Trade Dollar aficionados please show your 1876 PR I/I's
Realone
Posts: 18,519 ✭✭✭✭✭
supposedly there are approx 2 dozen known but I believe that number might have possibly risen slightly.
0
Comments
none here!
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
Proofs really aren't my speed.
Darn, I was hoping to see some... @Realone... Why not post yours?? Cheers, RickO
There was an NGC P64 on eBay for a while recently. Given how long it was up there, it appears the collector base for this proof variety is saturated with enough examples already.
Yes, all 3 of us.
Please help me understand the contradiction so that I can correct it.
I wrote this registry summary a number of years ago and certainly more examples have been found since then. I should update the estimate number to be more up to date.
But still, although these are rare, the number of collectors who pursue them for their collection is very, very small. My point above is that the collector base is extremely thin and fully supported by the number of available examples, I see no contradiction.
The only thing rarer than trade dollar varieties are trade dollar variety collectors
Took you long enough
How about a trade dollar variety collector focusing on only chopmarks?
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
I believe that there is only one PR die for the I/I. This date is notorious for MS PL examples that can be confused with a PR. And before one says, but it's in a TPG holder, that doesn't make it a solid. There are many 73 and 74s that are not correctly attributed.
Happy Holiday's Trade Dollar collectors, he's back!
Given the low number of PR Type I/I minted (likely 200), I think that it is more likely that just 1 set of dies was used. I have seen ~ 6-8 coins that are PR's and all share the same attribute.
I'm not sure why the 73-CC is relevant? Is the point of the public comment show that I can be mistaken? Sure, I can! I did purchase Bill's coin but never publicly claimed anything. I previously identified 5 or the 6 dies used in 1873-CC mint production and was wondering if this could have been the 6th. Many attributes were "off", some were "correct". PCGS addressed it a counterfeit, I agreed and I returned the coin. Subsequently I saw the same die in a TPG holder (which means that it was a pretty "good" counterfeit). Hey, I made a mistake in my original conclusion but I don't have enough hubris to think that I know everything. I recently debunked a 75-S in a PCGS holder (which was by far the best counterfeit that I have ever seen) so sometimes I'm correct! I have also submitted coins to PCGS and NGC where I believe that they are mistaken.
keoj
Respectfully and and constructively I'll answer your question but you wont like it. TPG's make errors both ways but IMO I have seen more coins in PR holders that are actually MS than the opposite. There are many 73 and 74 PR coins that I believe are attributed incorrectly. And then there are the cases where PR dies are retired to MS production. In this case , what separates a PR from MS?...usually intent, die prep, planchet prep, strike process, etc. They can be challenging to distinguish.. Die prep and planchet prep can result in a great PL coin (the deepest mirror coin that I own is a 77-s, better than almost all PR coins that I own). Strike relief of features (edges, stars, denticles, beads in headdress, numbers, letters, etc.) all com into play. Again, just an opinion (I'd like to think an educated one).
You and I discussed this coin three years ago and I respectfully disagreed (and still disagree). I have NOT seen a good high res image of the coin. All I'm basing this on is:
So lets review, I had an opinion. I shared it. You disagree. You pointed out that I'm not infallible and I don't know Morgan Proofs. You have an example in front of you, I don't. You don't need to convince me to be right. I'm just a crusty skeptic until I examine examples.
keoj