The Reason This Old Guy Has Issue with TPG’s

I recently picked up this lovely 1794 cent from one of our members for a song (thank you @C-B-D). This cent displays beautiful detail and even a hint of the original luster peeks through though the photos don’t show it well. To hold this coin, it is a very eye appealing early copper...... She has one flaw. Because the surface is porous, it is an environmentally damaged piece.

Yesterday I attended a show and looked at many tables with slick, almost unrecognizable 1794 cents. Costs ranged from $850.00 to $1100.00. To me, pretty strong money for a coin that looked little more than a copper slug. Yet, I know that many refined collectors would shun this lovely and very eye appealing piece in favor of the “problem free” worn slick copper.

From the outset, I have always favored owning coins that were a joy to look at. This coin is a true joy to view. All elements of the design are bold. There is much that this coin can offer. I believe much more so than a worn slick copper. Particularly when the worn slick copper is valued at double the investment. I will take a TPG problem coin with detail and eye appeal any day over its worn unrecognizable problem free counterpart.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

While reading your text the idea that it was struck on a porous planchet immediately popped into my head.
But when I saw the images it has the look of environmental damage.
But lots of nice detail.

Has it been graded as a DETAILS coin?

 

Yes it has. And deservedly so. And I feel it is still a desirable coin. I just have issue that this would be shunned by many refined collectors because it has been branded as a problem coin. It presents beautifully.

 

I can see both sides, and both have their appeal. I wanted an example of both a 1793 chain cent and a wreath cent, but can only afford low grade coins. My chain is smooth and nicely colored but only a hint of a number or two in the date. I wanted one of them to have a legible date so for my wreath I got one with fine detail but environmentally damaged surfaces.

 

Looks great, Randy! Nice pics, too!

 

Love when they have lots of meat on em.

 

Great coin!

 

Hunting down early copper without surface issues is a very tedious task. The TPGs don't always help in making that hunt less grueling. I have seen all kinds of surface issues slabbed up and given a seal of approval. Porous surfaces, verdigris, unnatural discoloration, run over by a horse drawn carriage, these are all things they turn a blind eye to. Problem free early copper should be expensive, it is rare.

Luckily this conversation hasn't devolved into the grades handed out by the TPGs on early copper.

 

Oh no.... That was not the intent at all. I am drawing attention to the disparity that exists here. I also own an AU Bar Copper damaged due to tooling. All that fancy verbiage on the slab simply means that someone centuries ago scraped crud from between the bars with a pocket knife of something similar. It isn’t even a noticeable flaw. An AU Bar Copper is a 15k coin. Because of the cancerous verbiage on the TPG label, I was able to source the coin at a third of the value had the piece not been branded as damaged. While refined collectors will shun these pieces, I am a buyer every time.

 

And that is, Randy, precisely the reason many coppers guys (still) prefer to buy their coppers raw. They look at the coin, judge if it is appealing in spite of potential problems, and make their decision based on their own judgement. Not based on what the plastic says. That is the way that I do it.

Problem-free early coppers (93's, 94's, 95's 96's, 97's and 99's specially) is extremely difficult to find, with prices to match. There is a lot of good value in so-called details coins. You have one of those. Coins which because of the 'details' designation are available at considerable lower prices. In fact, there is a fairly recent video available by one of the well known EAC experts where he explores precisely this point: good values in coppers which are presently in 'details' holders. His advice: look beyond the plastic.

I have taken the liberty to light-up your photos a bit (so that I can see it better, mainly). I agree, your coin has a lot of appeal. By the way, it appears to be a Sheldon 28, R-2 coin. So you did just fine, and if you like it, trusted your eye, and find pleasure in the coin, that is the main thing in my opinion.

 

Thank you @Eduard !!!

 

I was trying to start trouble. I would think, most people that collect early copper, myself included, have to weigh the good with the bad. I bought an UNC DETAILs large copper cent, that was cleaned. If the coin had straight graded, I too, would not have been able to afford it. The coin looks better in my Dansco album anyway.

 

Randy, I think you should have put the word refined in quotation marks ("refined"), as there are different variants.

For example, some people who may be described as "refined" are merely anal retentive.

Another example is sugar; raw sugar is superior to "refined" white sugar.

If I find a coin I want & buy it, then place it in that proverbial "safe place", I hope to "refined" it someday.

Yet another example is me: I'm usually fine, but sometimes I'm bad. Then when I recover, I'm "re-fine-d".

"Refined" synonyms: cultured, cleaned of impurities, delicate, sophisticated, discerning, genteel, urbane, sublime, high-brow, ritzy, snazzy, swanky, well mannered, well bred,...

I could go on, but I think I've made my point: It's not always good to be "refined".

Btw, I'm right there with you on that coin - I do the same thing. (Fortunately we're not so "refined" as some others! )

 

I guess I'm not "refined" I think your 94 looks great. I know I would be tickled to have it in my collection.

 

It seems early large cents overcome many challenges...for example 1798 Sheldon 157 Die State I is referred to as Perfect Dies. All subsequent Die States have increasingly severe rusted dies (both dies) in the description. The late Die State IV S-157 cent surfaces would not be beautiful even in higher grades to a typical collector, but a large cent collector would consider it a beauty!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Randy, your coin is a beautiful coin steeped in history. I would own it in a heartbeat.
Edited to add date.

 

Nice coin Randy. Your OP left one question in my mind.

Which song was it...
Love me tender ?
Can we hear it ?

Seriously, I agree your coin has the detail needed to see the design. Those slicks leave much to the imagination.

 

@Randy Abercrombie you picked up a lovely coin and your thinking was right in line with what I’ve done for my type set.
I’ve included many coins that are defined as problem coins but have plenty of appeal to me (and show the design well).
As long as you’re enjoying the coin and can afford it, keep doing what you’re doing.

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/dansco-7070-type-set-the-beginning-of-a-new-challenge.296537/

And here was another thread where we showcased some problem coins:

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-beauty-is-in-the-details-post-your-problem-coins.293570/

 

@Eduard..... Your post left me wondering something. I did purchase this raw. I had it slabbed so my wife would have an easier time selling when I leave this party. I fully knew it would come back noted damaged. I only wanted the slab noted “Genuine” which is exactly what they did for me........ So now I have to wonder if my thinking may have been flawed here. Would I have been better to leave the piece raw?

 

From what I’ve read about EAC grading, the surface quality is just one aspect of the grade, so there really isn’t a boundary between a “problem” and “problem free” coin.

I wonder if that creates more potential for deals on details graded early copper, if the details slab depresses the price more than an EAC collector would discount the coin for a given issue.