USAuPzlBxBob

Then take the certified coin route, pay up, and live a life of coin collecting pleasure.

You got 88% of your money back. I have overpaid for coins in the past where they are genuine. An immediate loss, easily on a par with a 12% loss. Then amortize the fact that one of them is still slightly underwater and I've owned it for 10 years, and if I were to try and sell it, a dealer would have to make money for him to sell it, so I would only get… 70% of what I paid for it. So, technically, it's got a -30% ROI. Inflation has halved the value of things in the last 10 years, too, and at the rate things are going, well, it sort of reminds me of Marisa Tomei's biological clock. I do enjoy my coin collection, however, so there is satisfaction in that. And most of the coins have kept up a little with inflation. It's a hobby. Not really an investment. That's the way it goes.

Send the coin back. You're making your case, step by step, and this is the next step. You've provided a valuable lesson to all of us, you've documented everything the best you can, you've gotten the attention of all the primary parties, and you'll see what happens, good or bad.

And just this morning another coin of my (mere) 14 coin US Gold coin collection (Puzzle Box Gold) has risen 29% on NGC's Price Guide. 1891 CC $5 Liberty… up $725. Ceaseless Happiness.

Without having to join the site to reveal the winning bid, the winning bid was $100,000 since there was no further activity since last Tuesday.

Hasn't budged an inch in price since yesterday when I last posted, close to a day and a half ago… $100,000. Around two hours left to go. Should be fun to check in on the link this evening.

The person who wins this has tons of money. My guess is the winning bid will be $350,000.

You have to come up with a theme for your objectives and an expectation of how much you can afford to spend. Serendipity helped me, in that my first coin just happened to whet my appetite to go for a small gold typeset. Then, extraneous factors limited my objectives — the puzzle box could only house 14 NGC holdered coins — and I knew I wanted a rare US gold typeset, but I didn't want to go broke in the pursuit. I discovered early on how to take photos that were pleasing to me with just a company supplied iPhone. That set the bar for what I was looking for from dealers. The old "you know it when you see it" adage, when browsing online. Glad I collected ten years ago… the coins just seemed to come my way. Today, the pickings available are slim to none… even dealers have difficulty acquiring inventory.

Why? What for? There's more to life than pursuing similar coin websites than we currently avail. No? And so on, and so on…

Interesting to chronicle "the hand" still occurring for matina at Joined: 20 hours ago, 2 posts. (a data point of reference)

Anyone buying this stuff has a completely different motive from that of a "true" coin collector. From Littleton's perspective, it is a hope of fostering future "true" coin collectors. Inexpensive dreck to attract whomever. Nothing to get riled up about.

In the lab I used to work in, an associate played a trick on me, maybe a bet for a beer at the Go Go bar around the corner, after work, saying that he could make a penny float. I took him up on it… and he won the bet. He carefully reached in his pocket and pulled out a penny, filled a little lab beaker with water, and dropped the penny in… but it didn't sink at all. It floated right on top. Earlier he had taken the brand new penny, had put it in the vise edge facing up, then he used a sharp knife and made a small slit in the edge. He put the penny in a beaker of one of the dilute acids we were always using in the lab, and it began to bubble from the small slit he had made. The acid attacked the zinc core much more aggressively than the copper cladding, and it had hollowed out the coin, making it lighter than water.

He definitely didn't know what he was doing. When using a polish gunked on the Dremel attachment, you should always use the shield that comes with the Dremel. You can tell that he got splashed in the face when he revved it up at one point.

This is the best I can manage on this letter. Exceedingly difficult, like doing a crossword puzzle… Mint of the United States Philadelphia, August 25th, 1856 Sir, In the “Act. making appropriations for certain civil expenses of the government" public No. 55 — approved August 18. 1856, I notice one appropriation of $ 2,200. is made to meet the expense incurred under the Contract of the Secretary of the Navy for the “Ingraham Medal”. As this is intended, I presume, to meet the difficulty arising out of the payments of a like amount to Mr. J. B. Longacre whose salary, by your letter of the 25th of June last, was directed to be withheld, I have now to ask whether the Treasurer of the Mint may be authorized to pay Mr. Longacre the arrearage and future installments of salary, or whether the prohibition as stated in the letter refund to mint continue to be enforced. I have the honor to be with great respect Your faithful servant, Hono. James Guthrie James Ross Snowden Secretary of the Treasury Director of the Mint Washington City

So, since the above letter is difficult to decipher, is it indeed the beginning of the asking for the $2,200 back, which was rescinded later?

Looks like this has something to do with… In the mid-1850s, Longacre was engaged by the Navy Department to design a medal to be presented to Captain Duncan Ingraham. Longacre produced the imagery used for the reverse; the obverse was by Assistant Engraver Cross. Although Bowers describes Longacre as having been "strictly ethical in the duties of his office", when the Treasury Department learned that Longacre accepted a $2,200 payment from the Navy for his work, they required that he repay the money under a federal law barring compensation of this kind.

Only 21 states currently require cursive instruction, according to the National Education Association. At St. Edmund, they never stopped teaching it. And surprisingly, some kids are taking to it. Jan 23, 2023 (found the above when I queried the subject)

Sandon, I view my sets rarely these days. I have an ongoing Registry Views Project and it seems that anytime I view my sets, the views on them skew higher overnight. I asked Ali E., once, about how this could possibly happen, could it be from my viewing them even though logged in, and she said no, and that it was probably just coincidence. So, just for example, I looked at all of my eight sets yesterday to pull their start dates from each of their Set Histories, and sure enough, four of the sets showed increased views this morning. Very infrequently do I get that many views on my sets overnight. Maybe I'm being "tracked?" (not to be confused with followed) These days, I look at my Registry coins solely by viewing my Competitive Coins page, which I prefer because I can use the Recently Added display feature which sorts them by their mint years.

I have a 2019 Apollo 11 50th Anniversary Commemorative Coin, sent it to NGC for grading and when it came back there was a fleck of plastic right above Buzz Aldrin's visor. It really bothered me because it was so noticeable. Couldn't get it to budge to save my life. Was thinking of sending it back to NGC for reholdering but never did. Six months later when I looked at the coin the fleck was no longer there. It's in the holder somewhere, but now "out of sight, out of mind." There's many things that can be wrong in a holder, I suppose.

Suspected as much.

For me, the coin coming directly from the Mint would have had nothing to do with anything… I would have looked at it solely to marvel at its proof-gorgeous beauty. Did you own a loupe magnifier? Both then and now? (Pardon my interrogation-like indulgence.)

I like mysteries and puzzles. Here's my latest puzzling on this coin. All long-shots. It's a very beautiful coin design, especially on the reverse. You got it directly from the Mint and it was never taken out of its Mint capsule before submittal to NGC. Did you look at the coin when you first got it? If you did and the defect was there at the time, do you think you would have noticed it? Could anyone else have had access to your gold coins, maybe played around with them, opened this one's capsule, something went wrong, and they put it back unbeknownst to you? Someone else substituted their identical coin for yours, nefariously? Was the coin ever kept in direct sunlight where it may have received lens-like focused sunlight, possibly over many years, such that this defect occurred gradually on the same, small area? Like a mirrored display case made of glass? Phoenix-like sunlight? A hot car dashboard?

Is there a way to find out your first day of NGC Registry participation and dates of when you began additional Registry Sets?

Also, another thing to try is take a loupe and give the defect a close look. Look for an indentation or some raised aspect that should not be there. See if the coloring hues are uninterrupted as they make their way around some sort of center. See if the slight chatter on the front, above IN GOD WE TRUST, lines up with the defect on the reverse. RWB's book From Mine to Mint goes into great detail on the way things used to occur in the making of coins. I've only browsed through my copy, but if I had a mysterious defect like you do, my curiosity would have me pouring over any relevant chapters. There must be videos on YouTube that show how cameo .9999 Au coins are made. In some ways you're sort of lucky because you have a coin that is compelling you to learn more. That's a good thing.

Pursue the topic of Heat Treatment of gold. Not so much for coins, but just generally. Find pics and discussions on the Internet of difficulties that artists have faced dealing with it.