Terence:)

One more inquiry on these prior to sending in. The 1984 that is toned on the obverse and super frosty on the reverse .... does anyone think this is detrimental for a favorable grade? I never sent in such a heavily toned coin before. 

Thanks everyone, this has been very helpful.  I'll send in as is. 

44 minutes ago, JKK said:

GSA is a subclassification of each of these issues. If you crack one out of its holder (unlike if the grading service does it; they will preserve that classification and put it on the holder), you will subtract an indefinite amount of value from it on the spot. If you want to sell them in their holders as they are, fine; if you want formal grades, that's also fine; but taking them out yourself to sell separately, I think, would be combusting value.

Okay, I didn't realize that NGC could (or would) remove a coin from the GSA holder in order to grade it, good to know.  I was making an assumption that if I wanted these graded and slabbed I would have to remove myself and submit in a flip. The question still stands as to whether or not the grade would be potentially better if the coins  where removed (by NGC)  as opposed to being  graded in the existing GSA holder.  I know that that would be entirely speculative (it is more of a rhetorical question)  Bottom line .... I'm looking for a max return on my investment,  not going to keep any of these. 

Hello, my next inquiry is on grading some GSA Carson's  'as is' or removing from holders. The collection I am working on has 7 cc Morgans all GSA of various dates. My question is sell 'as is' -or-  Send in  the GSA holder for grading  -or- remover from holder (to maybe get a better grade??) and then send in to be graded. Pics are in order obverse to reverse starting with the 78's. Please forgive the minor abrasions to the plastic holders or if there is a subtle reflection in the plastic.  Thanks!

25 minutes ago, Rummy13 said:

I really like it when people get coins given to then. That is how we get a lot of new collectors.  @TMG, you have been given some really nice coins, thanks for shearing with us.  I do hope you keep adding to the collection and not sell it all off for the money.  $1000, I have been adding to it, so when I pass, it will go to someone that I hope adds to it too.

While I have my own collection for me that I have amassed over the years .....  this particular collection was purchased in order to resell for profit. I will no doubt keep a few select coins for me (like the lam posted in this thread). 

I do appreciate the second set of eyes and opinions Kirt. I have a kot of good stuff to go through and this chat room seems to be a good place to help me confirm what I may want to grade versus just sell as is. Next up I have several GSA Carsons I have questions about.

Without actually looking at an ASE in hand (both sides) it's hard to say whether it's gradable. That said from this pic there seems to be a rather large milk spot between the I and B. If that's the case it will be on the lower end .... but more than 30

6 minutes ago, Kirt said:

Wow....I assume you're checking the reverses of those for full steps, right?

That's a beauty. Very jealous!

Oh yes and there seem to be several 5FS  .... I found a small box  with this quality nickle (15 of them) all in packaging. Not sure how circulated they are if at all. I've gone through a few of these already. Trying to decide if any are worth send in for grading.

2 minutes ago, Kirt said:

Completely agree, lamination error. For a war nickel that one is also in great shape. Not worth slabbing but definitely protect it!

Yup,  agreed Kirt. This one I'll keep for myself. I've got several dozen war nickles and buffalo's to go through in this collection and many of them  in this condition or better. Here's an example of some of the better ones.

7 minutes ago, Greenstang said:

Looks to me more like a Lamination than a crack. You can see it alsonon his chin and nose.

Yup, I've been doing more research since posting this and that seems to be the general consensus. Never saw one like this before ... kinda cool!

Hello, I have come across this nickle with a crack across the obverse and another on the reverse (but not as evident. I don't have much experience with whether or not it is post damage or a die crack. Thoughts on this one would be appreciated.

https://www.ebay.com/usr/coincat

2 hours ago, Kirt said:

Not necessarily on assuming it's an error...tokens are really difficult to value because they are different than coins. They can be worthless to most people, but when you find that one collector they can be valuable. If this is the same estate, the collector seemed to be going for highly collectible tokens, so I'd take your time with any others you find. Nothing you've posted is junk or worthless, particularly when compared to face value (0). Someone will want this thing.

Thank you Kirt, that is very sound advice.  I still have a lot of work ahead of me and look forward to sharing what could be some interesting finds in the future. 

And yes this is from the same estate collection. I have about 2000 or so coins to look through. 

15 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

https://www.ngccoin.com/census/us-tokens-and-medals/civil-war-store-cards/118/

A dozen different tokens including this one on HA sold 2003 for $184. Just a wild guess - somewhere in the $10-30 range, probably on the low end due to damage.

Thanks, looked through the link but it doesn't give much in the way of values (I'll look into Heritage later My thought was the original owner probably acquired thinking the damage was an error therefore valuable. 

Good afternoon, found a civil war token that looked interesting. I couldn't get too much info on value, would like to hear from anyone who has thoughts on these.

The damage is evident. Looks like post damage but opinions are welcome. Thanks!

12 minutes ago, Kirt said:

Reference? Link? Some of us would like to learn more! 

With the info I have learned today I searched various selling platforms and found this exact one listed with many disclosures on being  "non or not gold". 

Many of the listings imply that they are gold until you read the entire post .... some don't. Bottom line, I saw enough of them to determine it is a commemorative token. It has some value but not much, maybe 5 or ten bucks?? I attached one such listing.

Just an update .... the token is a Commemorative Token with no gold content.

Thankfully this is not a coin I based my price point on with the cost of the estate collection!

12 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

Yes, thanks. Interesting read. So these "souvenirs" are now collectible, but in their day, regarded by "leading numismatists" as counterfeits or imitations. Sounds vaguely familiar.

The TmgT coin design looks similar to the 1/2 in the lower right, but not quite. At least the Zerbe ones were 10k gold.

Some similarities but also many differences. The Eureka is also not separated by the helmet as well as that it has been pointed out about no denomination on it. So this makes more sense that it is most likely a fake as well

6 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

Yes. Here is a link to a site that has some more detail, mostly about Farran Zerbe and his role in selling these and other souvenir tokens and coins.

http://www.filmsgraded.com/mehart/hartset.htm

 

I also read another site some time back that claimed that M.E. Hart was a lady, named Mary Hart, but I don't really remember much detail about the article.

Thank you for this link.  Great info on here !

14 minutes ago, Alex in PA. said:

Taken from a blog.  Reseaqrch California Fractional Gold.

 

Identifying Fake California Gold

The photo above features a genuine California Fractional Gold piece with a US currency denomination on the reverse and a fake piece, or replica, on the right with a bear symbol, which is not from the 19th century, not gold and most assuredly not from California. It was listed in a Proxibid auction has "1855 Cal. Gold Token."

At best, this should have been listed as a "plated gold or brass replica."

If you spot a bear on the reverse, or any other symbol or text without an indication of denomination, such as "dollar," "dol." or even "d," my advice is not to bid more than $1. My local coin dealer sells them for that much, and he has a box of them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for that info !

3 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

This exact quote stuck in my head from a long time ago - something about the ones with bears being fake/suspicious. I have no idea whether any of this is true.

Well that makes since then .... I cannot find this with the bear anywhere (except Ebay .. lol)  

This estate find that I got has a lot of great stuff and these coins where in very old  paper type flips with the purchase price on them. Based on that these Liberty heads go back to a purchase time in the 40's maybe. As for the token .... I can find some very similar Eureka gold coins but not with the 'bear' on the reverse. All the 1850's I found have the lettering 'one' 

17 minutes ago, Kirt said:

For the token, have you looked through the territorial gold coin resources (https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-explorer/territorials-pscid-79)? That would be where I would start.

I will search that link, Thanks. I started my search in California & State Fractional Gold Tokens here on NGC but couldn't find this particular one.

What's you thoughts about getting the Liberty Heads graded?

Good morning, I have an estate collection that I am going through and came across three gold coins that I may send for grading. The gold eagles look good but the token is giving me trouble finding the exact one pictured here.  Thoughts on grade-ability of the Liberty Heads would be appreciated and has anyone seen this particular 1850 token before?  Thanks  

1885 - Liberty Head $10 GE

1905 - Liberty Head $10 GE

1850 Eureka Calf. Token (?)