Let's see your newest acquisitions!

Won in a GC auction last night against a worthy underbidder who recognized the rarity of this die remarriage, the 1832 LM-10.3, R-6, estimated 13-30 known examples. Not in hand yet so here are GC and PCGS photos.

This is the seventh use of Reverse U. By the ninth and final use of this reverse die with 1832 LM-10.4, the die crack from rim through A2 to scroll would develop into a huge cud across TES OF A.

Here's the emission order using this Reverse U. Note how it was used across coin date years 1832 and 1833 and not sequentially, underscoring how the mint is those days was not very scrupulous about striking coins in the year they were dated.

1832 LM-10.1
1833 LM-4.1
1832 LM-10.2
1832 LM-11.1
1833 LM-4.2
1832 LM-11.2
1832 LM-10.3
1833 LM-4.3
1832 LM-10.4

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

About that 1832 LM-10.3 half dime in my previous post and referring to a different post that was about how to know and value coins with adjudged rarities.

I had suggested to the OP in that post that sometimes you have to take a deep dive into the series in order to find out what the rarity and value of these coins are.

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/question-on-survival-estimates-and-those-r-numbers.421260/

If one had just looked up the value of a generic 1832 VF-20 half dime in the price guides you would have gotten:

PCGS $150
Greysheet $111
Red Book Quarterly $145

This coin hammered to me in the GC auction for $536 which was, in my judgement, about the right price in a market with informed buyers. What's the cause of this apparent value difference? It's the difference between a common coin (R-1) and a truly rare coin (R-6, 13-30 known). The only thing that kept this coin's price down was two factors: The first is that the Capped Bust half dime collector community is not very large and the second is that many collectors of this series, especially the Registry Set collectors, prefer a higher-grade specimen.

Now, since GC unlike Stacks and Heritage, does not provide any information on the specific coin at auction, it is solely up to the buyer to know what's on offer which provides opportunities for buyers and a problem for sellers of rare and esoteric issues.

Sorry about the long post - just dumping several thoughts that have been accumulating for a while.

 

Nice pick up. That is one sweet looking commemorative.

 

Love minor league beisbol. Not many teams left compared to the old days.....

 

wanted/needed a raw 1938 washington proof for an all raw proof set. this popped up on fbay for what i think is cheap
will crack out for the set. this one a new weakest strike, note liberty, ribbon, and neck almost gone.

 

Lovely Bob...I like #3 the best.

 

Thank you. Flick it back and forth and you get the other two. It’s definitely a clean coin.

 

1865 PCGS VF30 CAC - my wallet suffered mightily to win this one. It's an improvement over the PCGS VF25 1865 I purchased recently that has too much corrosive "black crud" on the coin.


Here's the P25 1865 with black crud. IMO, this should not have been graded (or at least not purchased), but I was too eager to fill that slot and TPGS don't seem to mind coalesced black crud with the pitting and corrosion it usually hides. I'm happy to replace it now.


1856-O XF40-45 (raw) - a BIN for $100 less than Redbook price? I cannot find any problems with the coin aside from some possible old, light cleaning, so I bought it to check it out in-hand (it hasn't arrived yet). I hope to get it TPG graded and sell it so I can purchase other coins I need for my SLH set.


1856-O WB-9 CACG XF45 - purchased this past year raw. It was cheap, attractive, and I couldn't find anything wrong with it except for some light tooling to ameliorate a scratch above the foot. CACG didn't mind or didn't see the tooling.