What would you bid on a 1969 Proof set, sight unseen

CouchP · February 20, 2003 9:54AM

Any takers?

MadMarty · February 20, 2003 9:56AM

$5

DanC · February 20, 2003 9:56AM

Sans a picture... perhaps a description would assist in determining?

Sight unseen, without a description? $8.50

dwood · February 20, 2003 9:58AM

$8.51

Russ · February 20, 2003 9:58AM

Are you selling one, or needing to get a value so you can buy one? They're usually about $8 or so.

Russ, NCNE

Baley · February 20, 2003 9:58AM

can i paypal it or do i have to mail a check?

maybe five bucks if it's easy, not interested if I have to go to any trouble

gmarguli · February 20, 2003 9:59AM

Bid is $6.25, so I would say $4.00 and flip it to a dealer for $5.

CouchP · February 20, 2003 10:03AM

Man you guys realize there are like 6 replies within 5 minutes of me posting?

It is an auction here in town. I cannot open the cardboard cover to see it.

There is also an 1848 Large cent, looks au or better to me, no wear that I can tell except on the wheat leaves on reverse are red, the rest is brown and has some green over, but deosnt seem to have any pitting.

BillJones · February 20, 2003 10:03AM

A week ago I handed a 1964 Proof set with the worst Proof JFK half dollar that I have ever seen. The set was in its original flat pack and had not been tampered with. The obverse of this coin was so badly corroded that it was hardly recognizable. What happened? Was there acid on the coin when it was packaged?

After seeing that piece I’d be reluctant to pay over melt for most any Proof set sight unseen. Things can go horribly wrong.

braddick · February 20, 2003 10:04AM

And I'd have no problem buying them all day long from Greg and flipping them on eBay at about $8.00 a pop. Who knows? A few might even have that much sought after DCAM!

cladking · February 20, 2003 10:13AM

It's usually safe to pay bid for modern mint and proof sets sight unseen. They
are not usually picked over to any significant degree. The '69 set is worth about
a 10% premium if you know it's original. While there are some clunkers in some
sets and some sets that are all clunkers it is superstitious to believe the sets
can't be purchased without an inspection because of one badly tarnished half dollar.

gmarguli · February 20, 2003 10:14AM

Braddick, I've got $6000 worth of proof/mint sets sitting in a box right next to me. Want to buy a few?

If you can get $8 for a 1969 (28% above bid), then you can make a fortune off of mine. My records shows I have (19) of the 1969 sets and about 400 others. I'll let them go a little back of bid.

Russ · February 20, 2003 10:17AM

Bill,

I've seen more than my share of those 1964 disasters myself.

Russ, NCNE

cointoast · February 20, 2003 10:33AM

And you would know eh Russ???

Russ · February 20, 2003 10:35AM

Know what, cointoast? That a lot of 1964 sets have problem coins in them? Why, yes, I do know that.

Russ, NCNE

MacCoin · February 20, 2003 11:06AM

7.50 is this an auction

BillJones · February 20, 2003 11:07AM

Yes, Russ, the one I had was light gray in color and had a powdery look to it that almost looked like an oxidizing zinc cent. The coin was so far gone that you could barely see JKF and the date. This coin was well beyond tarnished.

cladking · February 20, 2003 11:33AM

<< <i>Yes, Russ, the one I had was light gray in color and had a powdery look to it that almost looked like an oxidizing zinc cent. The coin was so far gone that you could barely see JKF and the date. This coin was well beyond tarnished. >>

At the risk of pointing out the obvious the thread was about 1969 mint sets.
The condition of a 90% silver half that doesn't even appear in a '69 set is
hardly relevant.

braddick · February 20, 2003 11:33AM

Are they unopened?

If so, please PM me. I've seen success on eBay for UNopened earlier proof sets.

Russ · February 20, 2003 11:43AM

Cladking,

The fundamental issue of storage and environment applies equally well to a 1969 set. Both of these issues have been out there a long time and, unless properly stored, both are subject to plenty of problems. While the plastic case of the 1969 set does serve to reduce some issues, such as hairlining and rub, it still isn't effective protection against humidity, chemicals and other factors that the set might be exposed to over a 30+ year period.

Russ, NCNE

cladking · February 20, 2003 11:55AM

There are certainly similarities between '64 and '69 proof sets, not the least of
which is that they are from the same era. The packaging is somewhat different.
Billjones experience notwithstanding there is relarively little similarity between
these sets. Surely a 90%half dollar "beyond corroded" in a flat pack pliofilm packet
has little bearing on the clad and silver clad coins in a '69 plastic case. There are lots
of great coins from the era and generally they can be purchased sight unseen.

GaCoinGuy · February 20, 2003 12:06PM

Sight unseen, I'd go no higher than $7-$8, theres always a chance to pull a DCAM out, but they are hard to find without haze. I've bought several over the past few weeks and have found a few nice cameo coins, mostly brilliant..........some pretty, some hideous.

GMarguli, any DCAMs in that bunch of 69s?

TomB · February 20, 2003 12:23PM

Ninety-one cents.

gmarguli · February 20, 2003 12:59PM

GMarguli, any DCAMs in that bunch of 69s?

Possibly. I haven't really looked thru most of the sets yet. I'm hoping to get thru most of them in the next few days. I figure I'll submit any nice coins at Long Beach.

What would you bid on a 1969 Proof set, sight unseen

Comments

Leave a Comment