1917

On 9/9/2020 at 8:42 PM, Insider said:

Yep. All four.  He  does not exist in my mind or on my screen!      

according to relativists, he isn't even real (or something like that; when ur rule is there shall be no rules...)

22 hours ago, Alex in PA. said:

I hope everyone reads this thread then no one should ever have to ask why they call this unfortunate forum "Sleepy Hollow".

do they really call it that? (I'm genuinely curious fyi)

it appears to be some sort of die chip or PMD

judging from the pictures, it appears you have a specimen of the genre of low grade coins. interesting type of coin to pursue... some very odd examples are out there...

12 minutes ago, Modwriter said:

Mike Byers, Inc. specializes in error coins. The 1970 error quarter is graded by NGC. 

 https://mikebyers.com/   It looks like a microscopic error, not worth $35,000 to me.

Personally, I wouldn't pay more than like $500, but that's my opinion. Of course, it could be notable in that it involves multiple countries coins, so though micdoscopic, it is strange and rare. Then again, how much do ppl really want to pay for that sort of thing? Not key date money

Alright, where is the ANA insider here? I'm wondering when the ANA Registry is set to come out, specifically.

Don't worry, I won't tell  Ellsworth or Kiick           

On 7/28/2020 at 12:49 AM, kbbpll said:

Your pictures are better.

#1 gets 8,729 points for their 1935-D in MS67, and you get 2,464 for your 1935-S in 65. Over 6000 points different for 2 grade points, hurts my brain. I can see why I don't have any desire to play in this sport.

To be fair, it kinda makes sense for walkers... It is extremely hard to find a 67, much harder over a 65 than say, a 64 over 62

That said, I also am not into the registry game... Too expensive for me 

Also, @Brian478, the error is supposed to be a proof. Is yours a proof? (I can't tell from pics)

1 minute ago, Modwriter said:

Be careful with ebay. Only buy from a 5 star seller there. Was the $35,000 quarter graded and slabbed by one of the third party grading services? If I was to buy a $35,000 quarter, I would only buy it through a reputable auction house such as Heritage Auctions.

The seller is mentioned in the article I linked above. It is a incorporated company

So I searched Google and found this article:  https://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/rare-1970-quarter-defect/2016/06/09/id/733033/

Essentially, this is a coin that has raised questions, being a proof 1970 U.S. coin apparently stamped over a 1941 Canadian quarter, and has its legitimacy backed by our own NGC. Perhaps, after more review to be safe, you yourself @Brian478, should consider submitting this coin. 

What I want to know is, if it is legit, how did this error come to be? How did Canadian dies/quarters wind up on the production floor? Was it because some quarters got slipped in with the regular blanks? If so, then how? Why does this coin exist, if it's legit?

I think that it might make for a good few hours spent if you inquired to both companies why the said the coins were fake or legit. That, assuming you or the owner has the budget to do so, resubmit the coins to both companies for a second time... Although technically you could just accept the certification as legit b/c it was slabbed as such and move on...

On 7/23/2020 at 4:29 PM, VKurtB said:

Maybe it's the "real" #1, since it wasn't offered there? After all, that's the coin that all our grandfathers could use to buy nearly anything.

yeah, still regretting that technical errror.... really thought for once I was operating the computer right, lol...does anyone know if it's possible to edit the polls after they are started

On 7/24/2020 at 4:15 PM, Moxie15 said:

I don't know maybe the Walking half. It is hard to beat a fully struck for beauty, but I have seen so few

I got one that is pretty close, if not there, on my registry set (it's a 1936-P in MS64)

thank you for the replies, but I already had my question answered in the forum 'ask ngc' (or whatever the name is)

this is interesting... thus far the Buffalo nickel is not only tied for second, but it is leading in third as well...

also, the term Golden Era is used in reference to the artistic merit of the design, not the coin's ability to last in circulation (otherwise, we'd be voting on which C. Barber coin was best). Perhaps some may disagree, but I consider this to be the ideal time period of us coin design because nearly all, if not all, of the coins make a case for an very good coin. Thus, I'm not saying that one of these is the best all time, but that all six when put against six of other eras as a unit is better. This is even before one considers gold issues, for example,  the stunning (and arguable one of the best if not the best us coin) St. Guaden's double eagle.

Actually, that might make for an interesting poll; which era is the golden era? The only question is what is the best way to divide time periods. I would think they would go something like this: Early US (the very first us coins, plus large most large cents, 1804 dollar, etc.) , then mid-18th century (like seated liberty, flying eagle penny, Indian Head cent, the two cent, and three cent, etc.) , then late 18th (Morgan dollar, Trade dollar, 20 cent, V-nickel, etc.)  , then early 20th (the coins in this poll), and finally modern (the stuff we got now, unless it were to be divided into two sections, modern, and modern current, if only because of stuff like Franklin halves, Ike dollars, etc.).

I think the designs would be assigned eras based off of when the design was introduced. I would like to know, should the era's be divided by a general idea of when they are, or be assigned specific dates based off the general ideas?

2 hours ago, kbbpll said:

I'm still curious what defines "golden era". It implies a period that somebody has already decided has the best designs, whether I agree or not. I would have put buffalo nickel in the top spot, given the choices, even though it's a bison, not a buffalo. The Native American is real instead of some hokey Caucasian Indian princess with a war bonnet, the bison is one of my favorite animals, and the depictions on both sides, given a good strike, to me are phenomenal.

Wheat cents are downright boring. We're all sick of wreaths of vegetation by 1909. I don't know why it even makes the list.

The Peace dollar portrait's expression always struck me as vacuous and oddly pseudo-sensual. I love the eagle on the reverse though. It still amuses me that they had to tell her to cover up on the Standing Liberty.

as noted in above post in topic, there was a technical error. I had intended for all six coins to be in all six questions

4 hours ago, Big Nub numismatics said:

The Lincoln cent had plenty of good striking years. In terms of design, I think the wheat cent is the most iconic (older generations still tend to cling on to these even if not collecting) of the 20th century, but in terms of best, I have no idea why Mercury dime or buffalo nickel failed to make it to even be voted on for number one.

SLQ is a great design, but with serious striking flaws, it's hard to find a nice example with all of the details present. 

 

that was, as noted in above post in this topic, merely a technical error. I intended for all six coins to be in all three questions

for some reason several of the options didn't come through for the "Best Coin"

If the coin you wanted to select for that isn't there, my apologies, and please note which coin you would have selected in the comments

Ranking the Top Three coins of the early 20th century US coin designs

1 hour ago, Morpheus1967 said:

Nice!  The 16 year old thread has some legs left on it!

only b/c a coinvester showed up to defend the company...

I can't tell, but I usually struggle w/ dd's

I think to some extent even in areas where there may not be a coin shortage there is a sort of desire to avoid using them, because of covid...

wow, I've seen the all Philly version of this error, but you have the mint mix of 1983 from Denver! rumor has it that there usually is only three of these at any given time in the world

Is it possible to change the name of a journal? (not the name of a specific entry, but the journal as a whole)