kbbpll

No experience at all selling coins, let alone with Stacks, but that sounds like a typical sales strategy to me. Keep the numbers mysterious until they can hook you with the sales pitch. I saw that email too by the way.

Maybe you're looking at another grading service. One seems to use "1878-S $1" and another "1878-S $". For trade dollars, NGC uses "T$1". Those also overlapped with gold dollars. Maybe in the morning someone more knowledgeable will weigh in. Regardless, the mint mark designation would be next to the date, not the denomination. Your holder is fine.

It's their abbreviation for "silver dollar". If it was minted in San Francisco, it would say "1889 S S$1". I suspect that it's because there are also gold dollars coexisting with silver dollars until 1889, but just a guess.

I've been trying to follow all the snippets scattered here and on multiple other threads where @GoldFinger1969 brings this up, and there seems to be some effort to "prove" something, but I can't figure out what that something is, or what evidence there is. My own opinion is biased by the 1944 deposition from Israel Switt, where he pulls the old Sgt Schultz routine. If he doesn't flat out lie "on his oath", he's at least being deliberately disingenuous, presumably to avoid perjury (since he probably knows the statute of limitations has expired on the other stuff). He knows darn well how he obtained the 10 coins known in 1944. Nobody just forgets how they got a 1933 DE, then or now. If he knew he obtained them legally, or even thought that they were obtained legally, he could have just said "I bought them from the cashier", or whatever. Instead, he acts like a guilty person. That taints everything that followed for me, right on down to the Langbords magically discovering 10 more. As such, I have to go with Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is that it happened exactly as the jury found. Calling them "dolts", calling some presentation of evidence "BS", doesn't help solidify an opinion on this. Present a specific case for some alternative. There seem to be a lot of strong opinions, which I've seen on forums for years now, and I find it curious that there is such a big chip on people's shoulders about it. I doubt anybody on here or any other forum could ever afford one of these anyway.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/barber-dimes/dimes/1900-s-10c-pcgs-4823-/i/800094580.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515 What's up with this dime? I have never seen or read about any Barber "specimen" strikes, and the $183,750 price is in 1894-S range. It's not shoot-for-the-moon marketing hype since Heritage doesn't identify sellers, so what gives?

One of these coins is AU58 and the other is MS63. I thought it might be an interesting experiment to see if members can match the grade to the coin. Seller images.

I published this article back in March 2019 in the Barber Coin Collectors' Society quarterly journal. At the time, I thought it was kind of a big deal, that there was actually a third Barber dime reverse design type. All the literature says there were two reverse types, "old" and "new", "thin ribbon" and "thick ribbon", and that the second was introduced in 1901. Yet, there was actually a new reverse design introduced in 1900, and the 1901 "thick ribbon" was really an addition to the 1900 type, not an addition to the original 1892-1899 type. Along the way, I discovered a couple of new transition varieties. The new 1900 reverse was apparently put into service in Philadelphia ahead of the new century, and so there are 1899-P dimes with the 1900 reverse. And San Francisco minted some 1900-S dimes with the old 1899 reverse. Funny to me, I got absolutely zero feedback from that article. I mean, how many times is a new design type discovered in US coins from 120 years ago? So, I figured maybe it was common secret knowledge, previously published elsewhere where I can't see it, or maybe nobody cares. But I was encouraged to post it somewhere, and so here it is. It would be a shame for it to disappear into the numismatic black hole. If anything, it would be nice for the guide books and the TPG "facts" sites to get the story straight. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DGaN6teGJiZ6jK81G9KJsPPHxTUo9dTY If the link doesn't work, let me know.