I've never had an issue with your images. I think they're great and I like the details they give me.
66.
Once again too much going on for me, so I gave it a 65 but after that last round I'm gun-shy of NGC.
Whoa...never saw that coming. I thought it might have gotten a 66.
Very cool to own one, but they're worth about a buck.
65.
63.
Although 66's are plentiful for this one, I can't give this coin a 66 given the marks and spotting. I went with 65.
I'm not seeing anything other than the possible doubling from the doubled master hub for this year. Probably 50% of the 1972s from all mints...
I'm not sure I get this argument. Of course you wouldn't buy if the price was too high. However, you would by if the price was low and you...
64.
I don't see a cud either. The die chip is minor.
Wow! Wow! Wow! Holy Sh*%!
Look, I'm not some hard ass, sue you type. As I said, just have the courtesy to put up a sign saying that the marked prices are outdated. Just...
I agree with Merc. I do hold anyone, whether they are 20 or 70 years old to the same standards if they are selling. Whether they are a Fortune...
My analogy is not flawed at all. What you're saying is that since they can't manage their prices efficiently they should be excused. Your excuse...
LOL! But then again, who would expect them to keep their quoted prices up to date?!
Imagine if the New York Mercantile Exchange engaged in such practices. "We're so sorry, but the price we quoted was the price of silver at the...
Separate names with a comma.