MarkFeld

If you’re going to use the word “exactly” you should use it correctly. While the difference in value is insignificant to most, wheat cents routinely trade for more than one cent.

If you’re paying more than $50 for grading of lower value coins, you’re doing something wrong - using the wrong grading tier, submitting through the wrong dealer, submitting on your own, but not being efficient or other. Graded coins might be offered at less than it cost to have them graded for reasons such as: The submitter thought the coin would grade higher and sell at a higher price. The submitter had a quantity of coins graded (possibly through bulk grading) and some of them were scores, while others were losers. But the submitter was content to sell all of them, hopefully having made money on the group.

The 1878-CC looks genuine to me.

The link didn’t bring up that coin.

Before resubmitting the coin, you should try to show it to someone who is knowledgeable about grading and find out what MS63’s and MS64’s are actually trading at. Based on the image, it looks accurately graded, but regardless, the current difference in value between a 63 and a 64 probably doesn’t justify the cost of regrading and postage.

The weight is correct but nothing about the coin looks genuine.

The Two Cent Pieces from 1873 were produced only as Proofs and the pictured coin does not look like a Proof or a genuine example. Better pictures might make me think differently, but it’s highly unlikely.

The coloring is just part of it. I’d have to look at photos of genuine ones to articulate the specifics of why it immediately hit me as counterfeit. However, even without looking at photos, my memory and brain tell me it doesn’t match with genuine examples.

It looks like a counterfeit. It’s a shame that you didn’t return it at that time.

You chose a challenging type of coin to obtain in problem-free condition. I’d advise patience and caution. I’d stay away from the two linked coins, due to the issues that you mentioned. Many copper coins have been recolored, a number of them, deceivingly so. The surfaces of the 1804 Half Cent posted by Coinbuf look uncommonly wholesome.

You're most welcome. If you mean at the rim on the far right, that area is a negative/detraction.

Welcome to the forum. Your 1821 (not 1921 😉) dime looks like an easy AU to me.

I’m speaking just for myself here - I don’t think anything about shows for next year is definitive. How could it be at this point?

You wrote both “CAC” and “no CAC”.

Please correct the below thread title of yours. The title to the book reads “Saint-Gaudens..” Roger Burdette's Saint Gaudens Double Eagles Book And the one below, too. It doesn’t include a denomination, so it’s unclear what coin you’re asking about. 1798 Draped Bust -- legit value ?

Listen to yourself - all you thought was to drop the word “Augustus”. It’s not YOUR thread (title).

If you want to take issue with thread titles, there are plenty of better candidates than this one. As is, it lets people know quite well, what they need to. Just because someone doesn't like it, isn't a valid reason to have it changed.

I agree about the planchet issue. I thought there might also be some signs of a rusted die, based on portions of the obverse portrait and some of the obverse lettering. It might just be the images, though.

Jason, do you think it might be a rusted die too?

I don’t think the holder matters, either way. But the crack in it would drive me crazy.

Thank you. I asked, because my thought is that in most cases, even collectors who assemble amazing collections, aren’t necessarily especially influential. That doesn’t mean they’re not greatly respected, appreciated or admired. Just that, their collections might not influence others on a widespread basis.

In what way(s) do you feel each of those individuals was so influential?

I believe that “proof-like” generally applies to reflectivity from a distance of approximately two to four inches. However, a proof-like coin isn’t produced the same way that a Proof coin is.

I'd call it a Proof. But either way, it's a no win situation, when making such a call. And I'm well aware of the potential slippery slope, when labeling coins "Specimen" or "Proof" when there's no official record of their production.

I never said I didn’t care. And for the record, I do. That said, as a grader, what call would you make if you saw a coin which looked as obviously Proof as any Proof you’d seen, but for which there was no official record of Proofs having been struck?