Ebay...Still a Cherrypickers Paradise 2017'

Great eye. You were the first to call it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Ok I didn't read through this whole thread, but PCGS has this coin valued at $40,000.

Am I missing something here?!?!?!??!

 

I wonder if the OP is related to jazzcoins?

 

You may have missed the part about it not being a proof.

 

oh. thanks. I was gonna say... You figure the seller would be smarter than to sell a 40k coin for 56 bucks..

 

Think of it. I'm a non-professional grader. I inspected the coin when I got it back from this professional grader. I didn't find the coin "incorrectly described." Why, then, am I obliged to return the coin in five days? The fact is, by the very terms of this notice requirement, I'm not so obliged to return the coin in five days. Only when I find the coin incorrectly described am I obliged to return the coin in five days. I don't find the coin incorrectly described, they can stick this disclaimer of liability in their ear, it doesn't kick in.

A law student must have written that. Let me give you the dope (...straight from the horse's mouth ). Notwithstanding that notice requirement put on their non-professional grader customers this Professional Coin Grading Service isn't off the hook for their professional grades. They incorrectly describe a grade, that's professional negligence liability, at issue, and they'll be held to the professional standard of care in the industry on that. Plaintiff's damages, that's a different matter. Liability, though, is there, at issue.

 

@Larry Pelf

Let's try an experiment: Send it to CAC
Where is the devil emoticon when you need one?

Edited to add: I am not suggesting you sell or misrepresent the piece. I want to see if CAC is paying attention.

 

PCGS's notice is like the annoying bark of a sassy chihuahua. All bark, no bite. What are they going to do if he decides he wants to keep it as a curiosity piece (i.e. not to sell as a MPL)? Are they going to sue him and admit that either they're (1) stupid or (2) extremely sloppy? What about their non-existent damages? All self inflicted? I would actually like to see that.

@Larry Pelf - Did you submit the coin yourself?

 

Regarding your second subject, I did positively and personally identify 2 different obverses and 3 different reverses for 1909 VDB matte proofs. These coins were either from auctions or from certified coins. I most likely shot photographs of the diagnostics, but it would take me a while to find them as I have about 30,000 - 40,000 photos I believe.

Kevin J Flynn

 

Though initially coined with the same matte surfaces as the 1909 VDB cent, this issue is more often found with satiny surfaces. This feature was probably the result of the dies becoming slightly worn when coining the later impressions.

The obverse die used to coin VDB cents was continued with this issue and the same diagnostics may be found. A second obverse die was also used, and it's distinguished by a fine crack running from the truncation of Lincoln's bust to the rim. A couple of short die gouges run vertically from the top of the letter L in LIBERTY, while letters TY reveal some fine, vertical polishing lines. A third obverse features heavy die polish to the right of Lincoln's nose.

Two reverse dies were used, one with tiny chips appearing between each wheat ear and the border and the other with numerous, vertical die polishing lines around letters O and E of ONE and Letter T of CENT. A few more such lines appear between letters CA of AMERICA and the wheat stem. It's not know which combination of these dies may have been used.

David W. Lange

 

If it were sent to cac or NGC undercrossover, since it is high value (possibly) it would cost the high tier price to submit.

 

Exactly! I'd keep it. If anything, it's an example of their professional incompetence. An '09VDB matte proof, just over only 1000 minted, and three graders say he hit it? It's worth $40,000 just to get it back, so they can destroy the evidence!

 

Must be Sicilians, eh?

 

Sure was an interesting story though.

I still love those Matte Proof Lincolns! I stumbled on this old photo shot by Robec a few years back of my 1909 Matte Proof Lincoln. Amazing you can make out some of those VDB diagnostics on the obverse (like those nose polishing lines) ... but darn that reverse, what a difference not having those 3 little initials makes on the value. Amazingly Robec shot this through the slab plastic which is why the rims arent as wide as typically seen.

 

And to think all that magic took place at this little nondescript building in Philadelphia over 100 years ago.

 

Oh this is perfect. Stigmatize a race with a wise-crack because you don't have a clue on the spot this TPG is in. But there are others of us that do, Kurt, I'm confident of that.

 

Larry, Yes, this is directly from David Lange's 1995 book "The Complete Guide to Lincoln Cents" (page 304) however this is about a different coin:

David Lange is writing about the 1909 Matte Proof "PLAIN" and not the VDB.

Information on identifying a VDB proof is found on the preceding page in Lange's book. (page 303) There you will find the same identifying characteristics that have been mentioned earlier in this thread. Mainly;
1) The crescent on the reverse to the right of UNUM
2) The line from Lincoln's back towards the letter R in Liberty
3) the fine lines running NNW to SSE just to the right of Lincoln's nose. (Lange says NW to SE but they are somewhat more vertical and that's why I wrote NNW to SSE)
4) "Unusually broad borders, thick edges showing no beveling at the rims and sharply raised and squared-off inner borders." - Lange

 

I was out all weekend so I've just followed the thread on my phone. I can barely understand Larry's posts; they consist of completely unintelligible sentences and non-sequiturs.

Let me preface this by saying I've never owned a VDB proof but I've found raw, unattributed MPL's in the wild: 1913, 1914 and a 1915. I've also owned a 1916.
This VDB is not a proof unless the die markers are present.

I wish Larry could be sensible enough to respond to a simple question:
Can you provide us with a picture of any die markers on your VDB?

We all know the answer is no, which is why we can expect him to continue name calling, denying and posting completely incoherent gibberish.

 

He's already said it's not a mpl, he knows everything we know now.

 

I'm not sure what is being referenced here but Kevin Flynn, in his own book from 2009 "Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs" identifies only a single obverse and single reverse die in the production of the VDB proof. This is in complete agreement with Carl B. Waltz Jr. in his 2015 book "A Study of Matte Proof Lincoln Cents" where he also definitively states that only 1 obverse and 1 reverse die were used to produce the VDB proof. He is a top expert in the field and his studies, examples and posters of matte proof Lincolns have been presented at the major coin shows. He personally has a wonderful collection of all the matte proof issues, including examples of all the dies that were used between 1909 and 1916. As mentioned earlier, David Lange also references just 1 die pair for the VDB proof run.

If you believe in your heart and mind that your coin still is a genuine VDB proof, take PCGS up on their offer for free shipping and a no cost evaluation of your coin. They could conclude it is a proof after all. If on the other hand, they say it is just a business strike, you still have a very nice coin for $56. You also have a great story to tell at parties, family gatherings, talk shows and on and on. At this point you really have nothing to lose! Also if it comes back as a business strike, wouldn't you get a nice refund for the fee they originally charged for the higher grade? (I'm not sure how that works exactly)

If you just hold on to the coin as it is without a valid PCGS certification number, it has no official backing and could become a bad legal tangle if you ever want to sell it. It is your coin and all the choices are yours. But, you could get lucky a 2nd time if you do send it in!