Extra! Extra! The big bnb news!!!!! 3 legger on its way!

BNB, do you think the "smudge " you mention might be a very light fingerprint?

And as to value, rarity, desirability,etc, of varieties and coins, at least the 1922 no D and the 3-L Buffalo were HONEST mistakes of the mint, rather than the 1913 nickel, the 1933 St. Gaudens, the 1974 Aluminum Lincoln ( no tracking), and thousands of patterns and downright thefts by mint workers,officials ,and the government in particular. I think the 2 most recognizable coins of America are the 3-L buffalo and the 1955/55 Doubled die.

Happy Holidays,
Jim

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I was just reading Breen. I know he was not always correct but he thought the pressman took an emery stick to the die to remove the clash. Most say a polishing caused the variety. Just thought it was interesting. Wonder if they were able to polish a die without removing it from the press?

 

I think one of the driving points of the 37-D Three Legged is the relative availability of the coin, even in mint state. I don't think a single Heritage major auction goes by without at least two or three (or more) MS Three Legged coins being on the block. I think the most apt comparison is actually the 09-S VDB Lincoln, another coin of such relative availability that it has actually driven the popularity of the coin. As an example, the 37-D 3 legger's population at NGC and PCGS runs well over 1500 coins (admittedly, there must be a good number of resubmits here). By comparison, the 16 DDO Buffalo has a grand total of 13 certified MS coins at both services according to Lange. What this means is that there are literally hundreds of collectors who have a single Buffalo and that is a 3 Legger. I suspect there is a similar story behind the demand for the S-VDB.
Lange's quote on the 37-D 3 Leg is apt: "They turn up for sale less often than their certified population would suggest, due to an unceasing demand that results in quick placement."

 

WHOA? FOR SALE ALREADY???
Man, and this was a "one of a kind" 3 legger. (Still haven't answered me or anybody else why it is 3 of a kind)
BNB you said this coin was

(Thread right here) http://www.cointalk.com/t81883/
(Can't even begin to wonder how you can make a claim like that.)

And you are selling???
Why so soon?
Also, why aren't you providing the people at collectors universe, the pictures you took, so the people there can get an idea of what the coin truly looks like? Seems pretty deceitful to me.


http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=754257&STARTPAGE=1

 

One would have thought that, with BNB's presence on both forums, he would have known that this kind of Tom Foolery would have been exposed in a quick second.

 

What are you talking about?

 

You know what this means... I'm on the ignore list!!!!
So BNB has no clue...

 

You're selling your almighty and absolutely beautiful 3-legged nickel that you preached so much about. You're misleading others with the heritage photos as well knowing they don't truly represent the coin. edited

 

He's referring to to T$ post:

 

I agree with the sentiments of Broadstruck onf the PCGS forum:

It should seem obvious that he can't sell it here lest he be roasted unmercifully. In addition, he did say that coin looks different in hand than the Heritage photo. I have seen BNB's photo and it stinks. I wouldn't show them that photo either.

So he talked some trash about a coin he bought sight unseen and now that he has it in hand, he is no longer enamored with it. Everyone here has done that before, except maybe the trash talking. Maybe instead of rubbing his nose in it you guys could show a little compassion. You know, for the Christmas spirit and all!

 

Misleading is ok then?


stainless

 

I don't think the reason we are being harsh, is is the fact that he is selling it because he is no longer enamored with it. It is the fact that he knows that the heritage photos don't show the coin accurately, and while his photos may suck, they probably show the coin's color and luster a bit better, and I think his and HA's photos combined, might show the coin accurately.
He decided to only post Heritage photos of the coin, and say that the coin looks different. That isn't right, when he knows that those Heritage photos makes the coin look better than it actually is!
This reminds me of a time where I sold, one of my best morgans. (At the time) I believe it was an 1884-O, NGC MS63 morgan dollar. It had a great strike, and was a very nice MS63, but it had a very ugly black spot on the reverse, and no matter how hard I tried, I couldn't get GOOD pictures of the coin, and the spot. I took some very good photos, without the spot, and when time came to sell I was going to use those photos, and just say there was a black spot. But, I thought better of it, and instead of just putting up those good photos, I put up a piece of crap photo of the reverse, clearly showing the black spot, and stated that I would give a return if the buyer found the spot to be worse in hand. I emailed the buyer twice, just to make sure he wanted the coin, and he said that he did.
I shipped the coin out, he got it, he loved it, and I received glowing feedback. I think if I were to not take the additional photos I did, I think the buyer would have been a bit shocked at the spot.

 

I gotta' disagree with you on this one Lehigh (which I usually never do). Personally, I don't care what he does with the coin, if he doesn't like it and wants to sell it, it's 100% his right. BUT, imo it's not right to post the HA pics after he's said they don't look anything like the coin, it's misleading, and yeah, there are a lot of people who do the same thing, and they're sellers I would never do business with.

 

TMoney, respectfully, I am not sure that BNB's photos show the coin any better than the Heritage photos. It is still unclear to me what BNB doesn't like about the obverse -- if it is die erosion (I honestly can't tell from his arrows what he is pointing at), that should not bother any prospective buyer looking to buy a 3-Legged Buffalo. I also think most CU buyers are sophisticated enough to know the accuracy of the HA small photos. In other words, I am not sure there's anything on BNB's coin that equates to your "black spot".

I agree it is kind of sad that BNB was so excited about this coin that he was getting for Christmas and is now already looking to move on from it.

 

How is it misleading? He stated that the coin does not look exactly like the photo. You guys saw his terrible photo so you think it is misleading. My bet is that the Heritage photo is much closer to reality than BNB's photo and since we don't have the coin in hand, we don't know. The photo he should show should be the one that best represents the coin in hand. If that happens to be the Heritage photo which is of better quality so be it. As long as he admits the photo looks different than the coin in hand and offers a return on the coin, I see absolutely nothing unethical about his actions.

 

saying the coin looks different isnt enough...differnt how..less toning, more toning...looks crappier, much nicer?



stainless

 

Paul is correct. Look at your statement "when he knows" - no offense to bnb, but he jumps in and out quickly and I am not sure he does "know". Again no offense intended - but bnb you do tend to rush things a bit. Second - T$ how do you know the heritage photo is misleading? Have you seen the coin in hand to compare to the picture(or his pictures)? No offense intended to anyone, especially BNB and T$ - but I do not trust his knowledge at this point to look at the coin and to photograph the coin(maybe over time as he gains experience), but I do know if he does not like it or disagree's with it he can sell it and use the Heritage photo's. There is absolutely no reason to trash his actions - and yes we have all been there. Capturing eye appeal in a coin is tough with photos. So lets just chill as Paul mentioned is the spirit of xmas.

 

Did someone get caught with his knickers down? MY, my....nothing escapes the Coin Talk police.

 

...