58, I say it may very well have a somewhat attractive tone. I owned a 1866 toned like that many moons ago. When angled in the light it was nice. Just hard to photo.
If I say something in the woods, and my wife isn't around. Am I still wrong?
@MikeInFL said:
Looks like a nice coin and somewhere in the low MS range -- I'll guess 63, but even high AU wouldn't surprise me given grading is difficult from one set of photos. The coin seems a bit too evenly colored and wonder if it had a dip sometime in the past, but that's not necessarily anything bad. The spots on the reverse don't really concern me at this grade level. I like the coin and hope you do too.
Here is the interesting part, the seller said "Great color!" Now that is what is intriguing, I have to assume he would not write it in the description if it weren't so in this day and age on the bay, and if it he is being accurate then the photo is way off. But we shall see, hoping for a nice surprise.
Thanks.
To some sellers any "color" is great color, marketing at its finest.
I'll go AU58, nice coin, just a little dark.
Comments
58, I say it may very well have a somewhat attractive tone. I owned a 1866 toned like that many moons ago. When angled in the light it was nice. Just hard to photo.
That's where I'm at also.
Pete
Louis Armstrong
To some sellers any "color" is great color, marketing at its finest.
I'll go AU58, nice coin, just a little dark.
Collector, occasional seller
Tough date, I like it a lot. I really like the reverse spots and all. MS58, MS62 on a good day.
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide