What ya think about this pic?

How's the pic look to you, has it been juiced? The coin is a real beauty if the pic is real, if not. Well then I don't know. :rollling:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1917-TYPE-1-STA...itu=UCC&otn=5&ps=63&clkid=6067776220813251908

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

After looking at the other items, I
would not bid on this coin-
details are very good-toes,
rivits, almost full head
But the color looks AT
just MHO

 

I love that coin. I think the photo is legit, he may have played with the lighting to get the most flattering pic, but we all do that to a certain extent. I agree with you it's an absolutely beautiful coin. Looks like a bidding war heating up on it with 15 bids and over a day left. Rest assured, it's going to sell for a lot more than $90.
I'd bid on it if I needed that one for my SLQ collection. In any event he's got a solid return policy:

"Our coins are backed with a 100% Refund Policy upon return within 7 days of receipt excluding Bullion purchases as they are based on prevailing market rates. ​

If you are ever unsatisfied with your purchase, please call us and return the item for a refund."
I say if you want/need it, bid on it. If you don't like it in hand, send it back.​

 

The words "UNC DETAILS" in the title is a definite put-off.
That's the same sort of wording NGC uses for cleaned coins.
I'd pass.
There will be others.

 

Yeah... but isn't that because you can't specify a true grade in your title for raw coins?

 

Looks like a nice coin I wonder what UNC DETAILS means though

 

You can't say AU-50 or XF-45 in conjunction with raw coins.
And that not only applies to the title, but also the description.
I found that out the hard way.

But you CAN say AU or XF.

 

Well I appreciate the opinions, I'll go with the "pass" idea as it just looks too good! You can see some actual wear on her chest if you zoom in but none of the other areas show it! The sellers other pics have the same great looking additions. I'd say he has taken some photography classes minimum or has very nice photo accessories!! Besides, too much competition for me to give it a good go!!

 

It may not be indicative of all the sellers inventory, but a perusal revealed quite a few that appear to have been enhanced and then set out by the sump pump to regain what was lost.

The 1917 Lib Qtr has some nasty looking rim hits on the reverse. Also, Ms. Liberty should have worn a shin guard. Other than that, it's a nice looking coin.

 

A raw coin on e-bay with a questionable photograph from a seller without perfect feedback and a description that hints it is a problem coin. How many red flags do you need? FWIW, there appears to be a scratch on the obverse at 4 o'clock.

 

It's remarkable to me how closely this seller's photographic style resembles that of another huge ebayer from Texas, whose name I'm not sure I'm allowed to post. In the case of the latter, the coins are overdipped or otherwise problematic in ways the outstanding, clever photos don't reveal. I think this seller knows exactly what "unc. details" means. Also, he has too many pricey raw coins, such as the '89 CC and the '93-S Morgans. They're not slabbed for a reason. As was said, too many red flags!

 

The big seller from Texas I referred to also has a full, 7-day return policy and 99+% feedback. Unfortunately, all this means is that 1), people often don't know what they're getting and 2), are often reluctant to give negative feedback even when they're severely disappointed. On another forum, before the post was taken down, a buyer had mentioned this co. (the one I'm referring to) by name and complained he had spent $3,000 on coins that ALL came back BB'd from PCGS.

As you all know, there are too many sellers selling over-dipped and otherwise questionable stuff on ebay and no one seems the wiser.

 

It really looks great in the photo, but I just can't pull the trigger on something like that raw, without seeing it in hand.

 

When I see "details" anything....that means CLEANED. I'd pass.

 

I have some different questions about this coin, it is definitely a type one reverse, but it looks like the chain mail on Miss Liberty has been added. Here is mine to compare to.



Did they have some intermediate strikes that occurred between the type 1 and type 2? Maybe a type 1 and 1/2?

 

If it was as good of a deal as the guy is trying to hype it up to be, he would have had it slabbed. Too Many Red Flags For My Taste On This One!

 

I don't collect silver but I am very interested in the photography of coins - my first thought was that the black background and highlights was in the same style as GSC

 

GSC had 100% up to a month or two ago when a buyer posted 4 negatives regarding his coins coming back as cleaned/altered. I thought the basic of all forums was to share information and chat about coins. Why in heavens creation would GreatSouthernCoin not be called out? I have gotten several coins from them, but then I collect for the strike not caring so much about whether it grades or not.

 

There is only Type I and Type II struck in 1917. The Type I has 13 stars arranged in rows of 6 & 7 on the reverse and Ms. Liberty sports a "bare breast" just as the coin depicts in the auction.

The Type II, 3 stars were move below the eagle on the reverse and Ms. Liberty gets a new chain mail vest.

 

You nailed the seller easily enough. Some forums don't allow proper names, even if that seems counter to good sense and helping other collectors. I don't know, perhaps they don't want to risk a libel lawsuit.