Thompson2

24 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

I agree that it seems odd that Blanchard would not have the foresight to seal the coin with the COA. Looks like they would have known that buyers might want to preserve the pedigree by having them slabbed.

Right?  Seems crazy, especially since I've seen Blanchard Redfield slabs for other coins... 

There's still plenty of upside even if I can't convince them to attribute it... it's a really nice coin, I didn't pay a premium for the Blanchard stuff (which is pretty cool even as a stand-alone item), and this may be a VAM43 which should add a small amount to the value. 

I'm still gonna pursue this until I get a hard no... it's just keyboard time until then..   

41 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

The fact that it has been removed from the sealed Redfield holder will likely prevent it from being slabbed with the attribution. There is no way to prove that the coin in the PCGS holder is the same coin that was in the Redfield holder. The fact that it was sold by Blanchard & Co would not merit being put on a slab, either.

So a closer look revealed that the "holder" is just a flip.  This matches with what Blanchard told me when I called them.  The card with the "serial number", description and "grade" was in one side and the coin was in the other.  I need to see if Blanchard had any sort of detailed records on these that would help tie them back together.  I highly doubt it, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

10 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

The fact that it has been removed from the sealed Redfield holder will likely prevent it from being slabbed with the attribution. There is no way to prove that the coin in the PCGS holder is the same coin that was in the Redfield holder. The fact that it was sold by Blanchard & Co would not merit being put on a slab, either.

The odd thing is that the holder, in this case, wasn't sealed.  The shop had 2 pass through and said neither of the sleeves was sealed.  I haven't taken an in-depth look at it to see if that story holds water or not... But I understand the difficulty of proving the provenance in this case which is why I'm inquiring well in advance of sending this in.

And good info on the seller name not being a worthwhile addition to the slab.  Was mostly curious since there are so few kicking around unlike the Paramounts... 

Picked up a Redfield Hoard Morgan from a local shop.  They removed the coin from the (unsealed) holder in the folio and send it to PCGS for grading.  PCGS understandably didn't add the Redfield Hoard attribute.  Ideally, I'd like to get this correctly attributed to the Redfield Hoard and Blanchard with the serial number on the folio holder so that they are uniquely tied.  Less ideally, I'd like to just get the Redfield attribute added.   It also appears to be a VAM-43, but I'm guessing trying to add that with any of the rest of the attributes would be tough / impossible... 

Am I smoking something or would this be possible and how would I go about making it happen?

And the coin.  It slabbed as a 62... just short...

Real Tet is more than 14g, so yeah.. fake...   plus it looks nothing like the real deal (found that in a 37 second Google search)

2 hours ago, VKurtB said:

There are other people I'd want to show any purported third specimen before any TPGS. For any very rare cent, I'd want Charmy Harker from The Penny Lady and Andy Skrabalak from Angel Dee's to see it first. Both are the bee's knees in rare cents.

Why do you prefer that to a TPG?  I'm assuming you'd expect more diligence from them?

2 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Yes, a thorough check for an added mint mark should be a part of any authentication of any purported 1982-D small date bronze cent. There are the easy checks like the weight, but then the REAL fun begins. It's not a simple inquiry.

If it appears legit, won't NGC or other TPG certify it?  So from that standpoint it actually *is* a simple inquiry?  It seems like this isn't something you'd want to guess at.. 

13 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

I stopped doing those at ages (in order) 13, 35, never, 43, never, and about 10. I'm 65 now. I know specifically about golf because that's the age I was when I got married the first time. I never got to play again.

Good information?  Not sure where you're going with that... 

3 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

And yet we have seen exactly this on this very website. A guy was frantically working through rolls of cents because he had medical bills to pay. Not this particular OP, but many past are indeed doing it with an EXPECTATION of hitting it big. And we can't rely on self-reporting of the reasons, either.

Sure... and those people are being silly... but desperation leads people to do weird things and put hope in long shots.  And why do we care about their reasons?  None of our business, really.  All we can do is try to reset expectations.  And if people post like this, there's no reason to all over it without looking at what they've got.  It takes 2.5 seconds for a trained eye to determine if what the OP has is worthwhile...   yeah, it gets old to answer the same question over and over, but that's what you get in this forum.  If it gets to be too much, just skip those posts or take a break from the forum.  If you feel it's your duty to keep people "on track" then suck it up and quit being grumpy with people you don't know and have no idea on their motivations...   

3 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Well, @Thompson2, that's where you and I, formally educated in economics, will always differ. To me, there is no such thing as a zero cost activity; EVERYTHING has a cost, literally e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g. If there is no cash outlay, there still is the "opportunity costs"of literally everything we do. That is, what ELSE have you foregone in order to do what you do. And that is where the "costs" of searching for Holy Grail coins pile up. Virtually anything one could do is time better spent. Maybe pick up a numismatic themed book, for example.

@VKurtB - Kindly reread my post.  I never state there is no cost.  Quite the contrary... I state that the expenditure will be time.  Please do not assume that you are the only one here who understands and applies the concept of opportunity cost.  And also please refrain from applying your values to how people should spend that opportunity cost.  Just because you don't gain any enjoyment from roll hunting does not mean you can, as a universal blanket statement, state that there's no value to it.  Baseball, golf, bird watching, backgammon, romance novels, board games... there's an endless list of things that people do just for the enjoyment.  Do you universally condemn those as well?  Especially since there is ZERO chance of any "return" on those activities?  Probably not (if you do, then there are other issues at work here).  So why all over people who do this for enjoyment (or just happen to stumble across something that might be amazing)? 

All of this changes if someone is banking on that "holy grail" to provide a future... that'd be silly.  

@AkemiT - I apologize for taking this off course.  I hope that what you've found turns out to be legitimately awesome.  Don't let The Grump dampen your spirits on this at all.  He gets testy when he thinks people are just trying to take the easy way and "get rich quick".   When you have your scale, I'd suggest getting a couple of '81 or earlier (solid bronze/copper) and a couple of '83 or later (plated zinc) pennies to "calibrate" what the weight is your looking for.  That will eliminate the possibility that your scale is weighing heavy (or light), just in case it's off in either direction.  

6 hours ago, VKurtB said:

There are exactly TWO known in the entire world. What thought process leads you to believe it's worth the time looking for a third? Do you realize how much time, and how much area, and how many people's hands that adds up to? Clearly you cannot, or you wouldn't be doing it. 38 years, the whole world, but yeah, you're next. Riiiight.

 

I do get what some people think. "Why NOT me?" Fine, except it reveals an ignorance of the huge numbers and infinitesimal probabilities involved. That is also why we can't get a consensus on COVID. People simply don't understand the math. Any time any probability gets too far away from .5, people lose the ability to conceptualize the math.

Yup... only two known in the world.  Do you suppose that's all that were made or that still exist?  As long as you enjoy roll hunting and you're not skipping work or not spending time with your family to hunt rolls, it's a zero risk activity.  Literally zero.  Search through $10,000 worth of pennies and your only expenditure is time.  Yup... search through $10,000 worth of pennines and you'll probably not find one.  So what?  If the hunt is part of the fun, then there's no down side, except our local curmudgeon will grump about it being virtually impossible and a waste of time.  Every time I pick up a penny, I check to see if it's something special.  Is it?  nope...   Am I crushed when I don't find something special?  Nope..   Will that stop me from looking next time?  Nope... 

The odds are crazy, astronomically low that you'll find one... but there's still a chance... and the level of risk in looking is exactly, precisely zero.  There are few other activities that fall into that category.   

On 8/4/2020 at 5:43 PM, Dynamicoin said:

help me to understand the errors here?

 

Lighting is a bit harsh and last pic is way out of focus.  Oh - and you don't mention what area you think is problematic for the first pic.   

For just a second I thought someone had hijacked your account!  Whew!  Good to know all is still right(-ish) with the world... 

4 hours ago, Maurine said:

Thank you. I will ask NGC if they would be willing to do that

I'm betting they won't, but if there's a jeweler you trust, they would probably be better option anyway.

And post a pic here, please. 

And just so you don't get any crazy ideas, don't try to get rid of scratches, shine, clean or otherwise try to "fix" any of the problems with the coin.  You will only decrease the value.  

13 hours ago, VKurtB said:

I have a '64 Kennedy that I sent into our illustrious hosts that had enough nasty hits on it to grade MS63 at best, but it had wild peripheral toning. It came back MS65. I did it to prove a point, but err, umm, I guess I proved "two points".

 

The "best" part is that the toning continues to develop new colors in the NGC slab. Heck, it's probably a 66 now. 

Must have been an interesting variation to warrant being graded... 

I don't often feel sorry for the trolls, but dang... I actually hope he gets it graded and it comes back at least as "Genuine".. 

4 minutes ago, CRAWTOMATIC said:

Good digging.  I'm sure eBay would not side with the seller in this case but this is an awfully Red Flag type of policy to have in your listing.

 

WE OFFER A GENEROUS 30 DAY RETURN POLICY. IF YOU CHOOSE TO SEND AN ITEM TO A THIRD PARTY GRADING SERVICE YOU FORFEIT THE RIGHT TO RETURN THE ITEM FOR A REFUND. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH OUR POLICY PLEASE DO NOT PLACE ANY BIDS ON OUR ITEMS!

HOLY LOAD OF COW DUNG!  Would never have bought anything unslabbed from them... although I wonder if eBay would hold them to the "guaranteed authentic" in the listing... seems like you could force the issue... but I don't have that kind of cash to gamble with... 

4 minutes ago, Big Nub numismatics said:

Lol. My thing is how many five-star reviews the seller has.

Looks like they sell a lot of slabbed coins, so it's easy to get good reviews... 

17 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

I'm sorry, but first of all, because it's you posting it. You don't exactly have a stellar track record on here. Second, it looks like it's fresh out of a "private mint". In my observation, 130 year old silver just doesn't look like that. Third, I don't care how shiny and flashy it is. Post clear, focused, cropped images straight above the coin instead of all these bouncy videos. We get it, it's shiny. The date doesn't look right, but who can tell? Lastly, tell us where/how you got it and how much you paid. Those are important clues. Are those in-car photos of you driving home from some craigslist hookup, or a reputable dealer? It helps to know that.

eBay.. $610...  just a guess... :lol:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1891-P-SEATED-LIBERTY-PROOF-MOST-UNBELIEVABLE-DCAM-PR-EVER-HIGH-NR-17196-/392858940823

But if I had paid that much, I'd 100% get it graded... right now... like yesterday... since there's a non-zero chance it'll come back as fake.. then at least you can go back to the seller to get your money back... seriously... get it graded... otherwise that guy is laughing all the way to the bank.. 

If it's real and grades high, that'll be a hell of a score... 

Please tell Hank he is very welcome!  My collector's edition "Hank's Thank You Card" arrived yesterday.  

10 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Sounds like he's gonna need some of my earlier extras.

For sure... It was an older Whitman #2 folder, so nothing really old... or new... 

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

I'll pull out a very sweet-looking 2020 Kennedy half, in fact two, a P and a D, if you can private message me an address.

 

But for a set that a kid can work on and have some success, it's hard to beat Jefferson Nickels. The Lincoln Cent set has more tough coins.

He's got a decent start on Jeffersons... 62-84-ish  (I forget exactly what was in that folder)...  

2 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Yup, I don't agree. Letting idiocy ride just makes me complicit.  "Ignore him" just risks misinforming others. Perhaps the "don't feed the troll" is an Internet "rule" or truism to others. It's just damned stupid, to me.

"Don't feed the troll" isn't a rule... it's more of a survival technique... there's no end to the trolls and I'd hate to see you end up like Sisyphus.

3 hours ago, VKurtB said:

You seem to, but I'll bet I disagree with your solution.

Don't read posts by Ratzie.  I don't see how you could *possibly* disagree with that.. elegant, simple, fool-proof...

On 6/25/2020 at 1:24 PM, VKurtB said:

Every time I read a thread from Ratzie, I feel like I’m being sold a bill of goods.

You know what the solution to that problem is, right?   

A really bad picture of a damaged cent?