I sometimes wonder what the coin in the auction looks like in person. I had the following description and two photos to make a decision on. The description was 1794 LC, dark coin. Here are the sellers photos for which I blindly through money at. I don't remember now which photo is the obverse, oh well. Feel free to guess the Sheldon number. Later on I will post my blurry photos of the coin that I actually received. Hint, the coin is a 1794 US large cent.
I simply cannot understand how someone trying to sell a coin could take pictures like those and somehow think they're acceptable. Unless, of course, it was intentional. Still, if it were cheap enough I would probably also take a chance and bid. You never know!
That's a bit extreme, but there is straight profit to be made by those who can correctly evaluate the quality of the coin hidden by poor photography. Trust me on this.
It looks like there is some lettering and leaves still visible on the reverse, so it could be a pretty nice coin. Looking forward to the better pictures!
As promised, here are my blurry photos. In hand the coin has been hit hard in the one cent area of the reverse. I didn't see or read about that in the sellers desc/photos. Overall I'm very happy with my purchase. For less than the price of a pizza and a couple sodas, not a bad buy, this time. Any guesses on the Sheldon number now?
I'm speculating here. I think the top pic is the reverse. I'm also thinking you really benefited on this gamble. I've won auctions cheaply because of bad seller pics only to have the seller cancel on me.
Yeah - me too - I have alway wanted a 1700' dated coin - BUT I wonder why this coin has such worn features BUT the date is so nice and readable?
I have about 35 of the 1794's. The date is readable on all but one. Some the date is about all that's still readable.