Don nailed it ... a toned coin can well be DCAM, and acknowledged as such by knowledgeable collectors, yet the lack of contrast prevents the services from awarding the designation ... you almost think there should be a designation such as TDCAM -- Toned DCAM -- to recognize such desirable coins but to let would-be (novice) buyers know it is not a black and white contrasted coin ... and, no, I don't touch that coin...
Can't NCS go to a coin and conserve only what the owner would like to have taken care of ? If so the bothersome spots would be asked to be taken care of if it was my coin. A full conservation is out of the question in my mind because of past experience with what has been returned in the past, bright white and un-natural looking coins.
If a coin was just plain ugly, yes give conservation a shot. This coin is not Plain Ugly.
one of my specialities is proof lib nicks in cameo which i have been studying for more than 30 years before anyone knew or cared about them
i also made the proof 67 cameo walker at pcgs just over two years ago still the only and current finest proof walker in cameo at pcgs
in fact i got the first proof67 deep cameo lib nick at pcgs a 1901 almost 2 years ago a total monster and totally original never dipped coin which is not like the other two wannabe deep cameo lib nicks in 67 dcam pcgs holders that are both dipped blast white coins and the 1901 blows both coins totally away
and nothing wrong with that just the way it is but a deep cameo lib nick not dipped and original is a really rare bird and especially so post 1900 and even moreso post 1903 wow wild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i loved all the responses to this thread
i guess for me you really need to understand proof deep cameo lib nicks and ALSO
MOST IMPORTANTLY
YOU NEED TO EXAMINE THIS COIN IN PERSON SIGHT SEEN TO REALLY SEE THE "LOOK" AND UNDERSTAND THIS COIN
i was asked to look at this coin and i have it in front of me right now as i am posting this
the scan is good but this coin is much MUCH better in person
the coin is a totally original coin the coin has no hairlines or spots the coin has no rub or wear on the high points the coin was in a really old ngc holder and recently resubmitted for the ultra cameo designation a no brainer for me as i see the new generation ngc holder lol so i can surmise it was recently submitted being an original coin there are some areas that just toned slightly differently than the rest of the coin such is the chances of toning on a coin that took decades to tone like this from 1910 just the way the chances of original toning takes that is what makes it original i mean if the coin was a modern prefect manufactured coin well then it would be perfect this was made and stored in 1910 not 2004 lol for what it is the coin is actually underdesignated and at worst case scenerio solid for the grade
if the coin was perfect the coin would not be real kind of like an old masters painting of rembrant they are prefection just not perfect lol
this nickel has some areas of different toning just due to moisture/atmosphere of sitting somewhere and taking on some charactor but not so much so where it hurts the coin in fact it proves the coins originality and validity and enhances the coins character with ever so slight signs of age
well EXCUSE ME I HOPE YOU LOOK AS GOOD IN 100 YEARS LOL
and the mirrors are miles deep in fact the obverse of this coin even with the medium toning is a no brainer deep cameo
the reverse ALSO deep cameo but the reverses even on the three proof 67 deep cameo lib nicks at pcgs are always not as blast contrast as the obverses also the most important aspect of deep cameo lib nicks is that both the e pluribus unum and the dots on both ends of the word cents are fully frosted to make the coin deep cameo many lib nicks are deep cameo but not these two items not fully frosted so that means no deep ultra cameo
this toned coin has both these items fully frosted which are both dots on the end of cents and the e pluribus unum fully deep ultra frosted and the coin is toned amazing THIS COIN GLOWS not in the dark lol but it glows
even with this toning the coin is amazing and ngc is really severe and strick on what they call ultra cameo which is good!!!!! to be conservative on the ultra cameo designation as usually ultra cameo pre 1916 proof coins are total monsters as per the ultra cameo designation!! if they are clean clear non hazy cloudy mirrors make sure you buy them like that if you do buy them! make sure they have a certain "look' to them too if not you might be sorry but i cant go into that here too long
this coin which i have in hand and also the monster deep cameo 1901 pcgs coin both have the same surfaces underneath the toning and i am in a unique position to had been able to examine both of these coins at my leisure for many hours the owners have been so kind!! thanks!!!!!!!!!!
the services as per this current market the way they do things is that they do not certify medium to deeply toned coins deep ultra cameo proof designation unless they are mostly non toned or i should really say the devices the majority of the devices of the coin have to be toning free and of course that is a smart move on their part but it does leave some rare toned coins that are really truly deep ultra cameo in cameo holders and i guess such is the subjective nature of grading
they have their reasons again which i will not go into here too long and again everything is subjective as per the market and in this current market such is the ways things are but as always in a state of flux think of it as a bus trip a long one lol and you are just delayed at the stop for a little bit!!
this coin mark has posted on here this coin is as deeply ultra cameoed as the 1901 pcgs coin and this 1910 is toned medium toned and also not made as watery mirrors as the typical 1901!!! 1910 coins just do not have watery mirrors well this 1910 is an exception to the rule
this coin is unique/semi unique with this type of overall look and toning medium toning but the cameo still comes through and two tome also....... a MONSTER a truly amazing coin
now a little story for you this coin and three others i know of all have this same look to them i am sure guesstimate? they came out of an old estate some years ago and all were graded by ngc a proof 64 65 66 68 also you do sometimes see very similatr coins looking like the coin mark feld posted on here similar but still light years different than this coin mark feld posted on here
i mean you can have a good copy of a rembrant and then the real thing and in person to a knowledgable eye they are totALLY DIFFERENT and rightly so
the pr66 1910 has verigrated somewhat mottled lighter color and is not that great with averAGE EYE APPEAL and has a large carbon spot on the obverse at 10 pm the other two lower graded cioins worse! now this coin the proof 68 is a total monster and is the beast! the monster overall light years best of the four coins with a trained eye looking at this coin in a strong light you cant see any of the light toning dots on the obverse and you woujld most likely miss the reverse toning on the V of liberty but this is what makes this coin original or one of many things
i just have more information and experience on which to make this statement and i have seen this coin which i think is unique in terms of the superlatives for waht it is and the 1901 both for many hours and also have been studying such coins where most others really did not know or care
also this coin has no striations on the coin and of course being so deeply ulttra cameoed was one of the first coins off of a new die i happen to know that many to most all 1910 proof nicks are heaviely sttriated well you always see them this way lol this is just the way they come even if you look in the david bowers book on indian head cents on some later date proofs dave bowers goes into this particiularity with the indians in proof and makes reference to these later date lib nick proofs too but i will not go into it as then this would be twice as long here so it is in his book also
no one will read this or care ........LOL which is okie you either love the lib nicks or NOT just make sure you collect and study what you love with a passion and with coins it is three things specialize specialize specialize!!!
well anyway i have recently seen a monster proof 67 solid for the grade with these striations and monster carnival rainbow colorful toning superb and again solid for the grade
also usually for some reason the 1910 comes with nice toning not monster but always colored more often than not in fact if you would have just showed me the reverse of this particiular coin that mark feld posted on here and ask me to guess the grade i would have said 1910
this coin is really and TRULY AND ENIGMA THE COIN IS A MONSTER DEEP CAMEO NO STRIATIONS AND IS DEEPLY CAMEOED ON BOTH SIDES AND has the look flash blast of a proof 68 and is correctly graded as such and also medium toned wild!! the graders when they see a coin like this well a once in a lifeitme thing for a lib nick they just do not know waht to think and so just grade it 68 cameo not bad as it is not maxed out in its holder
NOT MAXED OUT IN ITS HOLDER IT IS EONS BETTER THAN A PROOF 67 the color is original rare and great no hairlines or marks or nicks and again deep ultra cameo
so actually not maxed out in fact kind of like someone scoring 100% on a test and someone says well this particiular test grade is maxed out well i guess it is lol if this exam student gets a 100% the point is moot no more room to move on the cruve as it is already soooooooo close to perfection for a .lib nick it hurts not good or bad or right or wriong just the way it is again as per all the above my thoughts based on what i see and have seen and experienced for many decades searching for the chance the opportunity to see such delicious delicacies am i wrong to have done so?? well a retorical question i do not wan the answer to lol
this coin should not exist it is something i know and rarely if ever see
the only problem with this coin is the current market lol the coin will be around when the market changes again but believe me this coin will always be a monster in any market just not a monster plus plus in this current market
why you ask??
it is in the wrong holder LOL and it is only cameo on the holder when it is deep ultra cameo
but that is good i would rather if i was the owner have it like this than pay 12k-15k or more for it lol
to dip this coin should be a lower class felony lol and i do not know what would happen if the coin was conserved dipped whatever you call it i am not a coin dipper/conserver the coin even if it came out fantastic would be worth less in my opinjion than with this original surface as now the look it has is unique
might i surmise based on my 30+ years of experience with proof cameo lib nicks and with me making the first deep cameo lib nick at pcgs a proof 67 no less and also have the added unique experience of being able to examine at my own leisure of looking at both the 1901 deep cameo lib nick in proof pcgs and this coin mark feld so graceous posted on here
that i will now surmise that the coin was first off the dies and you can see it was is special well in person anyways from my minds eye
someone put this coin along with a few others away as many did in 1910 as you again see some proof lib nicks with great toning someone put these coins away somewhere most probably in a velvet lined box/case, me thinks not in an album they most probably did not have these albums back then the coins all four of them well while toning for many decades got some mositure on them or particiulars of natural toning the others are nowhere as even good and great looking as this coin and with some ever so slight toning irregularities almost unseen to the naked eye in person the other qualities combined with the monster deep ultra cameo and the toning is an extremely rare to unique looking lib nick
i mean that is why you see all these hazy cloudy filmed milky deep ultra cameo pre 1915 proof coins they got dipped to get the designation and thAT IS OKIE
NOT FOR ME BUT OKIE
i like the ones that are dipped blast white but have the crystal clear mirrors non hazy cloudy like new proof silver american eagles and some are out there like that nicee nice!!
but this lib nick is simply incredible and saved as such as special from the date it was made put awAY for postarity with a few others and this one survived the best
in FACT TWO DAYS AGO I SAW THE PROOF 66 NGC COIN 1910 the one of four as per the above AND IT IS A NICE COIN BUT DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO THIS COIN PROOF 68 MARK POSTED
again i am just a crazy small collector who likes to super specialize and look at certain coins not smart just i have more experience and have seen more that is all in an extremely small specialized field and the 1910 happens to be one of my study coins in proof lib nicks a small field in yet another small field with coins no one cares about that is why i was able to do this and see so many of them!
A TRUE ENIGMA this coin
THIS COIN is a lib nick in proof and is just not popular as other series and you never EVER SEE any coins like this if collectors and dealers do not like such coins and have not seen the likes of such coins or even understand such coins again as they usually are not seen like this not only do most not know they do not care LOL
how can they command respect hence DEMAND and then corresponding huge $$$$$ in the marketplace????
all about demand demand demand and you need supply to fuel this demand FEED THE NEED SO TO SPEAK
unless you only want the best of the best the coiners caviar the ultimate ultra cameo technically superb coin a coin that was special enough to be put away during 1910 a coin one of the first off the dies and also in person the devices miss liberty are much lighter than the fields this coin must have originally beena freash off the dies blast white monster stellar cameo monster even more deeply frosted than any current proof state quarter if you want the best then this coin is it
**** mark feld you post some great threads****
such a coin has really made me excited today
coins are a hobby to have fun with and to buy with discretionary money you can afford to lose
but to each his own
i hope everyone makes all the right decisions in coins that makes them happy for themselves without hurting anyone nor putting anyone into coins in holders where the holders make up most all of the value of the coin!
michael oh and edited for spelling
also i have seen other lib nicks with this exact type of coloring and toning just not as nice as this coin in terms of overall eye appeal just the way they sometimes tone!
Michael said the coin is original, but a few people said they don't think so without explaining why, I'd sure like to hear their reasoning.
Mark, I think I would be shocked if you decide to go thru with this.
While I am personally against cleaning/dipping any coin except for pvc damage, I understand that some peple prefer the "blast white" look, but shouldn't that be only if the coin is ugly ?
I think even most people who like dipped white coins would think this coin looks fine the way it is.
Say, my 92 S barber half has a carbon spot near one of the wheat stalks, maybe if I have NCS dipp off all the "ugly" toning that carbon spot will come out to and I could "make" the second 67, what do you think Michael ???
Les
The President claims he didn't lie about taxes for those earning less then $250,000 a year with public mandated health insurance yet his own justice department has said they will use the right of the government to tax when the states appeals go to court.
Great post, Michael, and it's nice to hear from someone with your experience and who has looked at the coin. I presume you'd call this coin a true PR69 DCAM coin, right? In any case, it IS a beautiful coin, and I'll be the first to say that a coin which is first off the presses will always be a true rarity, be it a proof or a regular business strike. Additionally, a coin that has been carefully selected and lovingly cared for over the eons is a definite rarity and thing of beauty.
I'd suggested conservation only if the spots were corrosive and possibly growing, in order to minimize future damage. If they're stable, then by all means keep the coin as is.
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
So many comments so many opinions? Nope not really most correctly state DON't DO IT! I just skimmed thru some of the comments - TDN's comments sum it up aptly!!!!!!, ditto - Clankeye totally agree - you are correcto, and then hellllooo Michael - you deserve the "expert collector" under your name - totally awsome analysis and I hope that others would realize the truth in that essay. Mark you start some super threads that's all I can say
What a neighborhood - this is why many go insane without access to the threads often - including many active lurkers like me
Michael, I'm a bit confused - I only posted this thread yesterday, so how did you write so much in such a short time? In fact, I'm wondering if you somehow started writing your reply BEFORE I posted the coin
Seriously, though, thanks for some very interesting and informed comments.
I've never known Michael to get so excited about a coin. That nails it for me. If anybody wants a dipped, white nickel then buy one, don't mess with this special coin. I'd pay a premium to the PF 68 Cam price for this example and even extra if I could reprint Michael's analysis and keep it with the coin!
As mentioned before the reason there is this question is that the grading companies are not giving out Deep or Ultra Cameo designations to heavily toned coins. This policy and the willingness of collectors to pay lots more for the designations are the reason many special coins are getting ruined.
Not being a dealer and being uninterested in any potential financial gain, I would keep it as is. I think it looks really neat and would love to own it as is.
I've decided to post this follow-up today, instead of waiting until tomorrow, as I'd originally planned.
First, thanks to everyone for some great comments and food for thought.
I decided, fairly quickly (and before even starting this thread), NOT to have the coin conserved. Even though my decision did not take long, a lot of different thoughts and considerations went through my mind. I will share them, now, in an effort, like I sometimes make here, to try to place others in the shoes of a coin dealer .......
As best I can remember, this is the order of my thoughts and emotions....
First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation.
Next, I realized that the suggestion was made because of the possibility/probability(?) that the coin would go Deep/Ultra Cameo if the toning were removed.
Then, I thought about the potential difference in value between a Cameo and a Deep/Ultra Cameo. In this case, I think it would be $2000-$3000.
I also considered the possibility that the coin would end up as another untoned/color-free, generic looking widget, devoid of the personality and uniqueness that the patina gives it.
I thought about the chances that, in addition to the consideration directly above, the coin might not even end up looking good as a PR68, whether a Cameo or Deep/Ultra Cameo - perhaps there would be white/toning residue, light streaks, haze, stains, hairlines, etc.
And, what about the possibility that the coin might turn/change in the holder after being conserved?
What if it turned/changed while in the collection of one of our clients?
And, when I can do so in a way that does not harm Pinnacle or its clients, I like to make statements against conservation of such coins. I am not opposed to certain coins being conserved, dipped, etc., but I sure hate to think of ones like this, falling victim to the current "make them white" phenomenon.
One other point that I will raise, though it did not apply in this particular instance - if the coin had belonged to a client rather than to us, regardless of my personal feelings, I would have passed on as much information (pro and con conservation) as possible to the client and let him decide what he wanted to do.
I welcome additional comments, opinions and discussion on this matter.
"I also considered the possibility that the coin would end up as another untoned/color-free, generic looking widget, devoid of the personality and uniqueness that the patina gives it."
Mark: I totally agree with you and am very pleased with your decision.
As I stated earlier in this thread: << the ONLY reason that I would even consider having this Proof Liberty Nickel conserved would be if one felt that the gray pots were active PVC or other foreign material that could potentially further deteriorate and perhaps damage the coin >>
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
<< <i>First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation. >>
I heard of this happening to MANY originally toned and high dollar coins coming back from grading. People want to use their services fine. And I understand a company needs to promote themselves.... BUT, IMO they are doing Numismatics a GREAT disservice putting their little notes on coins such as these. They are encouraging ruining great original coins for potential upgrade and the almighty dollar.
I know a couple dealers that made a phone call and blasted them for leaving these little hints to "Fix" these type of coins.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I didn't read any of the replies, except a 'bit' of Michael's'. So I don't yet know the opinions of others.
I made one of the DCAMs Michael talked about, the 1897 PR67DCAM. I've never seen the one Michael made, or the other PR67DCAM, in person. Michael and I have discussed, via PM and phone, what he thought about the 3 PR67DCAMs of the Liberty Nickel series. I both respect, and appreciate, Michael's opinion on the series. Therefore, without reading his entire reply, I think I can say he's being honest and addressed the issue from an educated point of view. I hadn't intended on reading any of the replies, until I saw Michael's mentioned in Mark's reply at the top of the page I'm repling from because I have my own opinion about coin conservation, and about this coin.
To the point; I don't believe anything should be done with this coin. First, we're looking at an image. Images can be very deceiving! From what I see I think the coin is beautiful! I don't understand why anyone would want to 'dip/correct/enhance/clean/conserve' this coin. I get so frustrated when I see threads addressing 'look what I just cleaned'. To each their own I suppose. For me this coin, in it's current state is original, don't fu** with it. What will be accomplished by doing so? Nothing, except taking another coin off the market that was once an 'original' coin and adding it to the 'doctored' catigory.
That's my opinion, for what it's worth. Prehaps tomorrow I'll read the other replies. It's bed time here on the east coast. Hopefully my opinion isn't in the minority.
thanks mark feld for a great thread and your astute updated reply totally makes sense to me preserves coins and protects the end buyers and the coins look better too as is!!
good comments carl w!!
DAM great observations
michael
and thanks everyone for all the great discussions and replies i learned much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mark, try this scenerio: If you knew and were guaranteed the coin, although currated to a blast white, would receive the DCAM and an extra $2,000.00 would go into your pocket, would you change your mind?
<< <i>First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation >>
the problem w/ your stance is, like i said before, someone ALREADY tried to "conserve" that coin & did a crappy job. it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN.
my opinion would be to leave it as is, but not becuase it's original, but because it's already suffered enough from some dipsh--'s inept attempts to "conserve" it. it is in fact a "problem" coin as is, but i don't mind the "problem", & it's unlikely to progress.
part of NCS is to render an unbiased opinion. to that end, most of the replies to leave the coin alone are fraught with emotion to save it from "whitedom" where it will languish in shame. i find myself agreeing with DK about the possibility that the coin has already been dipped and isn't original which so many feel is a sacred thing. oh well, to each their own. my position isn't to dip a coin such as this to make it blast white just for the sake of making it blast white, but rather to do what's best for the coin. again, i believe that to be what NCS does best, evaluate the coin and determine a course of action, not just do blanket cleaning on what comes across the table. to that end, i think this coin could benefit from their lack of bias/emotion and from the simple fact that they're more knowledgeable about what they do than we are.
what i find most interesting in the responses thus far is the certain knowledge that most have on four points----the coin is original, the coin will not suffer any degredation if left as is, the coin will be conserved if submitted to NCS, the coin will be less aestetically pleasing if NCS chooses to conserve. in the end for me, there is only one certainty---the coin is lovely as is---with many, many possibilities which include the fact that it may change as is or be improved if submitted for conservation.
i sure hope i don't get categorized as a "white-aholic" for these comments. anyone who's seen some of my collection will testify to the opposite. i figure i'm just a little less sentimental/emotional about the original issues which continually get bandied about and more openminded to options that are currently available.
it's been a good thread, Mark, very thought provoking.
<< <i>it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN. >>
Karl, as much as I like reading your posts, there just ain't no way you can state that with certainty. Anymore than someone can say it is an original coin with certainty.
And Keets--I really haven't noticed anybody getting too "fraught with emotion" over this. A question was posed, people have answered.
Keets, you're obviously a "white-aholic", as opposed to my sister-in-law, who is obviously a "choc-aholic". Actually, your remarks/opinions seem very well grounded and open-minded to me.
With respect to dorkkarl's comments - having examined the coin in person, I do NOT believe it to have been conserved, dipped, or whatever, previously. Just my opinion.
<< <i>Mark, try this scenerio: If you knew and were guaranteed the coin, although currated to a blast white, would receive the DCAM and an extra $2,000.00 would go into your pocket, would you change your mind? >>
Pat, as a dealer, I think I would be forced to change my mind, under the exact scenario you laid out above. Though, as a purist and collector at heart, as well as for some of the reasons/concerns I mentioned in my previous post, it would bother me. By the way, I presume you meant that the $ would go into Pinnacle's pocket and not mine, personally.
that comment of mine is based on the startling similarity of replies by the same members whenever the issue of originality/conservation/blast white v. color are raised. you just need to read between the lines a little. check out the words chosen to be in CAPS, the use of quotation marks and exclamation marks, use of icons and the overall selection of words. your a writer, Carl, you should be able to see these things without me pointing them out.
an easy example-------consider the following lines and tell me which contains emotion as posted. you will be graded!!
<< <i>that comment of mine is based on the startling similarity of replies by the same members whenever the issue of originality/conservation/blast white v. color are raised. >>
I believe I see the same from the other side of the fence as well. BTW, please don't take offense here as none is intended.... That purple Morgan you posted if it is yours, might just be the pic, but appears very dark and lusterless. Might want to get an opinion to see what could be done about it.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
it is dark but nowhere near as dark as my photographic skills have rendered it. it also has luster and a very nice Cameo appearance. the obverse portrait is especially dark but the obverse fields are very mirrored with beautiful rainbow coloring. the reverse has less contrast but nice color and Cameo.
i submitted it to NGC at the F.U.N. Show and expect it back by months end. there is some chatter on the cheek and a mean reed mark on the eagles breast which will probably limit the grade to MS61. i bought it and chose to holder it only because i like the color for the date, 1878-S. my choice would be to not dip this puppy---why make it easier to see the flaws on the coin's surface!! besides, there are times when white just ain't right.
BTW, that reverse light mark is where some of the tone has apparently flaked off.
<< <i><< it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN. >>
Karl, as much as I like reading your posts, there just ain't no way you can state that with certainty. Anymore than someone can say it is an original coin with certainty. ... With respect to dorkkarl's comments - having examined the coin in person, I do NOT believe it to have been conserved, dipped, or whatever, previously. Just my opinion. >>
hey clankeye / coinguy1, yes your right that i'm going by an digi-pic, but it's a danged fine digi-pic, & there just ain't no way, NO WAY, a NICKEL turns brown like that w/ little psychadelic spots (which experience tells me occured where the offending liquid condensed as it evaporated & caused the spots) w/out a little help from it's friends. no way in aitch - ee - ell - ell.
i'm basing my assessment purely on that.
much as i hate to admit it, keets i agree w/ pretty much everything keets spelled out in this thread.
bottom line for me, original or not, it's a mkt-acceptable coin as is. it should be marketed as a nice, yes even "interesting" coin, but please, NOT an "original" coin.
<< <i>...& there just ain't no way, NO WAY, a NICKEL turns brown like that w/ little psychadelic spots (which experience tells me occured where the offending liquid condensed as it evaporated & caused the spots) w/out a little help from it's friends. no way in aitch - ee - ell - ell >>
Karl, in case it makes any difference, the coin is an even, light golden in color, not brown, in person. Feel free to continue to "disagree" though - it's much more interesting that way.
to clarify----i really don't believe that NCS would weigh the upgrade potential of Mark's nickel in their decision to work on it or not much the same as i don't perceive that the grading services base there assigned grades on any kind of a pop report pricing sheet. i just haven't reached that level of cynicism yet. in both cases, an unsolicited choice is made to use a service, in this case, the one offered by NCS where a charge is made based on FMV. sending in this coin as an NGC PR68CAM would have a corresponding percentage fee, not one calculated on where it would subsequently grade if sent on to NGC.
to that end, they would render an unbiased opinion. i have had coins come back still in the holder and a notation that they "couldn't guarantee the surfaces would remain undamaged" by whatever they did to the coin. some may see this as a bias used by NCS to protect themselves from liability, i see it as a sensible evaluation.
Too many corrosion pits in obverse and reverse! May clean up well, but the pits will return! Buy back? I don't think so. Past history of coin tells it all and would never up-grade, just continue to corrode away!
HEAD TUCKED AND ROLLING ALONG ENJOYING THE VIEW! [Most people I know!]
NEVER LET HIPPO MOUTH OVERLOAD HUMMINGBIRD BUTT!!!
WORK HARDER!!!! Millions on WELFARE depend on you!
Keets -- point noted. Sometimes I fall a little more on the cynical side. It takes a special person to give an "unbiased" opinion . . . but that's just my biased opinion.
Comments
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
If a coin was just plain ugly, yes give conservation a shot. This coin is not Plain Ugly.
Ken
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
i also made the proof 67 cameo walker at pcgs just over two years ago still the only and current finest proof walker in cameo at pcgs
in fact i got the first proof67 deep cameo lib nick at pcgs a 1901 almost 2 years ago a total monster and totally original never dipped coin
which is not like the other two wannabe deep cameo lib nicks in 67 dcam pcgs holders that are both dipped blast white coins and the 1901 blows both coins totally away
and nothing wrong with that just the way it is
but a deep cameo lib nick not dipped and original is a really rare bird and especially so post 1900 and even moreso post 1903 wow wild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i loved all the responses to this thread
i guess for me you really need to understand proof deep cameo lib nicks and ALSO
MOST IMPORTANTLY
YOU NEED TO EXAMINE THIS COIN IN PERSON SIGHT SEEN TO REALLY SEE THE "LOOK" AND UNDERSTAND THIS COIN
i was asked to look at this coin and i have it in front of me right now as i am posting this
the scan is good but this coin is much MUCH better in person
the coin is a totally original coin
the coin has no hairlines or spots
the coin has no rub or wear on the high points
the coin was in a really old ngc holder and recently resubmitted for the ultra cameo designation a no brainer for me as i see the new generation ngc holder lol so i can surmise it was recently submitted
being an original coin there are some areas that just toned slightly differently than the rest of the coin
such is the chances of toning on a coin that took decades to tone like this from 1910 just the way the chances of original toning takes that is what makes it original i mean if the coin was a modern prefect manufactured coin well then it would be perfect this was made and stored in 1910 not 2004 lol for what it is the coin is actually underdesignated and at worst case scenerio solid for the grade
if the coin was perfect the coin would not be real kind of like an old masters painting of rembrant they are prefection just not perfect lol
this nickel has some areas of different toning just due to moisture/atmosphere of sitting somewhere and taking on some charactor but not so much so where it hurts the coin in fact it proves the coins originality and validity and enhances the coins character with ever so slight signs of age
well EXCUSE ME I HOPE YOU LOOK AS GOOD IN 100 YEARS LOL
and the mirrors are miles deep in fact the obverse of this coin even with the medium toning is a no brainer deep cameo
the reverse ALSO deep cameo but the reverses even on the three proof 67 deep cameo lib nicks at pcgs are always not as blast contrast as the obverses also the most important aspect of deep cameo lib nicks is that both the e pluribus unum and the dots on both ends of the word cents are fully frosted to make the coin deep cameo many lib nicks are deep cameo but not these two items not fully frosted so that means no deep ultra cameo
this toned coin has both these items fully frosted which are both dots on the end of cents and the e pluribus unum fully deep ultra frosted and the coin is toned amazing THIS COIN GLOWS not in the dark lol but it glows
even with this toning the coin is amazing and ngc is really severe and strick on what they call ultra cameo which is good!!!!! to be conservative on the ultra cameo designation as usually ultra cameo pre 1916 proof coins are total monsters as per the ultra cameo designation!! if they are clean clear non hazy cloudy mirrors make sure you buy them like that if you do buy them! make sure they have a certain "look' to them too if not you might be sorry but i cant go into that here too long
this coin which i have in hand and also the monster deep cameo 1901 pcgs coin both have the same surfaces underneath the toning and i am in a unique position to had been able to examine both of these coins at my leisure for many hours the owners have been so kind!! thanks!!!!!!!!!!
the services as per this current market the way they do things is that they do not certify medium to deeply toned coins deep ultra cameo proof designation unless they are mostly non toned or i should really say the devices the majority of the devices of the coin have to be toning free and of course that is a smart move on their part but it does leave some rare toned coins that are really truly deep ultra cameo in cameo holders and i guess such is the subjective nature of grading
they have their reasons again which i will not go into here too long and again everything is subjective as per the market and in this current market such is the ways things are but as always in a state of flux think of it as a bus trip a long one lol and you are just delayed at the stop for a little bit!!
this coin mark has posted on here this coin is as deeply ultra cameoed as the 1901 pcgs coin and this 1910 is toned medium toned and also not made as watery mirrors as the typical 1901!!! 1910 coins just do not have watery mirrors well this 1910 is an exception to the rule
this coin is unique/semi unique with this type of overall look and toning medium toning but the cameo still comes through and two tome also....... a MONSTER a truly amazing coin
now a little story for you this coin and three others i know of all have this same look to them i am sure guesstimate? they came out of an old estate some years ago and all were graded by ngc a proof 64 65 66 68 also you do sometimes see very similatr coins looking like the coin mark feld posted on here similar but still light years different than this coin mark feld posted on here
i mean you can have a good copy of a rembrant and then the real thing and in person to a knowledgable eye they are totALLY DIFFERENT and rightly so
the pr66 1910 has verigrated somewhat mottled lighter color and is not that great with averAGE EYE APPEAL and has a large carbon spot on the obverse at 10 pm the other two lower graded cioins worse! now this coin the proof 68 is a total monster and is the beast! the monster overall light years best of the four coins with a trained eye looking at this coin in a strong light you cant see any of the light toning dots on the obverse and you woujld most likely miss the reverse toning on the V of liberty but this is what makes this coin original or one of many things
i just have more information and experience on which to make this statement and i have seen this coin which i think is unique in terms of the superlatives for waht it is and the 1901 both for many hours and also have been studying such coins where most others really did not know or care
also this coin has no striations on the coin and of course being so deeply ulttra cameoed was one of the first coins off of a new die
i happen to know that many to most all 1910 proof nicks are heaviely sttriated well you always see them this way lol
this is just the way they come even if you look in the david bowers book on indian head cents on some later date proofs dave bowers goes into this particiularity with the indians in proof and makes reference to these later date lib nick proofs too but i will not go into it as then this would be twice as long here so it is in his book also
no one will read this or care ........LOL which is okie you either love the lib nicks or NOT just make sure you collect and study what you love with a passion and with coins it is three things specialize specialize specialize!!!
well anyway i have recently seen a monster proof 67 solid for the grade with these striations and monster carnival rainbow colorful toning superb and again solid for the grade
also usually for some reason the 1910 comes with nice toning not monster but always colored more often than not
in fact if you would have just showed me the reverse of this particiular coin that mark feld posted on here and ask me to guess the grade i would have said 1910
this coin is really and TRULY AND ENIGMA THE COIN IS A MONSTER DEEP CAMEO NO STRIATIONS AND IS DEEPLY CAMEOED ON BOTH SIDES AND has the look flash blast of a proof 68 and is correctly graded as such and also medium toned wild!!
the graders when they see a coin like this well a once in a lifeitme thing for a lib nick they just do not know waht to think and so just grade it 68 cameo not bad as it is not maxed out in its holder
NOT MAXED OUT IN ITS HOLDER IT IS EONS BETTER THAN A PROOF 67 the color is original rare and great no hairlines or marks or nicks and again deep ultra cameo
so actually not maxed out in fact kind of like someone scoring 100% on a test and someone says well this particiular test grade is maxed out well i guess it is lol
if this exam student gets a 100% the point is moot no more room to move on the cruve as it is already soooooooo close to perfection for a .lib nick it hurts not good or bad or right or wriong just the way it is again as per all the above my thoughts based on what i see and have seen and experienced for many decades searching for the chance the opportunity to see such delicious delicacies am i wrong to have done so?? well a retorical question i do not wan the answer to lol
this coin should not exist it is something i know and rarely if ever see
the only problem with this coin is the current market lol the coin will be around when the market changes again but believe me this coin will always be a monster in any market just not a monster plus plus in this current market
why you ask??
it is in the wrong holder LOL
and it is only cameo on the holder when it is deep ultra cameo
but that is good i would rather if i was the owner have it like this than pay 12k-15k or more for it lol
to dip this coin should be a lower class felony lol
and i do not know what would happen if the coin was conserved dipped whatever you call it i am not a coin dipper/conserver
the coin even if it came out fantastic would be worth less in my opinjion than with this original surface as now the look it has is unique
might i surmise based on my 30+ years of experience with proof cameo lib nicks and with me making the first deep cameo lib nick at pcgs a proof 67 no less and also have the added unique experience of being able to examine at my own leisure of looking at both the 1901 deep cameo lib nick in proof pcgs and this coin mark feld so graceous posted on here
that i will now surmise that the coin was first off the dies and you can see it was is special well in person anyways from my minds eye
someone put this coin along with a few others away as many did in 1910 as you again see some proof lib nicks with great toning someone put these coins away somewhere most probably in a velvet lined box/case, me thinks not in an album
they most probably did not have these albums back then the coins all four of them well while toning for many decades got some mositure on them or particiulars of natural toning
the others are nowhere as even good and great looking as this coin and with some ever so slight toning irregularities almost unseen to the naked eye in person the other qualities combined with the monster deep ultra cameo and the toning is an extremely rare to unique looking lib nick
i mean that is why you see all these hazy cloudy filmed milky deep ultra cameo pre 1915 proof coins they got dipped to get the designation and thAT IS OKIE
NOT FOR ME BUT OKIE
i like the ones that are dipped blast white but have the crystal clear mirrors non hazy cloudy like new proof silver american eagles and some are out there like that nicee nice!!
but this lib nick is simply incredible and saved as such as special from the date it was made put awAY for postarity with a few others and this one survived the best
in FACT TWO DAYS AGO I SAW THE PROOF 66 NGC COIN 1910 the one of four as per the above AND IT IS A NICE COIN BUT DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO THIS COIN PROOF 68 MARK POSTED
again i am just a crazy small collector who likes to super specialize and look at certain coins not smart just i have more experience and have seen more that is all in an extremely small specialized field and the 1910 happens to be one of my study coins in proof lib nicks a small field in yet another small field with coins no one cares about that is why i was able to do this and see so many of them!
A TRUE ENIGMA this coin
THIS COIN is a lib nick in proof and is just not popular as other series and
you never EVER SEE any coins like this
if collectors and dealers do not like such coins and have not seen the likes of such coins or even understand such coins again as they usually are not seen like this
not only do most not know they do not care LOL
how can they command respect hence DEMAND and then corresponding huge $$$$$ in the marketplace????
all about demand demand demand
and you need supply to fuel this demand FEED THE NEED SO TO SPEAK
unless you only want the best of the best the coiners caviar the ultimate ultra cameo technically superb coin a coin that was special enough to be put away during 1910 a coin one of the first off the dies and also in person the devices miss liberty are much lighter than the fields this coin must have originally beena freash off the dies blast white monster stellar cameo monster even more deeply frosted than any current proof state quarter if you want the best then this coin is it
**** mark feld you post some great threads****
such a coin has really made me excited today
coins are a hobby
to have fun with
and to buy with discretionary money you can afford to lose
but to each his own
i hope everyone makes all the right decisions in coins that makes them happy for themselves without hurting anyone nor putting anyone into coins in holders where the holders make up most all of the value of the coin!
michael
oh and edited for spelling
also i have seen other lib nicks with this exact type of coloring and toning just not as nice as this coin in terms of overall eye appeal just the way they sometimes tone!
<< <i>to dip this coin should be a lower class felony >>
Whew! What a post.
Enjoyed reading that Michael. And I truly appreciate your insight on this coin.
That was a good read.
Clankeye
Mark, I think I would be shocked if you decide to go thru with this.
While I am personally against cleaning/dipping any coin except for pvc damage, I understand that some peple prefer the "blast white" look, but shouldn't that be only if the coin is ugly ?
I think even most people who like dipped white coins would think this coin looks fine the way it is.
Say, my 92 S barber half has a carbon spot near one of the wheat stalks, maybe if I have NCS dipp off all the "ugly" toning that carbon spot will come out to and I could "make" the second 67, what do you think Michael ???
Les
I'd suggested conservation only if the spots were corrosive and possibly growing, in order to minimize future damage. If they're stable, then by all means keep the coin as is.
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
Clankeye totally agree - you are correcto, and then hellllooo Michael - you deserve the "expert collector" under your name - totally awsome analysis and I hope that others would realize the truth in that essay. Mark you start some super threads that's all I can say
What a neighborhood - this is why many go insane without access to the threads often - including many active lurkers like me
Marc
Seriously, though, thanks for some very interesting and informed comments.
As mentioned before the reason there is this question is that the grading companies are not giving out Deep or Ultra Cameo designations to heavily toned coins. This policy and the willingness of collectors to pay lots more for the designations are the reason many special coins are getting ruined.
First, thanks to everyone for some great comments and food for thought.
I decided, fairly quickly (and before even starting this thread), NOT to have the coin conserved. Even though my decision did not take long, a lot of different thoughts and considerations went through my mind. I will share them, now, in an effort, like I sometimes make here, to try to place others in the shoes of a coin dealer
As best I can remember, this is the order of my thoughts and emotions....
First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation.
Next, I realized that the suggestion was made because of the possibility/probability(?) that the coin would go Deep/Ultra Cameo if the toning were removed.
Then, I thought about the potential difference in value between a Cameo and a Deep/Ultra Cameo. In this case, I think it would be $2000-$3000.
I also considered the possibility that the coin would end up as another untoned/color-free, generic looking widget, devoid of the personality and uniqueness that the patina gives it.
I thought about the chances that, in addition to the consideration directly above, the coin might not even end up looking good as a PR68, whether a Cameo or Deep/Ultra Cameo - perhaps there would be white/toning residue, light streaks, haze, stains, hairlines, etc.
And, what about the possibility that the coin might turn/change in the holder after being conserved?
What if it turned/changed while in the collection of one of our clients?
And, when I can do so in a way that does not harm Pinnacle or its clients, I like to make statements against conservation of such coins. I am not opposed to certain coins being conserved, dipped, etc., but I sure hate to think of ones like this, falling victim to the current "make them white" phenomenon.
One other point that I will raise, though it did not apply in this particular instance - if the coin had belonged to a client rather than to us, regardless of my personal feelings, I would have passed on as much information (pro and con conservation) as possible to the client and let him decide what he wanted to do.
I welcome additional comments, opinions and discussion on this matter.
You are a coins best friend. Good for you.
As I stated earlier in this thread: << the ONLY reason that I would even consider having this Proof Liberty Nickel conserved would be if one felt that the gray pots were active PVC or other foreign material that could potentially further deteriorate and perhaps damage the coin >>
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
<< <i>First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation. >>
I heard of this happening to MANY originally toned and high dollar coins coming back from grading. People want to use their services fine. And I understand a company needs to promote themselves.... BUT, IMO they are doing Numismatics a GREAT disservice putting their little notes on coins such as these. They are encouraging ruining great original coins for potential upgrade and the almighty dollar.
I know a couple dealers that made a phone call and blasted them for leaving these little hints to "Fix" these type of coins.
I made one of the DCAMs Michael talked about, the 1897 PR67DCAM. I've never seen the one Michael made, or the other PR67DCAM, in person. Michael and I have discussed, via PM and phone, what he thought about the 3 PR67DCAMs of the Liberty Nickel series. I both respect, and appreciate, Michael's opinion on the series. Therefore, without reading his entire reply, I think I can say he's being honest and addressed the issue from an educated point of view. I hadn't intended on reading any of the replies, until I saw Michael's mentioned in Mark's reply at the top of the page I'm repling from because I have my own opinion about coin conservation, and about this coin.
To the point; I don't believe anything should be done with this coin. First, we're looking at an image. Images can be very deceiving! From what I see I think the coin is beautiful! I don't understand why anyone would want to 'dip/correct/enhance/clean/conserve' this coin. I get so frustrated when I see threads addressing 'look what I just cleaned'. To each their own I suppose. For me this coin, in it's current state is original, don't fu** with it. What will be accomplished by doing so? Nothing, except taking another coin off the market that was once an 'original' coin and adding it to the 'doctored' catigory.
That's my opinion, for what it's worth. Prehaps tomorrow I'll read the other replies. It's bed time here on the east coast. Hopefully my opinion isn't in the minority.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
<< <i>I've decided, fairly quickly (and before even starting this thread), NOT to have the coin conserved... >>
Jade Rare Coin eBay Listings
thanks mark feld for a great thread and your astute updated reply totally makes sense to me
preserves coins and protects the end buyers and the coins look better too as is!!
good comments carl w!!
DAM great observations
michael
and thanks everyone for all the great discussions and replies i learned much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<< <i>First, I was disappointed, insulted (on behalf of the coin) and upset, that someone would suggest that such a nice, original coin be sent in for conservation >>
the problem w/ your stance is, like i said before, someone ALREADY tried to "conserve" that coin & did a crappy job. it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN.
my opinion would be to leave it as is, but not becuase it's original, but because it's already suffered enough from some dipsh--'s inept attempts to "conserve" it. it is in fact a "problem" coin as is, but i don't mind the "problem", & it's unlikely to progress.
K S
<< <i>There is an option when submitting to NCS, to pay a 1% (of the insured value) fee for grade insurance/protection.
I mention this, in case it might affect anyone's answer. >>
I didnt know this, and it probably would affect my decision in some cases.
Very good thread Mark.
part of NCS is to render an unbiased opinion. to that end, most of the replies to leave the coin alone are fraught with emotion to save it from "whitedom" where it will languish in shame. i find myself agreeing with DK about the possibility that the coin has already been dipped and isn't original which so many feel is a sacred thing. oh well, to each their own. my position isn't to dip a coin such as this to make it blast white just for the sake of making it blast white, but rather to do what's best for the coin. again, i believe that to be what NCS does best, evaluate the coin and determine a course of action, not just do blanket cleaning on what comes across the table. to that end, i think this coin could benefit from their lack of bias/emotion and from the simple fact that they're more knowledgeable about what they do than we are.
what i find most interesting in the responses thus far is the certain knowledge that most have on four points----the coin is original, the coin will not suffer any degredation if left as is, the coin will be conserved if submitted to NCS, the coin will be less aestetically pleasing if NCS chooses to conserve. in the end for me, there is only one certainty---the coin is lovely as is---with many, many possibilities which include the fact that it may change as is or be improved if submitted for conservation.
i sure hope i don't get categorized as a "white-aholic" for these comments. anyone who's seen some of my collection will testify to the opposite. i figure i'm just a little less sentimental/emotional about the original issues which continually get bandied about and more openminded to options that are currently available.
it's been a good thread, Mark, very thought provoking.
al h.
<< <i>it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN. >>
Karl, as much as I like reading your posts, there just ain't no way you can state that with certainty. Anymore than someone can say it is an original coin with certainty.
And Keets--I really haven't noticed anybody getting too "fraught with emotion" over this. A question was posed, people have answered.
Clankeye
Actually, your remarks/opinions seem very well grounded and open-minded to me.
With respect to dorkkarl's comments - having examined the coin in person, I do NOT believe it to have been conserved, dipped, or whatever, previously. Just my opinion.
<< <i>Mark, try this scenerio: If you knew and were guaranteed the coin, although currated to a blast white, would receive the DCAM and an extra $2,000.00 would go into your pocket, would you change your mind? >>
Pat, as a dealer, I think I would be forced to change my mind, under the exact scenario you laid out above. Though, as a purist and collector at heart, as well as for some of the reasons/concerns I mentioned in my previous post, it would bother me. By the way, I presume you meant that the $ would go into Pinnacle's pocket and not mine, personally.
that comment of mine is based on the startling similarity of replies by the same members whenever the issue of originality/conservation/blast white v. color are raised. you just need to read between the lines a little. check out the words chosen to be in CAPS, the use of quotation marks and exclamation marks, use of icons and the overall selection of words. your a writer, Carl, you should be able to see these things without me pointing them out.
an easy example-------consider the following lines and tell me which contains emotion as posted. you will be graded!!
1. leave it as it is.
2. LEAVE it as it is!!!!!
al h.
<< <i>that comment of mine is based on the startling similarity of replies by the same members whenever the issue of originality/conservation/blast white v. color are raised. >>
I believe I see the same from the other side of the fence as well. BTW, please don't take offense here as none is intended.... That purple Morgan you posted if it is yours, might just be the pic, but appears very dark and lusterless. Might want to get an opinion to see what could be done about it.
it is dark but nowhere near as dark as my photographic skills have rendered it. it also has luster and a very nice Cameo appearance. the obverse portrait is especially dark but the obverse fields are very mirrored with beautiful rainbow coloring. the reverse has less contrast but nice color and Cameo.
i submitted it to NGC at the F.U.N. Show and expect it back by months end. there is some chatter on the cheek and a mean reed mark on the eagles breast which will probably limit the grade to MS61. i bought it and chose to holder it only because i like the color for the date, 1878-S. my choice would be to not dip this puppy---why make it easier to see the flaws on the coin's surface!!
BTW, that reverse light mark is where some of the tone has apparently flaked off.
al h.
<< <i><< it obviously suffers from residual effects of an improper dip, which is the reason for the color. it is NOT AN ORIGINAL COIN. >>
Karl, as much as I like reading your posts, there just ain't no way you can state that with certainty. Anymore than someone can say it is an original coin with certainty.
...
With respect to dorkkarl's comments - having examined the coin in person, I do NOT believe it to have been conserved, dipped, or whatever, previously. Just my opinion. >>
hey clankeye / coinguy1, yes your right that i'm going by an digi-pic, but it's a danged fine digi-pic, & there just ain't no way, NO WAY, a NICKEL turns brown like that w/ little psychadelic spots (which experience tells me occured where the offending liquid condensed as it evaporated & caused the spots) w/out a little help from it's friends. no way in aitch - ee - ell - ell.
i'm basing my assessment purely on that.
much as i hate to admit it, keets i agree w/ pretty much everything keets spelled out in this thread.
bottom line for me, original or not, it's a mkt-acceptable coin as is. it should be marketed as a nice, yes even "interesting" coin, but please, NOT an "original" coin.
K S
The Bay of Eee awaits you--piece by piece.
Clankeye
al h.
K S
<< <i>...& there just ain't no way, NO WAY, a NICKEL turns brown like that w/ little psychadelic spots (which experience tells me occured where the offending liquid condensed as it evaporated & caused the spots) w/out a little help from it's friends. no way in aitch - ee - ell - ell >>
Karl, in case it makes any difference, the coin is an even, light golden in color, not brown, in person. Feel free to continue to "disagree" though - it's much more interesting that way.
<< <i>Karl, in case it makes any difference, the coin is an even, light golden in color, not brown, in person >>
As piece one of Karl of Dork goes hurtling towards the cold, cruel, Bay of Eee.
Keets, nice plug for NCS ( I do like their work), but anyone who stands to make a buck is obviously biased. It's unavoidable.
to clarify----i really don't believe that NCS would weigh the upgrade potential of Mark's nickel in their decision to work on it or not much the same as i don't perceive that the grading services base there assigned grades on any kind of a pop report pricing sheet. i just haven't reached that level of cynicism yet. in both cases, an unsolicited choice is made to use a service, in this case, the one offered by NCS where a charge is made based on FMV. sending in this coin as an NGC PR68CAM would have a corresponding percentage fee, not one calculated on where it would subsequently grade if sent on to NGC.
to that end, they would render an unbiased opinion. i have had coins come back still in the holder and a notation that they "couldn't guarantee the surfaces would remain undamaged" by whatever they did to the coin. some may see this as a bias used by NCS to protect themselves from liability, i see it as a sensible evaluation.
al h.
reading Michaels thread makes it sound like one of the top 3 coins for the entire series
Pretty easy to leave it the way it is and pass on the decision to the next owner
you mentioned a few times that this would increase the value possibly $2000-$3000, but that does not help me percentage wise -
Is this a $3000 -> $5/6000 decision
a $10,000 -> $12/13,000 decision
a $15,000 -> $17/18,000 decision
If the coin is truly as great as you say - you could just list it for that more
NEVER LET HIPPO MOUTH OVERLOAD HUMMINGBIRD BUTT!!!
WORK HARDER!!!!
Millions on WELFARE depend on you!
Keets -- point noted. Sometimes I fall a little more on the cynical side. It takes a special person to give an "unbiased" opinion . . . but that's just my biased opinion.