Coin buying education 101-1

Thanks Jim. Can't wait.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Jim,

Sorry but I always go with my gut feeling and I don't know if it is a problem coin but my gut says there is something wrong so I would pass and not look back.

 

Doug, I saw that too! How strange....

 

Coin revealed- 1921 peace $, ICG AU-58


Here is the coin in holder.




The following photos will try to answer some of the questions.

I made the mistake of taking photos through the holder's plastic ( this is one coin that I had no photo previous.) and not polishing away the light scratches on the plastic, I didn't notice them at first. I am not claiming there aren't some hairlines, there are. The lines over the jaw are on the slab.



Here is a good shot of the field in front of the nose, and you can see some. Since they graded it as AU, I assume that is OK. I do not notice any indication of abrasive cleaning or thumbing on the coin.



Here is close up of the back motto area. The scratches that are lighter, some have pixelation, are on the holder, looks like a light starburst over the R, have to focus up and down. You can see from the tarnish, I didn't dip the coin.



The doubling effect of the date is Machine, I find this often on the 1921-23 Peace $.

Now as to tooling,I am not sure of the areas being noticed, but I assumed the below might be the common ones. I looked carefully over the coin at high power (30X) and noticed no metal movement. What I thought were the trouble areas, were mainly from emphasis of the device by tarnish somewhat outlining the device. See below.








I have also another ICG58, and ANACS55, and PCGS55. This is the better looking and less wear than the others. It might not get the same grade in a PCGS, but it to me a reasonable coin.

The amount asked is HIGH for the grade. In hand with a loupe, I thought it might have a chance at MS ( this was a while back). Now that I look carefully with an excellent microscope, I would grade it 58 also. The only problem I see for an AU58 coin ( as it has luster, hope that shows in the first photo) is some tarnish. Especially around the devices, but there is also a "greying" of the fields that make them appear a little darker. But some know how to fix that if they want :whistle:

I won't mention a price, other than to say that it would have to be close to the AU55 to have been considered as a BIN. I paid $200.

I don't know if this helps many, It helps me as I have to really examine the coin and think what photos I should include on coins I wanted to sell. It points out to me what others see and how I should present the best photo for them to decide if there is a problem.

Thanks to all!!:hail:

Jim

 

Jim, This was great! I'm very interested to learn from the next round of feedback following your detail shots and background/explanations.

 

Interesting. I think the "ad" got many on the problem coin track. Lines such as:
-- "I might mislead in the ad,"
-- "This coin is graded ( or BB, or detailed) of a big 4 TPG."
likely skewed the responses.

Do you like the image better than the AU58 coins I pulled from Teletrade? To me, it might be scratches on the holder, or other photo variables, but the Teletrade ICG coin looks nicer than yours. The NGC coin looks about even.

Posting a coin for sale and asking bidders to go on the photos on Ebay often leads to low results, unless the photo, the coin, and the seller are all outstanding. By having a pretend ad, it likely skews the responses, vs. a straight guess the grade, with the comment that the coin is in an ICG no-problem slab. Quite a few folks have been burned buying a coin on Ebay where the seller says use the photo, but the coin isn't certified.

Sometimes forum members like to play "gotcha" by putting in a trick or twist in these kind of threads. For this one, the "trick" was that it was straight up. However, the initial "ad" made many folks think there was another trick coming.

Another factor is how many may have read the responses before making their own comments. If they read a couple of comments about the coin having problems, others often follow their lead. Seems like more than half of the responses cited problems or at least an uneasiness about the coin. So it might be the plastic, or the photo. Hard to say how many are novices (less than five years) and how many are experienced collectors (more than ten years). Hard to say how many actually collect Peace dollars and know how to grade them. 1921's are a specialty within Peace dollars because of the one-year type. All of this makes for a tough read.

For me the distractions on the neck led me to think there was something amiss. The other coins I highlighted had fewer or none of that kind of stuff going on. Again, it may be the reflection off the plastic.

On this second set of photos, the closeup of the eagle does increase the chances of this being a dipped coin in my mind. Now that isn't all bad because a lot of the white old silver dollars have been dipped and are in top tier holders.

 

Hi Doug,

I tried to crop to the areas you indicated. The image on the left is the coin above, the image on the right is the same area of an ANACS 55.




and here is the other area, same...original ICG on left, ANACS 55 on right.



Thanks

Jim

 

Don't know much about Peace Dollars but I'd have to agree with cleaned

 

Hi Red Tiger,

I would be very surprised if it wasn't dipped at least once. I think the tarnish on the edge of the devices is the remnant of that. But at least who ever did it, didn't go overboard and try to make it very white and remove the cartwheel luster from it.

My intention wasn't to fool anyone, just to leave the end result open. I did indicate it would have a TPG result, but I didn't want to just be a grade thing, but also to see if problems would be suggested by anyone, and certainly ICG could have missed problems or considered them market acceptable, so I wouldn't say posters were mistaken. It was good for me also, as I have looked at this coin much much longer then I did when I first obtained it. I think this has made me sharpen my focus. I certainly appreciate the time people took to look it over. Maybe I will try it again
as it is always interesting to me on grading, especially when it is my coin

Jim

 

Righit off, I noticed the areas Doug is focused on as well, although I assumed they were just numerous bagmarks (aren't Peace and Morgans pretty full of bagmarks because of how big they are and how they were maintained?). Anyway, those marks, whatever they are, are one reason there is no way this coin should be in a 58 holder (sorry, DesertGem).

I also still think the photo in the original post shows some funny color in the devices (almost a faux cameo look), particularly obverse, but it is not so noticeable in the photo of the coin-in-slab. Maybe best lesson of all here is that even very good photos can give false impressions.

Thanks again for the post, including the close-up photos, which are great.

 

I like the way you ran this. This is exactly the situation your are faced with any time you buy coins online and especially raw. In this case it was an even better example of the necessity for buyers to be educated because your coin is slabbed. The pictures provided by an ebay seller may have even been worse but with the slab it would have instilled confidence. Thanks

 

I agree. Great Idea!

:hatch: What's next?

 

PCGS price guide shows the 1921 in MS-60 at $260. In my mind an AU58 is about the same value of a MS-60, in fact I'd prefer an AU58 to a MS60.

So why was this coin NOT a good buy at $250? I didn't see anywhere that you said we had to buy it for resale and make a profit.

 

Hi Eagle eye,

I was valuing it close to what the grey sheet was, as ICG certified coins are not specifically listed, I used the raw values, AU 135, MS60 235. I figured the AU58 @ 2/3 the difference= $200-205. Not saying it is the best way, but I would feel OK at that price. Yes, I should have noticed the small wear that kept it from MS, but sometimes the strikes on these and their ability to escape with "friction" grades, I thought there was a chance for MS grade. Since most of the photos are 30X, marks look much more significant than they are. If I could find another twin to this raw, I would pay the same again myself. I find few raw ones that are MS, most seem to be sliders 55-58.
Hope this helps explain.

I have picked out a morgan that is not for sale I thought I might run the same way if there was enough interest. Hardest thing is not to comment right away and let the course flow to the end.

Jim

 

Doug, thanks for pointing out the areas you noticed. A couple of others also said it didn't look right, but they didn't really say which areas were suspect. I like the excuse to make big photos! I wasn't sure until I jacked up the magnification.

Jim

 

If this was a real auction, there would be several people bidding jsut to get the price higher.

 

Welcome to your past Jim.

Warning, there are at least 4 of these threads I've found, and have just started to dig in the graveyard.
Be good to us, or all of your typos will see the light of day once again.

Necro-Threads rising from the grave. Happy Halloween.

 

Baaah!!