I never knew DCAM Frankie's were so cheap.

relayer · September 20, 2003 5:43PM

I mentioned this coin last week in the What's the most you've lost on a coin thread because I didn't have a good feeling about it, and I was right.

1963 50c PR67DCAM

It's a pop 235/192 - sold yesterday for at 16% price guide of $375 for $61 (I bought it last year for $185).

Ouch

Nice rip

Baley · September 20, 2003 7:19PM

ouchies. however, your pictures of the coin were not too flattering. Is that why you had a bad feeling?

MacCoin · September 20, 2003 8:13PM

I don't get it pr67 isn't that high of a grade for a proof coin, and you can buy 63 proof sets all day long for about $10.00 to $15.00 each. why would the coin be worth much more than $20.00. I have seen pr69 sell for less than $20.00 one day and the same afternoon the same grade come sold for $179.00. why?

IrishMike · September 20, 2003 8:51PM

They aren't usually that cheap. If you look at the picture and read the description you'll see that someone bought the coin not the holder. It has some very distracting spots in key areas. My guess is that someone dipped it at one time and did a bad job of rinsing the coin and it turned in the slab. As Karl would say this is an example of why you can't always buy coins unseen, regardless of who slabbed it.

ClausUrch · September 20, 2003 10:55PM

<< <i> I don't get it pr67 isn't that high of a grade for a proof coin, and you can buy 63 proof sets all day long for about $10.00 to $15.00 each. >>

You can look through 63 proof sets "all day long" and not come across 1 DCAM Franklin.

EvilMCT · September 20, 2003 11:06PM

I agree with ClausUrch. I've been searching/buying pre-64 proof sets over the last few months, and have only come across one 63 that was even close to FBL.

Ken

segoja · September 20, 2003 11:26PM

If those spots are on the coin, I'm surprised it brought even $61.

I've found that most folks buying cameo's want problem free coins, unless they are the real early ones, where problems are inherent.

The easier dates, like 1963 are too easy to come by nice, and cost only a few bucks more, so why not buy the eye appeal vs the holder.

I'm quite surprised that ocin made it into a 67 holder with the spots.

IrishMike · September 20, 2003 11:29PM

The seller states that they are on the coin. My bet is that they grew after the coin was slabbed. It fills a slot in a registry set.

relayer · September 21, 2003 3:59AM

The Andale counters reported it as below average so people weren't looking at it (before the sale).

Cameo Franklin's are hard to find, let alone PCGS Deep Cameo's? I think the 3 spots are what kept it at 67.

But I don't think even Lucy can find those for sixty bucks.

DCAMFranklin · September 21, 2003 4:22AM

<< <i>They aren't usually that cheap. If you look at the picture and read the description you'll see that someone bought the coin not the holder. It has some very distracting spots in key areas. My guess is that someone dipped it at one time and did a bad job of rinsing the coin and it turned in the slab. As Karl would say this is an example of why you can't always buy coins unseen, regardless of who slabbed it. >>

Absolutely! Would have been smarter to send the coin to PCGS for the grade guarantee. That coin no longer (never did) belongs in that holder.

doop · September 22, 2003 3:57PM

<< <i>I mentioned this coin last week in the What's the most you've lost on a coin thread because I didn't have a good feeling about it, and I was right.

1963 50c PR67DCAM

It's a pop 235/192 - sold yesterday for at 16% price guide of $375 for $61 (I bought it last year for $185).

Ouch

Nice rip >>

That coin is not even worth that,considering the slab # and it was a total blowut item for having irremovable,non-reducable cream of tartur solution deep,heavy milk spots. It's what is commonly referred to a full barker, dog of the ultimate degree....GET RID OF IT.......

I never knew DCAM Frankie's were so cheap.

Comments

Leave a Comment