My Great Southern cherry pick (will it grade?)

jwitten · March 2, 2017 1:11PM

Many years ago when I was first starting to buy and sell coins, I remember selling a coin like this. I later discovered it was a mint error called a retained cud, and I have been trying to find another ever since. I finally found one being sold by great southern, and just got it today. It was not listed as such, which is why I call it a cherry pick, but I did pay more than I normally would, so probably others saw it as well. Do you think it has a shot at grading? There is a very light rim ding on the obverse, and a few very light scratches on the reverse. I have seen worse get graded, but you never know what mood the graders will be in it seems.

And here is an example of one already graded. I like the way they have the reverse shown facing forwards.. I might go for that too!

oih82w8 · March 2, 2017 1:46PM

Neat cud! I don't know about a straight grade or not. One way to find out.

jwitten · March 2, 2017 1:56PM

Man, I just looked at the fee for getting an error graded. If I do that plus secure service for pictures, plus shipping, etc... yikes!

oih82w8 · March 2, 2017 1:58PM

It would be best to gather a few "friends" to go along for the ride to PCGS, that is why I have been holding out for a while for sending in my 1881 Quarter Eagle...and gold has it's own category too!

BLUEJAYWAY · March 2, 2017 3:11PM

I like it. Nice score.

rhedden · March 2, 2017 3:22PM

Cherrypicked from GSC? I grade it Proof-65.

Just kidding about the proof, but the cud is really neat. I don't recall seeing a cud on an Indian quarter eagle before.

lkeigwin · March 2, 2017 3:26PM

That's pretty cool! I think it will grade problem-free, as an error submission. The rim ding and scratches look minor.

Nice score!
Lance.

FredWeinberg · March 2, 2017 3:34PM

It's not a rare retained cud for that coin,
but gold cuds or even retained cuds,
are very scarce and unusual in general.

I've CP'd 'em over the years - good sellers.

For those wondering why it's a retained cud,
look at the fraction bar separation - that's the
element that needs to be there to be called a
retained cud die break.

From what I see, it should grade with no problems.

Nice CP

PLMXYZ · March 2, 2017 4:08PM

I am new to the board-usually just read. I have been collecting quite a few years and mostly ignore error coins but that one is really cool!
Nice coin!

hchcoin · March 2, 2017 4:22PM

I agree, very cool coin.

oih82w8 · March 2, 2017 4:28PM

PM sent

OldIndianNutKase · March 2, 2017 4:48PM

Very NEAT coin, and definitely worth the price for grading.

OINK

coinhack · March 2, 2017 4:54PM

Nice coin. That is a neat error.

coinhack · March 2, 2017 4:54PM

Oh, and welcome to the forum, PLMXYZ

Zoins · March 2, 2017 5:00PM

Wow, that is a great looking error! Congrats and good luck on getting it graded!

CaptHenway · March 2, 2017 5:09PM

What Fred said. Have seen a few of these over the years and agree that it is not rare, but it is a nice legitimate gold coin error.

msch1man · March 2, 2017 5:13PM

I've never seen one before on an Indian QE...that's cool. Hope it grades for you.

jwitten · March 2, 2017 5:20PM

@FredWeinberg said:
It's not a rare retained cud for that coin,
but gold cuds or even retained cuds,
are very scarce and unusual in general.

I've CP'd 'em over the years - good sellers.

For those wondering why it's a retained cud,
look at the fraction bar separation - that's the
element that needs to be there to be called a
retained cud die break.

From what I see, it should grade with no problems.

Nice CP

@CaptHenway said:
What Fred said. Have seen a few of these over the years and agree that it is not rare, but it is a nice legitimate gold coin error.

This is the second I've owned, and there are currently 2 more listed on ebay (as buy it nows, so they've been listed awhile). You said it is not rare, but is scarce... what would the definition of that be? It is scarce enough that it has taken me a year or so of searching to find one listed without the owner listing it as such. Also, this might be my rarest error.. do you know how rare or scarce these are?

CharlotteDude · March 2, 2017 7:01PM

Cool looking coins. I really like the cud on the '27!

'dude

MedalCollector · March 2, 2017 7:30PM

@jwitten said:

Wow. Sometimes those prongs really suck!

Your coin is very cool. Nice find!

Retained cuds are common as dirt on wheat cents. For qtr eagles, they are much rarer in comparison, as you allude to with your long search. I would bet that examples attributed with the error only come up for sale a couple times per year.

I am a little surprised though, that such a minor error commands any premium considering the price of gold. There must be a couple gold-only error collectors out there! Your typical error collector wouldn't pay that much for an example of a retained cud.

Is there any reference that breaks these Indian quarter eagles down by die and die state?

jwitten · March 2, 2017 7:49PM

@GoldenEgg said:

@jwitten said:

Wow. Sometimes those prongs really suck!

Your coin is very cool. Nice find!

Retained cuds are common as dirt on wheat cents. For qtr eagles, they are much rarer in comparison, as you allude to with your long search. I would bet that examples attributed with the error only come up for sale a couple times per year.

I am a little surprised though, that such a minor error commands any premium considering the price of gold. There must be a couple gold-only error collectors out there! Your typical error collector wouldn't pay that much for an example of a retained cud.

Is there any reference that breaks these Indian quarter eagles down by die and die state?

I wish there was! There are several varieties of the 1908 too (die clash). I have a couple where you can see the progress of the clash and then a chip or something on the 9 in the date.

Jackthecat1 · March 2, 2017 8:48PM

A fascinating error. Good eye.

CaptHenway · March 2, 2017 10:48PM

@jwitten said:

@FredWeinberg said:
It's not a rare retained cud for that coin,
but gold cuds or even retained cuds,
are very scarce and unusual in general.

I've CP'd 'em over the years - good sellers.

For those wondering why it's a retained cud,
look at the fraction bar separation - that's the
element that needs to be there to be called a
retained cud die break.

From what I see, it should grade with no problems.

Nice CP

@CaptHenway said:
What Fred said. Have seen a few of these over the years and agree that it is not rare, but it is a nice legitimate gold coin error.

This is the second I've owned, and there are currently 2 more listed on ebay (as buy it nows, so they've been listed awhile). You said it is not rare, but is scarce... what would the definition of that be? It is scarce enough that it has taken me a year or so of searching to find one listed without the owner listing it as such. Also, this might be my rarest error.. do you know how rare or scarce these are?

Well, I never asked anything extra for the error when I had it in inventory, but perhaps I was wrong.
TD

illini420 · March 2, 2017 11:03PM

These are a neat error on a gold coin... not super rare, but not super easy to find either, particularly a nice high grade example. When they are attributed correctly, they do go for a decent premium too. At least that has been my experience and I've sold several of these in the last few years. Here's one in MS63 that was in Heritage not too long ago, selling for over double the value of the non-error in the same grade:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1231-9671.s

But yeah, the error attribution fees on these at PCGS are extraordinarily high... especially on a relatively easy attribution like this one where just about all of them will look the same (or at least very similar). This is something that probably should be in the Cherrypicker's Guide w/ an FS number and then we'd only have to pay the much more reasonable variety attribution fee.

Anyways, for a better look, here's a close up of the retained die cud from the TrueView photo that was done of my PCGS MS65 example:

jwitten · March 2, 2017 11:34PM

@illini420 said:
These are a neat error on a gold coin... not super rare, but not super easy to find either, particularly a nice high grade example. When they are attributed correctly, they do go for a decent premium too. At least that has been my experience and I've sold several of these in the last few years. Here's one in MS63 that was in Heritage not too long ago, selling for over double the value of the non-error in the same grade:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1231-9671.s

But yeah, the error attribution fees on these at PCGS are extraordinarily high... especially on a relatively easy attribution like this one where just about all of them will look the same (or at least very similar). This is something that probably should be in the Cherrypicker's Guide w/ an FS number and then we'd only have to pay the much more reasonable variety attribution fee.

Anyways, for a better look, here's a close up of the retained die cud from the TrueView photo that was done of my PCGS MS65 example:

Very nice! I am tempted to send it to ngc because of the cost to grade. Looks like it would be $45 to grade there, not including shipping, etc. Would pcgs be $60, or would it be the normal grading fee PLUS $60? The premium looks to be enough that I will probably grade... and I HOPE it straight grades obviously. I have a few more Indians I want to get graded, but they are not error coins. At ngc, I think you can combine them on one invoice. I don't think you can at pcgs. That is another added cost.

jwitten · March 2, 2017 11:50PM

@illini420 said:
These are a neat error on a gold coin... not super rare, but not super easy to find either, particularly a nice high grade example. When they are attributed correctly, they do go for a decent premium too. At least that has been my experience and I've sold several of these in the last few years. Here's one in MS63 that was in Heritage not too long ago, selling for over double the value of the non-error in the same grade:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1231-9671.s

But yeah, the error attribution fees on these at PCGS are extraordinarily high... especially on a relatively easy attribution like this one where just about all of them will look the same (or at least very similar). This is something that probably should be in the Cherrypicker's Guide w/ an FS number and then we'd only have to pay the much more reasonable variety attribution fee.

Anyways, for a better look, here's a close up of the retained die cud from the TrueView photo that was done of my PCGS MS65 example:

Just saw you had 4 for sale... wow! How did you find them all?

ricko · March 3, 2017 5:48AM

That is an interesting error.... I like the way it splits 1/2 symbol. Cheers, RickO

asheland · March 3, 2017 8:30AM

Very cool! I've never seen one like that before.

My Great Southern cherry pick (will it grade?)

Comments

Leave a Comment