I have seen well struck 1917 philly type 1s with subdued luster. Probably more of a sign of how it was stored. The reverse luster appears better than the obverse, perhaps it has been polished some to repair some clashing.
Here is another well struck 1917. The rims are even sharp.
@jmlanzaf said:
Quick question: If I don't like the coin or think it is mislabeled when it arrives, can't I just send it to ANACS for a refund of the price differential? Doesn't that make buying it kind of risk-free? I know there's some issue over dates given that the only guarantee is of coins slabbed since 2008, so is it only gold labels that get the guarantee.]
[Although the seller gave me 14 day return privileges. If I can get it before Baltimore, maybe I can get someone to walk it through.]
Mechanical error means it has no guarantee, and I have never heard Anacs paying out on a big error. Unless a major dealer endorses its proof status, you have a business strike which makes it worth around $500 max if it graded as a 64 FH.
@jmlanzaf said:
Quick question: If I don't like the coin or think it is mislabeled when it arrives, can't I just send it to ANACS for a refund of the price differential? Doesn't that make buying it kind of risk-free? I know there's some issue over dates given that the only guarantee is of coins slabbed since 2008, so is it only gold labels that get the guarantee.]
[Although the seller gave me 14 day return privileges. If I can get it before Baltimore, maybe I can get someone to walk it through.]
Mechanical error means it has no guarantee, and I have never heard Anacs paying out on a big error. Unless a major dealer endorses it's proof status, you have a business strike which makes it worth around $500 max if it graded as a 64 FH.
I have a Greysheet.
I also have a coin in an ANACS Proof 63 holder. Well, not yet. It hasn't arrived.
@clarkbar04 said:
Anacs chimed in on page 2 and verified it as a label error.
Yes, but who really trusts them. LOL. They are the same ones who put the label on it.
And pardon my cynicism, but 10 years later they've identified a "mechanical error" without looking at the coin. In that same note they say that the "ANACS record has been corrected to show MS". Really? So, if it's a "mechanical error" why didn't your records always show MS? Is there finishing paperwork showing MS? If there is not, then how do they know it's an error without re-examining the coin? If there is finishing paperwork showing MS how did it get into the database as a proof?
ANACS, feel free to contact me for further discussion. I would be interested in seeing any paperwork you have on this coin.
Hey, welcome to CU on your ten+ week anniversary. I agree with you. I think you should pay a lawyer to sue ANACS for a label error! Please keep us informed!
Hey, welcome to CU on your ten+ week anniversary. I agree with you. I think you should pay a lawyer to sue ANACS for a label error! Please keep us informed!
Ha-ha. I'd rather not pay a lawyer. I'd also rather that if ANACS is going to do anything they need to either stand behind their label or shut up. They can't have it both ways.
I paid next to nothing for this coin, so it's no big deal. Maybe I'll throw it up on eBay to see what ANACS does.
Be careful. It can be dangerous to tickle a sleeping tiger with deep pockets. AFAIK, you are still "innocent" of any possible wrong doing. You may come out way ahead by asking ANACS to check the coin and change its method of manufacture if it is not a proof. PLUS, ask them to give you X number of free submissions for removing (if it is not Proof) it from the market.
@Insider2 said:
Be careful. It can be dangerous to tickle a sleeping tiger with deep pockets. AFAIK, you are still "innocent" of any possible wrong doing. You may come out way ahead by asking ANACS to check the coin and change its method of manufacture if it is not a proof. PLUS, ask them to give you X number of free submissions for removing (if it is not Proof) it from the market.
The coin is what it is. No one has done anything wrong. I'll settle for ms63FH PL.
@jmlanzaf said:
Quick question: If I don't like the coin or think it is mislabeled when it arrives, can't I just send it to ANACS for a refund of the price differential? Doesn't that make buying it kind of risk-free? I know there's some issue over dates given that the only guarantee is of coins slabbed since 2008, so is it only gold labels that get the guarantee.]
[Although the seller gave me 14 day return privileges. If I can get it before Baltimore, maybe I can get someone to walk it through.]
Or you could overnight to a couple grading services and then do walkthroughs. Baltimore is a little late this year. If you live within driving distance of a major numismatist that is another option.
@Insider2 said:
Be careful. It can be dangerous to tickle a sleeping tiger with deep pockets. AFAIK, you are still "innocent" of any possible wrong doing. You may come out way ahead by asking ANACS to check the coin and change its method of manufacture if it is not a proof. PLUS, ask them to give you X number of free submissions for removing (if it is not Proof) it from the market.
I'm not trusting ANACS to do anything just yet since they seem to have any opinion on a coin they haven't seen. While it COULD be a mechanical error (proof please?), it could also represent a legitimate grading opinion at the time.
Obviously, I need to see the coin in hand> @logger7 said:
@jmlanzaf said:
Quick question: If I don't like the coin or think it is mislabeled when it arrives, can't I just send it to ANACS for a refund of the price differential? Doesn't that make buying it kind of risk-free? I know there's some issue over dates given that the only guarantee is of coins slabbed since 2008, so is it only gold labels that get the guarantee.]
[Although the seller gave me 14 day return privileges. If I can get it before Baltimore, maybe I can get someone to walk it through.]
Or you could overnight to a couple grading services and then do walkthroughs. Baltimore is a little late this year. If you live within driving distance of a major numismatist that is another option.
Comments
Just to stir the pot a bit. Gardner's Standing Liberties: 1917 example formerly thought to be a Proof brings 'impressive price'
And there's this...
https://coins.ha.com/itm/standing-liberty-quarters/quarters-and-twenty-cents/1917-type-one-ms-64-accompanied-by-breen-proof-papers-the-satiny-surfaces-are-overlaid-with-light-gray-russet-toning-for-f/a/163-5439.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
I have seen well struck 1917 philly type 1s with subdued luster. Probably more of a sign of how it was stored. The reverse luster appears better than the obverse, perhaps it has been polished some to repair some clashing.
Here is another well struck 1917. The rims are even sharp.
Mechanical error means it has no guarantee, and I have never heard Anacs paying out on a big error. Unless a major dealer endorses its proof status, you have a business strike which makes it worth around $500 max if it graded as a 64 FH.
Anacs chimed in on page 2 and verified it as a label error.
I have a Greysheet.
I also have a coin in an ANACS Proof 63 holder.
Well, not yet. It hasn't arrived.
Time will tell, once I get it in hand.
Yes, but who really trusts them. LOL. They are the same ones who put the label on it.
And pardon my cynicism, but 10 years later they've identified a "mechanical error" without looking at the coin. In that same note they say that the "ANACS record has been corrected to show MS". Really? So, if it's a "mechanical error" why didn't your records always show MS? Is there finishing paperwork showing MS? If there is not, then how do they know it's an error without re-examining the coin? If there is finishing paperwork showing MS how did it get into the database as a proof?
ANACS, feel free to contact me for further discussion. I would be interested in seeing any paperwork you have on this coin.
it's probably easy for them to verify since none were produced.
That position is slightly more controversial than your simple statement suggests.
https://www.thespruce.com/the-standing-liberty-quarter-specifications-4096404
@jmlanzaf
Hey, welcome to CU on your ten+ week anniversary. I agree with you. I think you should pay a lawyer to sue ANACS for a label error! Please keep us informed!
Ha-ha. I'd rather not pay a lawyer. I'd also rather that if ANACS is going to do anything they need to either stand behind their label or shut up. They can't have it both ways.
I paid next to nothing for this coin, so it's no big deal. Maybe I'll throw it up on eBay to see what ANACS does.
Be careful. It can be dangerous to tickle a sleeping tiger with deep pockets. AFAIK, you are still "innocent" of any possible wrong doing. You may come out way ahead by asking ANACS to check the coin and change its method of manufacture if it is not a proof. PLUS, ask them to give you X number of free submissions for removing (if it is not Proof) it from the market.
The coin is what it is. No one has done anything wrong. I'll settle for ms63FH PL.
Or you could overnight to a couple grading services and then do walkthroughs. Baltimore is a little late this year. If you live within driving distance of a major numismatist that is another option.
I'm not trusting ANACS to do anything just yet since they seem to have any opinion on a coin they haven't seen. While it COULD be a mechanical error (proof please?), it could also represent a legitimate grading opinion at the time.
Obviously, I need to see the coin in hand> @logger7 said:
I've got a guy who can walk through Baltimore.