physics-fan3.14

Does anyone have a link to this article? Sounds interesting, but I'm not a subscriber.

I got one too. I thought that was a really nice sentiment. Thanks, @dena

I checked - they have a category for the company, but it is empty - no catalogues available.

Agreed... OP's coin is definitely counterfeit.

Hardcovers are usually special issue, limited release. They often trade at a large premium, as they are higher quality.

Its back up for me.

Yes, I'll agree that this seems to be the case. There are a few very passionate die marriage collectors (the Bust Half Nut Club), but my understanding is that membership is lower than it used to be. And I'll also agree - pursuit of the grade, avoiding problem coins, and looking for registry points may be a strong contributing factor.

Obviously, this is super rare. CoinFacts shows a problem free PCGS VF-35 sold in 2011 for $94k. The one DWLange mentioned is currently up on Heritage, VF details with a hole: https://coins.ha.com/itm/early-dollars/1795-1-flowing-hair-two-leaves-b-20-bb-16-r8-holed-damaged-ncs-vf-details/a/1326-4161.s Based on the sale of that one, I'd expect the newest example to be worth a bit more than the holed example - holes are murder on value! Even though this is F details vs VF, I'd rank the newest example higher. The advantage of the holed example is the Reiver pedigree, which is fantastic. When this coin sold in 2006, it sold for $9200

I only keep auction catalogues if they can serve as a reference. Something like a Heritage FUN sale has a lot of coins, and it may have one or two detailed descriptions, but its not worth filling up space on my bookshelf. However, for really specialized collections, sometimes the auction catalogue can become the standard reference. For example, I recently purchased "The John W Adams Collection of Comitia Americana and related medals," put out by Stacks and written by John Kraljevich. Absolutely spectacular, detailed, and comprehensive work (even if it is only 150 pages or so).

Congrats to everyone who won a Registry Award! I recognize at least a few names on this list. You all should be super proud! https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/8807/2020-ngc-registry-awards/

I have hit refresh approximately once per minute waiting for the results. You're killing me!

Starting in 2009, the date and mintmark were moved to the edge. Most people don't have any idea what these dollars look like; I'm almost certain I've never seen 3/4 of them before today. You can see them all here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacagawea_dollar#Native_American_redesign_(2009-present)

Good luck on your set! A collection of 1795 coins is a very advanced undertaking, and I wish you luck! To answer your questions: 1. First, the die clashing does not automatically make this O-116, but a clash in this area is seen on the O-116. Clashes can appear on numerous marriages, and a reverse could be paired with a difference obverse (and thus be a different marriage). The identifiers for the O-116 can be found here: http://maibockaddict.com/1795-o-116-r4 2. There are two primary references for early half dollar die marriages. The first is Overton's "Early Half Dollar Die Varieties" and the second is Tompkins "Early United States Half Dollars." Overton covers the entire series from 1794 to 1836 in a single volume, and has been the standard reference for decades (updated periodically). Tompkins is a new work, in the last few years, and is coming out in 3 volumes. Only the first volume is out, covering 1794-1807. It is gaining acceptance, but is nowhere near as widely recognized yet. So, to go back and finish answering part 1 - "O-116" is the numbering from the Overton reference, T-11 is the equivalent from the Tompkins reference. 2/2 indicates the die state, with 1/2 not having the clash, 2/2 having the clash. 3. Properly graded coins will cross. You need to choose properly graded coins, coins with good eye appeal, and original coins - and then you will have no trouble crossing at all. 4. Small rim nicks are completely acceptable on old coins like this. I'd avoid an AU coin with a decent nick, but I don't mind a small nick like this on an EF coin.

This has been treated with a substance called "MS-70." It is highly controversial, and a quick search of this site or of google should show you why. However, coins with this look are very often slabbed, so it is no surprise.

Google seems to indicate he died in 2009.

I recently watched a video about this. Not sure if this is the same website as the OP in this thread is referring to. It is quite basic so far, but shows some interesting ideas.

The problem with resurrecting really old threads like this is that many of the pictures are gone.

It wasn't until 1893, with AG Heaton's "Treatise on the Coinage of the US Branch Mints" that people really began looking at or for mintmarks. His book is obviously quite outdated and has many inaccuracies, but it really did influence collectors at the time. You can read it on the Newman Numismatic Portal, here: https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/512404

Mark, a rusted die exhibits as a pimply surface, and does not give streaks like shown. I see no evidence of a rusted die here. I honestly think what I'm seeing on this coin is a planchet issue

Your coin exhibits a classic, if somewhat severe, case of "roller marks." Extremely common, detracts from grade and value, and rather unattractive. The marks occur when the planchet is being rolled to the proper thickness. Its not common to see a coin as completely obscured by these marks as your coin is, but it's also more commonly seen on larger coins where the same amount of marks would be considered less severe.

I don't like you and I have you on ignore (I only saw this post because Mark quoted it.) However, I can't recall you explicitly breaking any rules, and I don't recall reporting any of your posts. I've just got you on ignore. Report post functions become important, for example, in the recent threads where members were calling people part of the KKK or Nazis. That is clearly across the line, and prompted the intervention of moderators.

Gotcha. I won't be able to read it then.

Trust me, there is a legitimate use for it without being the thought police. Some posts are clearly out of bounds.

Got a link? I can't find the article you're talking about.

Had a dealer email me and offer to pay $2000 above the mint's price if I would order and ship them to him. Absolutely could not get out of work today to be on the website at noon, but I really tried.