1917 Standing Liberty Quarter on ebay? Looks to good?
kevinstang
Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭
Don't usually do this but I saw this on ebay yesterday https://ebay.com item 302650095260
Something seems to good on this quarter to me- like straight outa the China mint too good. I only looked at auction because the seller had a bunch of tokens going for $200+ dollars and had what looked to be a $50 Canadian 1 oz gold coin in the lot....thought maybe a seller that didn't know much about coins... so I checked on their other auctions and see lots of coins and numismatic related material, so why would a seller drop a 1 ounce gold coin in a beat up token lot? Then I saw this quarter and thought fakes. Opinions?
0
Comments
Sorry, working link below hopefully
https://ebay.com/itm/1917-STANDING-LIBERTY-QUARTER-GEM-BRILLIANT-UNCIRCULATED-BEAUTIFUL-COIN/302650095260?_trkparms=pageci%3A47b43d4f-222c-11e8-b745-74dbd180b4c4%7Cparentrq%3A017d71cd1620ad4b134651b3fffebb8e%7Ciid%3A1&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236
https://ebay.com/itm/1917-STANDING-LIBERTY-QUARTER-GEM-BRILLIANT-UNCIRCULATED-BEAUTIFUL-COIN/302650095260?hash=item467759f69c:g:gxgAAOSw1Npakbvh
Date looks funny, but it could be the angle.
Looks okay to me.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Try this: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2057872.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.X302650095260.TRS5&_nkw=302650095260&_sacat=0
I think it's legit....
bob:)
It looks too bright to me as if it's had something done to it. My experience with these coins is that the original finish was frosty, not bright. The blow-up of the photos make this look like an AU that been stripped of its original surfaces.
Dipped AU, in my humble opinion.
Dave
When in dough don't.
If this is the coin, pass. Too shiny.
Agree with Bill. Obvious AU with overt bright dip. A nice coin that is now ruined.
.
an ms64-5 raw on the bay isn't common but happens often enough for various nice type. i've been under-bidder on several coins i felt were mid-bu recently.
the coin appears so nice as to be a bit suspect. the date is a little off to me which is a prime area for counterfeit focus.
be careful posting items like this that are not obvious fakes (to me anyway), could mess up someone's good buy.
i like you are sharing this kind of stuff. great education takes place here because of things like this getting posted.
if anyone wants to do some comparison, here is the CF link.
.
Stay away from that shiny thing......
Only if it was certified by a TOP III service.
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,...
yep, there are no nice SLQ on ebay, move along..
the coin is ungraded for a reason
.
list was nuked? perhaps it was a counterfeit. i would liked to have seen better images.
.
Seller had some other silver coins listed with a similar shine - must have been the same "ultra-dip" - LOL
Funny - he actually has listed a used bottle of copper coin darkener - I'm not kidding...never heard of that before?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/CCD-COPPER-COIN-DARKENER-4-Oz-BOTTLE-RARE-FIND/292454822297?hash=item4417aa7199:g:ZtkAAOSwqvNaieuG
Looks OK to me, but he is selling almost 1000 PCGS graded coins, and 200+ NGC coins. Why isn't this one graded? You know the answer.
No wonder that bottle of darkener is no longer full....the condition detail states "Bottle has been shitting for years..."
I think it is genuine, and a high grade too.
Maybe properly "dipped", but still market acceptable as far as I'm concerned.
I never realized until just now that copper coin darkener bottles go to the bathroom.
Probably no coincidence that the coin was up on ebay for 4 days and disappeared once it was posted up here, so c'mon.. someone spill the beans!
Surely someone contacted the seller.
If the linked auction is the coin @KollectorKing posted I am surprised at the AU comments. To me, a non SLQ expert, that coin looks to have unbroken luster and no sign of wear with a good strike. What jumps out to you that makes you say AU? I don't see it.
Collector, occasional seller
It's not AU by any stretch of the imagination.
The pictures posted by KollectorKing are of the coin, to me it is to good- no signs of any contact marks on the coin anywhere-maybe just the photo angle I don't know. But the date looks off and something about the rims-maybe its just the angle again. I don't think I've even seen a standing liberty quarter that bright and mark free in or out of a slab.
Listing is gone now...did a forum member jump on it?? I did not see anything conclusive that screamed fake... and while it may have been dipped, there is still a lot of luster there.....Cheers, RickO
It was an auction, had around 19 bids, and was taken down with around 5 days left to go. I think at the time the high bid was $114.
No need to "stretch the imagination" - it's an obvious AU from the abrasion all along the right leg.
... And the head ...
Please explain to me then how a coin with full luster and not a mark on it anywhere survives circulation with only abrasions to its leg. The shin
Bone isn't even the high point, nor is the
Head
The knee and the shin bone are high points, or at least spots that get the first signs of wear. That fact to illustrated on coin after coin.
There are two issues with the op coin as an original surface Mint State piece. First it is "too bright." Something was done to it that modified the surfaces from their original frosty mint surfaces. Here are two examples. First a 1917 Type I quarter from my collection. This coin is graded PCGS MS-65, Full Head.
Second, a 1918-D photo that was taken from the "Coin Facts" site. This coin is graded MS-66, no full head.
Both coins have full mint bloom, but it is not flashy. I have observed and read that the mint intended that the silver coins would have this type finish because the artists of time thought that the very bright Uncirculated look distracted the viewer from appreciating their artwork.
Here is an AU-53 graded piece from the "Coin Facts' site. There is a very subtle general rub on this piece that impairs the luster. It's not easy to see because the coin is bright, probably from dipping, but it is there. At the same time the frosty surfaces are still evident. Check out the knee. It looks "gray" compared to the rest coin, which is the hallmark of a light rub. You can't see that on the photos that are now seen here of the op coin, but when you ran the magnifier over the photos on the Ebay site, you could see the rub.
It is hard to show this with photographs, and the Standing Liberty Quarter is one of the most difficult coins to grade, but I hope I have made a beginning in helping you to understand the grading of these pieces. I went out of my way to show white coins to help make the point. Most original pieces will have some toning.
Looks like an uncirculated piece that has possibly been hit with the juice, as in MS-70. I sure don’t see any rub I can tell you that.
Happy hunting
Just a suggestion -- if 'crazyhounddog' and others "don't see any rub" they might want to take the ANA grading course before they buy another "BU" or "MS" coin regardless of plastic holder and paper label.
This is not meant as a negative comment, but as one to encourage learning more abut the hobby's nuances (and 'nuisances').
I'm sorry have we met? I've been at this for over 50 years my friend. Some folks here are self proclaimed knowitalls and can lead folks down the wrong path. First off it's near impossible to get it right from pics. Secondly, I think what your seeing on the leg is not rub but just the way the angle is with the light . According to the ANA grading book it says shield breast and knee are the high points on the obverse then the breast and the ridge of the wing, where I don't see any rub either, on the reverse. Does a coin only wear on one side? Of course the coin has been dipped, or at least that's my opinion.
I'm also having a hard time separating your comment from a negative shot at me or anyone else that doesn't agree with you. Everyone has an opinion but yours is the only one that counts is what I'm reading here.
Its funny there's no mention of the head in the ANA book. Maybe ya should take a look before passing out your negative shots.
Just saying
@BillJones The MS66 and AU53 specimens you posted both show weakness in the shield which the coin above does not. The 53 does show obvious wear along the right leg and up Liberty's right side and shield as well as the eagle's wings, breast, and head. Unfortunately I didn't catch the auction before it was pulled so I can't really say anything about rub other than it doesn't show in the small pictures above. All I can see from blowing these up is this fuzzy mess:
The 67+ at the top of the list here as well as one or two of the 66's appear to have the same type of luster as the coin in the now defunct auction.
Collector, occasional seller
The short answer is, “no it doesn’t.”
To steal a line from the Musical “Annie” the op coin “shines like the top of the Chrysler Building,” which it should not do. There is a chance that it’s the photography, but I suspect it’s not. At any rate the op coin started off with a minimum of $110 which is $100 less than Gray Sheet bid for an MS-63. The coin is also not certified. Both of those facts should set off alarm bells in your head. Most sellers, especially those offer a lot of certified coins, don’t sell raw coins at bargain basement prices for no reason.
As a young collector, in the days before there was any kind of certification (1960s and ‘70s), I learned about rubbed knees and shins on these coins. A rub there can cost you a lot of money. If you look at your blow-up photo of the head, you will a see a “gray line” running down from where the ear would be if it were struck, down through the neck. That is break in the surface, and that’s why I made my comment about the head.
'crazyhounddog' -- if you wish to take offense at a friendly suggestion, that is your choice. I'm simply encouraging you to take advantage of resources that might have been skipped in your half-century of experience. We can all learn something- every day.
I do learn everyday my friend. It just seems like your taking a shot at me by what you wrote. I don't take it as friendly. I take it as shoving your opinion down my throat like I'm new at this. And here we again telling me I missed so much in the last half century, like you didn't. I have several ANA grading books over the last several decades so please don't insinuate that somehow I know nothing about what I'm talking about, only you have all the answers. I'm moving on away from this thread.
Happy hunting.
Ignore him! Some good research though does not buy, sell, or more importantly own any coins.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
The coin could be UNC. Really hard to tell from the image. The spot on the shin looks more like blurring of the image. However, there may be rub on the eagle's breast visible - or a weak strike.
It's a coin I might take a shot at at XF money (AU, possibly dipped) but would never buy sight unseen for anywhere near UNC.
I love a good fuss and enjoy reading posts on CU every day. This is directed at no member in particular.
Observable Facts:
Telling anyone they cannot grade is like telling the world their "bread" doesn't rise. Much of the time both are true.
With many exceptions, the amount of time spent as a dealer/collector means nothing. That's because most folks never were properly educated in the first place and our eyes change with age. There are YN's who have attended a few ANA seminars who can pluck the eyes out of most old timers with decades of "experience!"
The majority of Standing Liberty Quarters in ANY MS GRADE below MS-65 have some loss of luster down the leg! It's caused by several factors. One is bad and is usually "covered up" (altered surface) with chemicals or buffing.
Mirror Proofs are shiny bright silver. Authentic, original, unaltered, MS coins are neither shiny silver as the OP's nor shades of gray. They are frosty or satin "white" when untoned.
This myth about not being able to judge a coin from a GOOD image is nonsense much of the time as it is a developed "skill."
Very few of us know each other. Nevertheless, we all try to advance numismatic knowledge. I've been told by a moderator on a coin forum that there are all skill levels on these forums and don't expect much. Thankfully, most CU posters prove he was mistaken. Many of you give me a good spanking on a daily basis yet you are educating me. I don't know any know-it-alls. If they exist, I sure would like to have as many of them as possible educating me.
Finally, I don't care what you post, how you post, how you feel, etc. Bring it on as your advice/opinion is welcome.
Look at you, the voice of reason.
But I do disagree a bit about the images. They are too easy to manipulate or to alter with lighting angle changes. Look at the 35 Peace $ on the other thread with the disappearing hairlines.
I also enjoy a good fuss. Keep it going, gentlemen! I propose a pop and lock dance-off to resolve this dispute.
IMO It is BU, it looks dipped, and the white balance is off on the photo. Now take shots at me.
Please show us your raw self-graded EF/AU "rub" coins that you have for sale.
"All and all, it's just another Crawlspace in the wall". I don't need popcorn. I don't want popcorn.
Throw your weight around, roomies, if it is deemed necessary.
That's not what I am here for.
I saw enough of that when I was a Child. I used to want to crawl into that crawlspace back then.
Pete