James_OldeTowne

Can you please supply a photo with the item next to, or on a ruler? An idea of diameter would help greatly.

Or, it could just be common toning streaks.

That looks tooled to me, as Roger noted. I say that only because of what appears to be a dramatic change in texture or color from the blurry photo.

What a fabulous proof type example! The 1883 N/C is one of my all-time favorite proof coins, period. As some of you know, I assembled a complete circulation strike set of V-nickels some time ago, and still have it - it's maybe my favorite collection that I've finished. The lone exception I picked out was: the 1883 N/C nickel. Mine is ex-NGC PR-65 CAM! I did crack it out and placed it in my Dansco where it's been happy ever since, going on 20 years.

I'm not really qualified to make any kind of clever or insightful observation. However, this kind of work always reinforces my admiration for the skill level required to hand-tool those dies way back in the day.

I agree the numerals are a little distracting. If you cropped it a little more closely, then eliminated the top left and bottom right "7070", that might decrease the noise to a nice, background hum.

Icon-da like it!

My first question: Are there explicitly stated rules banning the practice of using a deholdered slab insert in the registry? If no, and it's still a question of "ethics", the next questions that come to my mind are: Who will be harmed? And to what extent? My suspicion is, since the registry is meaningless to me (and almost certainly most collectors), and nobody is really going to be harmed, then I'm not concerned that there's an ethical question here at all. (Of course, since I do not participate in the registry and am unaware of the rules, my answer is based on a lot of assumptions.)

It's a replica and one that seems to be pretty frequently encountered.

Yep, strike doubling.

There are some exceptions, such as when clashes identify a particularly rare die-state (think: early copper, early half-dollars and dollars). In some cases as well, a huge or grotesque clashed die appeals to some collectors and will pull in a good premium, such as for capped-bust halves with "gills" on the portrait (clashed with the shield on the reverse).

Yep, that's exactly right.

It looks like a cleaned cent to me.

Funny you would post one of the clashed dies - I just yesterday cataloged a trio of Flying Eagles, clashed with the $20, the half-dollar and the quarter.

My observation is that the dearth of in-person shows has driven up online prices, including at auctions.

Alex_in_PA posted a self-slab that I have no problem with at all. I see nothing wrong with selling a coin, well-protected, like that.

I have never seen one either, at least not with truly mirrored fields. However, I did own one that, in-hand, was the closest to prooflike that I've ever seen. This was many years ago and I got a substantial premium for it. If memory serves, it was one of the ultra-common dates - 1923 maybe?

My thoughts also - struck off of decrepit dies that show severe die erosion.

I have a collection of Conder tokens, but lack every one of those. Unfortunately, compared to the days when one could still pick up UNC pieces with some mint red for twenty bucks, their value has skyrocketed to the point that I can't afford the ones I really want at the grade level I'm interested in. But I really like the ones posted here! I'm open to receiving charitable contributions .

Huh, I had no idea such a thing even existed! I wonder accurate / what kind of resolution those miniatures offer?

The photos are too blurry to reliably assess authenticity, but the damage is pretty obvious. Regardless, this one should go straight to NGC for certification.

The OP coin is a legitimate UNC, but only in the MS-61 to 62 range.

I didn't look and probably won't. At the risk of seeming like a Debbie-Downer, collections chock-full of "finest knowns" and "grade rarities" hold basically no interest for me. But I hope the venture proves exciting and educational for you!

I'd be very cautious even though an investment of only $73 has limited loss potential. It could be a bunch of self-slabbed junk.

... which in turn, should teach me not to give a photo a cursory glance before pronouncing judgement! (Or at least, examine the larger resolution photos before forming an opinion.) I concur with your assessment!