• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

These exact colors on a morgan would go unquestioned

201 posts in this topic

Dont you own part of Legend-Morphy ?

 

Yes - through my investment in Legend. That doesn't affect the fact that the catalogs are printed well in advance and it's a simple exercise to check that the description hasn't changed recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont you own part of Legend-Morphy ?

 

Yes - through my investment in Legend. That doesn't affect the fact that the catalogs are printed well in advance and it's a simple exercise to check that the description hasn't changed recently.

 

Well that certainly doesnt make you a disinterested impartial witness... sorry.

 

And I dont think anyone said anything about the catalog I think we were all talking about how it was listed on the auction site...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never claimed to be disinterested - I'm simply providing you with some facts. And the fact is that the auction site description and the catalog description should be the same - for every coin - because Laura writes them one time and then they go to the printers and online. So if the printed catalog matches the online catalog, it wasn't edited recently - in fact, that would prove no changes for pretty much 6 weeks now.

 

Now what of that information is biased?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never claimed to be disinterested - I'm simply providing you with some facts. And the fact is that the auction site description and the catalog description should be the same - for every coin - because Laura writes them one time and then they go to the printers and online. So if the printed catalog matches the online catalog, it wasn't edited recently - in fact, that would prove no changes for pretty much 6 weeks now.

 

Now what of that information is biased?

 

I would just let this one go... its in your best interest. Agreed ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I have compared the online description to the catalog description, there is indeed a difference. As a result of the NGC thread started on 2/4 [note: well after the catalog had been at the printers], Laura added this to the online description:

 

NOTE: we have confirmed at one time it was a MS64+, the owner paid $8,800.00 as a 64. Clearly they knew the coin was undergraded!

 

This is the ONLY difference between the printed catalog description and the online description. I believe that reinforces my point that no mention of Duckor was recently deleted from the online catalog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never claimed to be disinterested - I'm simply providing you with some facts. And the fact is that the auction site description and the catalog description should be the same - for every coin - because Laura writes them one time and then they go to the printers and online. So if the printed catalog matches the online catalog, it wasn't edited recently - in fact, that would prove no changes for pretty much 6 weeks now.

 

Now what of that information is biased?

 

I would just let this one go... its in your best interest. Agreed ?

 

Hmmm - logic and facts show up and THEN it's best to just let something go? :makepoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never claimed to be disinterested - I'm simply providing you with some facts. And the fact is that the auction site description and the catalog description should be the same - for every coin - because Laura writes them one time and then they go to the printers and online. So if the printed catalog matches the online catalog, it wasn't edited recently - in fact, that would prove no changes for pretty much 6 weeks now.

 

Now what of that information is biased?

 

I would just let this one go... its in your best interest. Agreed ?

 

Hmmm - facts show up and THEN it's best to just let something go. :makepoint:

 

Really... let it go. Im not going to believe you. Its your company. Of course you are going to take the position that no change had been made. I know what I saw. That was confirmed by others here and even dimefreak confirmed that you espoused a story about how it was Duckor's last coin ect ect....

 

How's that Cardinal Dollar treating you ? She sure is beautiful !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely commented in the thread about it being Duckor's last coin - as I said, I didn't check the assertion that the OP posted and went with it. Mea Culpa.

 

As far as not believing me, that's certainly your choice. Perhaps you can explain why a catalog that went to the printers before the original thread was started makes no mention of Duckor? And has the same verbage of the online description?

 

Conspiracy theorists abound! sigh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't think it's worth all the back and forth but I would wager a very high amount of money that the title of the auction stated ex duckor. But I have no way of proving it so it's meaningless to debate. I don't get all the hostility.

 

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never claimed to be disinterested - I'm simply providing you with some facts. And the fact is that the auction site description and the catalog description should be the same - for every coin - because Laura writes them one time and then they go to the printers and online. So if the printed catalog matches the online catalog, it wasn't edited recently - in fact, that would prove no changes for pretty much 6 weeks now.

 

Now what of that information is biased?

 

I would just let this one go... its in your best interest. Agreed ?

 

Hmmm - facts show up and THEN it's best to just let something go. :makepoint:

 

Really... let it go. Im not going to believe you. Its your company. Of course you are going to take the position that no change had been made. I know what I saw. That was confirmed by others here and even dimefreak confirmed that you espoused a story about how it was Duckor's last coin ect ect....

 

How's that Cardinal Dollar treating you ? She sure is beautiful !!

 

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

 

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

 

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

 

Your recent posts in this thread speak for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

Your recent posts in this thread speak for themselves.

What are you, a policeman? He's speaking his mind and you're trying to shut him down by throwing around your weight and intimidating him. Why don't you give it a rest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

Your recent posts in this thread speak for themselves.

What are you, a policeman? He's speaking his mind and you're trying to shut him down by throwing around your weight and intimidating him. Why don't you give it a rest?

 

What are you, a policeman (wannabe)? I'm speaking my mind and you're trying to shut me down by throwing around your weight and intimidating me. Why don't YOU give it a rest?

 

By the way, you are back on "ignore". So you get the last word if you want it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize to all for even bringing up the recent 1923-S PCGS MS65 Peace Dollar. I wasn't attempting to derail the thread or to cause any problems. I was trying to make a point to Paul about something, and I never foresaw that my comment would have led the thread in this direction including debates about Legend-Morphy and their auction descriptions or to cause disruption/chaos. The point of my comment was to demonstrate, with a recent sale, the fact that just because colors on a coin are atypical does not automatically mean that they are AT. I have never seen another Peace Dollar as extreme as the one that just sold with those colors (like Paul claimed he had never seen a Peace Dollar like the original poster's coin - edited to add, not the AT monster in the very first post, but the 1921 lilac/lavender example), but I have no doubt that 1923-S Peace Dollar toning is 100% natural. Similarly, based on the colors and patterns that I have seen on other NT peace dollars with less extreme toning, I think the 1921 is NT even though I understand why it may appear suspicious to some.

 

I also am apologetic to Legend and Legend-Morphy; while I never claimed that "ex-Duckor" was part of your auction description or the website or that you had ever represented it as such, it started a debate about your website and the auction catalog. This was never the intent and surely something that I did not foresee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

 

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

 

Saying that no matter what a person says you won't believe them is the equivalent of calling them dishonest. Why am *I* the one probably mistaken? A catalog sent to print BEFORE the thread was even started is definitive evidence of Laura's description. I suggest that it is far more likely that others are mistaken - as I was. They saw the title of the thread and *assumed* the coin was indeed the Duckor coin. I know that I did - until Laura later corrected me. That is all I have to say on the matter.

 

The Cardinal 1794 is spectacular. I only wish that I could spend as much time with it raw as Martin obviously did. What a treat that must have been!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize to all for even bringing up the recent 1923-S PCGS MS65 Peace Dollar. I wasn't attempting to derail the thread or to cause any problems. I was trying to make a point to Paul about something, and I never foresaw that my comment would have led the thread in this direction including debates about Legend-Morphy and their auction descriptions or to cause disruption/chaos. The point of my comment was to demonstrate, with a recent sale, the fact that just because colors on a coin are atypical does not automatically mean that they are AT. I have never seen another Peace Dollar as extreme as the one that just sold with those colors (like Paul claimed he had never seen a Peace Dollar like the original poster's coin), but I have no doubt that 1923-S Peace Dollar toning is 100% natural.

 

I also am apologetic to Legend and Legend-Morphy; while I never claimed that "ex-Duckor" was part of your auction description or the website or that you had ever represented it as such, it started a debate about your website and the auction catalog. This was never the intent and surely something that I did not foresee.

 

No worries. Imo, the coin in hand was a spectacular example of a toned Peace dollar. I agreed with the grade and loved the color.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Saying that no matter what a person says you won't believe them is the equivalent of calling them dishonest. Why am *I* the one probably mistaken? A catalog sent to print BEFORE the thread was even started is definitive evidence of Laura's description. I suggest that it is far more likely that others are mistaken - as I was. They saw the title of the thread and *assumed* the coin was indeed the Duckor coin. I know that I did - until Laura later corrected me. That is all I have to say on the matter.

 

The Cardinal 1794 is spectacular. I only wish that I could spend as much time with it raw as Martin obviously did. What a treat that must have been!

 

So do you visit the 1794 often ? I think I would be at the bank every day just to visit with it...

 

I would love to think that you could keep it at home but that would just be silly...

 

It truly is amazing how that coin has been pampered since the moment it was minted. It really is an American treasure. Congrats on your purchase.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that if you can afford a 10mil coin you can afford a home solution to rival a bank as far as coin/asset safety. Granted part of that safety might include not admitting so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im pretty sure he could handle the coin at home, something that small would be relatively easy to keep safe. My old boss had a 7 million dollar painting hanging on his living room wall literally on a single rusty nail.

 

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am learning something new about NT and AT, and I am little concerning about one of my coin. I am still a rookie about rainbow, grades, and varies. I understand that most of you said it is easier to identity an AT on Morgan Dollars, so I will post my coin to double check with your opinion. Sorry, my pictures are a not great picture as your's.

 

Photo2013-03-07112102PM_zps0c93d28b.jpg

 

Photo2013-03-07112056PM_zpsf9e91e42.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fine to me.

 

It looks better than fine to me and blatantly natural/original.

 

By fine, I meant NT.

 

I knew that :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

 

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

 

A catalog sent to print BEFORE the thread was even started is definitive evidence of Laura's description.

 

Print is static, but HTML is not. I don't see how the catalog being printed 1 way guarantees the lifelong matching HTML on a site. You yourself admitted that a different edit WAS made. The site may have matched the catalog at one point, been edited to add Duckor as seen by all of us, then edited again to remove duckor. That possibility is far to obvious to not have been noticed. But sounds more like it was ignored in hopes of using it as evidence, as if no one would think of multiple HTML edits. The site absolutely 100% mentioned ex-duckor at one point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really being antagonistic and unfairly do. Just because Bruce has ties to the company is no reason to expect or presume that he would be other than honest.

 

And in my book, some of your "evidence" is far less credible than the printed catalog itself (not containing a reference to "Duckor").

 

Unfairly ? How so ? I only stated what I saw and knew to be true.

 

I never called Bruce dishonest nor would I. I said I wouldnt believe him. He is just probably mistaken. Though he did admit to describing the coin as an Ex-Duckor. Is that not evidence ?

 

Antagonistic ? I also asked him to leave the issue alone move on and to talk about coins... I even asked him about his most recent purchase...

 

I would still love to hear about his newp...

 

A catalog sent to print BEFORE the thread was even started is definitive evidence of Laura's description.

 

Print is static, but HTML is not. I don't see how the catalog being printed 1 way guarantees the lifelong matching HTML on a site. You yourself admitted that a different edit WAS made. The site may have matched the catalog at one point, been edited to add Duckor as seen by all of us, then edited again to remove duckor. That possibility is far to obvious to not have been noticed. But sounds more like it was ignored in hopes of using it as evidence, as if no one would think of multiple HTML edits. The site absolutely 100% mentioned ex-duckor at one point.

 

Really?

 

2 years and 11 months later?

 

HTML review failure?

 

It is as if Rumpelstiltskin just woke up and started reviewing coin catalogs and old Basher threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites