CRAWTOMATIC

Member
  • Content Count

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About CRAWTOMATIC

  • Boards Title
    Collector is an understatement.

Personal Information

  • Location
    Garland, TX

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. From what I've seen firsthand with the "floating roof" pennies they are really common for some years. I recall checking a few tubes of late 60's cents for high grade MS in one sitting and I feel like 25-33% exhibited some form of "floating roofedness". I think any demand that exists is the product of disinformation and ad barking behavior to generate value where none should exist. (Thanks YouTube.)
  2. I'm not seeing it @Collector3745. I think a few others said the same thing.
  3. Agreed on all technical points, however, there's a history of collectability with overpolished dies and such. I wouldn't necessarily say they're not worth looking for but more like, only look for the ones that have a niche market. The "2 Feathers", "3-Legged", & "3 1/2 Legged" versions of Buffalo Nickels are popular segments of overpolished dies and draw quite the premium compared to the intended version. In the LMC series NGC provides attribution for the 1969-D "No FG" version (only 1 listed in Census Report) but I see nothing listed for a 69-S attribution under VarietyPlus. I've seen these sell raw for $15-$20 and while I have no personal interest in them I set them aside if I notice them (half a tube of uncirculated on stock currently with no motivation to list them). Since I'm discussing the 69-D version it's worth noting that it's possible to have the "floating roof" effect from overpolishing without the "FG" initials being completely polished away. If there's any hint of initials then it's not considered - sorta like the half feather effect on "2 Feathers" that some sellers would try to pass off as a "2 1/2 Feathers" unethically.
  4. Oh my, that flea market looks amazing. I've been trying to figure out for a year or so where I should go internationally with my AA miles and haven't been able to find a spot that makes me *zing*. But I think that coupled with the history of the area and the proximity for travel to other cities/countries by train grants bonus points. And it looks like they may have a beach which is one of the big point items on my ongoing list. Thanks for sharing!
  5. yw, and I did, it's a nice looking strike on the reverse but I don't know enough about pre-33 gold preservation to suggest an answer. I'm sure somebody will come along with a reasonable approach.
  6. For the 2001 Silver Eagle...I'm not familiar with that packaging but I'm sure @Mohawk is since he's done time in an actual coin shop. Looks like a clam shell over some sort of mounted card. Good news is that 2001 isn't a key date for the series and water won't damage silver aside from staining and spotting (that I know of). Staining & spotting detracts from eye appeal but if you treat it like a straight buillion coin that matters less. I think in the effort of effectively tackling this all I'd cut it out and place it in a flip then revisit it later.
  7. This quarter has a partially clipped planchet and is easily identified as a mint error while it still lives in the mint set cellophane packaging. My concern is if removed from the packaging it may be mistaken for post mint damage. If submitting for attribution is it allowable to submit in the wrapper to confirm authenticity? I would fill out the authorization to remove paperwork of course. After it's received and prepared for grading would my concerns about mistaken PMD be there again? Just trying to figure out the best way to do it. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
  8. OOOH! Great point about the plastic around the edge! IF the coin is in a 2x2 designed for a larger coin - like a nickel in a quarter one or a quarter in a dollar holder, etc.... - then there should be plenty of room to just cut the plastic and skip the whole multiple cuts operation. Based on the pics there's plenty holdered like that on the towel so that should make things easier.
  9. Just putting it out there, you may already know but there's always a newbie somewhere lurking, if you're removing from the cardboard 2x2's they're not re-usable. Some folks try to carefully pry the staples up and slide the coin out but then you risk unnecessary scratches. What I do is take a nice sharp pair of scissors and simply cut all 4 sides off the 2x2. Then you can lay it flat and pull off the top half leaving the coin exposed to be moved to a safe space. And perhaps it's a little extra of me but I try my best to remove the paper dust after each removal operation, even going so far to spray the inside of the new 2x2 out with canned air before placing the coin in. I hate looking at a coin in a 2x2 later and getting distracted by a stray paper hair running across the face of the coin.
  10. Yeah, when I saw it yesterday I was like, "oooh, I want it". Let's see some more pics of the reverse!
  11. Just here to remark on photos, that software for the usb microscope looks pretty robust. It should have a screen capture option. Then you could attach those files directly to the post. I think that would provide better picture quality than taking a picture of your monitor with the cellphone.
  12. Appears to be incuse so I'd wager it was stamped into the coin post-mint. Definitely not part of the die or it'd be raised.
  13. I zoomed but couldn't see the details of the error. Strikethrough errors are one of those that's either very "meh" or really somewhat interesting depending what was struck through and the impact on the design left behind.