Henri Charriere

Actually, speaking strictly for those unacquainted with these strikes but bowled over by the heated exchanges attendant to their existence as debated here over the years, I believe a conclusive, no holds barred comprehensive research study would be welcomed by all members, active combatants or not, to put this matter to rest to rest, once and for all, for all time.

Anything that saves me the trouble of doing something like that, in the interests of research and contributing to the "body of knowledge" in numismatics, counts, it goes without saying. 🤣

Respectfully, wrong answer. You should have said you don't know because you haven't broken one yet.

[It is too bad you were not able to provide "before" and "after" photos. I would have been curious to see exactly what it was that prompted you to take such a drastic measure. This is an odd hobby where flaws of any kind are worshipped but cleaning in an attempt to improve the appearance of a coin is generally frowned upon.

Only time, and a traditionally fickle market, younger or older, will determine whether this initiative, still in its infancy, has produced a Ford Mustang -- or a Ford Edsel. Viewer Discretion Is Advised... A vulgar street expression commonly heard in marginal neighborhoods, is applicable here: "Good dope sells itself." You do not have to push it. A notably seedy cohort actively seeks it out. I don't sense that with X. No buzz. No chatter. No sustained publicity. A paucity in promotion for a brand-new product. Was this by design or neglect? Time will tell.

"I have one too. How much do they sell for?" Unanswerable as phrased. What exactly is it that you have? A similarly corroded 1909 cent with extensive post-mint damage, or a coin exhibiting wear consistent with its age. The only way anyone can provide you with information regarding grade and price, is to examine it in-hand. Barring that, photos of both the obverse (front) and reverse (back) focused sharply under optimum lighting conditions and cropped appropriately for posting, would be necessary.

Here is the direct quote: "I took it to a coin dealer and said it is most likely real" Now let's try a few more variations... "I took it to a coin dealer and said it is [was] most likely real[.]" "I took it to a coin dealer. I told him it is (was] most likely real[.]" Absent context, none of the above make sense. Compare those, with this: "I took it (past tense) to a coin dealer and [he] said it was (past tense) most likely real. (period)" The reason why I find your assertion to be lacking credibility comes down to human nature. As much as we would all like to believe everyone in the coin business is upright, blameless and without sin, there are a number of ravenous wolves running amok among us without morals, ethics and scruples. In New York City, that same dealer you took that coin to, intuitively sensing you had no idea as to the value of what you had, would have casually asked you what you wanted for it. He most assuredly would NOT volunteer its FMV, as member Sandon did above. When you approach any dealer, first impressions count... your dress, your gait, carriage, how you comport yourself...how well you speak. Welcome to the real world of coin collecting.

I would guess the point is doing something that, with the exception of the liquor industry, will enable a generation of [younger] collectors to acclimate themselves to a new scale in the whole panoply of collectibles they are already somewhat familiar with. The reason why conversion to the metric scale failed in the United States, in my opinion, is they went about it the wrong way. To introduce any new system, like metrics, and in liquids particularly, you emphasize liters and millileters and put gallons, quarts, and pints in parentheses. Only the liquor industry, to their credit, succeeded in this regard. NGCX chose to skip the equivalence factor. A great many collectibles use different scales. Ancients reduced their grades to a dual five-point scale. Paper currency, if I am not mistaken, uses acronyms like EPQ (Exceptional Paper Quality) and numerical grades spaced five-points apart. This effort will open the collectible-loving public to a hobby they may not be acquainted with, with a condensed scale. The market they have in mind is comprised of younger folks -- the wave of the future, and saviors of the hobby. Coins graded abroad using their own grading standards, will remain unaffected. I suspect the majority of coins already graded in the U.S. will remain in their holders. The best way to regard this is as a trial run. Like using horse-drawn buggies and transitioning to horseless carriages. Either it will take, or it won't. There is no other logical reason I can think of to fix, what isn't broken.

Would "whiskers" be observed if a Sacagawea dollar were "broken"? Different composition -- no silver -- and less than half the manganese of the war nickel: only 3-1/2% to the war nickel's 9% or is silver key to the phenomenon?

If this were to be certified, do you believe it would qualify for plus ➕️ sign status? And if not, could you point to a specific area that would disqualify it from such consideration?

Silver segregation, eh? Is that a polite way of suggesting the presence of non-silver contaminants? Makes one wonder what additional refining method is used to help .999 silver attain .9999 fineness. 🤔

Reminds me of the old Goldwater slogan, "In Your heart You Know He's Right."

This should have been a no-brainer. But I don't feel a cent should be spent lobbying Congress. You would need a broad constituency backing you. Right now Congress can't even agree on what to have for lunch. I wouldn't waste my time on high ticket items. The future of the hobby depends on the young and they don't have the money. If anything, I would have re-introduced classic coins for the common people... Flying Eagle or Indian Head cents, etc. But that high-falutin bliu-ribbon committee they appointed to study the issue, didn't see it that way. One more thing which definitely won't go over well on this Forum is something other countries routinely do on anniversaries: right-sizing the prison populations by freeing select categories of people by declaring a general amnesty. In the absence of parole and an antiquated Executive clemency system, it's well past time to get rid of the dead wood. Maybe give each deserving releasee a classic coin for good luck. Anybody want to hear my views on the border? I didn't think so. To re-cap: forget the pricey stuff. Introduce the young boy and girl to the classic coin designs we all enjoyed in our youth.

🐓 : if you don't mind me asking, what did you get for your #1 set on the West coast? H.C.: Funny you should ask. No plaque (you have to pay now for the privilege of owning one if you want it). No pin (like last time). Basically bupkis. Oh, and a nice yellow ikon, I think they call it, next to the Set's name on the Registry. [In another year, God willing, I will give the No. 2 guy back his Top Spot which was taken away from him twice, once by me at the culmination of his efforts. He spent a great deal of time and money putting his set together. He deserves it.] Besides, NGC seems to be the place to be.

This may come as a curious surprise to some but I do not regard exorbitantly priced, Proof 2023-S ASE's, or any such dated ASE's as "bullion." Uncirculated, or of lesser grade, Yes; Proofs, No! A "numismatic" aura attaches to any Proof. Nobody is ever going to commit the outrage of consigning a Proof coin to a furnace, refinery for its purported prevailing melt price in the future. Only FMV will attach. If I an sadly mistaken, I will relinquish my Rising Star status immediately.

Probably not fair to say, but I remain skeptical about any errors found some 64 or more years after the fact. A lot can happen to a coin presumably in circulation for that long a period of time. On the plus side, their saving grace is their 90% copper content.

What I see, highlighted in Frame 3, is an altered sub-machine with grip, which clearly did not exist during President Roosevelt's reign... but it would not stop me from advertising it as such on a foot-loose and fancy-free platform like Etsy.

When you come right down to it, only 7% of all grades awarded have nothing to do with wear. The vast majority are a but an exercise to grade -- to a point. It is that miniscule minority, bearing evidence of PMD in the stratospheric upper end of the Mint Scale range, that poses a true challenge. As much as I love Morgans dating to my youth, I would need formal instruction in their grading. But I would say to Morgan collectors the same thing I would tell collectors of any other coin series. Study the finest examples available and then you will know what to look for along the rest of the continuum. Put another way -- and I am confining my remarks to Mint State-graded Morgans, in particular, it is difficult to know what one grade ought to look like if you don't have a finer example at hand to refer to. The more the better. Grading is an art involving a skill set that relies on a series of viewings and cumulative experience. Rare is the whippersnapper who's got all this down pat at a very young age.

Nice acquisition! I take it the coppery glow is an optical illusion.

Not at all. I subscribe to the VKurtB school of thought on this. For example, contemporary proofs issued straight-from-the-Mint, do not require validation, ditto Monster Box submissions, etc. To express my disapproval, I freely use grades like VF-37 and AU-59. As you may be aware, France and Germany utilize Stempelglanz and Fleur De Coin to refer to the six Mint State grades from MS-65 to MS-70. The excruciating incrementalization of the top-tier grades exists for no other purpose than to promote and facilitate the interests of investors. My interaction, as a coin collector and hobbyist, can be best described as forced complicity.

The specifications on this are incredible! The detailing so intricate they cannot be fully appreciated with a once-over. I wasn't aware this even existed. The closest thing I have come across was a quality brochure examining in detail the inner workings of a Patek Philippe chronograph watch. I used it to illustrate to my fiancee's mother the perfection I saw in her daughter. This is a truly unique one-of-kind-piece made possible with the cooperation of many people in many countries. Thanks for sharing.

If the decedent has any objection to my attributing a quote to him, he will let me know. As for you, you are free to ignore me. Problem solved. Oldhoop was free to ignore me as well, but, big BUT, adamantly and very publicly refused to do so! Then he blundered thereby committing irreversible error: he demanded a retraction from a figment of my imagination: Ricky the talking Rooster! An exchange of conversation with an inanimate emoji with a personality all its own is always risky. That vulnerability to embarrassment proved to be too much for a member who framed his comments egocentrically, not with "I," like a commoner, but "We." It is difficult to disagree with he who assumes the position of speaker for all. He left, not for the lame reason you cite, but because like any worthy opponent, he had met his match and was apparently in failing health. I learned of his untimely demise from another member shortly after my departure. You are not privy to the private communications I had had with him as well as a communique I had received from the Website Coordinator. Only days ago, I received a cordial response from a consummate gentleman and professional member, M Feld. I cannot fathom why you go out of your way to repeatedly stalk me, but I defend your constitutional right to play with fire. I find you to be ill-mannered, a braggart, and given to making generalized comments which are impossible to confirm or deny. If casting stones at me elevates your standing and the quality of your life in Sleepy Hollow, by all means continue to do so. You would do well to drop the pretense of being incapable of expressing your thoughts clearly and completely by adhering to standard English writing style replete with capital letters, paragraphs, and final periods, as appropriate. The renowned poet, e. e. cummings, you are not. If the big words I use are too big, perhaps, for you, look them up. Save that hooey for the guys with the higher numbers. My apologies to the OP. I feel, at the very least the characterization by a fellow member of a substantive contributions you make, dismissively with an epithet on a public forum viewed by millions, to be bad form. The upstart has gotten a taste of his own medicine and not surprisingly, decided he didn't like it. Karma triumphs again.

I never fail to get a queasy feeling in the pit of my stomach when I see a question being asked about an instantly-recognized rare coin. Without scrolling, I consider the possibilities... How did you come about this coin? Inheritance? Bought? From whom? For how much? Where? (Hopefully not a street or local bar.) The very first thing any Newby should do is familiarize himself with the coin in question. The Red Book should be your first stop if the coin was minted in the U.S. Know what you have and what it's supposed to look like. Then step into the wild world of chat boards and gird yourself against some fairly opinionated, very direct, members.

Excellent, very helpful reply @Sandon

My sincere condolences...