Mr.Mcknowitall

Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Content Count

    14,297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

1 Follower

About Mr.Mcknowitall

  • Boards Title
    TOTAL NEWBIE

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think in the numismatic economic community, we are in the minority concerning the 22 no D. I think the reasons are a combination of individuals that may not understand the reason for the no D, and that it is not a Mint error, coupled with it is more wampum for it and that keeps the "myth" going (which is good and bad for collectors/dealers alike depending on the $in a pocket), and collectors that simply want an example in their collection and do understand it is nothing special. Now, as long as Mr. Robec does not post that I am a dingbat and my post was not at all what he meant, I am safe.
  2. I sort of understand the point.I assume it is a reference to the Red Book, and notes concerning the 1922. The 09S-VDB does not have a comparable Red Book comment concerning weak vs strong, etc. The OP is simply asking if ANACS has the notation "weak VDB" why doesn't PCGS or NGC? The one distinction I note is that there is no Red Book comment. But, (there is always a "but") the 22 is listed in the Red Book with the corresponding note, and was the only Lincoln so listed and notes added. It would make sense if the 09S-VDB was listed as "weak", with a corresponding note that it was from extremely worn dies. I have read one numismatic author that claims the "weak" 09S-VDB was from extremely worn dies. Maybe so. So, it leave a question of inconsistency, to a person when a TPG (ANACS/PCI) notes a difference and another TPG doesn't. I can understand the "similarity" of the comment, and to some degree is not quite at an apples/oranges level. Sometimes, we should be more consistent in things, until it reaches a level of the ridiculous. Personally, I don't think the 1922 should be given any elevated status, but that is my opinion. It is not a mint error, it is just extremely worn dies.Market hype, so to speak.
  3. Which is sort of sad, when a person can do so for graded comics, can they not?
  4. I don't think you are listening. Just buying slabbed coins from now on teaches you nothing and you will more than likely repeat the previous disappointing purchase. Read what I wrote. Sleep on it, digest it, and think it thru. If you don't want to put in the time and enjoy the hobby and learning about it and consider it a waste of time, then I understand. I have a suspicion that you may be considering the hobby an investment siren. It isn't, and it certainly will be a bankruptcy if you do not know what you are doing. If you think all is OK by buying slabbed coins, I suspect you are going to be taken advantage of.
  5. Welcome. The first comment I want to make, is do not be discouraged. EVERY collector, new and experienced, has bee disappointed by a grading result. Do not let it hold you back. So, what that grading means, is that the coin could have received an almost circulated grade concerning the details of the coin, which would translate.... 50-58...as a numerical grade, except in the case of this coin, it has post mint damage, the obverse scratch. The TPG Third Party Grading company, does not put a numerical grade on damaged coins. Another way of informing you what the "grade" means, is that the coin would have been respectable but the respect is substantially reduced because of the scratch, and is not a coin that most collectors would want. It is a space filler in an album, until you find a replacement piece. The value of the coin is substantially reduced when there is post mint damage, or cleaning, or artificial enhancement of the appearance. But (there is always a "but") the coin does have value. It will help you learn. Go to a few shows. Take the coin with you. Compare it to coins that are graded AU 50-58, that don't exhibit any scratches,dings, etc. It will also teach you to start recognizing what a coin that has been cleaned (a no-no) looks like. Look for a coin club in you area. Join it. Go to the meetings. I have no doubt you will find mentors eager and willing to help you learn. Start building a library. there is an author on this boards with the board name physics fan. He has a book available that, all things considered, is a very good easy to understand book about grading coins, and would be a good starting point in building a library. Hint: He doesn't like me, but that does not give me pause to recommend his book. I have read it, and learned something from it. It is certainly worth buying. I think right now he will sign it for you. Check the sales thread. There is much more I can mention, but for now that is the basics to share with you. There are a heck of a lot of good books to start with, but I have no doubt you are about to get plenty of suggestions. The best value and assistance and learning experience right now for you? These Boards. A lot of very knowledgeable people and a lot of information available. Become active here. You won't regret doing so.
  6. It may be more logical to spend it in bad health, in order to help recover from bad health which will assist in being able to obtain more of them, or the alternative....that it does not improve the bad health and hastens the exit form life, the knowledge that nobody else got to spend it can be comforting. So there is that..... Silver Sickle, as to the coin, if you are referring to the condition as being superior compared to other circulated pieces, that is not unusual at all. Many rolls of 1959 were saved, since it was a design change, and years/decades later finally spend them or cash them in at a bank. There would not be a monetary reason to fraudulently plate the piece.
  7. Good Morning, Mark. My choice of words might have caused a logical interpretation that I concur that bronze cents (all Mints) are "errors". I do not. I am not aware of any definitive proof that clandestine and/or purposeful human intent was not the cause of the bronze cents (and many other "errors"). Concerning your question, is the deserving title to be awarded based on public/collector popularity, or market value, or collector desire (different from popularity), or quantity? For rarity based on quantity, my choice would be the 1866 no motto quarter, half, and dollar, not listed in the mint reports and not intended for circulation. That the pieces escaped the Mint, and were even made, is indeed an error, in my opinion. As to public/collector popularity, it is a 3-way tie between the 37D 3-Legged Indian Head Nickel and the 1909S, V.D.B. or 1955 Double Die Lincoln Wheat Ears Reverse Small Cent. As to collector desire, and based only on my experience at various Shows over the years, and general conversation with many different types and personalities of collectors and Dealers, my opinion would be the 37-D 3-Legged Indian Head Nickel. For market value, I would not know where to begin. I would think this would be based strictly on selling price, and since this is subject to any given day....and based only on that criteria....it would be the highest selling price for an error. But (there is always a "but"), I personally eliminate any piece that is questionable as to whether the piece was created due to clandestine and/or human intent, which is a problem with so many so-called errors/misstrikes, etc.
  8. As far back as I can remember, I have been on the 'contrarian' side of thought concerning the 1943 bronze cent "King of Mint Errors". I remain so, and have never read anything that persuades me to change my position.
  9. In general, I would concur with your comments for post 1954 Commemorative pieces. My opinion is that pre-1955, there is a very special historical subject aspect (and except for a very few) presented in a manner of artistry and design that support the historical significance and is what makes these pieces and series special and desirable to collectors. When consideration is given to the many years that did not have a commemorative piece issued, the "short set"...pre-1955...takes on a second level of significance. Sure, over the years and on many occasions, pricing manipulation in the market caused these pieces to increase and decrease to the point of exasperation. But, the down cycles always end, and the price recovers, and collectors have cherished this series as long as I can remember. As to condition, it is of interest to note that a very low percentage of these pieces were kept in pristine condition, and were cleaned/dusted/dunked/made pretty for display on the mantel and/or the family album/gatherings, where they were passed around and ooed and ahhhed and in the process dinged/banged/wiped/dropped, etc. There were very few die hard collectors that were knowledgeable in storage and preservation, and even fewer that could even afford such pieces, except maybe post Korean war, when the economy started to truly produce disposable income that a collector did not feel guilty about spending for a coin. Also, we have to remember that the pieces that didn't sell were for the most part returned to the Mint and melted. This happened a lot more often than mint totals would suggest. On many occasions, pieces were released for circulation. These factors made already low mintage numbers even lower, and to the point that today we really don't know the true final availability on many pieces. Thus, outstanding circulated pieces equaling the piece above are rare, and I would suggest very rare. In 65 and above (and please understand I am not referring to market grading) it is even more difficult to obtain. We also have to realize what we are buying with a $ today, vs. say 1980 and 88, 2 big downturns I cringed at on behalf of collectors. The series is a bargain accordingly and pieces that are of the quality I described are actually rising and when appear are quickly bought. Yes, there are a few high mintage pieces (high for the series), such as the Columbian Exposition, the 52 BTW (some would say the same for the 46 BTW but we just don't know how many saw the fire). Even then, exceptional pieces are not frequently encountered. I consider the pieces I am describing scarce and certainly desirable under any criteria. I freely admit that my nature and interest is and always has been a love of history of all things and no less so for numismatics, and this personality fault of course infects my opinions. I do not view the subject from an investment point of view, except as an investment for preserving history for the future.
  10. I will guess that what you mean (and is the question) is whether a piece created by Mr. Carr may well have been produced by the U.S. Mint and "exist" but there is no record or official awareness of such a piece at this time. If that is the basis of the question, then given the individuals that participate on this Board and ATS that are lifelong researchers of such Records, and none have commented in the affirmative or presented, as of now, any indication of such a possibility, I would have to answer there is no chance at this time.
  11. I would disagree. The first post by the OP was about the Philly Show. The OP is asking question that, while a bit confusing as to intent, is certainly not trolling, IMHO.
  12. This is Currency, and can and will be used Worldwide. It is a cut above a token.