Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Numiscent, post: 686466, member: 16300&quot;]Hey guys, I just happened to glance at the forum tonight in my free time (Sorry that I seldom do.)&nbsp; I&#039;ll gladly chime in and help clear up a lot of the guesswork involved when only having photos to view. I read all of the posts up to this, so if I miss something critical in my answer, just point it out to me and I&#039;ll address it.</p><p><br /></p><p>Both coins are in the weak strike / possibly altered, possibly original / &quot;just ok&quot; category that a lot of my recent S mints on eBay have fallen into.&nbsp; I don&#039;t see signs of cleaning on either.&nbsp; I&#039;m not positive about the state of color on either one.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Sometimes coins can be obviously recolored, whether they are pale pink from being dipped or even if amazing looking coins &quot;pumpkin&quot; blazing red gems.&nbsp; Other coins are unmistakably original.&nbsp; Then there are a bunch in between.&nbsp; When talking early raw Lincolns, there are a LOT in between.&nbsp; These are two of them.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>If I thought they were definitely original, I may have considered having them slabbed (probably MS62 or so due to the softness).&nbsp; Or maybe I&#039;d try to sell them raw, pricing them a little lower than slabbed would bring, in exchange for avoiding the headache that is submitting copper coins to PCGS or NGC.&nbsp; In that case I would stress that I think they are totally original, which would be the big selling point.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>You may wonder why don&#039;t I explain all of this in my auction description if I think they might not be original in color.&nbsp; There are several reasons.&nbsp; One, if there&#039;s a chance that they are original, I&#039;m doing the coin&#039;s more harm than they deserve.&nbsp; I always list in my auction descriptions that a coin is definitely or likely recolored if I think it is.&nbsp; People appreciate the honesty and it doesn&#039;t hurt me.&nbsp; That brings me to the second reason...I think it&#039;s assumed that most raw early Lincolns from the branch mints are probably raw for a reason.&nbsp; The low prices they bring surely reflect that!&nbsp; I also assume that when I buy them, and it quickly becomes so commonplace that without realizing I just assume it&#039;s generally accepted.&nbsp; Of course they are not all altered, but I don&#039;t think I&#039;m delivering any news by saying it comes with the territory.</p><p><br /></p><p>Back to these coins in question.&nbsp; Both have mint luster, which is the single hardest thing for me to find for both a raw 24-S and raw 26-S.&nbsp; So when I see that, I immediately think &quot;bonus&quot; and want them.&nbsp; Then if I see hairlines or other evidence of abrasive cleaning, I decide do I want to sell this and mention the hairlines, or do I want to pass?&nbsp; Nothing of the sort stood out to me on these, so my thought was to offer them.&nbsp; These dates are slim pickings and even a not-so-pretty 26-S with mint luster has appeal to me both as a collector and as a dealer.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>These are the thoughts that go through my head, more so than simply &quot;is it original or not&quot; or &quot;will it slab or not.&quot;&nbsp; You will surely drive yourself crazy playing that game with S mint Lincolns from the teens and twenties!</p><p><br /></p><p>Hope that helps.&nbsp; I must have missed some of those great points brought up.&nbsp; I&#039;ll be glad to add more if asked.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in