Grade opinions?

Anyone with an grade opinion on this one?
Thanks a lot for any opinions!






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

AU Details, for the small holes obverse

 

What he said.

 

What they said.

 

What they said and also looks to have been cleaned, judging by the letters and numerals. Also has a die crack at the date.

 

what they all said.

 

Cleaned and damaged. Wait a second...they all said that.

 

There are some Shield Nickel enthusiasts here that might chime in. I cannot enlarge from this photo but there also appears to be something above the 7 and between the 1 & 8. Perhaps a variety? I'm not an expert on these but these are known for varieties. Of course they may also be die chips.

 

I agree it has been brought cleaned pitted reverse

Agree

From the hobby center and think tank of MTS.LLC

 

I see no variety on this coin.

For those of you who pointed out a pitted obverse, that's the *reverse* with the holes. Also the holes are not what I would call pits (which result from defects in the die). The holes are post-strike damage - digs into the coin.

My grade is AU details, damaged.

 

Thanks a lot for the inputs! I think this year include a open and closed 3 variety - and think this is a open 3 variety - which is the least scarce variety.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thank you all for your feedback. So AU details damaged, die crack at date, most likely cleaned and psd (holes) on reverse....all that taken into consideration...what would be a fair value for this coin $30-60 range or higher considering AU details?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree with the consensus on this one.

 

Yes, it looks like an Open 3. Sometimes it's very hard to tell. IMO, the conventional wisdom that Closed 3 is much scarcer than Open 3 is wrong. I see them with about equal frequency.

Possible reason the conventional wisdom is wrong: It is assumed that since the switchover from closed to open happened early in the year that most of the year was spent producing open 3s. This does not allow for the possibility that the mint had a stock of closed 3 dies at the switchover date.

 

Thanks for the reply!

My assumption regarding scarcity of the varieties was only based on the catalog values and not the actual mintages per se.

Do you or anyone know why the closed 3 variety has a higher catalog value then?

Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Because the closed 3 is assumed to be a lower mintage. IMO that's not a correct assumption as detailed in my previous post.