn't like it then, don't like it now. I don't care in what holder it resides or what someone else is willing to pay for it.
I would never have a coin with a fingerprint like that one in my collection under any circumstances. To each his own.

tradedollarnut · February 18, 2014 5:55AM

<< Seen images of this coin before. Didn't like it then, don't like it now. I don't care in what holder it resides or what someone else is willing to pay for it.
I would never have a coin with a fingerprint like that one in my collection under any circumstances. To each his own. >>

In hand it is one of the most lustrous, original and beautiful bust dollars in existance.

ALL early coinage requires compromise from perfection. What makes a fingerprint any worse than adjustment marks, an old cleaning or other mishandling? Like you say - to each their own. Your loss. Shrug

Brol · February 18, 2014 6:50AM

Fingerprint on coin - OMG - it's definitely better to have a coin with fingerprint, than cleaned, holed, scratched.

zas107 · February 18, 2014 7:32AM

Honestly if money was no issue to me, I would not let the fingerprint affect the price I would pay for this coin. It is a beauty!

nags · February 18, 2014 7:37AM

I suppose beauty is in the old of the beholder. We each are bothered to different degrees by adjustment marks, light cleaning, fingerprints, copper spots, chop marks, holes, "tarnish"...

Personally I love the original look of the coin.

Mark · February 18, 2014 7:48AM

TDN:

A few days ago you said

<< Sorry guys but this coin is famous for being the one truly original bust dollar. >>

How far back do photographs of this coin show the fingerprint? If photos only go back a couple or so decades, what are the odds that it was dipped (say in the 1950s) and the fingerprint created then? Of course, if photos go back to the early 1900s and they show the fingerprint, then I'd be a LOT more comfortable that the coin has not been relatively recently dipped.

topstuf · February 18, 2014 7:52AM

I wish it were mine to sell, for sell it I would. Even as rare as the condition is.

magikbilly · February 18, 2014 8:09AM

I have no problem with it at all. It's is not like there is a school bus parked on the coin, or a Pollos Hermanos, it is a finger print. Folks touch coins and leave prints. If I can handle adjustment marks this should be a walk in the park, especially in this context.

Eric

Unknown · February 18, 2014 8:14AM

This content has been removed.

kaz · February 18, 2014 8:22AM

That's a beautiful piece of metallic sculpture and it simply shrugs off the print, imo.

magikbilly · February 18, 2014 8:41AM

<< That's a beautiful piece of metallic sculpture and it simply shrugs off the print, imo. >>

Well said! You made me think of what may be part of a Jim Morrison poem - "she dances in a ring of fire and throws off the challenge with a shrug" (the coin is round, like a ring, and people call coins "she"...)

Eric

stman · February 18, 2014 8:43AM

<< 

<< 

<< Seen images of this coin before. Didn't like it then, don't like it now. I don't care in what holder it resides or what someone else is willing to pay for it.
I would never have a coin with a fingerprint like that one in my collection under any circumstances. To each his own. >>

In hand it is one of the most lustrous, original and beautiful bust dollars in existance.

ALL early coinage requires compromise from perfection. What makes a fingerprint any worse than adjustment marks, an old cleaning or other mishandling? Like you say - to each their own. Your loss. Shrug >>

It really irks me when I hear these generalized rules about collecting, "all fingerprints are bad" and other phrases similar. It is like there is this perfect look and this horrendous look pray you don't have the so-called horrendous look on your coin. We are speaking over 200 year old unc coins here. We are speaking of a state of preservation that few can imagine let alone own. I have never let a fingerprint persuade me not to jump all over a 200 year old coin since the print will be always be toned or toned over and becomes the fabric of the coin. I hate it when I hear the uppity fellows say "its distracting to me" as if you have a choice in the matter, like we can pick and choose and adjust a coin of such incredible preservation..........complete nonsense! >>

Not sure why you always slam people that don't care for prints. They/we are entitled to not like them, just as you are free to like them. You're not going to convince anybody to like them if they already don't......although you sure try hard.

Unknown · February 18, 2014 8:47AM

This content has been removed.

magikbilly · February 18, 2014 8:51AM

Of course to each his own. That is a given.

Some folks can't accept finger prints or moderate smudges from the original signing in autographs.
I am not one of them. I have a candid peel print of John Agar and Jack Paar C. 1952. Agar's blue fountain pen died in mid signature. He resigned right over, in black fountain pen. To many it is a problem piece, undesirable. To me it is one a few signed unique candids. I accept it easily. Others prefer common b/w 8x10's signed in Sharpie like everyone else has (easier resale). I like my candid

To each his own.

Eric

stman · February 18, 2014 8:51AM

I see, so only happy talk concerning prints. And it has to agree with the Realone theory. Otherwise they're being "uppity."

kaz · February 18, 2014 9:05AM

<< 

<< That's a beautiful piece of metallic sculpture and it simply shrugs off the print, imo. >>

Well said! You made me think of what may be part of a Jim Morrison poem - "she dances in a ring of fire and throws off the challenge with a shrug" (the coin is round, like a ring, and people call coins "she"...)

Eric >>

Cool association, Eric.

Elcontador · February 18, 2014 9:36AM

<< 

<< 

<< Seen images of this coin before. Didn't like it then, don't like it now. I don't care in what holder it resides or what someone else is willing to pay for it.
I would never have a coin with a fingerprint like that one in my collection under any circumstances. To each his own. >>

In hand it is one of the most lustrous, original and beautiful bust dollars in existance.

ALL early coinage requires compromise from perfection. What makes a fingerprint any worse than adjustment marks, an old cleaning or other mishandling? Like you say - to each their own. Your loss. Shrug >>

It really irks me when I hear these generalized rules about collecting, "all fingerprints are bad" and other phrases similar. It is like there is this perfect look and this horrendous look pray you don't have the so-called horrendous look on your coin. We are speaking over 200 year old unc coins here. We are speaking of a state of preservation that few can imagine let alone own. I have never let a fingerprint persuade me not to jump all over a 200 year old coin since the print will be always be toned or toned over and becomes the fabric of the coin. I hate it when I hear the uppity fellows say "its distracting to me" as if you have a choice in the matter, like we can pick and choose and adjust a coin of such incredible preservation..........complete nonsense! >>

Please do not put words in my mouth. I never said "all fingerprints are bad." You did. I've seen a number of early coppers with light fingerprints which did not bother me, because I did not find them to be eye-catching distractions. If a coin has what to me is an eye-catching distraction - I don't care what it is - a large fingerprint, a mint caused problem that is the first thing I notice about a coin - I'm not interested.

I don't fish in that deep end of the pond. I don't deal in six figure, or even high five figure coins. What I do know is that if you had a type Seated Dollar in AU 58 with a fingerprint like that, you would have a hard time selling it.

tradedollarnut · February 18, 2014 9:59AM

What I do know is that if you had a type Seated Dollar in AU 58 with a fingerprint like that, you would have a hard time selling it.

Unless said AU58 was dripping with luster, arguably could be graded MS63 and was net graded due to the print...

Unknown · February 18, 2014 10:49AM

This content has been removed.

D · February 18, 2014 10:59AM

I think it's a bummer that until I hold the coins and the cash in my hands I will never be able to tell you which I would prefer.

I would be inclined to trust the opinions of the people with those opportunities as to which coins are more, less, or not at all original.

-D

veryfine · February 18, 2014 2:01PM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Seen images of this coin before. Didn't like it then, don't like it now. I don't care in what holder it resides or what someone else is willing to pay for it.
I would never have a coin with a fingerprint like that one in my collection under any circumstances. To each his own. >>

In hand it is one of the most lustrous, original and beautiful bust dollars in existance.

ALL early coinage requires compromise from perfection. What makes a fingerprint any worse than adjustment marks, an old cleaning or other mishandling? Like you say - to each their own. Your loss. Shrug >>

It really irks me when I hear these generalized rules about collecting, "all fingerprints are bad" and other phrases similar. It is like there is this perfect look and this horrendous look pray you don't have the so-called horrendous look on your coin. We are speaking over 200 year old unc coins here. We are speaking of a state of preservation that few can imagine let alone own. I have never let a fingerprint persuade me not to jump all over a 200 year old coin since the print will be always be toned or toned over and becomes the fabric of the coin. I hate it when I hear the uppity fellows say "its distracting to me" as if you have a choice in the matter, like we can pick and choose and adjust a coin of such incredible preservation..........complete nonsense! >>

Not sure why you always slam people that don't care for prints. They/we are entitled to not like them, just as you are free to like them. You're not going to convince anybody to like them if they already don't......although you sure try hard.

>>

IMO, Realone makes some valid points. He may not convince some collectors to "like" prints, but he can probably steer us into ACCEPTING them. After all, fingerprints are a "natural" part of an old coin's journey.

mr1931S · February 19, 2014 9:17AM

I once owned an '80-S with a fingerprint.I recall paying about $10 for it.Was offered $100 for my '80-S at a show.That's how nice that coin was fingerprint and all.

The $500,000 fingerprint

Comments

Leave a Comment

Categories