New Seated Dollar

tradedollarnut · December 31, 2010 2:47AM

Here you go, guys - pick this one apart. I have it in hand and will post my impressions later this weekend. How about them Dawgs? Woof!

1860-O dollar

Patches · December 31, 2010 2:53AM

I saw that one...price seemed pretty rich, especially considering the awful photography for that dollar value of a coin. I hope your pleased with it, and looking forward to seeing your pictures of it. Happy New Year!

roadrunner · December 31, 2010 2:53AM

Don't think you would have posted it if it didn't end of looking good in hand. But on the seller's minimal photos all I could tell was that it was quite heavily toned with an average mottled look. I'd bet you already knew of this coin and the seller. So must be a 64pq at the minimum if not a 64+ candidate. Can one assume that with toning like this it probably didn't come out of the bags of 60-0's released in the early 1960's? I like the holder as well.

Late Christmas present?

roadrunner

Lakesammman · December 31, 2010 3:42AM

Pretty entertaining game and a real surprise.

Looking forward to the pics.

SoCalBigMark · December 31, 2010 3:46AM

I hope you get it in a 65 holder.

johnny9434 · December 31, 2010 3:51AM

i cant wait to see the pics either. best of everything with that

TennesseeDave · December 31, 2010 4:02AM

Looks to be well below your usual standards in those pics,but I'm sure better pics may change my opinion.

RYK · December 31, 2010 4:05AM

I await the rest of the story.

Bochiman · December 31, 2010 4:21AM

<< I await the rest of the story. >>

Ok. Here is the rest of the story.....the Univ of Washington Huskies played Nebraska Coinhuskers

in the Holiday Bowl and totally OWNED them (after a previous meeting this season where UW got owned by them). 19-7 was last night's score.
Happy now?

Oh yeah....TDN, show us a better pic

clw54 · December 31, 2010 4:22AM

Coolest series there is. I look forward to seeing better photos.

AnkurJ · December 31, 2010 4:27AM

Hope it turns out nice, though I'm sure it's been attempted to be upgraded already.

tradedollarnut · December 31, 2010 4:34AM

<< Hope it turns out nice, though I'm sure it's been attempted to be upgraded already. >>

How is that possible if it's still in the older holder?

Here's the rest of the story: First of all I will say that I checked to see if the seller was one of the usual suspects or whether he might actually have a nice coin in an older holder. However, it was only after I made my offer to him that I realized it was NOT in a rattler holder ... ugh ... my bad, but I wasn't gonna back out. Upon receiving the coin, I was actually pleasantly surprised. The surfaces are semi prooflike but also lustrous with the reverse displaying full gem qualities - same sort of satin luster as on my MS66 1873-S trade dollar. With a different toning color, I could see the coin in a gem holder - however, in this case I believe the toning is on the edge of being a negative and so it won't quite make it. With that said, it's an extremely nice 64 that will probably 64+ and in my mind worth every penny or more of the purchase price.

To my way of thinking, a high end 64+ seated dollar at anywhere near 64 price guides is a great bargain.... considering NGC65's routinely sell in the $30k range and PCGS 65's in the $50k range!

abitofthisabitofthat · December 31, 2010 4:34AM

pmac · December 31, 2010 4:35AM

<< Hope it turns out nice, though I'm sure it's been attempted to be upgraded already. >>

Do you really think this is the case, being in a relatively old PCGS holder? I have a feeling TDN, the old codger, has something up his sleeve. Let's see what he has!

roadrunner · December 31, 2010 5:05AM

My own gut feel is that PCGS will hold the line on not placing that in a plus holder as they are sticklers for blast and eye appeal on type coins. Too mottled and too deep for PCGS. A plus sign would arguably create a $15K to $25K coin, or pseduo MS65 as you suggested. I think they will factor that in when regrading it. For now, I'd just leave it in the old holder. The + game will always be there when it comes time for that final decision. Meanwhile, nice coins in ogh's only continue to go up in price. How often do you find MS64 and 65 ogh seated dollars???

And didn't you have "only" a MS64 1860-0 in your dollar set for the longest time? Did you ever finally find a decent MS65?

roadrunner

TexasNationals · December 31, 2010 5:09AM

Regardless, it puts my 1860-O in VF-35 to shame! I never could pull the trigger on big buck seated, don't know why?

pmac · December 31, 2010 5:16AM

Think Rick0 could fix that "problem"?

tradedollarnut · December 31, 2010 5:31AM

<< My own gut feel is that PCGS will hold the line on not placing that in a plus holder as they are sticklers for blast and eye appeal on type coins. Too mottled and too deep for PCGS. A plus sign would arguably create a $15K to $25K coin, or pseduo MS65 as you suggested. I think they will factor that in when regrading it. For now, I'd just leave it in the old holder. The + game will always be there when it comes time for that final decision. Meanwhile, nice coins in ogh's only continue to go up in price. How often do you find MS64 and 65 ogh seated dollars???

And didn't you have "only" a MS64 1860-0 in your dollar set for the longest time? Did you ever finally find a decent MS65?

roadrunner >>

The toning is not deep, but at the same time I consider it a slight negative. Compared to the typical MS64, it's a nice coin for sure.

I have a blasty MS65 in my new set. The old set had a beautiful MS65 that was downgraded from an NGC66

GoldenEyeNumismatics · December 31, 2010 5:48AM

I've skipped over this coin many times before (I search the seated dollar listings often) assuming it was a dog of a coin. I guess it turned out to be a nice piece after all.

notwilight · December 31, 2010 6:12AM

<< 

<< I await the rest of the story. >>

Ok. Here is the rest of the story.....the Univ of Washington Huskies played Nebraska Coinhuskers

in the Holiday Bowl and totally OWNED them (after a previous meeting this season where UW got owned by them). 19-7 was last night's score. Happy now?

>>

I was at that game. It was very cold. The good midwestern boys from Nebraska, while able to play well in Washinton, were overwhelmed by the sights, sounds, and temptations of southern california and were all severly hung over last night....

I sat behind a 350 lb guy in a purple shirt with a 10 on it. I should have gotten a picture of his huge back to remind me of the view every time W did something good.

I can't see the coin yet.

--Jerry

relicsncoins · December 31, 2010 6:13AM

No way to tell how it looks in hand from the photos given. One thing I can say for certain is that it is either correctly graded, overgraded or undergraded.

AnkurJ · December 31, 2010 6:19AM

<< 

<< Hope it turns out nice, though I'm sure it's been attempted to be upgraded already. >>

How is that possible if it's still in the older holder?

Here's the rest of the story: First of all I will say that I checked to see if the seller was one of the usual suspects or whether he might actually have a nice coin in an older holder. However, it was only after I made my offer to him that I realized it was NOT in a rattler holder ... ugh ... my bad, but I wasn't gonna back out. Upon receiving the coin, I was actually pleasantly surprised. The surfaces are semi prooflike but also lustrous with the reverse displaying full gem qualities - same sort of satin luster as on my MS66 1873-S trade dollar. With a different toning color, I could see the coin in a gem holder - however, in this case I believe the toning is on the edge of being a negative and so it won't quite make it. With that said, it's an extremely nice 64 that will probably 64+ and in my mind worth every penny or more of the purchase price.

To my way of thinking, a high end 64+ seated dollar at anywhere near 64 price guides is a great bargain.... considering NGC65's routinely sell in the $30k range and PCGS 65's in the $50k range! >>

Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. I am just skeptical with many old holders. I feel like there is a reason the coin is still in an old holder. And for coins where there is a significant price difference from one grade to the next, I am sure someone has already tried sending it in for an upgrade with no success.

Just my thoughts.
Ankur

ColonialCoinUnion · December 31, 2010 6:34AM

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh?

AnkurJ · December 31, 2010 7:13AM

<< 

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh? >>

From the PCGS site:
Regrade: Use the "Regrade" service for coins previously graded by PCGS that you feel might be worthy of a higher grade. Submit the coins in the holder. We guarantee that the coins will not be downgraded.

RYK · December 31, 2010 7:16AM

<< 

<< 

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh? >>

From the PCGS site:
Regrade: Use the "Regrade" service for coins previously graded by PCGS that you feel might be worthy of a higher grade. Submit the coins in the holder. We guarantee that the coins will not be downgraded. >>

Those coins get broken out and re-holdered.

AnkurJ · December 31, 2010 7:29AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh? >>

From the PCGS site:
Regrade: Use the "Regrade" service for coins previously graded by PCGS that you feel might be worthy of a higher grade. Submit the coins in the holder. We guarantee that the coins will not be downgraded. >>

Those coins get broken out and re-holdered. >>

Not if you put a minimum grade.

roadrunner · December 31, 2010 7:32AM

Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. I am just skeptical with many old holders. I feel like there is a reason the coin is still in an old holder. And for coins where there is a significant price difference from one grade to the next, I am sure someone has already tried sending it in for an upgrade with no success.

One might get an off-the-record courtesy review by a TPG grader but that's about it. In days of yore the Presidential (HRH) view was possible. But neither was any guarantee as to what the next set of graders would say about the coin once cracked out and officially regraded.

roadrunner

ColonialCoinUnion · December 31, 2010 7:40AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh? >>

From the PCGS site:
Regrade: Use the "Regrade" service for coins previously graded by PCGS that you feel might be worthy of a higher grade. Submit the coins in the holder. We guarantee that the coins will not be downgraded. >>

Those coins get broken out and re-holdered. >>

Not if you put a minimum grade. >>

There is no such animal - you cannot specify a minimum grade on a regrade submission.

RYK · December 31, 2010 7:42AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< Its possible the coin was sent in for a regrade or re-evaluation (not sure what they call it), and PCGS did not feel it was worthy of a higher grade. >>

Huh? >>

From the PCGS site:
Regrade: Use the "Regrade" service for coins previously graded by PCGS that you feel might be worthy of a higher grade. Submit the coins in the holder. We guarantee that the coins will not be downgraded. >>

Those coins get broken out and re-holdered. >>

Not if you put a minimum grade. >>

That would be a waste of time and money.

BTW, your assertion:

" I am just skeptical with many old holders. I feel like there is a reason the coin is still in an old holder. And for coins where there is a significant price difference from one grade to the next, I am sure someone has already tried sending it in for an upgrade with no success."

is not an absolute, by any stretch. But, just to be safe, I suggest that you avoid all of the coins in OGHs (where 5 of my 6 gold stickers sit, BTW) so that you do not get stuck with a coin that someone once tried for an in-holder, min grade upgrade attempt.

topstuf · December 31, 2010 8:32AM

Well, this one WAS in a 64 rattler when I owned it.

That grade soured me on grading in general and was my most glaring numismatic blunder.

topstuf · December 31, 2010 8:39AM

My present 60-O is so hard to photo that even Pinnacle had to juice it. The fields look hairlined, but the hairlines are raised and don't go across the devices.

It's fairly clean. Nuttin like ole Superdollar though.

Close to actual color:

NGC....63

???

littlebear · December 31, 2010 8:43AM

<< Well, this one WAS in a 64 rattler when I owned it.

That grade soured me on grading in general and was my most glaring numismatic blunder. >>

I'm sure that the MS66 REALLY disturbed you for some time.

Larry L.

ColonelJessup · December 31, 2010 8:54AM

My recollection is that there was a hoard of 60-O's found in a chimney somewhere in the South within the last 10 years. More than a handful graded 65 and 66 ATS. They were dusky to a point just this side of of opacity. I think some sold in a Heritage sale subsequently.

clw54 · December 31, 2010 9:12AM

<< Well, this one WAS in a 64 rattler when I owned it.

That grade soured me on grading in general and was my most glaring numismatic blunder. >>

That's in the Tradedollarnut collection now, according to his website.

DorkGirl · December 31, 2010 9:12AM

<< Pretty entertaining game and a real surprise.

Looking forward to the pics.

>>

Me too!

DaveE · December 31, 2010 9:14AM

WOW, killer 1871!

The 60O looks a little funny to me. But I collect Morgans not Seated Dollars.

RedHerring · December 31, 2010 9:25AM

<< Not if you put a minimum grade. >>

I think you're confusing a crossover with a re-grade. Or were when this conversation started.

On a re-grade you're guaranteed the grade will not be lowered, but you're also guaranteed a new holder.

Happy New Year!

BigE · December 31, 2010 9:26AM

TDN, you should never buy sight-unseen off of E-Bay-----------------------BigE(sorry, couldn't help it

)

DieClash · December 31, 2010 9:53AM

rld14 · December 31, 2010 2:38PM

Geez.. my early guess was the TDN knew the coin and that's why he bought it off those lousy pics.

Glad you like it in hand tho.

rld14 · December 31, 2010 2:40PM

Oh, and Ankur... ALL regrades are cracked out. They guarantee that it won't downgrade, but this is why a lot of coins stay in rattlers, OGHs and Doilies..etc.

Imagine sending in a doily holder and the grade comes back the same, but in a blue label?

Fail.

AnkurJ · December 31, 2010 2:57PM

<< Oh, and Ankur... ALL regrades are cracked out. They guarantee that it won't downgrade, but this is why a lot of coins stay in rattlers, OGHs and Doilies..etc.

Imagine sending in a doily holder and the grade comes back the same, but in a blue label?

Fail. >>

My error, I didn't know they were automatically cracked out. Sorry.

rld14 · December 31, 2010 3:00PM

Yes they are. twice a month I fly to California with my hammer and a sick grin and smash up the regrade slabs for PCGS.

topstuf · December 31, 2010 10:15PM

<< I'm sure that the MS66 REALLY disturbed you for some time.

Larry L.

>>

I'd just like to know what it would have graded had I not "messed" with the surface on the reverse. I was a pure rookie when I bought it in 1972.

It was an absolute shoo-in for a 65 at least. When it came back 4, I was pissed.

My fault though.

ah well......

I still own the finest known HK 623 though.

............................big deal

speety · January 1, 2011 1:24AM

TDN, glad the coin was fairly nice when it came in. Now find a couple 1859-Os please!

Topstuff, those are some great dollars.

cupronik · January 1, 2011 3:04AM

I'm curious what some of those great coins from the Number #1 set brought when they sold. 1849 MS67, 1848 MS66, etc.?

littlebear · January 1, 2011 4:54AM

<< 

<< I'm sure that the MS66 REALLY disturbed you for some time.

Larry L.

>>

I'd just like to know what it would have graded had I not "messed" with the surface on the reverse. I was a pure rookie when I bought it in 1972.

It was an absolute shoo-in for a 65 at least. When it came back 4, I was pissed.

My fault though.

ah well......

I still own the finest known HK 623 though.

............................big deal

>>

I misunderstood your original post. I thought you were the one who got that into a 6 holder. With all the info, I can imagine your disappointment. Still, what a magnificent coin!

Larry L.

speety · January 1, 2011 4:57AM

<< I'm curious what some of those great coins from the Number #1 set brought when they sold. 1849 MS67, 1848 MS66, etc.? >>

The set was sold intact.

SoCalBigMark · January 1, 2011 5:05AM

<< 

<< Oh, and Ankur... ALL regrades are cracked out. They guarantee that it won't downgrade, but this is why a lot of coins stay in rattlers, OGHs and Doilies..etc.

Imagine sending in a doily holder and the grade comes back the same, but in a blue label?

Fail. >>

My error, I didn't know they were automatically cracked out. Sorry. >>

I suppose you may have been thinking of crossover service.

tradedollarnut · January 1, 2011 6:52AM

<< TDN, you should never buy sight-unseen off of E-Bay-----------------------BigE(sorry, couldn't help it

) >>

I have a 7 day return privilege. Still deciding if I like the color.

roadrunner · January 1, 2011 7:07AM

If you're still deciding if you like the color....that's already not such a good sign. A plus sign is not automatic, even for nice coins.

roadrunner

New Seated Dollar

Comments

Leave a Comment