1882-CC Received Wrong Coin, What to do/What Would it Grade?

Wait, what? A pic of another coin proves the first isn't DMPL? Or, does the pic of that second coin prove the first pic is doctored? I'm not following you here.

And for the record, OP, I know too much about coin photography to think I can conclusively say that the coin you bid on isn't DMPL.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

First image on the 55th post is altered .
Unless the GSA arcyic slabs are blue in color ...

 

I tried to explain this once, but the box that the slabs reside in are made of blue felt. That is what you see.

 

I've own lots of GSA before .
I know what they look like .

 

I know I'm beating a dead horse at this point, and it's pretty irrelevant, but take a look at this photo. You can see the whole camera in the image as it continues onto the coin. If it's not DMPL, it's at least PL, or else the image would not look like that. That reflection is not from the acrylic, it's on the coin. Maybe it's semi-PL, you're right. Maybe it's not at all. If that's the case then I really lucked out.

Edit: I will concur the coin was not DMPL maybe not PL at all. That makes this all even more confusing, but in the end the coin I got was better than the photos, so it's like reverse deception.

 

Sorry, I see what you are saying now. Yeah, I think it's just bad white balance but that's just me. Like I said, why would he try to fool me with a lesser coin?

 

That I can't explain, but it seems to have work out good for you . At least for the better looking one .
If it would of been the other coin and its wasn't either a DMPL, looking like it does, I think you would of told the seller I'm sending it back . I think .
Here's one of my favorite saying: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me .

 

My last comment on this coin is that you got a nice one. What you do with it is up to you. My advice: look at Bluvette's previous posts in the archives. He has an extensive collection of magnificent DMPL and PL coins that he has posted. Take a good look at them, as they should be a great learning experience for a less experienced collector.

 

There is no doubt you guys have amazing coins

 

And I'll chime in one more time. I'd rather have a clean 65 then a baggy 62-3 dmpl. Why nearly all Morgans I buy are 64 and better. But I buy for toning and eye appeal

 

Even factoring the known reflection from the acrylic, the coin in that image shows strong evidence of reflectivity. The fact that the seller isn't a sophisticated-enough photographer to nail the White Balance every time (he is probably unaware of the term) isn't indicative of some deliberate malice, either. From a monetary standpoint, I believe the OP is in the better boat with the coin he received, and I think the real loser here is the seller who must be pulling his hair out. I'm sorry, I just don't see deliberacy here.

 

When I take my images, I match what my true surrounding look like . Then when I'm looking for coins, I can spot iffy images .

 

Heres the orginals

 

Looks like the same coin to me. Marks all match up.

 

The obverse looks different. Check the dentils above the R and between the UN in UNUM. The scuff marks on Liberty's head also look different.

 

You're right, it is a different coin. I think you actually got a better one judging from the nasty hits on her cheek in the PL listing.

 

So after 4 pages of posts, it seems to me we've come to a consensus:

a) coin in eBay listing is not the one received by OP
b) coin in eBay listing is probably not DPL as the seller tried to represent
c) coin OP received is a nice MS, likely a 65, and preferred by many over the eBay pictured coin!
d) buyer is happy with the result

Did I capture the essence of the thread?

PS: I chimed in earlier in the thread as well.

 

Just got this back from NGC, MS65. A most bizarre transaction!

 

Congrats! Glad everything worked out in the end.

 

Nice. Was what I called it. I like them in 65 not a fan of baggy coins