2nd Opinion on a slabbed 1794 Large Cent

OK, there are a number of camps with opinions on slabbing of coins, from the early copper guys, with many who loath slabs (and “professional” opinions of grade, condition, etc.) to folks who sell for a living and the slab and grade help in determining value and selling price- I am NOT trying to start a debate here about that! I am interested though in grade “inflation” and the crack-out dance to try and improve the grade and “value”. I understand it is done with high grade examples of silver and gold types but I am not aware of it happening a lot with early copper.



So, I purchased this 1794 “head of ‘93” S-18b in a genuine environmental damage- G detail holder with an interesting planchet defect. The coin appeared to have higher detail than good to my eyes and the environmental damage seemed minimal compared to the mint made planchet issue; I decided to send it in for review and see how it may shake out from a second opinion.




Anyone care to advance a guess as to the results?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

G-4

and it's a total guess

 

I'm horrible at grading so I'll pass.

Ironically, I'm against slabs EXCEPT for anything pre-1800 US coins and other specific ones. So I probably would have bought it too.

 

G4 or maybe G6

 

I'll stick with the grade of Good (4 or 6).
As I understand it since double grades (obverse/reverse) are not done anymore the obverse rules the game and the reverse only comes into play when there is a slight difference of opinion.
Discounting the defect for the moment, from your images the obverse appears to be the lower grade of the two sides to the point that the date is significantly worn.
And LIBERTY is disappearing.
Hence my sticking with Good as the grade.

 

Mostly going of the tone of the thread and no so much the coin itself, I’m gonna say VG8.

 

Haven't considered what it grade, and I have determined the variety yet, but from what I can see I will say I don't believe it is a head of 93. I think it's a head of 94.

 

So much of early copper is net graded to begin with it just really isn't conducive to do that.

 

I'd have a hard time buying that it straight graded, so I'll say it came back as VG Details

 

it's going to come back in a details holder again because of the environmental damage in my opinion. TPG's many times grade coins with planchet issues from the 1790's as straight graded. But the environmental damage is obvious and it will body bag this coin every time. I would be quite surprised to see this coin end up in a straight graded holder for that reason.

 

I’d say G04 or net graded to AG03. I doubt they assigned a higher grade, because it would imply they screwed up completely when the coin was first graded. If the wrong variety was attributed, well then they screwed up too. I am just guessing of course, as I don’t know anything about early copper

 

Thank you for all the comments and insight; it clearly won't straight grade as several noted, but it is coming back with the planchet flaw noted instead of the "environmental damage" and a higher details grade of Fine. It is clearly an S-18b/ head of '93 (the edge leaf can be viewed from the slab).


Does anyone feel this actually changed the value of this coin as a result?

I added an image of another S-18b courtesy PCGS for reference.


Jack

 

I believe that any time the word Damage is removed from the slab the value increases.

 

I think a planchet flaw is not as bad as other problems. In addition, the label now says F details instead of G details, that’s quite an upgrade in my opinion!

 

Thanks for the response micbraun; I had a copper Dealer tell me he looked at this as a $1500.00 upside.

 

That is actually quite a nice coin for an S-18b. I certainly agree with details of F12.
This is a variety where the reverse wears down very quickly. On this example, the reverse shows quite a lot of detail. I have seen S-18bs graded AG3 where the reverse is practically gone.

My own example shows this well: the reverse is in basal state state while the obverse shows some detail.

 

That was fun. Love these type of threads.

 

Okay I'll agree with the 18 be when I was looking at it last night lighting wasn't good and it didn't look like the junction of the hair and forehead was far enough to the right. The heads of 93 have the junction centered between the T and Y and it looked more like the one on that one was below the right edge of the foot of the T.

 

Thank you, Jack. I am happy with my S-18b because of the distinct bust, (and fortunately, it was quite inexpensive). I would like an upgrade, however, at some stage.
Maybe another of the head of '93 varieties if a suitable one comes along.

As mentioned, I think you did quite well on your S-18b. It has nice detail and certainly better than G details.

Regarding your comment about copper in slabs: I am a purist here as well. None of my early coppers are encapsulated, save two (which just happened to come that way).