zadok

...well we do have some Alice's here....

...ill just wait for the movie...n see who stays for the credits....

NGC did you a favor by sending the coins back to you. You don't want to pay the fees involved to grade that many coins. 
As far as NGC switching out the 1857 Dime, no, never, can't happen.

...no one said it was going to be easy....

Did you cut OldHoopster slack when he repeatedly asked you to leave him alone?  The fact that you still drag him after his death is the reason I will show you NONE.  
It's of no matter... because, you never intend to leave this forum.  You like to attention seek, so leaving takes away (what seems to be) your most common vehicle for this activity.  Interestingly, I do think you have some numismatic knowledge in there somewhere.  But, you don't commonly share it... and it's buried in word salad when you do.  I can say you have taught me nothing (which is not to say you owe me an education).
I wish you no ill will at all.  But, I want you to know that you have (nearly single handedly) ruined this forum with your behavior.  It's sad, because despite what you think... that will be your legacy to most here.  Once you are gone, perhaps discourse can continue without your derailments.  Thus, improving these boards overall.
So... do whatever you wish.  I am not signing off from the boards... I am just blocking you.  You have earned it.
 
 

Totally contradicting his earlier stance, and quietly reversing his former position, this member, assuming an authoritative tone, now claims the set which is DNA-identical to the one and only set featured on the NGC Set Registry for years, is the Real McCoy, effectively forgetting in a Presidential-like memory lapse that he, and only HE -- and no one else, including the nearly 100 known collectors of the F20FrGR series, vociferously objected to the inclusion, in any set, of both the Original and Restrikes, as one would saying apples have no business being with oranges. In a nod to others of his ilk, PCGS created TWO more sets, one duplicating the set it vandalized (which z remains unalterably opposed to) and another dedicated to refrappes (restrikes, in French). The very set he trumpeted to all those who would listen to him, he virtually decreed was the only legitimate set. Two months later, two (count 'em) TWO collectors signed up for the Restrike Set. 🐓  :  You're the best, Quintus, and it may not be popular to say so or admit as much, but given the choice between listening to the owner of a junkyard dog who equivocates on a matter he knows nothing about and paying attention to the Top Authority in the hobby who has written extensively on the subject matter as a self-educated man and Rooster Registry participant, who sought out and paid a ransom to bail my family out, I would choose the latter.  

I regret to inform you, Set #1, is where I was, minding my own business, before high order explosives were placed to blow it up, without prior notice.
a).  Set #1 had been the sole set in existence much like NGC's is today featuring the entire series. That set, which contains BOTH the Original (1899-1906) examples and the Restrikes (1907-1914) examples was cannibalized without notice to participants, to no avail. Nothing has changed.
b).  Sets 1 & 2 are mutually identical in every way, shape and form Evidently, owners of Set #1 are undecided as to what to do.  That often happens to mugging victims. YOU ARE THE ONLY NON-MEMBER WHO CHAMPIONED THE FORMATION OF A SET DEDICATED TO RESTRIKES.
c).  Set 3 is devoted solely to Refrappes (Restrikes) 1907-1914.  It has never been explained how (or if) Refrappes minted on the years featured differ from those minted decades later bearing the same date, identical composition and specifications.
Not surprisingly, and contrary to what you claim, two months after the debacle occurred, only two (2) members opted to transfer their respective holdings to a Set Registry dedicated to Refrappes.  All that talk about "padding" sets, and such, appears to be just that: HOT AIR.
I believe the subject should be open to those who understand and participate in it.  I prevailed not because I had influence -- I am not a PCGS member and do not otherwise participate in their affairs -- but likely because I am their TOP Set Registrant in that category and won the award for Best French Set for the past four consecutive years.
Say, is that Rusty your junkyard dog barking?  Maybe he is due for his supper.
As earlier stated here and in other venues, I believe it best to speak knowledgeably about things you are personally familiar with. That's Roosters for me, and scrapped junk for you.
I am NUMBER ONE on the West Coast. Nobody, not my closest competitor who's halfway through, you, or Ratzie33 can take that away from me. In fact, I am already hard at work on my next project.
A bientot!  
 

Q.A.:  Is this the Newby thread?
🐓  :  No Sire, this is the Forum you can speak freely on.
Q.A.:  Then why is it I am finding the ambience here one of anticipatory retaliation?  In fact, I do not like the entire tenor of this party line!  Where's the OP?  Why is everyone so pre-occupied with attributes when AUTHENTICY HAS YET TO BE ESTABLISHED???  Not one member has expressed safisfaction with the opening post.  I want my old job back!
🐓  : Guest Moderator?
Q.A.:  NO, as Tribune relaying instructions to the Hortator in Ben-Hur:  "WE KEEP YOU ALIVE TO SERVE THIS SHIP!  SO ROW WELL -- AND LIVE!!!  It's either that or resolve the irreconcilable differences that have bedeviled this post from Day One.  How is anyone expected to have anything get done when the only issue, front and center, is establishing AUTHENTICITY?  
I have a fool-proof idea --
🐓 :  -- What if you lose?
Q.A.:  Do I perceive dissension in the ranks???  I CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE!  This is a career decision.  If I lose, @Coinbuf and @zadok win!!!  I go back to that thing @GoldFinger1969 mentioned...
🐓  :  Tarmac, Sire?
Q.A.:  Yes,... whatever that means.
(Posted at the discretion of Moderation.)

Is it too early for a joke?  Good...
Q.A.:  "Say, Ray Dalio!  I had no idea he was still at  Bridgewater State!"
🐓  :  "Not the school! The Massachusetts State Hospital for the Criminally Insane."
Q.A.:  Well, the Boston Strangler is long gone and Ray was always good with figures, prognostications and a sense of humor!  Maybe he finally got out and got a place of his own.  I tell you, Ray was one of a kind!
🐦  : Yeah, like me!
Good morning, all!  A day without Quintus and his entourage is like a day without sunshine!     
All who agree, chirp Aye!  🤣

“Winter is coming.”

 

...only set number 1 is a true registry set...the other two r padded sets of no consequence....

...this is by design, mostly so as not to over saturate the market n maintain stability in the proceeds....

...zero cost...both of the grading services have advertised in the past that they were willing to certify ultra rare unique n near unique coins for no charge other than insurance costs...the 1894-S barber dime comes to mind...others im aware of were the 1876-CC twenty cent coin...im sure there r more....

...zero cost...both of the grading services have advertised in the past that they were willing to certify ultra rare unique n near unique coins for no charge other than insurance costs...the 1894-S barber dime comes to mind...others im aware of were the 1876-CC twenty cent coin...im sure there r more....

Q.A.:  To paraphrase former NYC mayor Ed Koch, "How're we doin'?"
🐓  :  Very well. Oddly, no one seemed to recall the accommodation the latest owner of the '33 Double Eagle worked out with the other grading service, a multi-million dollar deal. P5000 laid out some of the cold hard facts I wanted emphasized that few of us ever need a reason to consider.
Q.A.:  He balked at paying the piper, but if it's any consolation many years ago, the Guinness Book of World Records cited the highest fee ever charged and paid to a then well-known Washington beltway attorney. If memory serves, it was $100,000.  Now, most of you would say, "Well, those billable hours (10 blocks of 6-minute intervals)  at prominent white-shoe law firms are expected to go thru the roof."
Yes, they can.  But the "legal work" consisted of a single question requiring a simple Yes or No answer.  I do not recall the answer given, but do remember reading the simple one-word answer rendered saved the company many millions of dollars.
Not to worry, I believe every member intuitively understands a certification is a mere formality with the costs expected to be passed on to the next "suitor."  🤣
Thanks, guys, for shining a light on grading at the other extreme.
 

TO MY FRIENDS AND ASSOCIATES ON THE FORUM...
I BELIEVE I HAVE SPENT MANY MORE HOURS DISSECTING THIS TOPIC AND THREAD TO NO AVAIL. PARDON MY IMMATURITY AND IMPERTINENCE IF I SHARE THE FACTS I HAVE FOUND TO BE THE MOST TROUBLING HERE WITH YOU.
IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER, AN OP WHO HAS SAT IDLY BY FOR OVER FOUR (4) YEARS, SUDDENLY ERUPTS LIKE MT. PINATUBO AND LEAVES IN HIS WAKE MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS...
1.  ANGRY DRAGON. WHY, OF COURSE! A CONCERN WITH INSTANT NAME RECOGNITION RIVALING THAT OF STACKS AND BOWERS, GC, HA, NEN, AMPEX, LIBERTY AND JULES J. KARP.
2.  THE PURPORTED REPRESENTATION OF A CLIENT WITH A COIN WHOSE FMV, NORMALLY STRATOSPHERIC, IS HINDERED BY ISSUES SO CHALLENGING THAT YOU, DEAR READER, CANNOT WITH ANY DEGREE OF CONCLUSIVITY STATE THE EXAMINATION TO WHICH IT IS HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBJECTED TO AND WHY ANYONE POSSESSING A COIN OF THAT CALIBRE WOULD BE REFERRED TO A CONCERN SO OBSCURE I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE NAMES OF ITS PRINCIPALS, ITS WEBSITE, E-MAIL OR STREET ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER.
3.  GIVE THIS RELIC TO ANY NEWBIE AND HE WILL FILL OUT A SUBMISSION FORM AND REMIT THE REQUIRED FEES.  WHY WOULD THIS STUMP THE TWO TOP GRADERS, AND WHAT WOULD CACG BE ABLE TO DO THAT THE OTHER TWO CANNOT?
4.  REGARDING SURFACE PRESERVATION:  THERE ARE FEATURES OF THE COIN THAT OUGHT TO LOOK DISTINCT REGARDLESS OF WEAR, AND FEATURES WHICH WOULD ORDINARILY YIELD TO WEAR AND TEAR, THAT HAVE EMERGED REMARKABLY UNSCATHED.  THE NUMERAL 7 IN THE DATE LOOKS ASKEW, THERE ARE SOME FEATURES THAT APPEAR TO BE THE RESULT OF UNSUPERVISED CHILD'S PLAY BUT RESPECT FOR FORUM DECORUM PREVENTS ME FROM CROSS-EXAMINING THE OP REGARDING THE CONDITION OF THE EDGE. I BELIEVE CLOSE EXAMINATION OF THE EDGE WOULD BE KEY.
5. TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS A WHOLE, MANY MORE QUESTIONS ARE RAISED THAN ARE ANSWERS.
IF THE QUANDARY PRESENTED EXCEEDS YOUR AREA OF EXPERTISE, THE GENTLEMANLY THING TO DO IS PRESENT THE EVIDENCE YOU'VE ALLUDED TO THUS FAR FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE CAPTIVE AYDIENCE HERE, AND MAKE AN APPROPRIATE REFERRAL.  IN THE END, THIS IS ABOUT NOTHING MORE THAN ACTING IN A CLIENT'S BEST INTERESTS.  IF YOU DO NOT FEEL YOU ARE UP TO THE JOB, REFRAIN FROM MOCKING THE PROCESS BY MAKING REFERENCE TO SPECIOUS, NEBULOUS CLAIMS REGARDING WHO HAS THE "DEEPER CAPABILITY FOR VARIETY ATTRIBUTION, STEP ASIDE AND LET JUSTICE TAKE ITS COURSE.
I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST THOSE WHO DABBLE IN CLEANING ELIXIRS WITH A PROVEN TRACK RECORD, MAKE AN INFORMED SUGGSTION AS TO WHICH WOULD PRODUCE THE MOST DESIRED RESULT WITH THIS COIN WHICH CURRENTLY APPEARS TO BE EMINENTLY QUALIFIED FOR FEDERAL DISASTER AID.   🐓 
(POSTED SOLELY AT THE DISCRETION OF MODERATION.)
 
  

I’m thinking that perhaps the coin was submitted to CACG (not CAC)  which some people use synonymously with CAC, these days. My reason is the part of the post I’ve quoted below. As, if the coin had actually been submitted to CAC, it should have already been in a PCGS or NGC holder.
“we submitted the coin on the customer's behalf to CAC for authentication and grading. Unfortunately, CAC came back with "questionable authenticity" which also left us unimpressed with CAC's research staff.” 
 

The below images of the pamphlet were posted in a thread across the aisle, PMG, and the poster has several more images of similar literature in there as well. Thought it might be of some interest to the coin people over here and since the OP gave me the ok to go ahead and do so here you go... The thread can be found HERE if you want to have a look at the images of the other items they've posted from the inherited collection.

Stumbled on these two pieces while searching today and found them interesting as I had not seen this type of encasement before, I would guess that they are pre 1903 base on some brief reading I did on the company. Sellers pics below.


They just made me wonder if they always encased both halves of the coin or did they have a bag of "half" cents and handed them out to the neighborhood kids telling them that they were error coins.  I also questioned the legality of cutting a coin in two or even owning a piece like this. A coin was clearly mutilated but there is not intent to defraud or attempt to increase the value so I would assume that these fall in with other types of "artistic" pieces like Hobo Nickels and fantasy issues. Anyway, I thought I'd share these with the group. 

Re: Flying Eagle Cent
Att:  @Sandon
As the OP of the long-running "Follow the Lead" Topic and thread does not encourage comments, I thought I would utilize this space.
I am puzzled by your use of the pejorative term, "graffiti" to describe what appears to be a most unfortunate disturbance to the surface preservation to one side of your coin.  In point of fact, the single incision apparently referred to which appears to have no useful purpose does not qualify to be termed a "graffitoe." which generally serves some useful,  purpose such as artistic expression..  If anything, this was an inadvertent, sadly consequential, strike with a sharp instrument.
*** 
In the same way, the "reverse" proof was invented, I would suggest you privately promote this as an example of a rarely-seen "reverse die break" to explain the bas-relief effect.  Knowing you as I believe I do, you will categorically reject participation in such an unseemly subterfuge, I can only suggest you relate what I have written hereinabove as something you had been told... and do so politely. Back stories do not have to be true, it is just something the public has a hankering for. Ultimately, the coin must speak for itself. NGC, and its membership,  is very fortunate to have you on the Chat Board!

The following extract was prompted by an exchange today on the long-running, "R [W] B / S G / D E Bk" thread.
Though some may not view it that way, jumping a subway turnstile or entering thru the Exit gate, commonly referred to by the press and police officials in New York by the benign term, fare evasion, is recognized by State Penal Law by its proper legal term, "theft of services." The city loses millions of dollars every year to such "theft."
To fully appreciate the concept of theft, how it developed and was codified in law, one must go back centuries to (Anonymous v. The Sheriff of London, the Case of Carrier Who Broke Bulk) (1473) forever enshrined as the Carrier's case, a monumental English case that extended the concept of the offense of theft to include a carrier of goods, initially in lawful possession, for converting goods to his own use.
The Carrier's Case was a precedent-setting case to the offence of theft which was hereinafter called larceny.  
[For a basic recitation of the facts, I refer the more scholarly- minded to this classic Star Chamber proceeding more thoroughly explored in Wikipedia, et al with citations.]
I regret to say, though the matter of the 1933 Double Eagles has prominent members in the Forum at each others throats like ravenous wolves, I have no opinion on the matter one way or the other.
(Posted at the discretion of Moderation.)

...there r 38 different die pairs documented for the '77-S half dollar, virtually all have extensive reverse die cracks in various die states...to accurately assess which die pair ur coin mite be would require a detailed photo of the reverse die....showing the entire reverse....

...there r 38 different die pairs documented for the '77-S half dollar, virtually all have extensive reverse die cracks in various die states...to accurately assess which die pair ur coin mite be would require a detailed photo of the reverse die....showing the entire reverse....

Malheureusement, (Unfortunately) the veteran seasoned members who've chimed in thus far, are of irrepproachable virtue.  They can do no wrong.  It's simply not in their DNA.  I believe it was the irrepressible z who suggested my vaunted status deserving of special attention from Moderation, was the product of an overactive imagination.  Not so. In point of fact, I am unable to post anything, directly, without interference from roughly 11:59 PM, Friday, clear thru 11:59 PM, Sunday. Period. I believe it fair to say, each member knows exactly where he/she stands as regarding the two Scenarios. I have grown so accustomed to this that I have taken to keeping a running log of topics I must return to, to check and see if I am still alive, or dead and stinkin'.  Either way, my attitude is the same:  Man, I love this place!  🤣    

Happens occasionally. The SW "Editor" buffer holds what you typed in the Reply window. So you can usually close the thread, reopen it, then  click on the Reply window. That will open a message asking if you want to restore the text.
I don't think the moderators do anything until a post is made and there's a complaint.