Ouch!

JxnBoy · January 18, 2004 1:48AM

1918 over 7 Standing Liberty

First off, I say, what a shame that this piece is sooooo damaged. That said, this piece in any condition is worth something, if it is in fact an 8/7.

Secondly, there's enough worn off the date that it's really hard to look at and identify as an 8/7. It looks like there was a die break around the date, which I've seen on SLQ's before, but either that damage has helped to obliterate some of the details of the overdate, or perhaps it's not.

What does anyone else think?

David

goose3 · January 18, 2004 1:51AM

doesn't look like an 8/7 to me.
the inside of the top of the 8 still appears to be round.

"Just a few scratches"

LucyBop · January 18, 2004 1:51AM

hmmmm......

that poor coin.....

hamiltonjh · January 18, 2004 1:53AM

lets try this again.....stupid laptop....

quote from seller: This coin has a few scratches and gouges but it will still fill that hole.

nepbrs44 · January 18, 2004 1:54AM

Tassa · January 18, 2004 2:00AM

That poor coin looks almost as pitiful as the coin Jeremy tortured and sent in to ANACS.

kranky · January 18, 2004 4:25AM

I don't think that's the overdate.

NoGvmnt · January 18, 2004 4:49AM

I wouldn't even consider paying Melt for that disgrace. Any collector who would put THAT in his/her collection would be conveying exactly how much of a true "collector" they are. THAT THING would definately lower the entire value of any collection, better to have the empty hole.

Jim

Conder101 · January 18, 2004 5:01PM

<< <i>I wouldn't even consider paying Melt for that disgrace. Any collector who would put THAT in his/her collection would be conveying exactly how much of a true "collector" they are. THAT THING would definately lower the entire value of any collection, better to have the empty hole >>

I don't understand this comment at all. It seems to be implying that anyone who puts a damaged coin in their collection isn't much of a collector and that it would be better if damaged RARE coins were disposed of! Well I'm sorry, I know this is the "Hobby of Kings" and I don't happen to be wealthy but I do like to be able to complete my collections. If that means that all I am able to afford is a damaged example of a rare coin so be it. And I would definitely consider them to be more of a collector than some people who adhere to the "Box of 20" theory of coin collecting. Yes the box of 20 may have better prospects for a good return but in most cass I have never seen them as much of a collection. More of a knowledgable accumulation.

PutTogether · January 18, 2004 5:16PM

I kind of agree with condor on that one.

sumnom · January 18, 2004 5:19PM

Gosh, what are we to make of Lard Marcoven????

lordmarcovan · January 18, 2004 5:27PM

coppercoins · January 18, 2004 5:48PM

I also agree with conder (not condor - that's a bird) on that one. You fill the hole then go for the better one if you need to.

Thing is, I also agree with others that this is not the 1918/7....and if it were, I'd be reserved to stick $500 on the table for that one.

Rampage · January 18, 2004 11:00PM

<< <i>

<< <i>I wouldn't even consider paying Melt for that disgrace. Any collector who would put THAT in his/her collection would be conveying exactly how much of a true "collector" they are. THAT THING would definately lower the entire value of any collection, better to have the empty hole >>

NoGvmnt-

How would that lower the value of a collection?! I would not be ashamed to put a damaged RARE coin in my collection at all. The purpose of coin collecting is to enjoy the hobby and not go broke. It is also nice to enjoy an occassional upgrade. No need to refinance the house just to buy a RARE coin is high grade bcause someone says you should.

>>

I don't understand this comment at all. It seems to be implying that anyone who puts a damaged coin in their collection isn't much of a collector and that it would be better if damaged RARE coins were disposed of! Well I'm sorry, I know this is the "Hobby of Kings" and I don't happen to be wealthy but I do like to be able to complete my collections. If that means that all I am able to afford is a damaged example of a rare coin so be it. And I would definitely consider them to be more of a collector than some people who adhere to the "Box of 20" theory of coin collecting. Yes the box of 20 may have better prospects for a good return but in most cass I have never seen them as much of a collection. More of a knowledgable accumulation. >>

Conder-

Thank you for posting this comment. I am not wealthy either, but I love this hobby. I have no problems buying low grade or damaged coins until I can afford a better quality. And, even then, I may not buy a better quality. I just love what I collect and on super rare coins, to me, grades don't matter.

airplanenut · January 18, 2004 11:18PM

<< <i>That poor coin looks almost as pitiful as the coin Jeremy tortured and sent in to ANACS. >>

Ask and ye shall receive:

baccaruda · January 18, 2004 11:42PM

This coin has a few scratches and gouges but it will still fill that hole.

Well, as long as the hole isn't round it'll fit I guess.

ealandg · January 19, 2004 3:13AM

I agree about the damaged coins. Of course we would all like to have a perfect specimen, but I sure wouldn't kick a 1895P morgan out of my album if it were scratched or cleaned. It can be very exciting to get that hole filled, especially if you are new to collecting.

JxnBoy · January 19, 2004 5:07AM

I'm happy to see that this thread has inspired a number of opinions.

Since I'm an avid SLQ collector, I'm often searching the bay for SLQ's, hence my find and post of this coin.

Since I started it, I'll add to the thread as well. I agree with Conder. Not everyone has an infinite amount of money to complete a collection or set. With just 38 coins, the SLQ may look easy, but there are so many keys (16, 21, 23-s, 8/7), semi-keys (19-d, 19-s, just about any branch mint with decent head detail...) it's really tough to put together. I've been working on my set for over three years now, and have bought relatively few other coins.

I didn't see this as an overdate either, and I don't think anyone did.

That said, even with the amount of damage, it's got at least low end VF detail, and a true VF 8/7 is in the thousands - and not just one or two. I'd have gladly paid between $100 and $200 for something like this to fill the hole (even though, as barracuda points out, it may not fit into a round hole!)

Alas, this seems to be a plain old 18-s with a die break/cud, worth perhaps $5 or $10 tops for a variety collector. And not me...

David

millennium · January 19, 2004 5:16AM

Hear! Hear! My hat's off to conder!....Well stated..and thanks from the "COLLECTORS" among us.....

MFH · January 19, 2004 1:16PM

The allure of the missing coin is far more attractive than that poor beat up SLQ. I don't see the markers of an overdate either. No die clash at Liberty's knee, no die marker at the "T" of Trust.

As another avid collector of SLQ's, and the proud owner of two overdates, one of which is in my Registry Set and listed as a PCGS AU55, and the other a SEGS (sorry) AU55FH, I can not understand how anyone could even consider adding that coin into their collection, and still call themself a Numismatist.

I also noticed that noone bought it.

Shamika · January 19, 2004 2:07PM

Conder,

Shamika · January 19, 2004 2:09PM

You know, that coin looks like it's been pried out of something with a screwdriver.

lordmarcovan · January 19, 2004 2:13PM

Dang, I've always loved Jeremy's Bust dime. That's a riot!

Ouch!

Comments

Leave a Comment