So I was performing my routine search of E-Bay for rainbow toned Jefferson Nickels when I stumbled upon this listing with a terrible photo and a huge price tag. Naturally, I clicked to take a closer look and this is what I found: 1945-S Jefferson Nickel NGC MS67 BIN $650 Now if the scans were not bad enough, here is the seller's description: The most beautiful War Time Silver Jefferson Nickel you have ever seen. Electric toning both on the Obverse and Reverse. Housed in an early NGC case before the Star Coins were born but guaranteed a STAR if resubed. Graded MS-67. Neet cheap but well worth the premium, I didn't steal it either!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Scan does not due this beauty justice, trust me you will love it in person even if you are like me and don't particularly love Jeffersons!! Really, the most beautiful Jefferson you have ever seen. That statement deserves a Come On Man! Next comes a statement which is either a deliberate lie or simply factually incorrect depending upon the numismatic knowledge of the seller. The seller states that the coin was certified prior to the inception of the star designation and is in an older holder. Now I don't know much about NGC holder generatons but I do know that the star designation started prior to cert # 2474845-xxx. Keep in mind that the certification numbers are in chronological order. The smaller the number, the older the certification. Here is a photo of my earliest star designation on an NGC coin. In it's infancy, the star designation was not the big bold star you see today but a small raised plain font star. Then the seller goes on to guarantee that the coin would get a star designation if resubmitted. I wonder what the terms of that guarantee are? Normally I just blow off these types of E-Bay miscues, but this one just rubbed me the wrong way. I find it hard to believe that the verbiage about the star designation was an innocent mistake. What do you guys think?
Optimistically, I think the seller must have not seen many war nickels, and he is mistaken about the *. To the latter point, he has a * coin in his inventory that's earlier (2043xxx) than the coin in question: http://cgi.ebay.com/1946-S-Roosevel...91?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item19be1998ef With all the lying that goes on by sellers on eBay (heck, coin dealers are guilty of the same thing!), I have come to just tune out any words that are said. The only important things are: 1) The photo 2) The price 3) The terms of the sale The rest is just noise, and sadly often of the distracting or dishonest type....Mike
I think that he made no attempt at all to show us this "monster" toning and I suspect that this coin will be a hard sell for any premium with those pics. If I were a rich man I'd buy it and resubmit it and just see if it gets a star or not.. and if not hold him to his guarantee.
What's really odd about that coin is that it has the sky blue/pee yellow toning of CuNi yet the coin is made of Silver. Odd.
Report him, it's a misleading and/or deceptive description. I report anywhere from 2-5 coins a day depending on what I'm looking at, and most get taken down.
When I first saw the scan, I thought it looked like a coin I own. Then I realized mine is a 1945-D. The color scheme is similar though, I think.
How can the seller prove he didn't steal it if he felt compelled to exclaim he did not in his item description.
+1 I was literally fixin to post something like that. I figured somebody would have mentioned that sentence by now lol
Me too, but honestly, as stated: 1) The photo, 2) The price and 3) The terms of the sale, are the most important things while the rest is unnecessary.
I really think this guy is a shyster who has more money than brains. Just who is he appealing to with your add? The knowledgeable collector knows he is wrong. The ignorant are not interested because of his lousy scan. That leaves only another shyster who has more money than brains or someone taking a shot. Look at the rest of his auctions; "1921 Peace Dollar High Relief (The rare one!!)"; he sells a lot of no-name slabs; but then he sells "1913 Matt Proof Lincoln Cent NGC PF-67 Full Red!! Pop-5" BIN for $7500. BTW, his sales consist of 1 gold nugget, 2 gold coins and a proof set.
Now that could not have been said any better. Yeah, he will probably be lucky enough to snag some newbie into spending $600.00 or better into this. Never ceases to amaze me .
An EARLY NGC case??? That slab style was first used in April 2008. Stars have been around since about 2001. And the invoice numbers on the slabs are not completely sequential, plus reholders keep the original serial numbers so you can have a recent slab with a low invoice number.
Here is an example of an early submission that was reholdered. The coin originally had the "T" designation and picked up a star during the reholder and pedigree process. According to NGC, the "T" should have been eliminated but someone made a mistake.
When the star designation began, the certification numbers were only 6 digits. So yes, that cert # would be after the it began.
The only thing that is safe to assume with the star designation is that you should never assume what will or will not get a star. The vote must be unanimous amongst all of the graders including the finisher and you never no what might cause a grader to disqualify a coin. The 1941 Jefferson that I showed earlier in this thread is nice but I have seen much nicer toned Jeffersons snubbed for the star. Based on just that example, I can't conclude that getting a star is easier now than then. IMO, it was always difficult to get and still is.
