Both the 1927 and the 1927-D are available in MS FH at what are very reasonable prices given their scarcity.
I just double-checked (7/9/06) and Heritage Auction Galleries has a 1927 MS66 FH that can be bought for $2,200 (including buyer's premium).
David Lawrence Rare Coins has a 1927 MS 64 FH that is in auction right now - next bid is less than $400.
I bought my 1927 MS66 FH, NGC, December, 2005. I bought my 1927-D MS65 FH, PCGS, February, 2006 (see picture).
In grades MS60 thru MS67, P
Altered Surfaces - maybe/maybe not. But if you are really, really confident the coin is correctly graded and it has no altered surfaces, then you should have no problems cracking it out and submitting raw to PCGS or NGC.
My personal philosophy is: "Buy the coin, not the holder, provided the coin is in an acceptable holder."The picture submitted by MWIT only shows the obverse, and perhaps the alteration is on the reverse? Even so, it is hard to tell without having coin in hand, but is it p
Perhaps I am in the minority -- am very satisfied with NCS/NGC response times.
While I am not totally pleased over some of the results in that I just "know" some of them should be higher (in grade), I have no problems with the response times of NCS and NGC (and even PCGS).
I sent 2 quarters raw, a 50c piece raw and two Morgans raw (total of 5 coins) to NGC for grading. Sent Registered mail 02/13/2006. I received notification today (03/06/07) that the coins were shipped.
Maybe I am counti
Likelihood of crossover from one to the other is mostly directly correlated to your own grading ability.
I have had ICG slabbed coins that crossed to NGC (and some to PCGS). Some did not. I have had NGC coins rejected by PCGS; and I have had PCGS coins rejected by NGC.
A good guideline is the following:
1. Given a coin in a slab with grade M (M is whatever it is).
2. If the coin is PQ and has a chance of being graded M+n, then the coin is likely to crossover.
3. If the coin is a so
Would you pay top dollar for a diamond with a flaw/inclusion that is incorrectly labeled as a D flawless?
I doubt if there are very many coin collectors who would pay top dollar for a D flawless diamond that they, themselves, can see an inclusion with a 5x loupe. So why would such a person turn around and pay top dollar for a flawed coin that is labeled flawless - as in MS or PR 70?
I, too, decided I wanted to own some "flawless" coins in the form of mint and proof state quarter sets.
A true story of a coin that started as 58, then to bodybag, 62, 63, 63PQ, 64 and, alas, 61.
This is a true story of what was once an absolutely gorgeous 1821 bust half: champagne gold with silvery electric blue, magenta, and green toning about peripheries and changing to light golden centers -balanced on both sides; lustrous w/full cartwheel, no discernible marks, no wear - even the clasp was well-struck.
I bought it July, 2001, for MS62 money even though it was graded as AU58 by PCGS (old P
Are you aware of the ANA-endorsed Coin Insurance offered in association with Hugh Wood Inc.?
Someone asked about a good coin insurance program and I answered via member contact. Got to thinking maybe there are others who would like the information below.
Hugh Wood Inc., 45 Broadway, New York, NY 10006
Offers an ANA-endorsed coin insurance program, insurer is AXA ART INSURANCE CORPORATION.
I elected the GOLD option, coverage is $170,000 - only h
I thought a main goal of the registry was to show-off collections and encourage friendly competition?
I notice there are a lot of "obscured" sets, including category winners. I believe that if a collector wishes to hide his or her set or their company's set, fine: do so.
But if they want to hide them, why are they also eligible to "win?" If they don't want to share, then fine - unregister the sets and keep them out of the sight and minds of others.
Just my opinion.