Define ***** and expensive *****

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

BTW, really expensive dreck: the $1 1804 PCGS PR68. It either turned or had something done to it. But its still the finest....OUCH! 

What about the graffiti laden Dexter specimen?

WilliamJ

This thread does not seem like it is for fun?

Legend

I'm not the only person who felt that way about the 1804 in 68-you see it w/a bean? Did it break $10 million? If it had been a PCGS CAC piece, I'd have been all over it as would others. Ask people who saw it before the sale. It turned or something. But its still a PCGS PR68 and is the FINEST. 

Yes, the Deter Dollar has a D. Graffiti laden NOT-please. But we know the D was there and Bruce loved the coin as does the new owner. The coin is NOT dreck. It happens to be a true GEM Proof. 

Lets not do tit for tat. My goodness. There was no other intent other then responding to what is an expensive dreck coin. 

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

I'm not the only person who felt that way about the 1804 in 68-you see it w/a bean? Did it break $10 million? If it had been a PCGS CAC piece, I'd have been all over it as would others. Ask people who saw it before the sale. It turned or something. But its still a PCGS PR68 and is the FINEST. 

Yes, the Deter Dollar has a D. Graffiti laden NOT-please. But we know the D was there and Bruce loved the coin as does the new owner. The coin is NOT dreck. It happens to be a true GEM Proof. 

Lets not do tit for tat. My goodness. There was no other intent other then responding to what is an expensive dreck coin. 

If it were a true gem, why did it not sticker?

And my point wasn’t to start a tit for tat. You snub many coins as dreck (I.e. problem coins); if we are really taking the purist route then the Dexter coin is similarly a problem coin. It is hypocritical. FWIW, I wouldn’t throw either of them out of a box of 20. 😂

For those holding expensive dreck, feel free to make donations to the EFC trust/early retirement fund. 😇

Legend

Sorry, I'll keep calling garbage garbage. You see any in CAC holders? NO! 

You don't get the thrill of seeing what I see in a day. The coins people buy-at NO fault of their own. They just do not know better. 

The more people shy away from the bad coins, the less incentive there is for them to be made. 

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

Sorry, I'll keep calling garbage garbage. You see any in CAC holders? NO! 

You don't get the thrill of seeing what I see in a day. The coins people buy-at NO fault of their own. They just do not know better. 

The more people shy away from the bad coins, the less incentive there is for them to be made. 

You’re deflecting. 

EarlyFederalCoinage

Let’s play a game: Dreck or not dreck?

I’ll start.

Common date Saint Gaudens PCGS MS65 non-stickered and low end for the grade… dreck or not dreck?

WilliamJ

    I was Just curious about the 1794 dollar that pcgs bought back, was it cleaned or repaired? Or graded wrong? Also I assume that it was a few years ago?

BustDMs

Just remember….

What is one person’s  Dreck is another’s fertilizer. 🤔

EarlyFederalCoinage

This place will be a lot less educational and fun without Rick. 

Wabbit

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

This place will be a lot less educational and fun without Rick. 

That didn't take long.


As far as the topic, was never a fan of the term.

WilliamJ

I agree,
Didn't take long at all!

Legend

The 1794 was a coin famous for being retooled. 

Yes, an over graded fugly Saint is dreck. Lets just say the worst of what is NOT CAC'd is probably dreck for a reason

braddick

Legend said:

The 1794 was a coin famous for being retooled. 

Yes, an over graded fugly Saint is dreck. Lets just say the worst of what is NOT CAC'd is probably dreck for a reason

I'd even go so far as to state it qualifies as Dreckity-dreck.

Zoins

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

Legend said:

I'm not the only person who felt that way about the 1804 in 68-you see it w/a bean? Did it break $10 million? If it had been a PCGS CAC piece, I'd have been all over it as would others. Ask people who saw it before the sale. It turned or something. But its still a PCGS PR68 and is the FINEST. 

Yes, the Deter Dollar has a D. Graffiti laden NOT-please. But we know the D was there and Bruce loved the coin as does the new owner. The coin is NOT dreck. It happens to be a true GEM Proof. 

Lets not do tit for tat. My goodness. There was no other intent other then responding to what is an expensive dreck coin. 

If it were a true gem, why did it not sticker?

And my point wasn’t to start a tit for tat. You snub many coins as dreck (I.e. problem coins); if we are really taking the purist route then the Dexter coin is similarly a problem coin. It is hypocritical. FWIW, I wouldn’t throw either of them out of a box of 20. 😂

For those holding expensive dreck, feel free to make donations to the EFC trust/early retirement fund. 😇

Regarding the Dexter Dollar, Bruce has posted that he's okay with no-CAC since all 1804 dollars are overgraded, and thus not qualified for CAC.

And the Dexter Dollar is a problem coin, it's missing a "T" and an "N"

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

The 1794 was a coin famous for being retooled. 

Yes, an over graded fugly Saint is dreck. Lets just say the worst of what is NOT CAC'd is probably dreck for a reason

What about the proposed PCGS MS65 common date CAC reject Saint?

Bidask

ANY coin without original surfaces

Catbert

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

MarkFeld

Catbert said:

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

That sounds about right. 

Zoins

MarkFeld said:

Catbert said:

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

That sounds about right. 

Imagine the premiums for those coins.