brg5658

Be that as it may, tumbling, bumbling, mumbling marks or whatever. Thems serious gouges on a common coin with 10s of millions extant. Why would anyone pay $10K for it beyond me. If graders have the capability to know how each mark on a coin is made, and then grade high if tumbled marks, low if post made marks, well then, they must be psychic.........

 

Best, HT

Well, they also claim to know the difference between a coin toned by "natural" means and one with some "artificial" process involved. There must be a lot of crystal balls in the grading rooms.

And lastly, regardless of whether those hits are made by damage or some part of the minting process, the question remains whether a coin with those marks should be deemed a 68. There are plenty of coins that are held back because of poor minting processes. Franklin proofs are one example, 1955D Washington quarters are another and plenty of bad quality P$. Just because a coin is as minted, doesn't make that minting high grade worthy.

And, let's not forget the active PVC on the reverse. With that it shouldn't be in a slab at all...

No matter what stories people create about the defects on the fasces on the reverse -- I don't need to see it in hand, the pictures tell me enough to know that the coin in the OP is not an MS68FB dime by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm done with this thread...

Maybe what you are missing is that those "hits/scrapes" you are talking about most definately are not hits or scrapes on the torch. Most coins that I've looked at from the same period have them. They are voids from where the metal didn't fill in the die completely when coin was minted. Had you been looking at the coin in hand, under light, you probably wouldn't have noticed them, but even if u did you would have known right away that they weren't "hits/scrapes". I don't know if any 1964 Kennedy halves exist without those same characteristics to some degree. They are also very commonly found on Franklin halves and especially early Franklin proofs. (50-51 mainly) although common on 53 & later.

 

They are clearly post-strike abrasions/hits. Either we're looking at different coins, or you need to get your eyes checked.

 

Thank you thats absolutely incorrect. Thanks for your pretty red arrows though.... those were exactly what I was talking about NOT BEING HITS, and they still arent.... I'll check my eyes if you go look at some coins... clearly you could use some experience.

AHFreak, the red arrows were there the first time I posted that picture on PAGE 2 of this thread. If you would have read the whole thread, you would know that.

As for them somehow being pre-strike planchet anomalies, you are simply wrong. As physics-fan has pointed out in his post above this one, that guess fails the logic test for how coins are actually struck between dies.

Maybe what you are missing is that those "hits/scrapes" you are talking about most definately are not hits or scrapes on the torch. Most coins that I've looked at from the same period have them. They are voids from where the metal didn't fill in the die completely when coin was minted. Had you been looking at the coin in hand, under light, you probably wouldn't have noticed them, but even if u did you would have known right away that they weren't "hits/scrapes". I don't know if any 1964 Kennedy halves exist without those same characteristics to some degree. They are also very commonly found on Franklin halves and especially early Franklin proofs. (50-51 mainly) although common on 53 & later.

They are clearly post-strike abrasions/hits. Either we're looking at different coins, or you need to get your eyes checked.

This coin was also graded 68 (NGC MS-68 * PL):

 

I keep it because it is so ridiculous its funny, and its an inexpensive coin.

 

(sorry for the crappy old pictures, but you get the point)

 

Well, it appears to be of the extremely rare "one sided coin" type, so that makes it special.

brg5658:

 

Wondercoin is not the same person as the "Just having Fun" collector. Wondercoin has acted as an agent for Just Having Fun, helping him sell (and I think also buy) some of the coins from his world- class collections.

 

Mark

Thank you Mark. I appreciate your reply. I was 99% sure they were not the same person, but good to know for sure.

Classic example of grade the submitter, not the coin.

 

Really? So, you know WHO submitted the coin?

Are you assuming Wondercoin originally submitted it? If you are, I would wager some significant funds that you are wrong.

 

No one implied that. Given the pedigree, I would assume wondercoin purchased it out of the Just Having Fun collection? Is Just Having Fun the same person as wondercoin?? Don't get your britches all in a bunch Bochi.

 

 

Ignorance here abounds.

 

JHF was well known for many of the series/coins he collected that were the top of the top. Many of the sources of those coins, particularly Roosies, were known as well.

 

It has also been known that Wondercoins has been his agent at selling them.

 

And, yes, it was basically implied that Wondercoins was the submitter.

 

So, in short, because I have your alias on the PCGS boards ignored, but not here yet, the answer to your question if Wondercoins and JustHavingFun are the same person, is NO. Wondercoins has always been an upfront person and not hiding behind any other persona.

 

That shouldn't have even been a real question to ask, but since it was, I will answer it.

 

Rather than think that someone is trying to pull something, hide something, or get something over on another, I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt when I see things being sold; story or no.

In this case, enough people that were around, and paying attention, on the PCGS boards some years back, would know the JHF story and coins.

All bow down to the great and all-knowing Bochiman.

1) I never implied nor stated that wondercoin was shady or doing anything wrong. I'm well aware of who he is, and his position in dealing and marketing ultra high grade ultra moderns. Much of that I find to be smoke and mirrors, but I have always found wondercoin as a dealer to be upstanding and honest on the PCGS boards. You, on the other hand, are like a toddler.

2) Please do block/ignore me here. I have had you on ignore for years, but I still like to "unmask" your complaining posts on occasion for S&G. You never let me down. Though, it is pretty humorous how you only show up here when you have to defend the honor of someone from ATS.

Classic example of grade the submitter, not the coin.

 

Really? So, you know WHO submitted the coin?

Are you assuming Wondercoin originally submitted it? If you are, I would wager some significant funds that you are wrong.

No one implied that. Given the pedigree, I would assume wondercoin purchased it out of the Just Having Fun collection? Is Just Having Fun the same person as wondercoin?? Don't get your britches all in a bunch Bochi.

Looks like PVC on the reverse to me. I like the coin as a 7, not sure about the 8.

The PCGS price guide is as follows:

66FB: $65

67FB: $375

68FB: $10,000!!

How does a Roosevelt Dime with two huge hits/scrapes across the torch on the reverse grade MS68 FB? Is that active PVC on the reverse towards the top of the torch?

Kenny, these were my exact same thoughts.

This is a blatant example of a little color massively inflating the grade of an otherwise truly pedestrian coin. The gashes on the fasces on the reverse would bring this coin down to an MS66 IMO. And, the color isn't even that great. I have NO idea how this got into an MS68FB holder. Is this really the best surviving example of the 1.3 billion minted? I'm also not convinced that "green stuff" on the upper reverse is toning -- looks like active PVC to me.

It is fine that you posted, but are you posting to show the RB description on a 3 cent nickel. As a matter of fact I find it funny

It's a pattern in copper, not a 3 cent nickel.

I thought this was a fun and NGC-relevant piece of exonumia that I purchased recently. As best I can tell, 99 of these were slabbed for DW Lange's wedding in 2001.

It's a dark side medal, but thought a few of you may appreciate this. You can read more about it in my post in the NGC World Coins Forum.

Really happy with this newp from a January Heritage auction:

Picked up these two a few months back. Thought I posted them here, but I see that I didn't.

Please forgive my post of "Dark Side" material -- but I thought some of you may enjoy seeing this new Queen Victoria sixpence I picked up. It is blinding in hand. You can tell she's pretty in the HA images, but she absolutely beams under the camera lens.

Happy holidays to all, Brandon

Bob, SUPER medal!

Just purchased this Acorn Sixpence today from the offerings at Atlas Numismatics.

Is there somewhere with a photographic database of all known Conders? Also, would one of you mind explaining some of the jargon associated with these coins? I assume D&H numbers are some sort of cataloging system, but where can I access that catalog? Is it available online or only in print?

As Cyberspacevoid mentioned, D&H stands for Dalton & Hamer. Their guide is the primary numbering system for Conder tokens used for cataloging.

The full original catalog is available for browsing online at this link.

The best user-friendly version of the Dalton & Hamer reference (in my opinion) is the electronically available (PDF) version of the guide called "The Ultimate Guide to Conder Tokens" which can be purchased for $75 online at this link. It is worth every penny of the price, and is invaluable for searching for text legends, edge letterings, and has pictures of every token with descriptions.

You may also want to give the Wikipedia article on Conder Tokens a read. I added tons of new content to that page with cited references back in 2013. Most of the main references are cited there, and the history and collecting of the tokens is described.

Best, Brandon

William Till, Silver Halfpenny, 1794, obv lion rampant to left, HALFPENNY TOKEN . SLOUGH . BUCKS *RED LION INN *

around, rev view of an inn, MDCCXCIV in exergue, edge plain (Atkins p.5, 22; D&H Buckinghamshire 24; Preston-Morley 1046).

A few spots and light brush marks, otherwise nearly mint state and attractively toned, very rare.

 

BTW......it states it as min state but no mention of proof.....I understood these to be proof issued...unless I was mis informed.

 

WOW!!! That piece is gorgeous, but the bidding did go a bit crazy at £2,100 (~ $3,200).

I also love the lion design, and have it in copper. These Till tokens are an odd bunch, having actually been struck in the 1830s and 1840s by WJ Taylor for Till, not in the year 1794 or 1795 as they are dated. It's been a bit of a mystery to me as to why they were ever lumped with the other 1787-1804 provincial pieces other than the fact they carry these fictitious dates. The original compilers of the token series -- Pye (1795 and 1801), Birchall (1796), Conder (1798), etc. -- never would have seen these as they were issued years later. Nonetheless, I wouldn't worry too much if your silver piece is technically a proof or a mint state example.

Congrats on your new tokens! (thumbs u

Wonder how many were crossed from here to there or were those submitted raw?

That's the problem with census populations -- you can never really know. You just know the number of "grading events" at each service. You can't know the corrected numbers for resubmissions or crossovers.

Also, NGC has been grading Conders for a LOT longer than PCGS -- and while their recently released censuses of them are better than nothing, I know from personal experience that there are some pieces missing. My best guess is that this is because NGC has a difficult time massaging their data into clear counts because of the various text that they have printed on the labels over time. In fact, I'm pretty sure my DH-231 is not among those currently counted in the census, as it doesn't link up with the census when you look at the cert-verify page.

I noticed the same thing with the populations of their CWTs -- something is better than nothing, but there can certainly also be some graded tokens out there in NGC holders that are not listed in the pops.

==================

With regard to your token Stef, it looks to be a nice example. These Godiva's go for strong money in gem. I paid $425 for mine I believe 2 years ago. They aren't as silly money-wise as some of the "End of Pain" tokens, but they are certainly popular and demand high prices. I was fine paying up for mine because I really liked the look of my example and I was able to see it in hand -- and I am holding it long (35-40 years).

Keep us posted when it arrives! Congrats!

-Brandon

Below are the pops that NGC lists as of today, 28 Sep 2015 for the Godiva pieces (but I seriously doubt they are complete). That means there are at least 7 other MS65s around (besides mine and HT's) and at least 2 MS66s out there somewhere.

-Brandon

Nice HT, I'm wondering if someone can tell me the population of graded?

 

 

Are you asking about the Warks-231 population? Or all of the Godiva's?

I have this 231 in MS65BN. Picked it up at the FUN Winter 2014 show from Ernie Latter. I looked for over 3 years for a nice one though -- they aren't rare, but they seem to be hard to find in gem.

HT, is yours designated RB?

-Brandon

Here's a new one for me. It's dated 1795, despite what the NGC label says.

And here's some up close detail of York minster...