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

Bidask

Catbert said:

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

Yeppers 

MarkFeld

Bidask said:

Catbert said:

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

Yeppers 

So all dipped coins, including those stickered by CAC are “dreck”. Got it.

Bidask

MarkFeld said:

Bidask said:

Catbert said:

Bidask said:

ANY coin without original surfaces

Hmm…that would be about 90%?

Yeppers 

So all dipped coins, including those stickered by CAC are “dreck”. Got it.

Glad you caught my drift 😄

Zoins

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! 

Would you consider the coin in its current condition non-dreck at a different grade? Or would you consider it dreck regardless of the grade assigned?

CACfan

I would not characterize any numismatically valuable federal coin as "dreck". No matter how much doctoring and/or natural hideousness it may have, it will find a market. 

CACfan

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

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?

The 1804 PR68's owner should resubmit it to PCGS under their grading guarantee. If PCGS will not eat the coin or provide just compensation, he should sue them. I know numerous dealers who would gladly testify for the plaintiff, assuming that they agree with certain opinions posted hereon. 

But the owner should act quickly because I have heard a rumor alleging that PCGS's new owner will soon water down their grading guarantee. 

CACfan

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

Legend said:

The 1794 was a coin famous for being retooled. 

I suspect that the vast majority of Bust dollars have been doctored in some way (cleaned, dipped, polished, artificially toned, mechanically or laser smoothed, bleached, etc.).

Zoins

CACfan said:

I would not characterize any numismatically valuable federal coin as "dreck". No matter how much doctoring and/or natural hideousness it may have, it will find a market. 

It sounds like the PR68 1804 dollar would not be dreck in your view, so you would have a different definition the Laura is using. How do you define it?

Pyrite

I define it as an arbitrary name to call a coin you absolutely do NOT want.
Totally an individual standard.
  

MarkFeld

CACfan said:

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

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?

The 1804 PR68's owner should resubmit it to PCGS under their grading guarantee. If PCGS will not eat the coin or provide just compensation, he should sue them. I know numerous dealers who would gladly testify for the plaintiff, assuming that they agree with certain opinions posted hereon. 

But the owner should act quickly because I have heard a rumor alleging that PCGS's new owner will soon water down their grading guarantee. 

As far as I know, there was no guarantee that the coin wouldn't change in the holder. I believe any such law suit would be without merit and have essentially a 0% chance of success.

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

I saw this comment in darth vaderville:

I examined the 1804 raw (in hand, under good light) in Wolfeboro when the Childs sale was sold by B&M, and I viewed it a couple of times in the slab in recent years. First, I didn't like it as a 68 when I first saw it, and was surprised when it graded that way, but I still liked the coin A LOT. Second, I don't doubt that the appearance has somewhat changed since it was slabbed, but that doesn't prove that anything was "done to it". It could just be a function of whatever sort of film was sitting on the surface of the coin. And third, I find it impossible to believe that (Pogue's agent) Dave Akers or Brent Pogue himself did anything to the coin before it was slabbed. I'd bet that CAC would sticker it if in a 66 holder, but I'd want to look at it just one more time before actually putting money on it.

Andy Lustig

This is about the 1804 $1 Childs coin. 

No question it never should have been graded PR68. I'm for sure not the only one on that issue.  Something definitely has changed on the coin. I saw it many times as I was going to rep someone on it. I gave it a strong viewing. I do agree the late Akers would never mess with it. BUT that does not mean Pogue himself tried to clean up the coin. There have been rumors to that effect. It still is the FINEST 1804 $1. Is it dreck? 

Well, let's just call it a "problem" coin. Although it does fit my version of what dreck is (and that is MY personal take on it). In its original state in the Childs sale-the mirrors were like ice. This is a highly debatable coin. I'm sure the new owner will do very well with it. I chose not to buy it. 

Guys get it right-DRECK is a poor, cleaned, ugly, over-graded coin. It has NOTHING to do w/value. And a widget is NOT dreck. OMG. Dreck is a term I use and if the masses do not like my terminology-just pass it by. Please...... 

So now you are insinuating that Brent Pogue was a coin doctor? Simply incredible and absurd. So we reject the finest known (by your admission) because of some unsubstantiated rumors that there could be some alteration yet you buy an obviously manipulated specimen with graffiti? Wow. There are many “sins” in numismatics and movement of metal is usually regarded as among the most destructive/worst among collectors. I don’t materially see much difference between carving a letter into a coin than retooling the eagle’s feathers or other alteration of the devices.

EarlyFederalCoinage

CACfan said:

EarlyFederalCoinage said:

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?

The 1804 PR68's owner should resubmit it to PCGS under their grading guarantee. If PCGS will not eat the coin or provide just compensation, he should sue them. I know numerous dealers who would gladly testify for the plaintiff, assuming that they agree with certain opinions posted hereon. 

But the owner should act quickly because I have heard a rumor alleging that PCGS's new owner will soon water down their grading guarantee. 

I’m not sure it is possible to water down the guarantee much more. The exceptions create huge holes that you could (metaphorically) drive a dump truck through. 

Zoins

Legend said:

I know for a fact Brent LOVED his coins. Could I see him intentionally harming his coins? NO-NEVER. Could I see his cling-ons possibly-sure. But they might have thought dipping it or whatever would help it. Who knows? I am not saying 100% the coin was monkied with. BUT EVERY knowledgeable dealer who has seen it then and now agrees on 2 things-it HAS changed and its not a PR68. 

I recently saw an MS67 High Relief I would call dreck. It was overgraded and had a haze-possibly putty. I am not going to say which service, but it should be bought back. Again, dreck is not about price.

But would you consider the PR68 1804 dollar or this MS67 HR non-dreck in the same condition but a different / lower grade? Just trying to understand more

WilliamJ

I do hope Pogue didn't  mess with the coin.
However;
  I  do love a raw coin, without the plastic of a holder hindering my view, some coins are so magnificent just to actually touch and view raw!!
  

EarlyFederalCoinage

Legend said:

I know for a fact Brent LOVED his coins. Could I see him intentionally harming his coins? NO-NEVER. Could I see his cling-ons possibly-sure. But they might have thought dipping it or whatever would help it. Who knows? I am not saying 100% the coin was monkied with. BUT EVERY knowledgeable dealer who has seen it then and now agrees on 2 things-it HAS changed and its not a PR68. 

I recently saw an MS67 High Relief I would call dreck. It was overgraded and had a haze-possibly putty. I am not going to say which service, but it should be bought back. Again, dreck is not about price. 

EFC sounds to me like if I said the sky was blue you'd say I'm hyping it because the sky is really red. UGH HUH. Okay, we are hypocritical on the Dexter Dollar. So what?  We went in knowing what we had and we ended up with a tidy profit. Its okay to own an off coin if you pay the right numbers. The Pogue 1804 sold for what the market felt was the right number and the coin is what it is. 

Now we’re talking. Agreed on the Saint, and I think we may be coming to a consensus on the latter. It is really all about the price per quality regardless of label grade, plastic tomb, and appendages. 

CoinWeek_Morgan

To me, dreck is a level below "meh". There are certainly "dreck" coins and "meh" coins available to buy 24 hours a day online and before, during, and after business hours at every major coin show. Dreck is a coin you wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole, while a meh coin is ok, but you wouldn't spend real money on it. Sometimes meh is all you can afford, and there is nothing wrong with that. On the other hand, to me, the pursuit of wow coins, even if its a much slower pursuit, can be truly rewarding, even for collectors with just a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars to spend on a coin.

We've written time and time again, that a well-curated, tastefully assembled collection will always find strong interest so long as the coins are appealing. Even if the coins are common. I'd feel more confident buying a +++ toned Morgan dollar in MS64 or MS65 any day than a meh one in MS66. And don't get me started on the drecky ones.

Stevie

CoinWeek_Morgan said:

To me, dreck is a level below "meh". There are certainly "dreck" coins and "meh" coins available to buy 24 hours a day online and before, during, and after business hours at every major coin show. Dreck is a coin you wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole, while a meh coin is ok, but you wouldn't spend real money on it. Sometimes meh is all you can afford, and there is nothing wrong with that. On the other hand, to me, the pursuit of wow coins, even if its a much slower pursuit, can be truly rewarding, even for collectors with just a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars to spend on a coin.

We've written time and time again, that a well-curated, tastefully assembled collection will always find strong interest so long as the coins are appealing. Even if the coins are common. I'd feel more confident buying a +++ toned Morgan dollar in MS64 or MS65 any day than a meh one in MS66. And don't get me started on the drecky ones.

Your point is well taken. Just would add meh is something I would never buy even if I couldn’t afford it. I wait for the exceptional coin for my budget, no compromise 

john

I am assuming that is meant to read ".....even if I could afford it."

(I hope.)

ptolemyII

Coin #1 is an 1881-S $1 PCGS MS66. It may well be that CAC rated 65.9 and thus it failed. That it has "A" eye appeal is not considered.
Coin #2 is an 1881-S $1 PCGS MS65 that CAC rated 65.4 with "B" eye appeal and thus it passed.
Are either crap?

Other examples will apply and some won't. It works for proof Barber 25c in 66 (or 67). Does it work for MS67 Saints?, Is a 1928 $20 in 66.9 CAC worth more than a failing MS67? 
Are either crap? 


If you're not confused, you're not paying attention..... Perhaps that dividing line is not as definable as some might insist hope.

Stevie

ptolemyII said:

Coin #1 is an 1881-S $1 PCGS MS66. It may well be that CAC rated 65.9 and thus it failed. That it has "A" eye appeal is not considered.
Coin #2 is an 1881-S $1 PCGS MS65 that CAC rated 65.4 with "B" eye appeal and thus it passed.
Are either crap?

Other examples will apply and some won't. It works for proof Barber 25c in 66 (or 67). Does it work for MS67 Saints?, Is a 1928 $20 in 66.9 CAC worth more than a failing MS67? 
Are either crap? 


If you're not confused, you're not paying attention..... Perhaps that dividing line is not as definable as some might insist hope.

I am confused with what point you are making with coins 1 and 2? Please explain