Racketeer nickel set

[spiny]

What do you think would be a fair offer for this? I don't have a clue beyond looking at closed auctions on eBay. I think the non-plated one is an AU+ (Maybe even UNC), but with very subdued luster. I'm not sure if the color on the reverse is worth anything more than a mention since the luster is not there.

 

[spiny]

the coin...

 

[truthteller]

I used to sell racketeer nickels on a regular basis at $7-$9 each. Dealers usually offered them for about $20 retail.

 

 

 

 

TRUTH

[spiny]

Thanks. That's pretty close to what I saw for the plated ones on eBay (around $10). Do you think the other one is worth any more? I offered $25 for the set and a roll of mixed date circulated Canadian 5 cents, but that was just a guess and I can amend it if I was off much one way or the other.

[truthteller]

Believe it or not, the holder is worth a bit of $. I rarely see them offered as a pair in a nice capitol holder. The non plated coin looks very nice and appears to grade AUish. The light reverse iridescent tone is a plus.

 

 

 

TRUTH

[Hoot]

The plated nickel, as you probably know, is a post-racketeer mimic. They are very common. Given the condition of the non-plated nickel and the interesting holder, I think that $25 is about tops.

 

Hoot

[AlixTCat]

The plated nickel, as you probably know, is a post-racketeer mimic. They are very common. Given the condition of the non-plated nickel and the interesting holder, I think that $25 is about tops.

 

Hoot

 

I'd go for the two in the holder for $25. Nice piece of history. I like.

[TomB]

I agree completely with Hoot on this and would like to write that on a true racketeer nickel you might expect to find reeding added to the edge, which I highly doubt this coin will have.

[spiny]

The plated nickel, as you probably know, is a post-racketeer mimic. They are very common. Given the condition of the non-plated nickel and the interesting holder, I think that $25 is about tops.

 

Hoot

 

The thought never even crossed my mind that it could have been anything but made to put in the holder. But now that I think about it, are there any that could be attributed as 100%, no doubt, contemporaries?

[Hoot]

By contemporaries, do you mean original racketeer nicks?

 

If so, then there will likely always be some doubt about their authenticity without some form of pedegree, and I don't know of any. I know that Bill Fivaz has (had?) some that he considered original. Those usually show the gilting worn off except in the recesses of the coin, and like Tom said, they will have reeded edges that were finely filed into the coin. The reeding on the originals closely resembles the Liberty Head $5 gold pieces of the time. There are some of those that exist in AU, but even those will have some of the plating worn through. The true racketeer nickels were new pieces when they were plated and subsequently circulated to varying degrees. There's an article on Racketeer nicks and their history in April, 2005, Coin Values.

 

Hoot

[spiny]

Yes, I meant ones that would have been made around 1883.

There's articles in Coin Values?

I'll go check it out. Thanks!