Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2321262, member: 1892&quot;]Wish I&#039;d seen this before the results. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I disagree with only the Walker on that list (and I disagree strongly); strike quality and color keep that thing below MS65, nothing else. There are very few physical marks on that coin and I&#039;d scarf it for 63 money every day of the week.</p><p><br /></p><p>The 1860-O Half probably merits a Gold bean IMO; I&#039;d be hard-pressed to go below AU53 for it and wouldn&#039;t argue AU55. They probably based their opinion on the fact that it&#039;s a <b>titanic</b> strike with visible wear, and I can see that. Frankly, I&#039;d go over market for that coin regardless of grade. It&#039;s a standout.</p><p><br /></p><p>Kinda surprised the Oregon Trail Beaned at 66<b>+</b>. Think it arrived there as an &quot;ugly 67.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>The 2C has verdigris (maybe PVC) on the scroll at top right of the shield; I&#039;d be seriously considering cracking that puppy to arrest it. That one had me thinking about the CAC sticker as well, but it&#039;s a Slider to me and if they chose it for Mint State, 63 isn&#039;t ridiculous. It really bothers me that TPG&#039;s will encapsulate coins with active degradation going on.</p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t think either the 1808 or 1898 would have Beaned, and I suspect you agreed which is why you did what you did with them. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> The 1808 is probably close, but the gouge on the IHC&#039;s neck should probably keep it below PR65.[/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