Take a look at this slabbed 1916 proof cent and tell me what you think abouit it!
BUFFNIXX
Posts: 2,735 ✭✭✭✭✭
Take a look at the following 1916 Lincoln cent slabbed across the street and tell me what u think about it,
It is on ebay and the item number is 276978156184
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
0
Comments
The coin looks underwhelming for a 66. I’d look for a CAC’d example at that level.
I’ve also had multiple issues with that seller and refuse to do business with them.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Based on the images, I would have guessed 65RB, rather than 66BN and those two grades have similar values. If that coin bothers you, countless others should, too.
When asking for members to take a look at listings and comment, you should include links. It’s easy enough to do (or learn to do if you don’t know how).
https://www.ebay.com/itm/276978156184?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You should also cut off everything after the ebay ID number to eliminate the trackers.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/276978156184
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Done, thanks.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Well the crappy pic and the mixed planchet metal make it impossible to see any diagnostics. But IF it is a MPL, it had to have been one of the last ones struck given the lack of detail in the beard. Looking thru the PCGS Trueview examples you can see others with not as sharpe rims and this one has the weakest beard detail.
https://pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1916-1c-rd/images/3326
WS
I don't like the grade on the holder.
I didn't know that. Good to know. Thanks.
I don't like the holder.
I would not pay 66 price for this coin, should I be interested. I like the comparison coin much better.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
I’m not convinced it’s a Proof based on a quick glance.
If I get a chance today I’ll see if I can die pair match it for confirmation.
At the least, it's an unflattering, uninspiring picture.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I’d say it’d be better to download the coin image and reupload here, or is that frowned upon? I say this because I believe after 90 days or so, the link will no longer work and people who read older threads will have no idea what the OP is talking about.
>
I’d say what you think would be better would, indeed, be better than what I suggested👍
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
What kind of issues?
What a confusing sale listing.
Selling this coin and showing a listing of a 66 BN CAC example. One that is MUCH more attractive too !
more from this seller:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/276258105790
note pictures of report of metal content
In one instance, they tried to pull a bait-and-switch. They sent me a certified coin of the same type and grade, but it was not the one in the listing (and was an inferior coin, of course). The listing did not state that the coin pictured was a stock photo, or anything along those lines.
In another instance, I caught them using photos of a coin I actually owned in a listing. I'm not sure what coin they would have sent if someone purchased it, but perhaps it would have been a similar situation as the one I described in the previous paragraph. Again, the listing did not state it was a stock photo.
And for a time, many of the primary listing photos they used were of a drooling baby or other obnoxious, non-coin imagery which constantly polluted my saved search results. It seems they've abated those practices but if you go deep into their old listings, you can see some of what I'm referring to. Edit: here's an example:
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
this coin is not a proof
but it is rather a pooof! as in there goes your money1
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
The coin has the look of a typical 1916, which always seems to come nice and well-struck. If it is a proof, it doesn’t appeal as such, lacks distinction. I just sold an 09 proof in 66 that is a nice coin, but looks pretty much like any nice 09. Wide rims and markers alone don’t cut for me any more.
I most definitely don't like the "chatter". Maybe that's not the word for it. I like clear fields. IMHOP the coin looks terrible.
Pete
There are things besides the coin making it look lousy. The picture isn't sharp, so it shows nothing of the razor sharp detail that makes matte proof Lincolns special. The lighting is flat, showing no fine detail on Lincoln's portrait and making the coin look dead. The slab also seems to need polishing, but that won't make up for the other issues of the photos.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I looked at NGCs site for the coin and their picture is even worse.
Huh? The sharp, squared rim says otherwise. Albeit a weakly struck proof.
I would avoid that coin. Having owned maybe 10 of these, you can take that for what it’s worth. The rim is not squared from 6-8 o’clock on the obverse, and I never buy ‘16 proofs with a weak inner obverse rim, even if the diagnostics are present. On this one I don’t see a die chip on the inner curl of the 9 either. Not a deal breaker but most of them have it.
Let someone else worry about it.
Empty Nest Collection
I will echo what @pocketchange said about this Ebay seller. For a very long time they were using a TV of one of MY Barber Halves, and showing it for sale on their web site, at an exorbitant price of course. I complained to ebay about it a number of times. I wouldn't EVER consider doing business with these guys.
I was unable to find any matching diagnostics, and with the bad images I'd highly suggest passing on this one.
From the photos this looks rather blah and not up to the grade. Maybe in hand under better lighting/viewing conditions it has a better look. Would love to see it in hand and then decide if the photos are a good representation of the coin.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
The thing about 1916 is that some of them come like that as circulation strikes.
Collector, occasional seller
A definite pass if one is looking for a true PR66 for the asking $$. This coin has too many issues as others have pointed out.
If someone tried to crack this one open and resubmit to PCGS it may just come back as a MS instead. Just look at some of the MS65 - 67 in CoinFacts to see some flat rims on MS grade coins. That would be a huge loss. JMO.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)