@CaptHenway said:
In my opinion, Rick Snow is a great guy and a great numismatist who appears to have made a mistake. I cannot see letting one troll (with multiple alts) who appears to have issues with him win his vendetta by harping on that mistake.
All those on here who have never made a mistake please take one step forward. Identify yourselves.
Tom DeLorey
I sort of agree. Personally, I think he just didn't update the listing to reflect the 68. The information in his listing is 2 years old. The 68 sold 4 months ago.
But it is just a little off-putting that he didn't just say that. Instead, he tried to dismiss the 68, implicitly throwing shade on PCGS in the process.
@rnkmyer1 said: @PerryHall: your question yesterday about zinc pest prompted me to look it up. Also known as “zinc rot”, it does affect pennies in particular since 1982 since that’s their primary component. What I read was zinc was an unstable metal & perhaps prone to this. Temperature changes, liquids, et. al. also contribute.
The curious part was Rick’s allusion to tin pest. Where’s the tin in this coin? Turns out they did experiment with tin but decided on zinc instead. The tin composition was over 96% as I recall. There weren’t many of these minted, but maybe these 1943/2-S coins were minted with tin? That’s the only explanation I can come up with but didn’t find a reference that affirmed this.
From the Bowers Type Coin book (Whitman) they were made of zinc coated steel. Basically same as a bucket. No mention of tin in the composition
@skier07 said:
“2 My MS67+ is the finest known. I saw the MS68 at the FUN show auction and it was awful! It has a large tin pest spot on the reverse at 5:00. Another smaller one in the field at 11:00. Tin pest on steel cents is the kiss of death. Mine doesn’t have any tin pest. On of the other MS67+ has a large strike-through on the reverse at 6:00”
Your 67+ might be nicer than the 68 but the 68 nevertheless has a higher grade and I think your description is inaccurate and misleading at best.
I am a nobody in the world of numismatics, and as such I realize my opinion doesn't carry much weight so take this with a grain of salt if you want. With that said, while I don't know the man personally, I have always held Mr. Snow in high regard based on his awards, achievements, and overall knowledge in the field of numismatics. However, this single thread (especially his response) has diminished my opinion of him significantly. Maybe it will lead me to never purchase another coin from him, maybe it won't (time will tell), but I think this can serve as a lesson for all of us. A reputation that it takes a lifetime to build can be torn down in an instant by pride.
Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists when in his opinioin it's just not good enough, has flaws, doesn't meet his standards! Aren't we allowed to disagree? There are collectors who want only the best. Some paying for that opinion, wanting them to look at the coin for them. If I was paying, I would want the truth! On the other hand if someone is consistently badgering on every coin graded, I think this would grow unfavorable with one's credibility.
I have a coin in a MS66 holder but have studied the coin for years. It's only through a 16X loupe can I see any marks and they are extrememly faint marks. So to me, it's a MS69+ calibur coin. No-one will be able to tell me anything different unless they can show me where it's evidently flawed and couldn't ever grade that high.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@rnkmyer1 said: @PerryHall: your question yesterday about zinc pest prompted me to look it up. Also known as “zinc rot”, it does affect pennies in particular since 1982 since that’s their primary component. What I read was zinc was an unstable metal & perhaps prone to this. Temperature changes, liquids, et. al. also contribute.
The curious part was Rick’s allusion to tin pest. Where’s the tin in this coin? Turns out they did experiment with tin but decided on zinc instead. The tin composition was over 96% as I recall. There weren’t many of these minted, but maybe these 1943/2-S coins were minted with tin? That’s the only explanation I can come up with but didn’t find a reference that affirmed this.
I think he's just using the term "tin pest" in the colloquial way that people use the term "rust" for non-ferrous corrosion. I guarantee that coin is not made of tin.
Before getting wrapped up in the wording, I believe @jmlanzaf has got this right. I often use “tin pest” when describing a seemingly raised spot of corrosion or similar on a coin “white” in color, regardless of the metal.
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
@skier07 said:
“2 My MS67+ is the finest known. I saw the MS68 at the FUN show auction and it was awful! It has a large tin pest spot on the reverse at 5:00. Another smaller one in the field at 11:00. Tin pest on steel cents is the kiss of death. Mine doesn’t have any tin pest. On of the other MS67+ has a large strike-through on the reverse at 6:00”
Your 67+ might be nicer than the 68 but the 68 nevertheless has a higher grade and I think your description is inaccurate and misleading at best.
I am a nobody in the world of numismatics, and as such I realize my opinion doesn't carry much weight so take this with a grain of salt if you want. With that said, while I don't know the man personally, I have always held Mr. Snow in high regard based on his awards, achievements, and overall knowledge in the field of numismatics. However, this single thread (especially his response) has diminished my opinion of him significantly. Maybe it will lead me to never purchase another coin from him, maybe it won't (time will tell), but I think this can serve as a lesson for all of us. A reputation that it takes a lifetime to build can be torn down in an instant by pride.
Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists when in his opinioin it's just not good enough, has flaws, doesn't meet his standards! Aren't we allowed to disagree? There are collectors who want only the best. Some paying for that opinion, wanting them to look at the coin for them. If I was paying, I would want the truth! On the other hand if someone is consistently badgering on every coin graded, I think this would grow unfavorable with one's credibility.
I have a coin in a MS66 holder but have studied the coin for years. It's only through a 16X loupe can I see any marks and they are extrememly faint marks. So to me, it's a MS69+ calibur coin. No-one will be able to tell me anything different unless they can show me where it's evidently flawed and couldn't ever grade that high.
Leo
This is often referred to as “ownership bump”. It rarely happens with coins we don’t own, but obviously we like the coin we chose over others graded similarly, therefore our own eyes will often see our own coins as better and others as right or overgraded. One of the fun things about this hobby is that we can put out say 5 VF35s of the same coin, and ask 5 people which is the best, and all 5 could chose a different example!
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
Sorry, but IMHO one does not have to have this variety to have a complete Lincoln set, indeed a complete set can lack many relatively minor varieties, and I count this among the minor varieties. Collecting is supposed to be fun and interesting.
Using such silly strict rules there could only be one complete set at most with that pesky 1943-D Bronze, no?
I'm just happy having a relatively complete set, like the 55 FS-101 seems good enough, I don't need an FS-102 and that list goes on -- just as another simple example I like the 1972 FS-101, 2,3, and 6 so I don't need the rest.
Just being happy and pursing the next nice coin makes more sense.
@FlyingAl said:
I believe this coin and its ethics have been debated twice, at length, on this forum.
Rofl - as far as the clucking hen house ethics mania coffee bar agree but making money main thing conditional in numismatics arena. If he can get $10k on it kudos to him - Perhaps he has an angle lined up make it happen possibly a well off private retail client. Low pop material anything can happen - 95 yd TD breakaway. USC student body left from own 5 yd line then speedster RB 95 yd run - touchdown!!!!
@skier07 said:
“2 My MS67+ is the finest known. I saw the MS68 at the FUN show auction and it was awful! It has a large tin pest spot on the reverse at 5:00. Another smaller one in the field at 11:00. Tin pest on steel cents is the kiss of death. Mine doesn’t have any tin pest. On of the other MS67+ has a large strike-through on the reverse at 6:00”
Your 67+ might be nicer than the 68 but the 68 nevertheless has a higher grade and I think your description is inaccurate and misleading at best.
I am a nobody in the world of numismatics, and as such I realize my opinion doesn't carry much weight so take this with a grain of salt if you want. With that said, while I don't know the man personally, I have always held Mr. Snow in high regard based on his awards, achievements, and overall knowledge in the field of numismatics. However, this single thread (especially his response) has diminished my opinion of him significantly. Maybe it will lead me to never purchase another coin from him, maybe it won't (time will tell), but I think this can serve as a lesson for all of us. A reputation that it takes a lifetime to build can be torn down in an instant by pride.
Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists when in his opinioin it's just not good enough, has flaws, doesn't meet his standards! Aren't we allowed to disagree? There are collectors who want only the best. Some paying for that opinion, wanting them to look at the coin for them. If I was paying, I would want the truth! On the other hand if someone is consistently badgering on every coin graded, I think this would grow unfavorable with one's credibility.
I have a coin in a MS66 holder but have studied the coin for years. It's only through a 16X loupe can I see any marks and they are extrememly faint marks. So to me, it's a MS69+ calibur coin. No-one will be able to tell me anything different unless they can show me where it's evidently flawed and couldn't ever grade that high.
Leo
How hard is it to write "In my opinion, this coin is better than the MS68 because..."?
He doesn’t have to. He’s got the only one in the room.
Yes now I like those folks who want the best but they gonna have to pay the money especially if it’s the only one in the room. Want argue price - write a letter to CW.
@skier07 said:
“2 My MS67+ is the finest known. I saw the MS68 at the FUN show auction and it was awful! It has a large tin pest spot on the reverse at 5:00. Another smaller one in the field at 11:00. Tin pest on steel cents is the kiss of death. Mine doesn’t have any tin pest. On of the other MS67+ has a large strike-through on the reverse at 6:00”
Your 67+ might be nicer than the 68 but the 68 nevertheless has a higher grade and I think your description is inaccurate and misleading at best.
I am a nobody in the world of numismatics, and as such I realize my opinion doesn't carry much weight so take this with a grain of salt if you want. With that said, while I don't know the man personally, I have always held Mr. Snow in high regard based on his awards, achievements, and overall knowledge in the field of numismatics. However, this single thread (especially his response) has diminished my opinion of him significantly. Maybe it will lead me to never purchase another coin from him, maybe it won't (time will tell), but I think this can serve as a lesson for all of us. A reputation that it takes a lifetime to build can be torn down in an instant by pride.
Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists when in his opinioin it's just not good enough, has flaws, doesn't meet his standards! Aren't we allowed to disagree? There are collectors who want only the best. Some paying for that opinion, wanting them to look at the coin for them. If I was paying, I would want the truth! On the other hand if someone is consistently badgering on every coin graded, I think this would grow unfavorable with one's credibility.
I have a coin in a MS66 holder but have studied the coin for years. It's only through a 16X loupe can I see any marks and they are extrememly faint marks. So to me, it's a MS69+ calibur coin. No-one will be able to tell me anything different unless they can show me where it's evidently flawed and couldn't ever grade that high.
Leo
He’s free to disagree with the assigned grade of the MS68 example. But if he’s going to include the PCGS population in his listing, it’s
wrong to exclude the 68, just because he happens not to like it. Being factual and accurate isn’t the same thing as kool-aid drinking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
‘’Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists …”
It’s downright scary that board members actually suggest this. I’ll chalk it up to ”devil’s advocate” fun talk.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
@Cougar1978 said:
He doesn’t have to. He’s got the only one in the room.
Yes now I like those folks who want the best but they gonna have to pay the money especially if it’s the only one in the room. Want argue price - write a letter to CW.
You don’t seem to get it. He doesn’t have “the only one in the room”. He has one that grades lower.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@wondercoin said:
‘’Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists …”
It’s downright scary that board members actually suggest this. I’ll chalk it up to ”devil’s advocate” fun talk.
Wondercoin
I agree, Mitch. And in answer to his question (“So why say a MS68 example exists…?”) because it does exist, no matter what he or anyone else thinks of it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@wondercoin said:
‘’Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists …”
It’s downright scary that board members actually suggest this. I’ll chalk it up to ”devil’s advocate” fun talk.
Wondercoin
I agree, Mitch. And in answer to his question (“So why say a MS68 example exists…?”) because it does exist, no matter what he or anyone else thinks of it.
If he were to dislike the grade of a couple others, he could have a pop 1 coin.
And if he thinks his is undergraded like Leo, he should probably advertise the coin a a 69 no matter what the silly label says.
Auction catalogs are about to get very confusing as everyone creates their own reality. After careful reflection and consideration, I've determined that I have the only actual 1931-S Buffalo nickel in existence. Don't be fooled by the pretenders.
@willy said:
So if I own the 68 I am supposed to be happy with an expert coming out and trashing my coin saying it is awful on a public message board. When he has one in a lower grade for sale. The gang would be all over anyone else if this was a coin for sale in a current auction. Helps to be the Dealer of the year I guess.
@willy said:
So if I own the 68 I am supposed to be happy with an expert coming out and trashing my coin saying it is awful on a public message board. When he has one in a lower grade for sale. The gang would be all over anyone else if this was a coin for sale in a current auction. Helps to be the Dealer of the year I guess.
Frankly, I don't see anyone on his side.
I guess we have a couple now🤷♂️
We do. One of whom doesn't seem to even understand the issue and one of whom doesn't seem to think you need to acknowledge facts you don't like. I'm very comfortable on the other side. Very odd.
Rick should send his coin to CAC for a Gold bean since it is so much better than the 68. Or see about getting a 68+ from PCGS.
No need to argue with Cougar 1978 as he has shown in many treads. We sure have some really great honest dealers that are trying to improve the hobby and others that just want to make money at any cost.
“The term ‘finest known’ is often used to market coins.
Such usage may correctly state that a coin has been encapsulated and certified with the highest given grade but it overlooks the possibility that the coin’s particular qualities make it less desirable than other high-end examples. In some instances, finest known coins are _over_graded. In other instances, series specialists have not formed a consensus regarding which example even is the finest. Knowledgeable experts can disagree.” — Finest Known - What it Does and Doesn’t Mean In the Coin Market (CoinWeek Notes February 23, 2024)
I would agree finest known is subjective for sure. Like a car dealer saying their sedan is the “best available in its class” without backing it up. And good luck actually proving or disproving either example. However, if you add a reference, such as a pop report, you’re tying that in to build a factual case. Just like when the same car company says it’s best in class according this or that survey. Still somewhat subjective, but clearly stated to lead a potential buyer to believing it’s a fact.
Edited to add:
I still think this is a buyer beware situation. If I’m going to drop that kinda money, and I sure ain’t, I’m going to do some seriously deep dive s&€% due diligence. Not defending nor questioning this dealer. It’s just a fact of life. This business IS this business and it will always be the same. I know, I’m a pessimist and I’m part of the reason it’ll never change…. Whatever. I live in Realville.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
@usmnterorrs said:
“The term ‘finest known’ is often used to market coins.
Such usage may correctly state that a coin has been encapsulated and certified with the highest given grade but it overlooks the possibility that the coin’s particular qualities make it less desirable than other high-end examples. In some instances, finest known coins are _over_graded. In other instances, series specialists have not formed a consensus regarding which example even is the finest. Knowledgeable experts can disagree.” — Finest Known - What it Does and Doesn’t Mean In the Coin Market (CoinWeek Notes February 23, 2024)
@usmnterorrs said:
“The term ‘finest known’ is often used to market coins.
Such usage may correctly state that a coin has been encapsulated and certified with the highest given grade but it overlooks the possibility that the coin’s particular qualities make it less desirable than other high-end examples. In some instances, finest known coins are _over_graded. In other instances, series specialists have not formed a consensus regarding which example even is the finest. Knowledgeable experts can disagree.” — Finest Known - What it Does and Doesn’t Mean In the Coin Market (CoinWeek Notes February 23, 2024)
@kaz: sorry for my sloppy research. There was an experimental piece discovered some 5 years ago that was analyzed to be 86% tin. But that’s the only one known. The other components were antimony, copper & vanadium, of all things.
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
And as of a moment ago, the misstated PCGS population hadn't been corrected in the description.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
And as of a moment ago, the misstated PCGS population hadn't been corrected in the description.
I think it's pretty clear that it isn't going to be...ever.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I can understand, and give a pass, to the error in the list, initially. The pop report clearly demonstrates a factual error, as does the claim that a MS68 is a $100,000 coin.
What I don't understand is why the response wouldn't be, "Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have clearly made a mistake and will immediately correct the listing. Thanks again for the heads-up."
The response upsets me 100 times more than the listing gaff.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
That's my point, but I guess "being aware of what's out there" and "being fully informative" wasn't precise enough. Regardless of the quality, the description is less than fully informative and even contradictory in omitting the documented MS68. An informed buyer may be puzzled and won't appreciate the omission. I wouldn't. Sheesh, I'd get fired in my line of work if I published a false statement like this.
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
Price guides are just that - a guide. When it comes to scarce top pop, single digit pop material it’s a different ballgame.
Experienced players know this
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
This is the first thread in a long while where I read through each and every post before giving my take.
There's nothing wrong with being proud of something you have but there is a difference between "puffing" and misrepresentation, intended or not. I have no axe to grind with Rick; he's been in the business at least as long as I have and I respect his knowledge in the Indian/FE arena and his contributions to the hobby immensely. That said, the bottom line is that there were some factual errors in the listing. Instead of saying "Oops, my bad, let me correct that", we get a lecture about how he, the oracle, has seen the higher grade coin and pronounced it inferior along with "thanks for the free pub" and an unspoken but inferred "how dare you question me; I'll just show you and stop posting". Is he right about the 68? Maybe, maybe not. But the uncontroverted fact still stands that there is a higher grade piece out there, and his isn't it. And it's not a good look for a highly visible and respected dealer to be petulant when confronted with a simple, easily remedied misstep.
As always, jmho.
(edited for typo)
@Cougar1978 said:
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
Unfortunately Rick isn't on here much so he probably doesn't know the nature of people rallying to his cause.
@Cougar1978 said:
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
Unfortunately Rick isn't on here much so he probably doesn't know the nature of people rallying to his cause.
It’s his inventory, his business. Highly possible that could be the lowest the consignor would go.
His reputation precedes him, so if he acknowledged the MS68 but said that he considered his coin to be superior I would have been inclined to believe him.
But to refuse to even acknowledge the 68 is just plain odd.
@Cougar1978 said:
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
Unfortunately Rick isn't on here much so he probably doesn't know the nature of people rallying to his cause.
Your blowing in the wind. Take your tirekicker defamation bs game and shove it lol. It’s his inventory, his business. For all we know that could be the lowest the consignor would go.
I really don't think you have the capacity to understand the issue here. Kind of making a fool of yourself if you want my opinion, which you didn't ask for. This issue has nothing to do with asking price, the coin itself, or anything else BUT the fact that there is a significant factually incorrect part of the listing (6 in 67+ NONE graded finer) which is NOT factually correct. I also am in the group that the listing was written before the 68 coin was made, but the fact that it has been pointed out, and instead of correcting, a response was given that clearly rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, which is not really what many may have expected from such a well-respected and deservedly honored dealer who has been such an asset to the hobby. Its not really semantics here, I expect as a long time dealer for my words/reputation to speak before me, but I also would want to correct any mistakes/wrongs I have done with a CURRENT listing. Nothing can be done about yesterday, but fixing an issue that some could see as an ethics issue is pretty important to the overall hobby.
With that said, a dealer, or anyone for that matter, can market anything based on their opinion, and this dealers opinion is very highly regarded and respected, including by me. I believe there is a little more to the story here, but from looking at this "on paper" there is an issue that probably would benefit from being corrected.
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
@Cougar1978 said:
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
Unfortunately Rick isn't on here much so he probably doesn't know the nature of people rallying to his cause.
Your blowing in the wind. Take your tirekicker defamation bs game and shove it lol. It’s his inventory, his business. For all we know that could be the lowest the consignor would go.
I really don't think you have the capacity to understand the issue here. Kind of making a fool of yourself if you want my opinion, which you didn't ask for. This issue has nothing to do with asking price, the coin itself, or anything else BUT the fact that there is a significant factually incorrect part of the listing (6 in 67+ NONE graded finer) which is NOT factually correct. I also am in the group that the listing was written before the 68 coin was made, but the fact that it has been pointed out, and instead of correcting, a response was given that clearly rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, which is not really what many may have expected from such a well-respected and deservedly honored dealer who has been such an asset to the hobby. Its not really semantics here, I expect as a long time dealer for my words/reputation to speak before me, but I also would want to correct any mistakes/wrongs I have done with a CURRENT listing. Nothing can be done about yesterday, but fixing an issue that some could see as an ethics issue is pretty important to the overall hobby.
With that said, a dealer, or anyone for that matter, can market anything based on their opinion, and this dealers opinion is very highly regarded and respected, including by me. I believe there is a little more to the story here, but from looking at this "on paper" there is an issue that probably would benefit from being corrected.
You, I and others who have tried to explain the situation to @Cougar1978 are apparently beating our heads against the wall. He either doesn't read (thoroughly enough), can't comprehend clear English or prefers to just spout off. And in the process, he makes unfounded assumptions, thumps his chest and includes "lol" in many of his posts. Perhaps, he's just trying to entertain himself and doesn't care about anything else.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
Isn't this Long Beach week?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
@Project Numismatics said:
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
Isn't this Long Beach week?
If you look at the listing in question there's something at the top about him being away through the 8th so perhaps that's due to the show.
@telephoto1 said:
This is the first thread in a long while where I read through each and every post before giving my take.
There's nothing wrong with being proud of something you have but there is a difference between "puffing" and misrepresentation, intended or not....
(edited for typo)
First, thanks to all for all the valuable information on this forum from a long time lurker in learning mode (childhood coin collector with a reawakened interest) .
An advertisement is deemed false/misleading under Section 43(a) of the Lanhan Act where each of the following are shown: (1) a false or misleading statement of fact; that is (2) used in a commercial advertisement or promotion; that (3) deceives or is likely to deceive in a material way; (4) in interstate commerce; and (5) has caused or is likely to cause competitive or commercial injury to the plaintiff. Additional requirement is that falsity of claim can be shown through objective, scientific information.
"Only 6 examples are graded MS67+, none higher" seems to be a statement of fact which can be readily shown to be objectively false. Will defer to other forum members whether such an objectively untrue statement would satisfy the other elements.
Again, kind regards to all for many interesting reads!
Welcome to the forum. I lurked myself for quite some time before actively participating.
Comments
I sort of agree. Personally, I think he just didn't update the listing to reflect the 68. The information in his listing is 2 years old. The 68 sold 4 months ago.
But it is just a little off-putting that he didn't just say that. Instead, he tried to dismiss the 68, implicitly throwing shade on PCGS in the process.
From the Bowers Type Coin book (Whitman) they were made of zinc coated steel. Basically same as a bucket. No mention of tin in the composition
W> @UpGrayedd said:
Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists when in his opinioin it's just not good enough, has flaws, doesn't meet his standards! Aren't we allowed to disagree? There are collectors who want only the best. Some paying for that opinion, wanting them to look at the coin for them. If I was paying, I would want the truth! On the other hand if someone is consistently badgering on every coin graded, I think this would grow unfavorable with one's credibility.
I have a coin in a MS66 holder but have studied the coin for years. It's only through a 16X loupe can I see any marks and they are extrememly faint marks. So to me, it's a MS69+ calibur coin. No-one will be able to tell me anything different unless they can show me where it's evidently flawed and couldn't ever grade that high.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Before getting wrapped up in the wording, I believe @jmlanzaf has got this right. I often use “tin pest” when describing a seemingly raised spot of corrosion or similar on a coin “white” in color, regardless of the metal.
This is often referred to as “ownership bump”. It rarely happens with coins we don’t own, but obviously we like the coin we chose over others graded similarly, therefore our own eyes will often see our own coins as better and others as right or overgraded. One of the fun things about this hobby is that we can put out say 5 VF35s of the same coin, and ask 5 people which is the best, and all 5 could chose a different example!
Sorry, but IMHO one does not have to have this variety to have a complete Lincoln set, indeed a complete set can lack many relatively minor varieties, and I count this among the minor varieties. Collecting is supposed to be fun and interesting.
Using such silly strict rules there could only be one complete set at most with that pesky 1943-D Bronze, no?
I'm just happy having a relatively complete set, like the 55 FS-101 seems good enough, I don't need an FS-102 and that list goes on -- just as another simple example I like the 1972 FS-101, 2,3, and 6 so I don't need the rest.
Just being happy and pursing the next nice coin makes more sense.
Rofl - as far as the clucking hen house ethics mania coffee bar agree but making money main thing conditional in numismatics arena. If he can get $10k on it kudos to him - Perhaps he has an angle lined up make it happen possibly a well off private retail client. Low pop material anything can happen - 95 yd TD breakaway. USC student body left from own 5 yd line then speedster RB 95 yd run - touchdown!!!!
How hard is it to write "In my opinion, this coin is better than the MS68 because..."?
He doesn’t have to. He’s got the only one in the room.
Yes now I like those folks who want the best but they gonna have to pay the money especially if it’s the only one in the room. Want argue price - write a letter to CW.
He’s free to disagree with the assigned grade of the MS68 example. But if he’s going to include the PCGS population in his listing, it’s
wrong to exclude the 68, just because he happens not to like it. Being factual and accurate isn’t the same thing as kool-aid drinking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
‘’Just because he chooses to not "drink the kool-aid? If he doesn't believe the coin grades MS68, there's little reason to acknowledge it exists. So why say a MS68 example exists …”
It’s downright scary that board members actually suggest this. I’ll chalk it up to ”devil’s advocate” fun talk.
Wondercoin
You don’t seem to get it. He doesn’t have “the only one in the room”. He has one that grades lower.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree, Mitch. And in answer to his question (“So why say a MS68 example exists…?”) because it does exist, no matter what he or anyone else thinks of it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If he were to dislike the grade of a couple others, he could have a pop 1 coin.
And if he thinks his is undergraded like Leo, he should probably advertise the coin a a 69 no matter what the silly label says.
Auction catalogs are about to get very confusing as everyone creates their own reality. After careful reflection and consideration, I've determined that I have the only actual 1931-S Buffalo nickel in existence. Don't be fooled by the pretenders.
I guess we have a couple now🤷♂️
We do. One of whom doesn't seem to even understand the issue and one of whom doesn't seem to think you need to acknowledge facts you don't like. I'm very comfortable on the other side. Very odd.
Rick should send his coin to CAC for a Gold bean since it is so much better than the 68. Or see about getting a 68+ from PCGS.
No need to argue with Cougar 1978 as he has shown in many treads. We sure have some really great honest dealers that are trying to improve the hobby and others that just want to make money at any cost.
“The term ‘finest known’ is often used to market coins.
Such usage may correctly state that a coin has been encapsulated and certified with the highest given grade but it overlooks the possibility that the coin’s particular qualities make it less desirable than other high-end examples. In some instances, finest known coins are _over_graded. In other instances, series specialists have not formed a consensus regarding which example even is the finest. Knowledgeable experts can disagree.” — Finest Known - What it Does and Doesn’t Mean In the Coin Market (CoinWeek Notes February 23, 2024)
I would agree finest known is subjective for sure. Like a car dealer saying their sedan is the “best available in its class” without backing it up. And good luck actually proving or disproving either example. However, if you add a reference, such as a pop report, you’re tying that in to build a factual case. Just like when the same car company says it’s best in class according this or that survey. Still somewhat subjective, but clearly stated to lead a potential buyer to believing it’s a fact.
Edited to add:
I still think this is a buyer beware situation. If I’m going to drop that kinda money, and I sure ain’t, I’m going to do some seriously deep dive s&€% due diligence. Not defending nor questioning this dealer. It’s just a fact of life. This business IS this business and it will always be the same. I know, I’m a pessimist and I’m part of the reason it’ll never change…. Whatever. I live in Realville.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.
What does the following mean to you?
“Only 6 examples are graded MS67+, none higher"
Joe.
Indefensible 🙂
@kaz: sorry for my sloppy research. There was an experimental piece discovered some 5 years ago that was analyzed to be 86% tin. But that’s the only one known. The other components were antimony, copper & vanadium, of all things.
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Simple fix along the lines of “while there is a single coin graded higher by PCGS, in my opinion this coin is superior”.
The OP’s post history and the doubling down by Mr. Snow leads me to believe that they have a personal dispute possibly unrelated to this coin. Regardless, Rick should update the description.
And as of a moment ago, the misstated PCGS population hadn't been corrected in the description.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think it's pretty clear that it isn't going to be...ever.
I don't have much doubt that this is the nicest example, given Mr Snow's reputation. I just don't think it would be well received by someone looking to purchase a top pop coin. Most collectors are going to research a coin of this rarity and be aware of what's out there, so the description as written is not fully informative and inadequate without some sort of qualifying sentence.
Imagine getting a scouting report and last year's league MVP is not mentioned in the report.
The main issue isn't the quality of the coin, as compared to others of the same or higher grades. It's that the PCGS population (which includes a higher graded/MS68 example) is misstated in the listing. And despite the seller being aware of that, he hasn't corrected the listing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The listing appears to have been removed.
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
I can still see it.
Link: https://www.ebay.com/itm/186086635768
Same, here.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It’s been removed from the website…..
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
It’s no longer on his website. That was my point of reference, not eBay.
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
I can understand, and give a pass, to the error in the list, initially. The pop report clearly demonstrates a factual error, as does the claim that a MS68 is a $100,000 coin.
What I don't understand is why the response wouldn't be, "Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have clearly made a mistake and will immediately correct the listing. Thanks again for the heads-up."
The response upsets me 100 times more than the listing gaff.
Knowing the possible or potential fate of these cents long term makes it a scary proposition to own these in lofty grades.
peacockcoins
That’s one heck of a matching set Pat! Well done!!
Wondercoin
That's my point, but I guess "being aware of what's out there" and "being fully informative" wasn't precise enough. Regardless of the quality, the description is less than fully informative and even contradictory in omitting the documented MS68. An informed buyer may be puzzled and won't appreciate the omission. I wouldn't. Sheesh, I'd get fired in my line of work if I published a false statement like this.
He doesn’t need to explain anything to anybody. Did anybody in here make a counter offer? Who knows that ask price could be the lowest a possible consignor would go. He’s like a natl champ head coach possibly he saw a crease in in the defense downfield, called a play, signaled the QB…
Price guides are just that - a guide. When it comes to scarce top pop, single digit pop material it’s a different ballgame.
Experienced players know this
My guess - He possibly sold it to a special very well off private retail client. Probably getting all the money or very close.
This is the first thread in a long while where I read through each and every post before giving my take.
There's nothing wrong with being proud of something you have but there is a difference between "puffing" and misrepresentation, intended or not. I have no axe to grind with Rick; he's been in the business at least as long as I have and I respect his knowledge in the Indian/FE arena and his contributions to the hobby immensely. That said, the bottom line is that there were some factual errors in the listing. Instead of saying "Oops, my bad, let me correct that", we get a lecture about how he, the oracle, has seen the higher grade coin and pronounced it inferior along with "thanks for the free pub" and an unspoken but inferred "how dare you question me; I'll just show you and stop posting". Is he right about the 68? Maybe, maybe not. But the uncontroverted fact still stands that there is a higher grade piece out there, and his isn't it. And it's not a good look for a highly visible and respected dealer to be petulant when confronted with a simple, easily remedied misstep.
As always, jmho.
(edited for typo)
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
He probably didn't sell it to anyone. As, was already mentioned more than once, his eBay listing is still active.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
He should list it for 99c and blow it out on the bay. That will get rid of the tire kickers.
Unfortunately Rick isn't on here much so he probably doesn't know the nature of people rallying to his cause.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
It’s his inventory, his business. Highly possible that could be the lowest the consignor would go.
His reputation precedes him, so if he acknowledged the MS68 but said that he considered his coin to be superior I would have been inclined to believe him.
But to refuse to even acknowledge the 68 is just plain odd.
I really don't think you have the capacity to understand the issue here. Kind of making a fool of yourself if you want my opinion, which you didn't ask for. This issue has nothing to do with asking price, the coin itself, or anything else BUT the fact that there is a significant factually incorrect part of the listing (6 in 67+ NONE graded finer) which is NOT factually correct. I also am in the group that the listing was written before the 68 coin was made, but the fact that it has been pointed out, and instead of correcting, a response was given that clearly rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, which is not really what many may have expected from such a well-respected and deservedly honored dealer who has been such an asset to the hobby. Its not really semantics here, I expect as a long time dealer for my words/reputation to speak before me, but I also would want to correct any mistakes/wrongs I have done with a CURRENT listing. Nothing can be done about yesterday, but fixing an issue that some could see as an ethics issue is pretty important to the overall hobby.
With that said, a dealer, or anyone for that matter, can market anything based on their opinion, and this dealers opinion is very highly regarded and respected, including by me. I believe there is a little more to the story here, but from looking at this "on paper" there is an issue that probably would benefit from being corrected.
You, I and others who have tried to explain the situation to @Cougar1978 are apparently beating our heads against the wall. He either doesn't read (thoroughly enough), can't comprehend clear English or prefers to just spout off. And in the process, he makes unfounded assumptions, thumps his chest and includes "lol" in many of his posts. Perhaps, he's just trying to entertain himself and doesn't care about anything else.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Isn't this Long Beach week?
Yes….
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
If you look at the listing in question there's something at the top about him being away through the 8th so perhaps that's due to the show.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
.
Welcome to the forum. I lurked myself for quite some time before actively participating.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012