What is your opinion of this Bust Half?

[Hard Times]

Hot off the press:

 

Coincidentally (really), I just viewed the 1811/10 half in person. I didn't even know it was in an upcoming auction until I happened to be viewing several boxes of coins today.

 

I grade it AU50. And, while I don't like the scratch, it is acceptable to me for a graded coin, especially one graded XF45. In-hand, at some angles, it is less conspicuous than in the image. To my eyes, at no angle, is it more conspicuous. It is also quite a bit less conspicuous without magnification.

 

I was somewhat pleasantly surprised, not to mention, shocked to see the coin!

 

Caveat Emptor to the bidders - I hope the auction house fairly depicts this scratch in the listing so potential buyers can make their own assessments. As you can see from the comments in this thread, many people do not agree with the idea that this scratch is acceptable on a graded coin that is CACed, including some who have also seen it in hand. Trick of light that shows it stronger or less conspicuous, it is still there and should be honestly shown and described.

 

Edited to add: I just looked at the auction listing and the image depicts the scratch fairly and includes the text 'Abrasions are inconsequential except for a diagonal thin mark on the left obverse field.'

 

So buyers can make their own judgement. There are some really nice halves in this upcoming auction!

 

Best, HT

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Hot off the press:

 

Coincidentally (really), I just viewed the 1811/10 half in person. I didn't even know it was in an upcoming auction until I happened to be viewing several boxes of coins today.

 

I grade it AU50. And, while I don't like the scratch, it is acceptable to me for a graded coin, especially one graded XF45. In-hand, at some angles, it is less conspicuous than in the image. To my eyes, at no angle, is it more conspicuous. It is also quite a bit less conspicuous without magnification.

 

I was somewhat pleasantly surprised, not to mention, shocked to see the coin!

 

With apology and without malice toward the OP or anyone else, I rest my commentary ( I am sure to the relief of all).

 

Thanks John!

 

 

Well, I do admit to a slight embellishment in my phrasing...

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Hot off the press:

 

Coincidentally (really), I just viewed the 1811/10 half in person. I didn't even know it was in an upcoming auction until I happened to be viewing several boxes of coins today.

 

I grade it AU50. And, while I don't like the scratch, it is acceptable to me for a graded coin, especially one graded XF45. In-hand, at some angles, it is less conspicuous than in the image. To my eyes, at no angle, is it more conspicuous. It is also quite a bit less conspicuous without magnification.

 

I was somewhat pleasantly surprised, not to mention, shocked to see the coin!

 

Caveat Emptor to the bidders - I hope the auction house fairly depicts this scratch in the listing so potential buyers can make their own assessments. As you can see from the comments in this thread, many people do not agree with the idea that this scratch is acceptable on a graded coin that is CACed, including some who have also seen it in hand. Trick of light that shows it stronger or less conspicuous, it is still there and should be honestly shown and described.

 

Edited to add: I just looked at the auction listing and the image depicts the scratch fairly and includes the text 'Abrasions are inconsequential except for a diagonal thin mark on the left obverse field.'

 

So buyers can make their own judgement. There are some really nice halves in this upcoming auction!

 

Best, HT

 

...and many do agree with the idea that this scratch is acceptable on a graded coin that is CACed, including some who have seen it in hand.

 

What a personal like or dislike of the scratch is, does not mean that we should, via subtle commentary that suggests there is a possible intent to mislead potential Bidders, disparage the entities involved.

 

That has been the real thrust of my thoughts in this Thread. The use of wording that is calculated to suggest a less than honest intent or ability of or by the entity that is the ultimate recipient of the judgment of the court of public opinion, does not add to the learning process, for any of us.

[physics-fan3.14]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

[MarkFeld]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

 

Jason, you make it sound like PCGS and CAC did something wrong, rather than that you simply disagree with their opinion.

 

But perhaps I am misinterpreting your language.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

 

Thank you.

 

I mean any entity involved. I did not even take notice of where the picture emanated from, and it does not matter to me, since it is not what I wanted to comment upon.

 

I did, however, take notice of the wording used to describe the actions of the entities involved in the Grading.

 

While I appreciate and understand the passion of your position, and opinions are as vast as fish in the ocean (well, whales near the Far East not so much), your thoughts are not given a higher level of merit by using words intended to convey incompetence and less than honorable intent by an entity.

 

Even by your phrasing used in this one reply to the many Posts I have made in this interesting Thread that you started, you continue to intimate - calculated or otherwise - incompetence and dishonesty on the part of the targets of your righteousness.

 

Does it matter to me? Well, not really. What does matter to me is that I take note that you are a valued member of this Board, and have earned respect from other members, and you are far more worthy of praise for your knowledge and contribution than I ever will be. By these simple facts, you have an influence on others. By these simple facts, you have a duty, self imposed or audience imposed, to convey an opinion with courtesy of language, not accusatory haughtiness that discounts the opinion of anyone or any entity as some type of scheme of deceit foisted upon the unknowing, without any clear undeniable proof of same.

 

I realize this may not have been what you intended.

 

You enjoy, to your credit, the respect of many in the numismatic world, and I am sure outside of same. I am simply suggesting that you maintain what is expected of such an honor, when conveying an opinion.

 

I recognize my opinion is probably useless words from an unimportant source. If I offend, then please dismiss same.

[Catbert]

Gawd, curlis, you are a load.......

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Gawd, curlis, you are a load.......

 

 

That, I agree with, and is an opinion I can endorse.

[physics-fan3.14]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

 

Jason, you make it sound like PCGS and CAC did something wrong, rather than that you simply disagree with their opinion.

 

But perhaps I am misinterpreting your language.

 

Maybe I was using imprecise language, to paraphrase Mr. Curlis. Nobody did anything wrong; I just disagree with PCGS and CAC, but think that Heritage has done a good job of fairly and clearly presenting the coin.

[MarkFeld]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

 

Jason, you make it sound like PCGS and CAC did something wrong, rather than that you simply disagree with their opinion.

 

But perhaps I am misinterpreting your language.

 

Maybe I was using imprecise language, to paraphrase Mr. Curlis. Nobody did anything wrong; I just disagree with PCGS and CAC, but think that Heritage has done a good job of fairly and clearly presenting the coin.

 

Thanks Jason.

[coinman1794]

Hot off the press:

 

Coincidentally (really), I just viewed the 1811/10 half in person. I didn't even know it was in an upcoming auction until I happened to be viewing several boxes of coins today.

 

I grade it AU50. And, while I don't like the scratch, it is acceptable to me for a graded coin, especially one graded XF45. In-hand, at some angles, it is less conspicuous than in the image. To my eyes, at no angle, is it more conspicuous. It is also quite a bit less conspicuous without magnification.

 

I was somewhat pleasantly surprised, not to mention, shocked to see the coin!

 

That must have been a surprise to see before your eyes! Thanks, Mark.

[Hard Times]

John, in no way did I at any time attempt to disparage or implicate Heritage. Their pictures clearly show the mark (indeed, it is their pictures which I posted here, and we have been discussing). The responsibility for this one is solely on PCGS (for slabbing it) and CAC (for beaning it).

 

Jason, you make it sound like PCGS and CAC did something wrong, rather than that you simply disagree with their opinion.

 

But perhaps I am misinterpreting your language.

 

Maybe I was using imprecise language, to paraphrase Mr. Curlis. Nobody did anything wrong; I just disagree with PCGS and CAC, but think that Heritage has done a good job of fairly and clearly presenting the coin.

 

Thanks Jason.

 

Yes I agree that in my case I just don't agree that it should get the CAC bean and am happy there is full disclosure with HA description.

 

Best, HT

[GoldFinger1969]

Saw a 1798 (?) Draped Bust dollar the other day for about $2,000. Not sure if it had a grade on the white cardboard holder, but for that price it must be below EF and even VF.

 

If you buy a coin with a grade of lower than 15 or so (it was in a white coin sleeve), I guess you have little downside if the coin really looks "OK" but I have never bought a coin that expensive before without it being either new or graded.

 

Any Draped Bust Experts out there who want to tell me if I am getting a steal or ripped off wanna tell me what to look for, let me know. (thumbs u

[GoldFinger1969]

I don't see any evidence of cleaning, though perhaps it was dipped long ago. Is that what you're speaking of? If so, a very large number of graded classic coins have been "cleaned", and many, much more so than that one.

 

Mark -- and others -- when you guys refer to 'cleaning' are you referring to a knowledgable professional or dealer or someone like that trying to improve a coins quality deliberately (what I am reading about in my books) as opposed to a person who had the coin and mistakenly wiped it with a rag and maybe some Endust or warm soapy water or something ??

 

Alot of older coins may have had the latter situation years or decades ago from the original owner or a son or daughter who mistakenly though they could clean it like they clean an antique on a shelf.

[MarkFeld]

Saw a 1798 (?) Draped Bust dollar the other day for about $2,000. Not sure if it had a grade on the white cardboard holder, but for that price it must be below EF and even VF.

 

If you buy a coin with a grade of lower than 15 or so (it was in a white coin sleeve), I guess you have little downside if the coin really looks "OK" but I have never bought a coin that expensive before without it being either new or graded.

 

Any Draped Bust Experts out there who want to tell me if I am getting a steal or ripped off wanna tell me what to look for, let me know. (thumbs u

 

Are you really, really, really asking for opinions regarding what type of purchase you'd be getting, without even providing an image? That's insane.

 

It's also insane to assume that "If you buy a coin with a grade of lower than 15 or so (it was in a white coin sleeve), I guess you have little downside if the coin really looks "OK.."

[MarkFeld]

I don't see any evidence of cleaning, though perhaps it was dipped long ago. Is that what you're speaking of? If so, a very large number of graded classic coins have been "cleaned", and many, much more so than that one.

 

Mark -- and others -- when you guys refer to 'cleaning' are you referring to a knowledgable professional or dealer or someone like that trying to improve a coins quality deliberately (what I am reading about in my books) as opposed to a person who had the coin and mistakenly wiped it with a rag and maybe some Endust or warm soapy water or something ??

 

Alot of older coins may have had the former decades ago from the original owner or a son or daughter who mistakenly though they could clean it like they clean an antique on a shelf.

 

There are many different ways in (and degrees to) which coins are cleaned. And a lot of older coins have been subject to those various cleaning methods/degrees, with a number of them having been graded and encapsulated.

[physics-fan3.14]

I don't see any evidence of cleaning, though perhaps it was dipped long ago. Is that what you're speaking of? If so, a very large number of graded classic coins have been "cleaned", and many, much more so than that one.

 

Mark -- and others -- when you guys refer to 'cleaning' are you referring to a knowledgable professional or dealer or someone like that trying to improve a coins quality deliberately (what I am reading about in my books) as opposed to a person who had the coin and mistakenly wiped it with a rag and maybe some Endust or warm soapy water or something ??

 

Alot of older coins may have had the former decades ago from the original owner or a son or daughter who mistakenly though they could clean it like they clean an antique on a shelf.

 

A lot of people tell a lot of stories about a lot of coins. The only thing that I care about is the evidence left on the coin - how it got there means absolutely nothing to me.

[GoldFinger1969]

Are you really, really, really asking for opinions regarding what type of purchase you'd be getting, without even providing an image? That's insane.

 

I'll take pics when I do more research, the guy had so many coins I only spent a minute or two on it.

 

Wasn't even looking for a Draped Bust but it seemed like a nice coin, just never bought a coin that expensive before without PCGS/NGC grading.

 

It's also insane to assume that "If you buy a coin with a grade of lower than 15 or so (it was in a white coin sleeve), I guess you have little downside if the coin really looks "OK.."

 

I meant mathematically, since you can't fall as far from a F-15 to high single-digits as you can if you buy something 'graded' as XF or AU and it turns out it really should be graded 12-15 points lower.

 

These are coins that are NOT graded by PCGS/NGC so I am going by the seller's guestimate and since I am not good at grading, there's alot of variables at play here.

 

That was what I was trying to say, Mark.

[MarkFeld]

Are you really, really, really asking for opinions regarding what type of purchase you'd be getting, without even providing an image? That's insane.

 

I'll take pics when I do more research, the guy had so many coins I only spent a minute or two on it.

 

Wasn't even looking for a Draped Bust but it seemed like a nice coin, just never bought a coin that expensive before without PCGS/NGC grading.

 

It's also insane to assume that "If you buy a coin with a grade of lower than 15 or so (it was in a white coin sleeve), I guess you have little downside if the coin really looks "OK.."

 

I meant mathematically, since you can't fall as far from a F-15 to high single-digits as you can if you buy something 'graded' as XF or AU and it turns out it really should be graded 12-15 points lower.

 

These are coins that are NOT graded by PCGS/NGC so I am going by the seller's guestimate and since I am not good at grading, there's alot of variables at play here.

 

That was what I was trying to say, Mark.

 

It's very dangerous to make generalizations or assumptions about having less downside, mathematically, just because you start out with a lower grade coin. For example some coins could lose more value dropping in grade from 12 to 8 than others which drop from 50 to 45 or 65 to 63. It depends upon the coins and their values at different grade levels.

[GoldFinger1969]

It's very dangerous to make generalizations or assumptions about having less downside, mathematically, just because you start out with a lower grade coin. For example some coins could lose more value dropping in grade from 12 to 8 than others which drop from 50 to 45 or 65 to 63. It depends upon the coins and their values at different grade levels.

 

I don't disagree with you Mark. Here's my thought pattern (and I might be totally off base here, I freely admit, but I'm telling you what I was thinking in the 90 seconds I looked at the coin):

 

I'm staring out with the assumption that -- and I have to do more work with that particular coin, I had done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING before on Draped Busts (95% of my work/reading has been on Double Eagles) -- that for the price (about $2K) that he had it graded/rated pretty low.

 

At that point, just based on a cursory look at the coin, I am thinking "Hey, this thing looks pretty good for a coin that is 200+ years old." I see quarters and coins from the 1900's that look like they were sanded down compared to that Bust.

 

So....I am thinking (hoping) that maybe he picked it up cheap...gave it a very low grade...priced it accordingly...and maybe, just maybe I can get a coin like this for a few hundred bucks less than what it really should sell for, maybe even $1,000 less (doubtful, but maybe). If I am buying at F-15 or even VF-20 and it should be a VF-25 or VF-30, maybe I get lucky.

 

That's all I was thinking about. Maybe an opportunity, since I went to see him strictly on Saints and Liberty Double Eagles.

 

Needless to say, I didn't buy...want to do more research....and then go back and look at the coin and the border writings for his 'grade' alot closer.

 

In the end, this coin may be priced 100% to market and it's no steal. Might even be overpriced -- maybe I missed something on the reverse, since I spent 90% of my time on the obverse.

 

But your point that I need to be careful and I can't rush in and the folks here can't make a judgement without more info/pics is duly noted.

 

Like I said, I will report back.

[MarkFeld]

It's very dangerous to make generalizations or assumptions about having less downside, mathematically, just because you start out with a lower grade coin. For example some coins could lose more value dropping in grade from 12 to 8 than others which drop from 50 to 45 or 65 to 63. It depends upon the coins and their values at different grade levels.

 

I don't disagree with you Mark. Here's my thought pattern (and I might be totally off base here, I freely admit, but I'm telling you what I was thinking in the 90 seconds I looked at the coin):

 

I'm staring out with the assumption that -- and I have to do more work with that particular coin, I had done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING before on Draped Busts (95% of my work/reading has been on Double Eagles) -- that for the price (about $2K) that he had it graded/rated pretty low.

 

At that point, just based on a cursory look at the coin, I am thinking "Hey, this thing looks pretty good for a coin that is 200+ years old." I see quarters and coins from the 1900's that look like they were sanded down compared to that Bust.

 

So....I am thinking (hoping) that maybe he picked it up cheap...gave it a very low grade...priced it accordingly...and maybe, just maybe I can get a coin like this for a few hundred bucks less than what it really should sell for, maybe even $1,000 less (doubtful, but maybe). If I am buying at F-15 or even VF-20 and it should be a VF-25 or VF-30, maybe I get lucky.

 

That's all I was thinking about. Maybe an opportunity, since I went to see him strictly on Saints and Liberty Double Eagles.

 

Needless to say, I didn't buy...want to do more research....and then go back and look at the coin and the border writings for his 'grade' alot closer.

 

In the end, this coin may be priced 100% to market and it's no steal. Might even be overpriced -- maybe I missed something on the reverse, since I spent 90% of my time on the obverse.

 

But your point that I need to be careful and I can't rush in and the folks here can't make a judgement without more info/pics is duly noted.

 

Like I said, I will report back.

 

For all we know, the coin could be a counterfeit, cleaned, repaired, tooled or whatever. Your thinking, as described, would have been bucking large odds.

[mkman123]

In this day and age everyone has a smart phone.......take a pic and post it

[GoldFinger1969]

For all we know, the coin could be a counterfeit, cleaned, repaired, tooled or whatever. Your thinking, as described, would have been bucking large odds.

 

Yup....like I said, for all I know he knows alot more about this coin than I do.

 

Like they say in my trade, if the smart money is selling, why are you buying....and vice-versa.

[GoldFinger1969]

Any tell-tale signs I should look for regarding a 1798 Draped Bust Silver Dollar ?

Hope to visit my contact tomorrow or Monday and I really think that it's not a bad buy at the price he is asking (he said he's 'flexible' -- I'l see ) which is about $2,200.

 

I've gone over the grading scale for this particular coin (though the multitude of different types for the 1798 is over my head) and done some reading and as long as the condition grade is OK, I'm getting a good coin for the $$$.

 

My 2 big concerns: a counterfeit (he doesn't think so, though he isn't much better at spotting than me so it's not a great comfort) and if the coin has been cleaned/altered.

 

If anybody has any tell-tale things to look for on those concerns, I'm all ears before I see him tomorrow. I'll get some pics, too.

[Hard Times]

Update, this 1811 half, the subject of the original post in this thread, which is in the current HA auction, has not met reserve yet. 3 days, 6 hours till online bidding closes. Will be interesting to see if someone ponies up for the aggressive reserve price.

 

Is the scratch that is so apparent in the images keeping bidders from bidding? Thoughts?

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1203&lotNo=3452&lotIdNo=121025&domain=all

 

Best, HT