ldhair

I'm about finished trying to help the jerks that post once asking for help and never come back or are too busy to answer questions. 

@xinfantry

Could you please share the grade that ANACS gave the coin? 

My opinion is no and no 

I'll guess a gasket punch was used. 

On 4/20/2024 at 8:46 PM, VasquezJ said:

Well obviously you have no knowledge about coins so maybe you shouldn’t even speak on it. 

The coin has been cleaned and has been in circulation. It has lost most of it's luster. It's worth the price of silver at this point. That is about $10.48 as of this morning. Nice image. It leaves little more to learn about the coin. If you don't agree, send the coin to NGC and prove the members here are wrong. 

Anyone with a basic understanding of this hobby will tell you it's a waste of time and money. 

We all know what the OP is all about. Good chance he is a past member that had his feelings hurt and is back to cause trouble. I'm sure he will be back with more false claims. 

Just a guess. Maybe NGC does not want two different labels out there for the same variety. I remember when the variety got it's nickname on the coin forums. I believe that was before the variety had an FS#. Can't think of many nicknames that lasted long. 

I'll add some of my thoughts on the coin.

The coin was not mounted flat in the holder. When the coin was imaged the lens was not flat with the coin. This created areas of the image that were a bit out of focus. Not enough depth of field to correct that. Much of the detail was lost. A bit of camera shake probably added to the focus problem.

On the obverse the stars look really nice but out of focus. It's hard to tell much about the scratches. Some of that may just be on the holder. I can't tell. The angle of the lighting really highlight these. Very little wear above eye and ear.

On the reverse I'm seeing some wear on the top of the wings or is that just a strike issue? The details of the talons/claws look really strong. They would probably look even better if the image was in focus. 

I'll guess ANACS graded the coin at 50 or 53 but I feel it's better that that. 

I don't think I would change the holder. Over the last few months, I have sold a lot of these early ANACS graded coins. I was shocked at some of the prices they brought at auction. Some bid more knowing the surfaces are stable and others feel they may grade higher if cracked out. 

I would love to see better images and what ANACS graded it at. 

Nice find.

I'm thinking AU-55 to 58. Nice coin.

The OP is just making up stuff. He knows the coin is just damaged.

It's clear to me that the coin was not struck on copper. The scale is wrong. 

I'm not seeing anything that looks like a die break. Nothing that looks like die failure. The weak lettering on the reverse looks like the results from a filled die. I'm seeing lots of dents, scratches and wear from circulation. Part of the rim damage came from being smashed or possibly the blank was punched from the end of the strip. This can create a blank that is not the same thickness across the blank. There is one spot on the rim that could have been caused by someone using the coin as a screwdriver. 

It's not possible to be sure what caused some damage but it's still clear that it is just damage. I'm not sure NGC would even slab the coin but I'm sure they will not grade it. If anything the label would just say DAMAGED. It will cost $50 to $60 in fees to answer that. 

I would take that same money and go out for a nice steak dinner.

On 4/12/2024 at 3:26 PM, VKurtB said:

Larry, I know you disagree with me on this, and that’s okay. But there IS A RIGHT WAY AND A WRONG WAY TO DO THIS HOBBY. Actually quite a few of each. I will never pretend there isn’t in order to spare someone’s feelings. I am not wired that way; I never was; and I never will be. Allowing someone to continue to go astray is actually EVIL in its own right.

We don't have a problem, just a different way of teaching. We both get results.