FSHO: 1922-D NGC MS-64* STAR Proof Like $399

[jerseycat10]

To be honest, I'm not terribly interested in selling this, but I do have other interests at this time. If it sells, great, if not, great.

 

$399

 

[mumu]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

[jerseycat10]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

Proof isn't anymore definitive than this coin, . Do you have a link to his comments anywhere?

[mumu]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

Proof isn't anymore definitive than this coin, . Do you have a link to his comments anywhere?

 

I think they were made ATS years ago. He claimed I believe 26 and 34-D were the only ones that could possibly come PL because of .

[MarkFeld]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

[jerseycat10]

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grsading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

Disagree. I think the picture of the reverse shows strong evidence of prooflike characteristics, enough so to justify a star attribution on an otherwise ordinary coin.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

Agree. But there should be, and is, a degree of prooflikeness, and the most prevalent should be recognized in some shape for us collectors.

[MarkFeld]

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grsading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

Disagree. I think the picture of the reverse shows strong evidence of prooflike characteristics, enough so to justify a star attribution on an otherwise ordinary coin.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

Agree. But there should be, and is, a degree of prooflikeness, and the most prevalent should be recognized in some shape for us collectors.

 

NGC awarded a star, presumably for surfaces that approached PL on one or both sides. And yet, they chose not to award the PL designation. Obviously, there was no PL designation on NGC's grading label and Crypto was not proved wrong. So I don't see how you can disagree with the first part of my post.

 

Evidence of prooflike characteristics on one side of a coin does not amount to a PL coin. And if, based on established standards, no Peace Dollars exhibit PL surfaces, I wouldn't award the designation to the ones that merely come closest to it.

[brg5658]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

If any other series were held to the standard of Morgan dollars for purposes of PL designation, all PLs would be much less common.

[TonerGuy]

PL or not -- Very cool coin.... Did you really buy that for $130 ?

 

(Note: I have no issue with your price, but if you did - you stole that coin! )

[mumu]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

You consider such coins PL, based upon what standards? Even the owner of the coin in this thread made reference only to its reverse as showing evidence of prooflike tendencies. Or is that "arguing on relative circumstantial semantics"?

[TonerGuy]

"circumstantial semantics"

 

Thats great! You just made that up - didnt you ?

 

I like it. Im going to use it. I will give you a nickel every time I do - thanks.

[coinman_23885]

PL or not -- Very cool coin.... Did you really buy that for $130 ?

 

(Note: I have no issue with your price, but if you did - you stole that coin! )

 

With no disrespect meant, I think it is in poor form to post a putative purchase price in someone else's sales thread. It is not relevant to the asking prices; for all we know, the OP could have purchased it with no premium, but it wouldn't mean that the coin wasn't worth a premium.

[mumu]

"circumstantial semantics"

 

Thats great! You just made that up - didnt you ?

 

I like it. Im going to use it. I will give you a nickel every time I do - thanks.

 

He quoted me one post above. I'm already +10¢ between you guys.

[mumu]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

You consider such coins PL, based upon what standards? Even the owner of the coin in this thread made reference only to its reverse as showing evidence of prooflike tendencies. Or is that "arguing on relative circumstantial semantics"?

 

Nice attempt at deflection but the truth is the PL Peace population is so small that it is clearly common to speak of coins such as the OP as PLish peace dollars. No one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans. That is just projecting ideas towards others that bolster whatever it is your argument is you're making.

[MarkFeld]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

You consider such coins PL, based upon what standards? Even the owner of the coin in this thread made reference only to its reverse as showing evidence of prooflike tendencies. Or is that "arguing on relative circumstantial semantics"?

 

Nice attempt at deflection but the truth is the PL Peace population is so small that it is clearly common to speak of coins such as the OP as PLish peace dollars. No one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans. That is just projecting ideas towards others that bolster whatever it is your argument is you're making.

 

There was no attempt at deflection - I don't play those games and suspect that, whether you will admit it or not, you know that.

 

If, in fact, the OP thinks the coin in this thread is PL on both sides, I do not know that from his posts.

 

Since you say that "no one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans", I will ask again, upon what standard do you and others deem them to be PL?.

 

For example, I have viewed quite a few business strike Seated and Barber coins which looked as or more PL than the "PL" Peace Dollars I have seen. And yet, NGC still declined to label them PL. So it appears that in the case of those type coins, NGC is imposing a standard which is quite close to that used for PL Morgan Dollars.

 

Why should Peace Dollars be treated differently/more liberally?

[yonico]

PL or not -- Very cool coin.... Did you really buy that for $130 ?

 

(Note: I have no issue with your price, but if you did - you stole that coin! )

 

With no disrespect meant, I think it is in poor form to post a putative purchase price in someone else's sales thread. It is not relevant to the asking prices; for all we know, the OP could have purchased it with no premium, but it wouldn't mean that the coin wasn't worth a premium.

 

i agree with this statement in general, but in this case - the seller left the sticker with the price on it on the slab, and included it in his pictures on the thread..?

if he wanted to keep his buying price a secret, he would have (or should have) peeled the sticker off or edit it out of the picture..

in any case, whatever the seller paid for this coin does not mean anything to the coin's value now, or to what he's asking for it....

[coinman_23885]

PL or not -- Very cool coin.... Did you really buy that for $130 ?

 

(Note: I have no issue with your price, but if you did - you stole that coin! )

 

With no disrespect meant, I think it is in poor form to post a putative purchase price in someone else's sales thread. It is not relevant to the asking prices; for all we know, the OP could have purchased it with no premium, but it wouldn't mean that the coin wasn't worth a premium.

 

i agree with this statement in general, but in this case - the seller left the sticker with the price on it on the slab, and included it in his pictures on the thread..?

if he wanted to keep his buying price a secret, he would have (or should have) peeled the sticker off or edit it out of the picture..

in any case, whatever the seller paid for this coin does not mean anything to the coin's value now, or to what he's asking for it....

 

I apologize to Toner Guy - I didn't see it listed on the slab.

[mumu]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

You consider such coins PL, based upon what standards? Even the owner of the coin in this thread made reference only to its reverse as showing evidence of prooflike tendencies. Or is that "arguing on relative circumstantial semantics"?

 

Nice attempt at deflection but the truth is the PL Peace population is so small that it is clearly common to speak of coins such as the OP as PLish peace dollars. No one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans. That is just projecting ideas towards others that bolster whatever it is your argument is you're making.

 

There was no attempt at deflection - I don't play those games and suspect that, whether you will admit it or not, you know that.

 

If, in fact, the OP thinks the coin in this thread is PL on both sides, I do not know that from his posts.

 

Since you say that "no one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans", I will ask again, upon what standard do you and others deem them to be PL?.

 

For example, I have viewed quite a few business strike Seated and Barber coins which looked as or more PL than the "PL" Peace Dollars I have seen. And yet, NGC still declined to label them PL. So it appears that in the case of those type coins, NGC is imposing a standard which is quite close to that used for PL Morgan Dollars.

 

Why should Peace Dollars be treated differently/more liberally?

 

Sometimes you go to other countries and the girls aren't as pretty as the girls back home. But eventually some of them start to emerge as "the hot ones" for that time and place.

[physics-fan3.14]

As far as I know, NGC applies the same standard of reflectivity to prooflike coins of all series and denominations. A coin must have a certain number of inches of reflectivity to be labelled PL - whether its a Peace dollar or a Capped Bust Dime or a St. Gaudens. That is why there are only 2 PL Peace dollars designated. They may be a few dozen that have PL tendencies but which don't meet the standard - that is one reason the star was invented. For most of us, these Star graded coins are going to be the most we can afford, but I would hope that nobody would fool themselves into thinking that they are PL coins. They are merely Peace dollars with PL tendencies.

[MarkFeld]

As far as I know, NGC applies the same standard of reflectivity to prooflike coins of all series and denominations. A coin must have a certain number of inches of reflectivity to be labelled PL - whether its a Peace dollar or a Capped Bust Dime or a St. Gaudens. That is why there are only 2 PL Peace dollars designated. They may be a few dozen that have PL tendencies but which don't meet the standard - that is one reason the star was invented. For most of us, these Star graded coins are going to be the most we can afford, but I would hope that nobody would fool themselves into thinking that they are PL coins. They are merely Peace dollars with PL tendencies.

 

Thank you, Jason.

[MarkFeld]

It's funny how that brilliant mind Crypto claimed 22-Ds don't come prooflike and I have now seen 5 including owned one. Nice coin JC

 

I don't see a PL designation on NGC's grading label. So it's not like the coin in this thread proves Crypto wrong.

 

And if Peace Dollars were held to the same standard as Morgan dollars for purposes of the PL designation, I don't know that there would be any Peace Dollars designated such.

 

That's all well and good except Crypto has a 1926 coin not designated PL which was his reference point and he considers PL much in the same way that those of us not looking for an argument for the sake of arguing on relative circumstantial semantics consider the above coin and others like it PL.

 

 

You consider such coins PL, based upon what standards? Even the owner of the coin in this thread made reference only to its reverse as showing evidence of prooflike tendencies. Or is that "arguing on relative circumstantial semantics"?

 

Nice attempt at deflection but the truth is the PL Peace population is so small that it is clearly common to speak of coins such as the OP as PLish peace dollars. No one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans. That is just projecting ideas towards others that bolster whatever it is your argument is you're making.

 

There was no attempt at deflection - I don't play those games and suspect that, whether you will admit it or not, you know that.

 

If, in fact, the OP thinks the coin in this thread is PL on both sides, I do not know that from his posts.

 

Since you say that "no one here is making the argument that these in anyway resemble pl Morgans", I will ask again, upon what standard do you and others deem them to be PL?.

 

For example, I have viewed quite a few business strike Seated and Barber coins which looked as or more PL than the "PL" Peace Dollars I have seen. And yet, NGC still declined to label them PL. So it appears that in the case of those type coins, NGC is imposing a standard which is quite close to that used for PL Morgan Dollars.

 

Why should Peace Dollars be treated differently/more liberally?

 

Sometimes you go to other countries and the girls aren't as pretty as the girls back home. But eventually some of them start to emerge as "the hot ones" for that time and place.

 

In other words, eventually, you hold them to a different, more liberal standard, as you seemingly want to do in the case of "PL" Peace Dollars. Which is essentially the point I have been trying to make in this thread.

[zboyle04]

i like it, but not at 999

[mikew148]

I like the Peace dollar.

 

However, It's not properly listed.

 

It's not anymore of a PL dollar than this one - for the Morgan comparison

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Morgan-Dollar-1880-S-NGC-MS-64-Star-PL-Obverse-Old-US-Silver-Coin-EDE13-01-/161341207665?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item2590af7471

 

As I said, I like the Peace Dollar but to call it PL is incorrect.

[TonerGuy]

I have no dog in the PL - not PL discussion - but does anyone have a link to photos of the 2 PL Peace $ ? I would love to see what NGC says is PL for Peace $.

 

And to Coinman - thanks. And yes I wouldnt have posted that question except for Jersey leaving the price on it. And really I want to know if he stole that coin. Thats the kind of price that would require a YOU SUCK type of response. And I think the coin is well worth the $999 price tag. Its a rare coin. If I liked PL coins I would buy it since that probably as close as you can get to PL without the designation or paying significantly more for one of the 2 PL designated dollars.

 

 

[jom]

That is why there are only 2 PL Peace dollars designated.

 

What dates are the coins with these designations? I'd like to know considering the somewhat "controversial" points being made in this post.

[yonico]

That is why there are only 2 PL Peace dollars designated.

 

What dates are the coins with these designations? I'd like to know considering the somewhat "controversial" points being made in this post.

 

Both are 34-D ; 1 in MS63, 1 in MS64

 

In addition, I've seen an ANACS peace dollar is MS62PL. The date, as I recall, was 34-D as well.

 

Edited to add: it is on eBay ATM

[coinman_23885]

1934 D

[yonico]

It kinda makes sense to me that when so few exist, they would be out of the same batch.. so same date and mint.

[mikew148]

That is why there are only 2 PL Peace dollars designated.

 

What dates are the coins with these designations? I'd like to know considering the somewhat "controversial" points being made in this post.

 

Both are 34-D ; 1 in MS63, 1 in MS64

 

In addition, I've seen an ANACS peace dollar is MS62PL. The date, as I recall, was 34-D as well.

 

Edited to add: it is on eBay ATM

 

Here's one in an ANACS holder. But from the pics I can't see it.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FRESH-PICTURES-1934-D-PROOFLIKE-Peace-1-ANACS-MS-62-PL-DMPL-RARE-/231270393875?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item35d8ca2813