GBrad

So @RWB, by no means am I trying to stir up a hornet's nest here, nor start an argument. I would like to think that by now, you and everyone else should know me better than that. I'm just a peaceful old mountain man, that is, unless someone starts in with the ridiculous and needless comments and starts pulling the r.ace c.......🙄 which really flips my switch (there I go again thinking out-loud...). You mentioned 'washing" with a nonabrasive soap. In my newbie mind, washing a coin implies applying at least some type of pressure to the surface of a coin in order to remove residue and/or oils. I can't help but to believe this will surely leave microscopic scratches? Now, if a coin is dipped in say acetone for example, which has been time tested and proven from my understanding, and then immediately rinsed in distilled water and every so gently pat to dry it off, is this still going to leave a chemical residue buildup that can be detected? I know acetone is not the cure-all for removing buildup on a coin, but I do know that acetone will dissolve and remove fingerprint oils in the event the coin's surface was inadvertently touched by ungloved fingers. I don't use gloves nor do I advocate them, at least for me. Too much of a potential to drop a coin with cotton gloves in my experience. Just curious as to your post about washing a coin. Obviously, I believe doing anything at all to a nice MS coin is a no-no, but I believe there are times when a quick acetone dip may very well be necessary in order to "save" a coin from the damage that can be caused by body oils. Am I even correct in my assumptions? Thanks!

Hello RJO. Long comment coming up here... I see you have looked into GC. I was recommended GC by members here on the forum a year or so ago when I was in the market for some slabs. I have since used them numerous times and could not be more pleased with Ian and his staff. Their customer service has been above and beyond for me personally. Below is a breakdown of their BP for anyone interested that may not already know. I have also had very good luck with L&C coins. I have purchased several raw and slabbed from them. I have also been overly pleased with their customer service. For example, I purchased an ASE last year from them graded at MS69 by a major TPG. When I received it in the mail, I was flabbergasted. I would not have put it anywhere remotely near an MS69, but closer to MS65 and that's being generous (must have been a very early Monday morning or a late Friday afternoon when that puppy got graded and sandwiched). I immediately made a quick phone call to them about the issue and they did not hesitate in requesting I return it. They made me very happy by replacing it with another same year ASE that was absolutely an MS69 this time. Needless to say, I was extremely pleased with their response to my concerns, quick turnaround time and friendly staff. One caveat though; I do feel that they should have very briefly examined the original coin they sent prior to shipping it to me. A 5th grader could have seen the flaws, blemishes and dings on it and they could have swapped it out then so as to alleviate the return process. Stuff happens though, we are all human, and I'm not complaining, just a hindsight thought. One other company I have not purchased from, and cannot recommend based on their product(s), but thought I would mention them here. I'm not sure if anyone here has dealt with Coin Advisor and can give some good/bad feedback on them, but they assigned me a personal company rep. (who's name I won't mention here) that was Johnny on the spot for me. Yeah....little ol' me, GBrad whom they have never met, and I have never purchased from them. I was in the market for a particular raw Morgan and asked the rep. if he would keep an eye out for me for the year and mint I needed. However, I wound up getting very lucky (I believe it was the same day as my conversation with this rep.) and I came across the coin I needed (raw) on eBay. Obviously, you have to be careful on the Bay, but for the price (my winning bid) I decided to take the gamble. I couldn't have been more pleased, or better yet completely surprised, when I received this coin. I definitely scored on that one! So.....back to Coin Advisor. The rep. called me a week later and had several he'd found for me raw, but I inadvertently felt horrible in forgetting to call him back to let him know I'd already purchased one. The rep. had no problem with my "incompetence", expressed himself that he was just glad that I'd found what I needed, and there were ZERO hard feelings at all. He continues to still politely and professionally call me from time to time (even after I did what I did to him which is NOT the way I operate, I simply forgot to call him and I still feel bad to this day about that). The rep and I still discussed the coins he had found for me and they were all very competitively priced. Had I not of already found the one on eBay I bought, I would have definitely purchased from them simply due to the phenomenal customer service and diligence this representative exhibited. That's all I can really say about Coin Advisor at this point in time, but I will definitely give them a shot in the future if I ever come upon some more "play money" for my hobby. If you would like to PM me, I will be glad to give you this rep's contact name and number. Maybe he can find what it is you are looking for. I hope at least some of this "book" I just wrote is of a little help. Good Luck! 👍 Below is copy and pasted from GC: Do you charge a buyer's fee? Ian Russell on Mon, Aug 21, 2017 11:51:59 AM Only our auctions attract a buyer's fee.GreatCollections Standard 12.5% buyer's fee (min $5) - if invoice paid by PayPal or Credit CardsGreatCollections Discounted 10% buyer's fee (min $5) - if invoice paid by Check, eCheck or Wire.Please note all Buy Now items are at a fixed price, and do not attract any buyer's fee.

I do now see what I believe you are talking about being a D mint mark on the 1982. Looks like a stain of sorts as a D mint mark does not remotely resemble this. Almost looks like an O. Soak it in pure acetone for a few hours and see if it the "D" looking stain goes away.

Not sure what you can see, or how you can see anything, on the reverse of the '59-D, too much gunk buildup. May be a case of pareidolia. The '82 is just a normal copper 1982 small date (if it weighs 3+ grams). I'm not even remotely seeing a D mint mark. Most likely some PMD under the date that once again, makes you see things.

Heck, put in your pocket for 6 months to a year, check on it regularly so as not to lose the date, and it may reach PO-1. There is a market for the lowest grade and they bring a better premium. Oh my, I just chimed in from awhile away from the forum.... am I sounding like "Slick"? 🥴 I surely hope not.

Thank you tj. This is what I had seen before in order to distinguish the reverse designs. I could not remember where I had read this. Thank you for posting these diagnostics again for me. I appreciate it!👍

Thanks Hoghead. I have compared my pic to both the normal and the type C reverse. To my eyes, there just seems to be quite a bit more definition present compared to the normal reverse design when viewing online pictures. I believe there was a design change regarding the arrow tips and I believe the S in States on the type C from what I remember. I was just not able to get enough pics of it before my phone died....go figure. I know where it is though.

I do not have full obverse and reverse pics so I'm hoping this one picture will suffice, sorry. I am not a Quarter collector, but I am aware that their is a type C reverse on a 1964-D Washington which exhibits more defined and detailed tail feathers. I took this pic just a little while ago with coin in hand, but my phone battery died and this is all I have. Is anyone able to say if these tail feathers appear consistent with the type C reverse? Thank you.

Normal coin with noticeable circulation wear and damage. The mark right of the mint mark may be a small die gouge, but it looks more like a scratch to me. If anything, you may be have a slight misaligned die strike on the reverse. I believe the reverse die was the hammer die for this year coin. I do not see any doubling either.

Well, I have to say Hoghead, that was a waste of a good quarter and at least several lights from the ol' zippo .

Thanks DW. That being the case, sounds as though it would then be considered damage, presumptively artificial toning. I appreciate it.

Hello everyone. I have a question that has perplexed me for some time now. I am familiar with normal and visible wear and circulation issues that will remove a coin from a Mint State designation. However, I often come across amazingly beautiful examples of both coppers and zincolns such as this one (not a great example of a pristine coin I have chosen to supply, but it shows what I am inquiring about) that have what appears to be discolored areas of a purple like tint. These areas are usually atop the higher relief design elements (right in the location that wear is most evident obviously, cheek, eyebrow, etc...), but I've also found this same look within recessed or protected areas on Cents as well. Could these areas I speak of be a result of coin on coin contact friction and not circulation wear? Or would this be considered "damage" in the form of circulation wear? Or..... does it even matter and wear is wear no matter how it occurred??? It is odd to me, for instance, how the earlobe is still unscathed. Being one of the higher points of relief, you'd think the earlobe would also show signs of this same discoloration as that of the other areas of the coin that you can easily see if it was a result of circulation. Thanks.

By no means am I a counterfeit or fake detection expert, but I do thoroughly enjoy the study of the subject. In my humble opinion, your coin appears legitimate based off of the pictures you have supplied when compared to known certified examples. The coin does appear dark as JP stated. The small weight discrepancy you mention could be a result of grime build-up on the coin, or your set of scales may be ever so slightly out of calibration, not uncommon. The coin does appear cleaned though which isn't a bonus, but it does appear legit to me.

Just for the record, the OP, meaning me, did not take any pictures of the "suspect" coin, nor its holder and label, which I clearly explained in my opening post (second sentence). I found this coin online, along with several others from this same dealer, that I believe to also be questionable. The photo's I supplied were straight from the actual NGC slabbed coin taken from NGC's certification verification page, and then the store's photos are exactly as they appear on their website. I did nothing other than copy and paste what you see. I did not photoshop anything whatsoever. I just wanted to make it crystal clear that the pictures of the dealer's coin I supplied were not taken by me as insinuated. In addition, the entire slab's reverse was not shown on the dealer's website or I would have been sure to supply it. Just FYI.

According to NGC, this is not the same coin.

Yes, I actually knew that now that you mentioned it. Not sure what I was thinking when I said heat sealed.... duh!. Thanks for the correction.

After speaking with NGC customer service yesterday about my concerns surrounding this coin, I was asked to supply the link to this post along with the coin dealer's website. Evidently, this information was quickly forwarded to the appropriate department at NGC. Below is the email response I received earlier today from the gentleman at NGC whom I have been in touch with via email regarding this coin. I do not know which NGC authenticator made this determination. I responded to this individual at NGC, who supplied this information, with a few other questions and concerns of mine. I have now viewed other NGC slabbed ancient coins, on this same dealer's website, which also appear to be counterfeit, in my opinion. I just wanted to share this response from NGC as to the authenticity of this coin (why he mentioned my "patience" I do not know. I think a response in about 24 hours was extremely fast!!). Thank you all. Copy and pasted response from NGC:

Hello Alex. I really do hope JustBob and Coinbuf are correct. I think anything like this (if found to be fraudulent) not only hurts numismatics and collectors, but can also have an indirect impact on our forum host as well. I simply could not sit on the sidelines with this one so I chose to pursue it. If I am wasting my time, then I've wasted my time, no big deal to me. I had simply rather put forth the effort to verify this one as opposed not to. If this does happen to turn out to be a fake, then I am grateful for the opportunity in getting one more of them off the market for our great hobby. Just my humble opinion here my friend. I completely respect, and truly appreciate, everyone's comments here on this topic. Maybe we are looking at a result of lighting and photography issues, but on the flip side, maybe we are not. I value everyone's opinion here for sure!

Hello Quintus. I contacted NGC today and spoke with a representative regarding this coin. During my conversation, I did respectfully request that David Vagi be notified of this one due to his knowledge of Ancients. We shall see where it goes from here. Thanks.

Hey Kurt. Yes, those are my same thoughts and gut feeling. I looked more closely at the plastic holder today and the three "heat sealed" dots (for a lack of better terms as I know the entire holder is heat sealed) on the left side of the holder do not even look the same as that of the authentic NGC holder. There's also a discrepancy at the bottom of the holder regarding this same "sealing" issue. There also appears to be a very prominent black carbon spot on the obverse of the NGC coin at about the 9:30 position (between the rim and center of the coin) that is not seen on the suspect coin. I contacted NGC today by phone after also sending emails to them yesterday. I just received an email response from an NGC representative several minutes ago who requested more info. regarding this issue. I responded to their request. NGC is obviously closed for the day, but I was glad to have gotten correspondence from them in which it appears they intend to investigate this further. I will keep the post up to date as I hear more from them. Thanks.

That is more of what I was alluding to which I should have made more clear throughout my post. This has been going on quite a bit from what I have read.

That makes two of us brother! I would however like for an experienced Ancient member to chime in though. For now, I will stick to my trusty ol' coppers.

It very well could be, I can't argue that point at all. It appears that there are numerous missing designs which I would think light should reflect off of regardless of the type of light or lighting angle. I am by no means an expert on photography, but would it not appear that there are missing designs in the areas I've circled here?

I totally agree with you on the lighting issue. However, there are just way too many discrepancies involved with this one in my opinion. From different shapes, design elements, and the slab label itself, just too much going on here.

If only Princes Leia was in that picture......... 😞.