• 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.

Gobrecht Dollar: Is this the same coin?

Started by MikeInFL,

101 posts in this topic

WoodenJefferson

WoodenJefferson

Posted
Posted

Ouy Vey....there is one characteristic where it might be the same coin, Miss Liberty's left shin has a weest of hit that shows up in both images. On the reverse, there are two denticles that merge between the T and A of STATES.

 

Wow, if this is the same coin, which is the before and after? One would have to assume that #1 is before and #2 is after.

 

Any hairlines under the tone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TJ'S Coins

TJ'S Coins

Posted
Posted

I do not see how they can be the same coin. The marks on the second are invisible on the first unless the toning covered them up.

 

I like example #1 just the way that it is. Example #2 gives an idea what these coins looked like from the mint but I like mine with more crud and toning on them, like #1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoot

Hoot

Posted
Posted

The marks on the cheek and shin give the coin away. There's also the suggestion of some similar character marks under the right foot of the second A in AMERICA. The basterd who had this done should have his nuts cut off.

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MAULEMALL

MAULEMALL

Posted
Posted
The marks on the cheek and shin give the coin away. There's also the suggestion of some similar character marks under the right foot of the second A in AMERICA. The basterd who had this done should have his nuts cut off.

 

Hoot

Dammmm Hoot blush.gif.....tell us how you REALLY feel...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bsshog40

bsshog40

Posted
Posted
What about the marks on the head and on the neck?

 

I think the mark on the cheek is the most damning evidence. frown.gif

 

I see those also but it also looks like the "9"'s are different on the date???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmarguli

gmarguli

Posted
Posted

1) They do appear to be the same coin.

 

2) If it is, I think whoever did this did a wonderful job. I do not know, but I suspect that #2 is the before picture and the #1 is the after picture. The coin looks AT and very possibly done to hide the polishing.

 

If this is the case, then this isn't the first Gobrecht that was ATed recently and put in a slab. Look around, there have been several on the market recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
robec1347

robec1347

Posted
Posted
What about the marks on the head and on the neck?

 

I think the mark on the cheek is the most damning evidence. frown.gif

 

I see those also but it also looks like the "9"'s are different on the date???

 

What about the hit on her left arm and the hit in the field to the right of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoot

Hoot

Posted
Posted
The marks on the cheek and shin give the coin away. There's also the suggestion of some similar character marks under the right foot of the second A in AMERICA. The basterd who had this done should have his nuts cut off.

 

Hoot

Dammmm Hoot blush.gif.....tell us how you REALLY feel...

 

Well heck-far and all that EZ_Z language, I'm told that the pictures are in reverse order of the appearance of the coin. tongue.gif So, I reckon I have to reconsider.

 

... Here we go... The coin looked like a piece of dog-doo before it "re-toned." Whomsoever dipped it in the first place may have done the coin a favor by placing it in the kind of environment that allowed it to regain a patina that looks half-way normal for a 175 year old silver coin. There may have been a horrible patina on the surface that may have had some form of active corrosive process, but we'll never know that. Then again, there may have been a gorgeous, thick and crusty patina that the person dipped off and is now slated for hell for removing; still, we may never know that. devil.gifinsane.gif

 

Anyhow, since the coin has re-toned, it is a much nicer piece. If it regained its toning under the right conditions, the patinization process will slow down and come to a veritable halt in the lifetime of any current owner. Silver that has been so thoroughly exposed (as it was) has the tendency to tone very fast at first when simply exposed to air. Time will tell. juggle.gif

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MAULEMALL

MAULEMALL

Posted
Posted
The marks on the cheek and shin give the coin away. There's also the suggestion of some similar character marks under the right foot of the second A in AMERICA. The basterd who had this done should have his nuts cut off.

 

Hoot

Dammmm Hoot blush.gif.....tell us how you REALLY feel...

 

Well heck-far and all that EZ_Z language, I'm told that the pictures are in reverse order of the appearance of the coin. tongue.gif So, I reckon I have to reconsider.

 

... Here we go... The coin looked like a piece of dog-doo before it "re-toned." Whomsoever dipped it in the first place may have done the coin a favor by placing it in the kind of environment that allowed it to regain a patina that looks half-way normal for a 175 year old silver coin. There may have been a horrible patina on the surface that may have had some form of active corrosive process, but we'll never know that. Then again, there may have been a gorgeous, thick and crusty patina that the person dipped off and is now slated for hell for doing; still, we may never know that. devil.gifinsane.gif

 

Anyhow, since the coin has re-toned, it is a much nicer piece. If it regained its toning under the right conditions, the patinization process will slow down and come to a veritable halt in the lifetime of any current owner. Silver that has been so thoroughly exposed (as it was) has the tendency to tone very fast at first when simply exposed to air. Time will tell. juggle.gif

 

Hoot

I am with the HOOT.... thumbsup2.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeInFL

MikeInFL

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I do not know, but I suspect that #2 is the before picture and the #1 is the after picture. The coin looks AT and very possibly done to hide the polishing.

 

Greg figured it out. thumbsup2.gif

 

Here's the rest of the story...

 

Coin #2 graded Improperly Cleaned--NCS Proof, sold in April 2006 for just shy of $20k.

 

Coin #1 graded PCGS PR 63 sold in Jan 2007 for a cool $46k.

 

IMHO, this is an example of an AT coin many of us can learn from. Looking at the 2007 color photo alone, it certainly would have fooled me. Here are slightly different shots of it:

 

422094031a.jpg422094031b.jpg

 

Note to self: Inspect closely album toned coins with white middles. 893naughty-thumb.gif ...particularly if they sold a year earlier as an all-white coin. blush.gif

 

Second note to self: Green on silver is not as "safe" of a color as once thought. 893naughty-thumb.gif

 

Have fun...Mike

 

p.s. I am also of the opinion that this one has been skillfully improved in other areas too -- although the photos and toning may be playing tricks on my eyes. confused.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zoins

Zoins

Posted
Posted

Excellent thread Mike!

Here's the rest of the story...

 

Coin #2 graded Improperly Cleaned--NCS Proof, sold in April 2006 for just shy of $20k.

 

Coin #1 graded PCGS PR 63 sold in Jan 2007 for a cool $46k.

Two questions:

 

(a) Did the winner know the history and about the AT at the time? Basically, is $16k the market price for that AT job plus PCGS encapsulation or was that bid made without full information?

 

(b) Do you know who the doctor was? Like we've seen in other threads here, some coins can use a skilled doctor's TLC. The difference here seems to be that this ended up in PCGS plastic while some of the patients shown won't.

 

A final thing to think about:

 

© Do you think PCGS encapsulated this knowing it was improperly cleaned and AT but "market acceptable"? TPGs are known to overlook problems on harder to find coins. Basically, did PCGS make a mistake or did they do exactly what should be expected from their policies and track record?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeInFL

MikeInFL

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Two questions:

 

(a) Did the winner know the history and about the AT at the time? Basically, is $16k the market price for that AT job plus PCGS encapsulation or was that bid made without full information?

 

(b) Do you know who the doctor was? Like we've seen in other threads here, some coins can use a skilled doctor's TLC. The difference here seems to be that this ended up in PCGS plastic while some of the patients shown won't.

 

A final thing to think about:

 

© Do you think PCGS encapsulated this knowing it was improperly cleaned and AT but "market acceptable"? TPGs are known to overlook problems on harder to find coins. Basically, did PCGS make a mistake or did they do exactly what should be expected from their policies and track record?

 

(a) I have no idea.

(b) No.

© I have no idea.

 

Sorry, I wasn't much help. confused.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing