SLQ Raw on EBay

calm down

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you can answer that, I want to ask you about some stocks...

 

Sorry, I didn't

 

This reminds me of other "proof" the Supreme Court didn't accept.

 

Holy Carp... mrbrooklyn!!!




From using the "Image Search" function

 

People often go metal detecting by themselves on land they have permission to detect on. And they occasionally find rare and valuable coins. But by your logic, they have to be stolen because one cannot prove that they weren’t. That would never hold up in court.

 

Was he the same mrbrklyn that was a member here on CoinTalk once?

 

We are all grown up at this point.

 

I'm not making any kind of argument like that. And I am expressing not opinion on issues relating to privacy and government surveillance. When the Gardner Museum was robbed, it became apparent that the paintings had been used as cash between mod gangs for 30 years now. It is a cash economy that evades taxes, but it is not good for the public or the art market. What is worst would be if it was like the coin market where the coins would show up again on the regular market, and dealers just took them in despite obvious signs and knowledge that they are stolen. That happens in the coin business, commonly. It doesn't happen in the art business. One can't just steal a Van Gogh or even a Picasso print and run down to SoHo and hock it without explanation.

 

I think I was fairly thorough in my description, and I don't think you usually need a notary. Appraisals is another matter and also afford protection.

 

You grossly overestimate the scope of the problem and the ability of a dealer to recognize every stolen coin. They are able to recognize high-profile coins, cross-reference lists reported stolen items, and observe suspicious behavior on part of the seller. They are not able to recognize that a collection of raw generic Morgan dollars or bullion (or any type for that matter) offered to then, which had already passed hands, was stolen. You merely assume they can because “they should” and because “they are liable.” The second part means that dealers try to not buy any stolen stuff and do their due diligence when there are red flags, but they DO NOT have the ability to recognize every single thing that has been stolen.

I generally refrain from using the phrase “you’re stupid” unless warranted, but you are clearly lacking in common sense in what you demand of the numismatic community. You are speaking emotionally rather than logically

 

Holy smokes! I can’t remember a shield struck with details like this one. Absolutely drop dead gorgeous!

 

I guess the fundamental disconnect is that I handle exclusively lower-value and more-common coins, unless I find a rarity by sheer luck, and I simply don't see any mechanism that could track such coins without killing the hobby.

For what it's worth, I agree that dealers should exercise due diligence when handling actual rarities, on par with high-end fine art.

 

Could the weakly struck wing be caused by the fully struck shield? ie: The metal filled the hammer die (obverse), leaving less metal to fill the anvil die (reverse) resulting in the lack of details in the left (facing) wing.

 

No. It is a low relief area (which don’t have strike issues) with little variation in elevation. That’s how the lighting makes it look like there is no distinct separation of the feathers

 

I don't know!!!

 

Is it really you Ruben? How have you been?

 

My research says that there is issues with metal flow on the shield and if can cause weekness on the back, especially on the lettering but also the wing. Few strikes do it all with Standing Liberty Quaters, especially 1917 type I. There are discussions about the sheild and the metal flow about the literature. I have to ask my father for more details. He just pointed me to the ANA guild which is buried somewhere. But finding a good reverse on this coin is a bonus. The focus on JUST the head is an after affect of the FH designation. To have a full head and half a shield and a faded wing kind of sinks.

Here is a good reference
https://books.google.com/books?hl=e...ts=zWGH8plCmN&sig=9_41HRIv3UNU8JJBUCg0c7Aw-kk

http://articles.calkinsc.com/MNS/Journal2014.pdf

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Standing_Liberty_Quarter/V-59oAEACAAJ?hl=en

You are very observant, and have a good grasp of the coin minting process. Try to avoid the bluster you often see on the internet and keep reading. FWIW, the one we had was a great strike:





You can see all the feathers distinctly. This is the coin that NCG delisted from there database, and was stolen. It is in ciruclation somewhere. We also look for the 'O', but that seems to be a die variety and not a nick. We see it oten when looking at 1917 Type 1's.

This image is very similar to the shield weakness pattern here


Bluster on the internet can mislead one. Continue to read and learn, and get a good collection of books.

 

No



That is Abba!

 

Well, considering the shield is opposite to the eagle’s head and neck, metal flow won’t affect the wing feather areas you indicated earlier.

Not a die variety. There are two hits on the O.

You also had angled lighting that accentuated the depth of the low relief devices. Of course it’s going to look better struck the overlit PCGS TrueViews