@Copperindian, thanks Ken. Just one of those “whim” pickups. I had no intention of buying it, but really liked the look of it and said what the heck.
Zack.
@scotty1419 said:
I would have a hard time saying the obverse pictures are the same coin.
Well they are!
Zack
That's fine but the original obverse pic was misleading at a minimum.
Why did you say that the first obverse picture was misleading, rather than the second one? And why “at a minimum”? It’s not like Zack was trying to fool anyone.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I guess I could have said "compared to the 2nd picture, the first one doesn't look anything like it and wouldn't produce grade suggestions close to the 2nd". The second in slab seems aligned with the grade it got, so it's fair to assume that is a more representative photo.
If someone has the coin in hand, and it looks like the 2nd, then I don't know why they would have used the first picture to prompt grade guessing.
I understand it's not rare that pictures can look completely different - as we saw from a Morgan GTG recently that was suggested as fake based on terrible pictures.
But it seems to me if someone is going to initiate a GTG, they should try for representative pictures.
@scotty1419 said:
I guess I could have said "compared to the 2nd picture, the first one doesn't look anything like it and wouldn't produce grade suggestions close to the 2nd". The second in slab seems aligned with the grade it got, so it's fair to assume that is a more representative photo.
If someone has the coin in hand, and it looks like the 2nd, then I don't know why they would have used the first picture to prompt grade guessing.
I understand it's not rare that pictures can look completely different - as we saw from a Morgan GTG recently that was suggested as fake based on terrible pictures.
But it seems to me if someone is going to initiate a GTG, they should try for representative pictures.
Because that was the first one I took. And it was representative of the coin. I NEVER had any intentions to try and fool anyone and you suggesting that, are 100% off base. The second set of photos were taken at a different time and under different lighting conditions, that’s all.
@MsMorrisine said:
where did the striations come from?
I think those are "roller marks" or "drawing bench marks" from where the planchet strip was flattened out. Pretty common on Trade Dollars and often will be preserved on the raised parts of the design.
I think if I had seen the second set of photos I would have guessed 62, as they seem to show more random contact marks and somewhat watery luster. Still 61 seems pretty harsh and would imply a much more beat up coin than I am seeing here, I think. I still beilieve it's a beautiful coin.
So doing this GTG exercise leaves me with another question, as many of you have suggested possibly that this coin could be under graded ? How many of those that participated in this post, might be inclined to send this back to our hosts for reconsideration? This coin is in a holder that was graded quite a few years ago, when grade/flation, hadn't taken hold yet? Your opinions would be welcome, especially from those who have gone through this experience. Please be brutally honest with me. I have never done this before, but I believe this may warrant an upgrade. Thanks for your thoughts. Zack.
That depends on what your goal is. If resale, I think a slightly undergraded coin in an older holder is probably the better route to go. If you’re going to keep it long-term and you would value the image that you get then it’s probably worth submitting because I still think it could go 62. The luster apparent in the second image certainly helps.
@tradedollarnut said:
That depends on what your goal is. If resale, I think a slightly undergraded coin in an older holder is probably the better route to go. If you’re going to keep it long-term and you would value the image that you get then it’s probably worth submitting because I still think it could go 62. The luster apparent in the second image certainly helps.
Thanks for your response. I have no plans on selling, I just thought it would present itself better in an upgraded holder and more representative grade, if that’s the case.
Zack.
@tradedollarnut said:
That depends on what your goal is. If resale, I think a slightly undergraded coin in an older holder is probably the better route to go. If you’re going to keep it long-term and you would value the image that you get then it’s probably worth submitting because I still think it could go 62. The luster apparent in the second image certainly helps.
Sometimes, the first answer to a question is the best one. I think there’s a very good chance that this will be the case here.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Comments
Looks like there are hairlines from an ill advised wipe at some time in this coin’s history
Zack - congrats on a great pickup! I didn’t guess as I know zero about T$1’s. If I did, I would have been wrong (thinking 63ish).
Ken
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Copperindian II
Indy Eagles
Gold Rush
Bust Caps
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Nickelodeon
Early Walkers
Successful transactions: Eagle Eye, redraider, winesteven, renomedphys, splitaces, oreville, ajaan, Cent1225, onlyroosies, justindan, blitzdude, DesertMoon, johnnyb, Heubschgold, SunshineRareCoins, ParadimeCoins, ndeagles, Southern_Knights, pcgsregistrycollector, BruceS
@Copperindian, thanks Ken. Just one of those “whim” pickups. I had no intention of buying it, but really liked the look of it and said what the heck.
Zack.
Well they are!
Zack
That's fine but the original obverse pic was misleading at a minimum.
Why did you say that the first obverse picture was misleading, rather than the second one? And why “at a minimum”? It’s not like Zack was trying to fool anyone.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I guess I could have said "compared to the 2nd picture, the first one doesn't look anything like it and wouldn't produce grade suggestions close to the 2nd". The second in slab seems aligned with the grade it got, so it's fair to assume that is a more representative photo.
If someone has the coin in hand, and it looks like the 2nd, then I don't know why they would have used the first picture to prompt grade guessing.
I understand it's not rare that pictures can look completely different - as we saw from a Morgan GTG recently that was suggested as fake based on terrible pictures.
But it seems to me if someone is going to initiate a GTG, they should try for representative pictures.
Because that was the first one I took. And it was representative of the coin. I NEVER had any intentions to try and fool anyone and you suggesting that, are 100% off base. The second set of photos were taken at a different time and under different lighting conditions, that’s all.
I think those are "roller marks" or "drawing bench marks" from where the planchet strip was flattened out. Pretty common on Trade Dollars and often will be preserved on the raised parts of the design.
I think if I had seen the second set of photos I would have guessed 62, as they seem to show more random contact marks and somewhat watery luster. Still 61 seems pretty harsh and would imply a much more beat up coin than I am seeing here, I think. I still beilieve it's a beautiful coin.
So doing this GTG exercise leaves me with another question, as many of you have suggested possibly that this coin could be under graded ? How many of those that participated in this post, might be inclined to send this back to our hosts for reconsideration? This coin is in a holder that was graded quite a few years ago, when grade/flation, hadn't taken hold yet? Your opinions would be welcome, especially from those who have gone through this experience. Please be brutally honest with me. I have never done this before, but I believe this may warrant an upgrade. Thanks for your thoughts. Zack.
That depends on what your goal is. If resale, I think a slightly undergraded coin in an older holder is probably the better route to go. If you’re going to keep it long-term and you would value the image that you get then it’s probably worth submitting because I still think it could go 62. The luster apparent in the second image certainly helps.
Thanks for your response. I have no plans on selling, I just thought it would present itself better in an upgraded holder and more representative grade, if that’s the case.
Zack.
Sometimes, the first answer to a question is the best one. I think there’s a very good chance that this will be the case here.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.