[ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH]
I don’t think the toning will carry it. Hammer Price 14000
Love the overdate. Nice one
That’s a great progression
I don’t think it’s probably as bad in hand. That being said I’d grade it ms 64 as I don’t think anything that significant belongs on a gem 65 or...
Oh I know. I’ve lost a few friends to opiates and very worried about a couple other praying they get clean. It’s not a good thing
I think even today it’s a solid 65. Even for A 80-s. Good eye appeal too. Pl tough call not in hand has a chance
Surface looks off to me. Not original. Why not in a top tpg slab. And agreed 63 at best
[ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] But giving this girl an opportunity to show off some pretty seated dimes....
Nice. I had a business strike 85 that had similar toning
Your 13 has a satiny luster. If not cleaned or impaired which I can’t tell through my screen I’d call it a 64 today. The 38 a 65 or possibly a...
Been my type set Morgan for a long time back when I was actually concerned about a registry set and trying to build it. I dismantled most of it...
[ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH] [ATTACH]
[ATTACH] Ok here’s another kind of striation nobody has posted. Mint made adjustment marks from filing an overweight planchet very common on these...
Yeah the one 66 cac. And toned pretty. The other an absolute monster. 63 cac. I paid strong for both around 2012-13. But nothing like todays...
True the c1. Much rarer. But agreed tough with decent surfaces
Damn. A 1802/0. That’s a beyond tough coin. Congratulations and recover quickly. Though vaxxed and boosted I’m sure it’s nothing but an inconvenience
Nice. At first I thought reused planchet common in the 1790s. But then saw the outline and the lettering too big. A deceptive one at first Jack....
Nice picks.
Not trying to hijack this s thread either sorry
Separate names with a comma.
