1838-D $5

[cameron12x]

Opinions on a technical grade?

 

 

This example has obviously had some work done to it. In your opinion what are the major distractions?

[cameron12x]

Oops, I forgot I had already started a thread on this coin.

 

It's here.

[MarkFeld]

Surely, you are an active and knowledgeable enough poster to know that both sets of images are inadequate for a meaningful grade guess.

[cameron12x]

Surely, you are an active and knowledgeable enough poster to know that both sets of images are inadequate for a meaningful grade guess.

Even just for an estimate for technical details? (e.g. EF40)

 

[MarkFeld]

Surely, you are an active and knowledgeable enough poster to know that both sets of images are inadequate for a meaningful grade guess.

Even just for an estimate for technical details? (e.g. EF40)

 

I bet you can do that, yourself, quite easily.

[cameron12x]

Surely, you are an active and knowledgeable enough poster to know that both sets of images are inadequate for a meaningful grade guess.

Even just for an estimate for technical details? (e.g. EF40)

 

I bet you can do that, yourself, quite easily.

Just looking for opinions, that's all...

[MarkFeld]

Surely, you are an active and knowledgeable enough poster to know that both sets of images are inadequate for a meaningful grade guess.

Even just for an estimate for technical details? (e.g. EF40)

 

I bet you can do that, yourself, quite easily.

Just looking for opinions, that's all...

 

AU details - impossible to know beyond that.

[cameron12x]

AU details - impossible to know beyond that.

Thanks Mark... just looking for validation.

 

 

The brings up an interesting segue to "net grading." How would such a piece be "net graded," and its ultimate valuation?

 

[FishyOne]

I like this one being net graded 30 points for value based on:

1. Harsh Cleaning

2. Ex-jewelry

3. Low eye appeal.

JMHO

[BillJones]

My technical grade would be EF because the mint luster and surface are gone with a deduction for whatever was done to the piece to created the abraded surfaces. Since the coin is in a holder there is no way to know if there is solder on the edge, but I would suspect that there is. In my view, ANACS got the net grade right. Given the level of detail left in the design, a net grade of VF-20 seems to be about on spot.

 

As a said in an earlier post, if you are a budget, getting nice Charlotte and Dahlonega is almost impossible. The market for the really nice examples has gone through the roof, and many of the nice coins are "in strong hands," some of them stronger than mine. It is hard to find these coins if you have the money, and when you find them it's often a "gulp and pay" situation. In other words there are few if any "bargains."

 

As a price it is always a challenge for a net grade piece. If you look at the Heritage results, $1,600 to $2,600 seems to be a range. Coin Facts says $3,200 for a VF-20, but as a collector I would prefer a "clean" VF-20 to a net grade VF-20 so the extra $600 might make sense. I think that the days of "problem" or very worn examples of these coins selling for less than $1,000 are over.

[cameron12x]

Thanks for everyone's input... much appreciated! And your last post was very insightful, Bill... thanks!

 

Inasmuch as I don't want to, I believe that I'm going to have to return the 1838-D $5 to the seller for the following reasons:

 

1. Lots of work has been done to the coin.

2. It has been whizzed and/or polished to a sheen.

3. Solder is still left on some of the reverse devices.

4. Scratches and/or damage on the reverse.

5. Slight rim damage likely exists.

 

I know that only about 275 remain extant, but I think that I'm going keep my eyes open and wait for a better example to come around. This thing hurts my eyes to look at it (it's that bright). It's sad, too, because is was probably a fairly nice AU piece before it was converted to jewelry.

 

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I took a chance on the poor photos in the hopes that the coin would show better in hand. It did not.