Bronze & Copper Collector

I'll check and see if I still have the images of that coin when I get the chance...

BEAUTIFUL COIN BOB, One of the nicest I've seen and almost certainly amongst the finest known....

I hoped you would pop in on this one. Thanks for the pics Gary. Have you closely inspected the slabbed F282A? Is it really a 6 over 8 or is there possibly traces of the upper arc of a 6 poking out above the upper 6? None that I can see.... It looks like the F-30 ... It's difficult to image through the plastic though..... I do need to take it out to conserve it, as is developing Verdigris spots...

1861 F-30 6 over 8 PENNY for reference purposes...

1861 F-282A 6 over 8

(part 2) 1861 F-276 6 over higher 6

(part 1) 1861 F-276 6 over higher 6

1861 F-274A 6 over higher 6

(part 2) 1861 F-274 8 over 8, 6 over 6, vertical line under the 8

(part 1) 1861 F-274 8 over 8, 6 over 6, vertical line under the 8

1861 F-274 6 over 6

I have several variants of the 6 over 6 which I will post after this... When I asked Michael Freeman a few years ago about the 6 over 6 varieties, he seemed to feel (this is from memory as he did not have any notes handy) that the F-282a was a 6/8 but that the F-274's were probably a 6/6....

Here' mine...

LIGHTER THINNER DOT LIGHTER THINNER DOT with DIE CRACK

While we are discussing 1897 pennies, I have three different specimens with the DOT between the O and N of ONE.... HEAVY THICK DOT

I'm going to have to review my collection.... Just looked at my F-148 (I think I have another one or two in other albums - not as nice as this one though) and forgot how nice it was... This is a scan and really does not do it justice....

.

There is definitely a problem when those in a position of authority, whose work is held to the highest standards, make basic errors of attribution that are accepted by the community merely because they are who they are…. These errors of attribution cost can buyers (I don’t call them collectors necessarily) thousands of dollars each time the coins are sold and are in doing so the error of mis-attribution is perpetuated… CAVEAT EMPTOR!!! I do not call into question the subject of grading nor the determination of whether the coin is genuine or not….. I only question the the fact of the attributions being correct…. I do not profess to be an expert on all coins, but those I do know, I can determine for myself when an attribution is incorrect… I acknowledge that it is impossible to know everything about everything, but, if you are going to accept a fee for that determination, then at least make the attempt to be correct and stand behind your work…. If you do not know the answer do not profess a professional determination that unfortunately is accepted as gospel, (although it should not be) by some... The advice that is always proffered, "Buy the COIN and NOT the SLAB" could not be more apropos than in this situation...

Just as one TPG handled the 1860 farthing Mule Mis-Attribution fiasco a few years back.... LMAO!!!! They refused to acknowledge any error, take any responsibility, nor admit any culpability... And in doing so essentially created a new variety.....

Same two coins now on Teletrade.... NOT a 1862 Small date on Teletrade.... Same coin previously sold in Stacks/Bowers Auction "1862 NO reverse Signature on Teletrade" Same coin previously sold in Stacks/Bowers Auction

That's a nice F169 Gary! It's certainly better than the London Coins auction example, and the best I've seen. Nice open 3s too, but Gary1000 has pipped you! Especially that obverse, which must be GVF to NEF. Thanks, I think I was the 1st or 2nd underbidder on the example sold on ebay....

SPECIMEN 2

I currently have two 1903 open 3's in my possession, both essentially in about the same condition.... Eventually, I'll probably part with one, along with some other duplicates that I have..... SPECIMEN 1

.

Hi Gary, I only picked up the dated 1844 and the 'PENNEY' misspelt models, which I believe were yours. I had the chance to buy the all-silver model too, but missed out on that one. Really lovely coins! Your 1* (F164A) certainly puts mine to shame. I've never seen a better one. While on the subject of Edward VII, do you have better than F versions of the 1903, open 3, or the 1909 F169 (which Freeman has as R9, but is way rarer)? A fellow forum member has an NVF Open 3 and I'm sure a VF example appeared on eBay some time ago, but otherwise everything else seems to be low grade. Here is my F-169 - I've been told about the 3rd or 4th finest known... 1909 F-169 1903 open 3 in the next post